Cartridges we can live without...

[R.W.Dale]

The diameter of the bullet is .315. The performance of the cartridge flags that of the 300 WSM.

http://www.chuckhawks.com/325wsm.htm

[Captain_Obvious]

That's odd. How can you have a bore diameter that is less than the bullet diameter?

The fact also still stands that there was big hype made about this round when it first came out. As with the others.

[Captain_Obvious]

''As for the WSMÂ’s they are all selling way too well and do offer to much to be considered cartridges that can be done without. The .325 WSM was never designed to compete with any of the .338 cartridges. You may not like the new WSM & WSSM but their are thousands of other hunters/shooters that do. Lawdog''

What exactly do they offer? I included them in my list and will not change my mind. SUE ME!  

[NONYA]

Capt O you are in way over your head here,these guys really know thier stuff,they are not just quoting some article they read in guns and ammo.

[Captain_Obvious]

So do I, NONYA, and I didn't quote any articles. Go back to school and learn to read.

[Ramrod]

That's odd. How can you have a bore diameter that is less than the bullet diameter?

Not odd at all. Bullet diameter is matched to the groove diameter. It will always be bigger than bore. About .008 bigger for .30 caliber and above. Example being a 30 caliber shoots a .308 bullet. I'll let you to do the math with a .315 bore.

[Rem725]

A lot of that won't stabilize 100 grain bullets in a .244 was a myth. One writer said it, and a bunch more copied it. Once in a while one would try it and report it worked! Of course you can't refute a myth.  

 
But it was a myth that doomed the 6mm Remington-a cartridge I believe is superior to the 243 in nearly every way but which has played 2nd fiddle ever since the 244 was said not to stablize 100 grain bullets.  I use 100 grain bullets in mine and never have a problem.  Of course, my rifle is called a 6mm and not a .244.

 
 
Actually magazine length in the calibre .244 722's and 725's helped doom the cartridge.  To load a long bullet, you had to seat it deep to fit the magazine.  A deep seated bullet lost performance and range.  The twist rate does play a role, primarily at longer ranges.

[Coyote Hunter]

"Â… I think the manufacturers are offering us far too much choice in rifle cartridges. The more variety they offer the more costly the manufacturing and distribution, and guess who that cost is passed along to?... So I think it's time to cull the cartridge herd, and I'm going to give you a shopping list of cartridges that I think the major manufacturers should drop like bad habits".
Col. Craig Boddington, USMC-Ret.

The Colonel needs to stick with what he knows best – and manufacturing economics certainly isn’t it.

To carry his argument to extremis, letÂ’s assume we get rid of every cartridge but the (substitute your favorite here).  With every manufacturer focusing on that one cartridge the cost for that cartridge should certainly drop.  The more efficient manufacturers would survive while the less efficient manufacturers would probably fall by the wayside.  

What the Colonel fails to understand is the synergy of products.  A manufacturer with a more diverse lineup can attract a wider base of clientele loyal to the brand.  Also, the wider product base also helps ensure that a slippage of sales in one caliber does not have as great an impact on the bottom line.  

The Colonel writes that we should do away with the fairly the long list of cartridges, but to do so would be a great disservice to the shooters who enjoy those cartridges and might well have adverse affects on the companies who manufacture them.  The truth of the market is that companies continually review their product line and make decisions to manufacture or not on a wide range of factors.  We donÂ’t need a wave of the ColonelÂ’s magic wand, the market will decide which cartridges survive and for how long.

[Slamfire]

A lot of that won't stabilize 100 grain bullets in a .244 was a myth. One writer said it, and a bunch more copied it. Once in a while one would try it and report it worked! Of course you can't refute a myth.  

But it was a myth that doomed the 6mm Remington-a cartridge I believe is superior to the 243 in nearly every way but which has played 2nd fiddle ever since the 244 was said not to stablize 100 grain bullets.  I use 100 grain bullets in mine and never have a problem.  Of course, my rifle is called a 6mm and not a .244.

