Thread: Redundant Calibres

Originally Posted by grandpamac

Greetings @ Tahr,
In the very early 1990's a friend and I were chronographing some 6.5x55 loads on my new 35P. One load was the Norma 140 grain load. This chronographed 2,750 fps. a little faster than claimed for the highly touted 147 grain load in the Creedmoor. Seems to me we have not made much progress in 30 years.
Grandpamac.

is the development of these new cartridges really about progress tho ...... or is it about profit ? as you evidenced the velocity is comparable
6.5cm = 6.5x55
7mm08 = 7x57
to name a couple
it leads me to wonder manufacturers can build lighter rifles with less materials to produce similar results lower build cost equals bigger profit? or am i just cynical?

Originally Posted by scotty

is the development of these new cartridges really about progress tho ...... or is it about profit ? as you evidenced the velocity is comparable
6.5cm = 6.5x55
7mm08 = 7x57
to name a couple
it leads me to wonder manufacturers can build lighter rifles with less materials to produce similar results lower build cost equals bigger profit? or am i just cynical?

Same could be said about the 7PRC & 7RM

Its about action & magazine length, efficiency & twist rates, the 6.5 CM is an AR10 cartridge

one could add some oldies now thankfully redundant - 16 gauge shotgun ( still have Dads old 1890 hammer gun -not to be fired ) .22 short .22 birdshot most all bloody useless - although I understand the short was popular early days indoor target shooting - but some one here can answer this one -I have always wondered about -if a .22 was supposed to be for short-long and long rifle as many early .22 were stamped then surely the jump of a short from breech to rifling must give the start of rifling problems - one old remington pump .22 I had -very clear ring about 1in from breech end - I often wondered if that was to many shorts early days as it was from twenties

Some, not all are about wring the last bit of accuracy or speed with every trick in the book.
Some of them are other cartridges tweaked with a sharper shoulder, shorter or longer neck with less body taper maybe with a shorter case.
In other calibres like the 6.5 prc they are attempting to get close to the speed of the 6.5 rem mag and 264 win mag by using a fatter case with no useless belt.
The new 277 cartridges are the same
The 270 cal has never been a mainstay of the target groupies.
To make it perform better than some of the newcomers like the 6.5s, they want to use higher BC projectiles which is fine but need a faster twist and while they are at it they develop a better case to make it go quicker. And so on

Originally Posted by Tahr

It surprises me that 6.5x55 is mentioned in this thread as possibly being redundant. Tikka still make them (as does Blaser).
There must be thousands of the M96 & 93 ex service rifles in NZ.
Mine is a modern (20 years old) S&L and is superb.
N560 and 140 AMAX or Gold Dots at 2840fps and its good for anything. 21.5" barrel.

Its the second 6.5x55 I have had and they both have been superbly accurate.

The S&L is my only heirloom rifle and its ear marked to go on to my sons. I even keep a little note book tracking the loads and details, and the loaded ammo in stock so that they can just pick it up and use it when the time inevitably comes.

Everybody knows the 308 was made redundant 61 years before it was designed.

7.62x39 is a great round.
Ammo can be very cheap, generally easy to find, light recoiling and reasonably effective on medium game.
My kids prefer shooting my Ruger Ranch which is surprisingly accurate even with the FMJ ammo.
Nothing too flash but great to be able to go out for a decent shoot without breaking the bank.

Originally Posted by Barry the hunter

one could add some oldies now thankfully redundant - 16 gauge shotgun ( still have Dads old 1890 hammer gun -not to be fired ) .22 short .22 birdshot most all bloody useless - although I understand the short was popular early days indoor target shooting - but some one here can answer this one -I have always wondered about -if a .22 was supposed to be for short-long and long rifle as many early .22 were stamped then surely the jump of a short from breech to rifling must give the start of rifling problems - one old remington pump .22 I had -very clear ring about 1in from breech end - I often wondered if that was to many shorts early days as it was from twenties

