Thread: overlap between cartridges

Greetings All,
It is going to be interesting to see what happens over the next 20 years or so (especially for those that are likely to live that long). The ranks of 6, 6.5 and 7mm cartridges are already packed with .270 and .30 calibre not far behind. Efforts to introduce new .22 and .25 calibre cartridges seem to have gone nowhere. Is there room for a new .22 calibre cartridge between the .223 and the .22-250 with an intermediate capacity and fast twist that would split the difference between the two. I am not talking of a wildcat but a factory offering. It could have a little more mag and neck length to handle a longer pill and fit in the medium bolt face.
Regards Grandpamac.

Originally Posted by bumblefoot

But people are weird about calibres anyway. I know someeone who rubbishes my .303 as being gutless, and raves about the power of his .300 Blackout....

Anybody who thinks the .303 is gutless never shot anything with one or saw the results afterwards.
Good to see your name again Bumblefoot.
GPM.

Originally Posted by grandpamac

Greetings All,
. Is there room for a new .22 calibre cartridge between the .223 and the .22-250 with an intermediate capacity and fast twist that would split the difference between the two. I am not talking of a wildcat but a factory offering. It could have a little more mag and neck length to handle a longer pill and fit in the medium bolt face.
Regards Grandpamac.

and function FLAWLESSLY in a savage rotary magazine or single shot ...hmmmm let me see now????????
that sounds just like.........oh yeah a .22hp Savage but in .224 and possibly blown out a fly shit in shoulder area

@grandpamac You know I just had to squeeze a 303 reference in eh?

The 6ARC in a bolt gun is where my interests will lay in the years to come if ammo/brass becomes more available.

Originally Posted by Micky Duck

and function FLAWLESSLY in a savage rotary magazine or single shot ...hmmmm let me see now????????
that sounds just like.........oh yeah a .22hp Savage but in .224 and possibly blown out a fly shit in shoulder area

That was the .225 Winchester. Came out in 1964 and flopped. It had the rim turned down so it would chamber with a standard medium bolt face. A 1 in 14 twist as well. It's short neck and throat would struggle with the longer pills. Getting close though.
GPM.

the long neck on the savage and that big rim are both something I like to see....one day,maybe. if my trebly had a faster twist than 1;14 it would have been rechambered already.

Originally Posted by bumblefoot

@grandpamac You know I just had to squeeze a 303 reference in eh?

It is good for younger people to know and be reminded that centre fire cartridge development was largely complete by 1900. Improvement continued with better components, especially powder, but we would not suffer today if we were restricted to cartridges developed prior to 1900. It might be a tad boring though. Almost half of my centre fire rifle chamberings date from between 1880 and 1900.
GPM.

As a 8x57 and 7x57 fan I tend to agree @grandpamac. However, also being a fan of obscure and lesser known cartridges, and inventing my own wildcats, I will continue to dabble in things that are iterations of designs, that are previous iterations of the pre-1900 forefathers. Why? Just for funzies

Greetings All,
Regarding my hypothetical .22 cartridge it seems it already exists, at least in wildcat form. It is called the .22 Bench Rest and was developed in the 1960's. It is just the 6mm BR necked down. It has minimum taper, 30 degree shoulder and longish neck. Net case capacity under a 55 grain projectile is 34.5 grains of H2O compared with 27.4 grains for the .223 and barrel life is reputed to be better than the .22-250. It would need a faster twist than the standard 1 in 14" and probably a longer throat for the heavier projectiles. Anybody using one?
Regards Grandpamac.

Also the new .22 Nosler and .22 Valkyrie fit your previous description.

Probably why the 25-303 has never been equalled or improved upon. Some things just are...

Originally Posted by Micky Duck

its been said that the .222remington was so popular with meat hunters and cullers here because it was so much lighter and was so much more accurate that the run of the mill other big cartridge rifles of the time..... I never really worked out what the writers who said this meant...I mean surely the factory ammunition and rifles werent that bad..... then just the other day having a look in my older Nosler manual there was page on using the simple reloading tools ...the LEE whackamole in particular... I recal reading it before but never took too much notice of the photos.....
the group size would have Dannyb in tears....... if that was the NORMAL expectation...and Ive read it in many places it was..... no wonder the wee trebly looked so darn attractive... these new skids on the jock dont have it so easy as things have been pretty sharp for last 30 years by comparison...

No suppressors in those days and I for one found my 308 a bit obnoxious. The .222 took me into another world where I didn't get smacked in the face by a poor fitting stock and I could shoot tiny groups. There are lots of your "cross overs" in the .224 cal world but the gap has widened the last few years because of heavier for caliber bullets and twist rates.

The same thought occurred to me when consideri g whether a 6mm PPC or ARC might be better for the big wallabies and small goats than a 75gr 223. Obviously, the frangibility if the available bullet has a lot to do with it. The PPC was never twisted to take 100gr bullets like ARC are and ARC dont have factory ammo as light as PPC so even there almost identical cartridges on the drawing board dont overlap.

Comparing the 223 with 243 as suggested, we have s 75gr 223 doing 2960 fps which is still a not too shabby trajectory for hare/ scrolloby shooting. Then the 243 can push it at 3400 fps, possibly not that decisively better and the BC is only half in 6mm. Kinetic energy is the main difference but perhaps for practical varmint purposes 243 is redundant now. With the advent of bush pigs and suppressors the need for a lightweight deer rifle is less than it was.

Well I don't know about the suppressor part although 2 of the guys I've been doing armed walks with for the last 2 years have suppressors but not bushpigs. Latch a bipod on and they are fecking heavy.
My mauser 8x57 with about a 23" barrel feels like an air rifle in comparison. I know what I'd be carrying around.
The suppressors do shut them up a bit I will admit.
We had a lot of crossover back in the day with Europe, England and America all doing their own and sometimes liking the competitions items so much they would do a close copy