 Actually you're wrong a myth this is not rifles marked .244rem use a 1:12 twist rate witch is too slow to stabilize 100gr bullets, and rifles marked 6mm rem use a 1:9 twist rate. As you can see remington didn't just change the name of the .244 they also changed the twist rate. Of course by the time remington realized their goof up 243 win had already taken off.

Actually, I owned a .244 that I bought in 1955. A fellah in the little town I lived in believed that stuff about not stabilizing 100 grain bullets and the gunsmith let me have it along with a scope and ammo for the list price of the rifle itself. As I said earlier I was satisfied with the 90 grain corelokts. I bought a .243 Left handed Savage in 1960 and left the old Remington 722 in the gun cabinet. After the 6mm Remington Ammo came out I bought a box of 100 grain and tried it out. It worked! I loaded up some other 100 grain bullets. The flat based bullets all stabilized, as long as I kept the velocity high. I ever shot some 105 Speer Round nosed bullet and they stabilized as well. I was not able to stabilize any 100 grain boattails, in that old .244. Next time you acquire a .244 try it you may be suprised.  :wink:

As far as the 6mm being superior to a .243 it is, kinda. You can get roughly 100 to 150 fps more velocity with just about any bullet weight. I don't really think it is worth sellin a rifle you like to get one you don't because the 6mm is the superior round. I have found that "superiority" of the basic 7x57 case over the basic .308 case to hold true in ever caliber they use in common. The .260 is as good as the 6.5 x 57 and the 7mm/08 is as good as the 7x57. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense but there it is!

[Coyote Hunter]

The fact also still stands that there was big hype made about this round when it first came out. As with the others.

That only proves the marketing people had some success.  As I recall there was tremendous hype for the Studebaker, too.

[NONYA]

LOL coyote the Studys and the Ultra/super mags...overhyped pos,maybe they should stop manufacturing them and sell the remaining stock as collectors items,my cousin has a 7mmrum that he would LOVE to be rid of.

[Brithunter]

Hi All,

     Well I started reading this thread right the way through but quickly got bored with the stupidity of some of the comments, like this one:-

   " all the European calibres can go"

     Well let's see, without the European cartridges most of the "American" cartridges would not have existed and you would still be shooting rimmed cartridges, to "great" 30-06 is not more than a slightly modified copy of the 7mm Mauser (7x57mm) which kicked the US military's butt in Cuba.

    For myself I will judge a cartidge upon it's merits, short mags neednot apply, cannot see any point in them what so ever :roll:  the list of cartridges that (unless I find a collectable rifle to fit a niche in my little collection) will not be found in amongst my stuff is:-

7-08
260 Rem
Short mags :roll:
Ultra mags :roll:
Weatherby's not ever :evil:
.243 win

[Captain_Obvious]

Actually, the hype proves nothing since much of it, in fact, the majority of it has been generated by overheated gunwriters like Boddington and Wayne Van Zwoll.

For the 270 WSM, I did make allowance since its not simply redundant, performance-wise, from what's already out there.

[LouD]

Brithunter Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2005 11:26 am    Post subject:  

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Hi All,

Well I started reading this thread right the way through but quickly got bored with the stupidity of some of the comments, like this one:-

" all the European calibres can go"

Well let's see, without the European cartridges most of the "American" cartridges would not have existed and you would still be shooting rimmed cartridges, to "great" 30-06 is not more than a slightly modified copy of the 7mm Mauser (7x57mm) which kicked the US military's butt in Cuba.

For myself I will judge a cartidge upon it's merits, short mags neednot apply, cannot see any point in them what so ever  the list of cartridges that (unless I find a collectable rifle to fit a niche in my little collection) will not be found in amongst my stuff is:-

7-08
260 Rem
Short mags  
Ultra mags  
Weatherby's not ever  
.243 win
 

Y'know,  you really should show a liitle more respect for the '06.... If it wasn't for it you'd most likely be speaking German after all....