I have a 1905 Winchester single shot .22 "Boy's Rifle". At least that's how I think of it. A lovely proportionate small 22. Bought it in Dunedin in 1980 for $25. It was well worn when I got it with a couple of cracks in the woodwork. A nice brown patina on the nickel steel. Stamped on the barrel is "22 Short-22 Long- 22 Long Rifle". I stopped shooting it with modern LR rounds after the first try as it spat powder back into your face. And it took a pocket knife or flat blade screw driver to lever the spent cartridge out of the chamber. Couldn't get or find 22 Longs but 22 shorts were easy to get. Lo and behold. That rifle was and still is a stunning tack driver with its tiny open iron sights and 22 shorts. It has cleaned up a feral cat problem in a certain city park where both Council and SPCA had washed their hands of it. Many moons ago now I hasten to add. In my hands it has knocked off a few possums and accounted for a modestpassle of hedgerow rabbits. But mostly it sits pining to be in the hands of a 12 yr old out in the paddock or in the scrub. It makes little noise and certainly does not wear a suppressor. My kids learned to shoot with it. Now my grandkids line up for a go. The lethal little 22 short is mild mannered, accurate and effective. If they still allowed it I would go hunting rats at the city dump. It's great for possums and rabbits to 25m. Headshots. I'll never willingly part with it and there's a lineup of family hoping to inherit it. I got given a couple of bricks of said 22 Short solids- target ammo. Then last year I bought a guys old stock of many hundreds of hollowpoints. The rifle was clearly fed a constant diet of shorts from new, which has led to a belling of the chamber, or maybe a groove, that LR cartridges expand into making extraction difficult. And the headspace can't handle LR pressure any more. I have other rifles to shoot LR with. Oh for the days when a 12yr old could wander the scrubby edges of gulleys and waterways with a little singleshot and a pocket full of .22 shorts. Rabbit, rat or feral cat beware.

Originally Posted by Barry the hunter

one could add some oldies now thankfully redundant - 16 gauge shotgun ( still have Dads old 1890 hammer gun -not to be fired ) .22 short .22 birdshot most all bloody useless - although I understand the short was popular early days indoor target shooting - but some one here can answer this one -I have always wondered about -if a .22 was supposed to be for short-long and long rifle as many early .22 were stamped then surely the jump of a short from breech to rifling must give the start of rifling problems - one old remington pump .22 I had -very clear ring about 1in from breech end - I often wondered if that was to many shorts early days as it was from twenties

Had an old BSA bolt single shot when I was a kid we'd shoot trout with. Me and my mate would load it with a short and put the whole gun under the water, inch it close to the trout and pull the trigger. We got a lot of trout with that gun and the barrel was 'ringed' all along it's length. It think we fired long-rifles through it too - I think my mate said it was legal back then.

We did that in those 'jump across' farm streams - got some big eels out of them too.

Those 'shorts' didn't make much noise - they had their uses around houses as they didn't upset anyone - wouldn't try that with an high velocity.

Never did figure out what the 'birdshot' ones did - I shot a rat in a garage once and the bloody thing kept going ...........

Greetings All,
I was sitting in our living room this morning, between outside jobs, thinking about what I may put in this post and the unmistakable first few bars of Black Magic Woman came through the speakers. I started thinking "Is this song obsolete as it was recorded over 50 years ago?" Next "Is the .270 obsolete because it was introduced almost 100 years ago?" To me the answer is no to both questions.

Cartridges can be broadly classified into three main groups.

Current.
Still chambered by a number of manufacturers and both ammunition and components are readily available. Well in normal times anyway. Examples would be .308W, .223 Rem and in Europe the 7.92 x 57 Mauser. The latter is still chambered by most European manufacturers.
Obsolescent.
Infrequently chambered today but ammunition and components still usually available in normal times. .222Rem, 7X57 Mauser. .303 British are examples here.
Obsolete.
No longer chambered today. Ammunition and components like cases hard to find. A handloaders proposition generally. 6.5 Remington Magnum and some of the WSSM cartridge are examples.
So where does your favourite cartridge fit? I rather like the obsolescent and obsolete ones myself.
Regards Grandpamac.

44-40...
Old man has a model 1892 Winchester 44wcf which was passed down from my late grandfather. Made in 1907. Have around 30 rounds that are 30 years old left with it (been stored well and dry but when you shoot them you can hear the difference in the rounds when fired) but keeping all the brass as my efforts so far to find any 44-40 ammo has been difficult.
Redundant or obsolete? One could argue both.
Would love to come across some more rounds for it but not also not in any great hurry to try locate some more rounds as reloading supplies appear possible to obtain.

Either way, would never part with the 44. It's in the family for good

Originally Posted by JustAnotherSpearo

44-40...
Old man has a model 1892 Winchester 44wcf which was passed down from my late grandfather. Made in 1907. Have around 30 rounds that are 30 years old left with it (been stored well and dry but when you shoot them you can hear the difference in the rounds when fired) but keeping all the brass as my efforts so far to find any 44-40 ammo has been difficult.
Redundant or obsolete? One could argue both.
Would love to come across some more rounds for it but not also not in any great hurry to try locate some more rounds as reloading supplies appear possible to obtain.