Regarding my rifles, they cover the spectrum, and I enjoy them all, including the Weatherby's, the WSM's, the Swede, the .243, the .204, etc. (not to mention the handguns, yikes!!!).  In the USA, you see, we can have whatever we like, and be "accepted" regardless of our preferences (as long as you're not a pompous snot about it).  That's just one of the many things that makes the USA so vastly superior to "Old Europe".    Anyhow, keep your opinions coming, as we love diversity.  You'll be accepted here no matter what your "orientation".  Just remember to be careful... and use protection....

Cherio !!!  :-D  :-D  :-D  :-D

[TX Devil Doc]

From early on when I started this thread, I noticed there are 2 recurring points. #1: there is one heck of a 6.5mm Swede following and #2: many feel we can live without short mag cartridges. Though not for me, I can still understand #1. But what gives with #2???

[jerkface11]

From early on when I started this thread, I noticed there are 2 recurring points. #1: there is one heck of a 6.5mm Swede following and #2: many feel we can live without short mag cartridges. Though not for me, I can still understand #1. But what gives with #2???

Maybe because NONE of the WSM cartridges do anything new? At best they duplicate an existing round. The 300 wsm isn't even as good as 300 win mag since you can't use heavy bullets. What's the point in a magnum if you can't use heavy bullets?

[TX Devil Doc]

jerkface11's reply:

Maybe because NONE of the WSM cartridges do anything new? At best they duplicate an existing round. The 300 wsm isn't even as good as 300 win mag since you can't use heavy bullets. What's the point in a magnum if you can't use heavy bullets?

 
I respectfully disagree in one regard, the advantage is one can use a short action rifle which has its inherent advantages. IMHO... As for heavy bullets in this caliber, 180's are at the end of the envelope for acceptable accuracy (whether in .300 WM or WSM factory loaded). The 200 & 220's in WM? Perhaps another rifle would better fit a situation where this would be necessary. A .338 Rem. Ultra Mag.?? (Just the mention of "Ultra" and "Mag" in one sentence will guarentee a response from GB.  

[Rummer]

My $0.02:

We can stand to be rid of:

Short and Super Short magnums-  I think that if you need more gun than the .30-06 family of cartridge offers; you probably need a bigger than 8mm bullet and a long case.

6.8 SPC-  I don't see a use for a slow .270.

Truth be known, most everybody would be very well served with either a .308 or a .30-06 but variety is the spice of life.  Let's let the market decide what goes and what stays.

Rummer

[Brithunter]

As for cartridges well quite a few American ones are really only copies of older European ones the .270 is only a copy of the 7x64 and 7.92 is actually superior to the vaunted 30-06 and yes I do have both :wink:

[jerkface11]

jerkface11's reply:

Maybe because NONE of the WSM cartridges do anything new? At best they duplicate an existing round. The 300 wsm isn't even as good as 300 win mag since you can't use heavy bullets. What's the point in a magnum if you can't use heavy bullets?

 
I respectfully disagree in one regard, the advantage is one can use a short action rifle which has its inherent advantages. IMHO... As for heavy bullets in this caliber, 180's are at the end of the envelope for acceptable accuracy (whether in .300 WM or WSM factory loaded). The 200 & 220's in WM? Perhaps another rifle would better fit a situation where this would be necessary. A .338 Rem. Ultra Mag.?? (Just the mention of "Ultra" and "Mag" in one sentence will guarentee a response from GB.  

From my experience a short action rifle has no advantages. Maybe you can think of some good that comes from shortening a rifle by 1/4" but i sure can't.

[R.W.Dale]

The new short magnums are absouletely neccacary. C'm on how else are these weekend warrior hunters with their $200 Browning jackets and thier $800 tree stands and the good ol $38,000 hunting truck gonna convince their buddies they can blow more money on huntin if they dont own a $600 remchester topped with a $500 scope that came from a country farther away than yours chambered in the newest  7mm ultrefatpetitshortboltactionultramagnum DUH :?

[Captain_Obvious]

I think short-action cartridges are overrated. I don't have any trouble with the bolt-throw of a standard length cartridge. The weight of a standard-length rifle doesn't affect my 6'1'', 195 lb frame at all. Maybe low physical strength and endurance is a new, growing trend. Perhaps Van Zwoll or Boddington will print an article stating that shooters/hunters who can't lift 100 lbs are inherently more accurate shooters than those who can!

[Bart Solo]

From early on when I started this thread, I noticed there are 2 recurring points. #1: there is one heck of a 6.5mm Swede following and #2: many feel we can live without short mag cartridges. Though not for me, I can still understand #1. But what gives with #2???

 
 
I have been thinking about a new rifle. I have looked at the WSM rounds (particularly the 300 WSM.) My goal is something in 30 caliber that isn't a 30-06 or a 308.  Something equally at home on an elk hunt and over a bean field during whitetail season.  A 300 WSM has more velocity than the 30-06 and 308 and should have better long range performance.  After a lot of thought I still haven't made up my mind, but i do notice that the new rounds have some advantages over other "magnums."  First, no belt. I have always liked a clean round. Second, the short wide case gives an inherent accuracy advantage, sort of like the advantage enjoyed by the 308 (a short "fat" case) over the 30-06 (wonder why the 308 is favored by target shooters over the 30-06.)  Third, reduced perceived recoil over the 300 Winchester  magnum.  I  think that is overrated, Newton's laws have not been repealed.  A fast 300 WSM and a fast 300 Winchester magnum should develop pretty significant recoil.  Don't believe me, do the math. Fourth,  bragging rights around the hunting camp. I would have one of those fancy new rounds instead of another 30-06.  
 
There are some real disadvantages.  First, I don't know whose offering, if any, is going to take    off. As a young man I chose the 6mm Remington over the Winchester 243, and lost that fight.  As a result my ammunition is a little more expensive and a little harder to find.  It could be that the 300 WSM is a loser and I will suffer for selecting it. Second, ammunition is hard to find, and expensive.  I reload, but I am familiar with traditional rounds and there is a lot of reloading data available for the 308 and the 30-06.  There is not so much information about the 300 WSM but what I do know is that it likes slow burning powders, which is fine.  The bullet selection is not as great as the 30-06 or even the 308.  Third, the rifles designed for the various WSM cartridges are apparently experiencing teething problems. That will change, of course, as the manufacturers work with the new bullet.  Finally,  and a reason I think is unspoken by a lot of hunters but one that drives the debate, the magazine capacity of the fat bullets is often greatly reduced over traditional cartridges.  Sometimes 2 rounds compared to 4 in a traditional bullet. It doesn't bother me. If you can't do what you need to do with two  rounds, 4 isn't going to help you any.  
 
My guess is I will probably buy a 30-06.  If I get ambitious I might buy a 308.  The 300 WSM is mighty tempting though. Just wish I could depend on the rifles manufactured for 300 WSM to feed properly.

[Bart Solo]

]
 
What's the point in a magnum if you can't use heavy bullets?

 
velocity, which equals less drop at distance, which equals greater accuracy.  So long as the bullet is the big enough, nearly any thing in the 7mm class and above will handle anything except griz, brown and polar bear in North America.  ( I would like something a little bigger for moose, but the 6.5 swede has been used successfully on moose.)  
 
There is no substitute for speed, except marksmanship.

[tuck2]

Save the 22 LR,30-06, and 375 H&H.--Junk the rest.

[jerkface11]

]
 
What's the point in a magnum if you can't use heavy bullets?

 
velocity, which equals less drop at distance, which equals greater accuracy.  So long as the bullet is the big enough, nearly any thing in the 7mm class and above will handle anything except griz, brown and polar bear in North America.  ( I would like something a little bigger for moose, but the 6.5 swede has been used successfully on moose.)  
 
There is no substitute for speed, except marksmanship.

A 30-06 will make a 165 grain bullet go 2900fps a 300 WSM will make a 165 grain bullet go 3100fps. So that's shooting how much higher at 200 yards? 1/4"?

[beemanbeme]

To wonder off-thread for a moment, the magnums were developed in order to send a greater weight of metal downrange at a usable velocity.  Not some boyhowdylook whatIcando warp speed with a light bullet.  Greater accuracy and/or less drop are silly justifications given by folks that do have a need for speed. Sort of like a kid telling you he gets better gas mileage by putting loud mufflers on his VW. The point is, once the bullet has past thru the animal, its speed means nothing.  A 200 gr bullet from a .300WM @2900fps is more lethal, will pass thru an elk and by the very fact of its lower velocity will cause more trauma than a say 150gr bullet at @3500fps.  
Shot placement will always trump velocity and whatever name the cartridge has on it.  The magnums fell into bad repute when too many folks bought into the wildly exaggerated hype the accompanied the rifles introduction in America:  "here was a rifle that you didn't need to practice with, just shoot into the big middle and the animal would be dressed, drawn, and wrapped into little packages suitable for freezing."  and, of course, "this thing will shoot flat as a tabletop out to 500 yards. No need to hold over with it nor have any idea of range, just blast away."

[Captain_Obvious]

Traditionally speaking, a WSM is no more accurate than a normal magnum. One of the things that makes the .308, along with several other similar cartridges, is the more gentle expansion of the gases pushing on the bullet, something which dissipates in a more intense round, regardless of the shorter case. The standard-length 300 Winchester Magnum has a very well established reputation for accuracy.

Secondly, any theoretical gain in accuracy provided by a WSM's case is insignificant.

[TX Devil Doc]

Krochus wrote:

The new short magnums are absouletely neccacary. C'm on how else are these weekend warrior hunters with their $200 Browning jackets and thier $800 tree stands and the good ol $38,000 hunting truck gonna convince their buddies they can blow more money on huntin if they dont own a $600 remchester topped with a $500 scope that came from a country farther away than yours chambered in the newest 7mm ultrefatpetitshortboltactionultramagnum DUH

Hummm... sounds more like class envy or a jest than a position of accepting that there are others willing and able to follow their own lead. :roll:

This thread has certainly brought up many interesting ideas. However, I think back to the original premise of this topic... "What FACTORY load can we do without and why"? Of those dropped, it is expected they would be picked up by either handloaders, custom, European manufacturers or even all. The result would be lessening of factory loaded choices and perhaps availability. But  the result is also lessening costs by "economy of scale" production management; the more of one type made instead of many, the less each would cost.

My question is, haven't the manufacturers been doing this all along?

[R.W.Dale]

Krochus wrote:

The new short magnums are absouletely neccacary. C'm on how else are these weekend warrior hunters with their $200 Browning jackets and thier $800 tree stands and the good ol $38,000 hunting truck gonna convince their buddies they can blow more money on huntin if they dont own a $600 remchester topped with a $500 scope that came from a country farther away than yours chambered in the newest 7mm ultrefatpetitshortboltactionultramagnum DUH

Hummm... sounds more like class envy or a jest than a position of accepting that there are others willing and able to follow their own lead. :roll:

This thread has certainly brought up many interesting ideas. However, I think back to the original premise of this topic... "What FACTORY load can we do without and why"? Of those dropped, it is expected they would be picked up by either handloaders, custom, European manufacturers or even all. The result would be lessening of factory loaded choices and perhaps availability. But  the result is also lessening costs by "economy of scale" production management; the more of one type made instead of many, the less each would cost.

My question is, haven't the manufacturers been doing this all along?

 Not class envy I can spend as much as I choose to on huntin. But come on turn on the outdoor channel and tell me that hunting isn't becoming more and more commersalized every year. Or better yet open a cabellas or bass pro hunting catalog 3/4 of the thing is devoted to clothing. Face it hunting as we knew it is dead gone are the days when a dead buck was all it took for a hunt to be considered a sucess now it HAS to score x number of points on a boone and crocket score card. I could care less how many points a deer has no matter how long you boil them you can't eat em, Just like a deer doesn't care weither or not you shot it with a shortfatactionultramag or a good ol 30-06.

 And no ammo manufacturers are not gonna send the profits they make on oddball chamberings to european manufacturers so you can save a couple of bucks on .308 ammo.