Either way, would never part with the 44. It's in the family for good

Components are quite easy to obtain and I probably reload over a thousand rounds of 44-40 every year.
Hunt and target shoot with one.
I do have some factory Winchester Ammo in the cabinet that was $140 per 50 rounds - I'll probably either never fire it or just use it and use the brass.
H&F in Hamilton has the factory ammo quite regularly for some reason

Originally Posted by grandpamac

Greetings All,
I was sitting in our living room this morning, between outside jobs, thinking about what I may put in this post and the unmistakable first few bars of Black Magic Woman came through the speakers. I started thinking "Is this song obsolete as it was recorded over 50 years ago?" Next "Is the .270 obsolete because it was introduced almost 100 years ago?" To me the answer is no to both questions.

Cartridges can be broadly classified into three main groups.

Current.
Still chambered by a number of manufacturers and both ammunition and components are readily available. Well in normal times anyway. Examples would be .308W, .223 Rem and in Europe the 7.92 x 57 Mauser. The latter is still chambered by most European manufacturers.
Obsolescent.
Infrequently chambered today but ammunition and components still usually available in normal times. .222Rem, 7X57 Mauser. .303 British are examples here.
Obsolete.
No longer chambered today. Ammunition and components like cases hard to find. A handloaders proposition generally. 6.5 Remington Magnum and some of the WSSM cartridge are examples.
So where does your favourite cartridge fit? I rather like the obsolescent and obsolete ones myself.
Regards Grandpamac.

In ref to your 2nd to last line - my favourite is 7x57 - not obsolete, just getting left behind because people think it's getting old.

The other is 6.5x54MS and I don't know if any commercial company loads for those. They can also be difficult to find cases for, or at least until Privi started making them - they probably load them too.
The old 'standby' Norma quit loading them years ago, but still load its cuzzies the 6.5 Jap and 6.5 Carcano.
Never quite understood why Norma quit on those, and I know it's all about making something that sells ............... and maybe they didn't.
The best bullet for that was the old Norma 139gr Vulkan - and that too is discontinued, in that particular weight anyway.
The second best bullet was the 156gr Alaska with the steel case. They were a good bullet, but the new '156gr Alaska' is copper jacketted - and you can't get them here any way.
Fortunately I've scrounged a short lifetime's supply of those - and cases, both Norma and Privi.

That's not a 'bitch' it's just the way it is - but that 6.5x54MS kills with the best of them ............. just not out to where people think deer are these days .............. and that just might be why.

Originally Posted by SF90

In ref to your 2nd to last line - my favourite is 7x57 - not obsolete, just getting left behind because people think it's getting old.

The other is 6.5x54MS and I don't know if any commercial company loads for those. They can also be difficult to find cases for, or at least until Privi started making them - they probably load them too.
The old 'standby' Norma quit loading them years ago, but still load its cuzzies the 6.5 Jap and 6.5 Carcano.
Never quite understood why Norma quit on those, and I know it's all about making something that sells ............... and maybe they didn't.
The best bullet for that was the old Norma 139gr Vulkan - and that too is discontinued, in that particular weight anyway.
The second best bullet was the 156gr Alaska with the steel case. They were a good bullet, but the new '156gr Alaska' is copper jacketted - and you can't get them here any way.
Fortunately I've scrounged a short lifetime's supply of those - and cases, both Norma and Privi.

That's not a 'bitch' it's just the way it is - but that 6.5x54MS kills with the best of them ............. just not out to where people think deer are these days .............. and that just might be why.

Greetings @SF90,
The 7x57 is not obsolete. I listed as obsolescent as it is seldom chambered, even in Europe. They now seem to favour the 7x64. Components and ammo should be available for a very long time for the 7x57.
Regards Grandpamac.

Originally Posted by grandpamac

Cartridges can be broadly classified into three main groups.

Current.
Still chambered by a number of manufacturers and both ammunition and components are readily available. Well in normal times anyway. Examples would be .308W, .223 Rem and in Europe the 7.92 x 57 Mauser. The latter is still chambered by most European manufacturers.
Obsolescent.
Infrequently chambered today but ammunition and components still usually available in normal times. .222Rem, 7X57 Mauser. .303 British are examples here.
Obsolete.
No longer chambered today. Ammunition and components like cases hard to find. A handloaders proposition generally. 6.5 Remington Magnum and some of the WSSM cartridge are examples.
So where does your favourite cartridge fit? I rather like the obsolescent and obsolete ones myself.
Regards Grandpamac.

I think that sums it up perfectly. Some people might think one cartridge is in one group and not another. But overall its pretty clear.

260 Rem i would call Obsolescent. 7x57 and 6.5x55 would be borderline, possibly current in Europe but not the rest of the world?
Wonder how long 7mm rem mag and 300 win mag will be current. again just like the 7x57 an 6.5x55 still will be heaps of rifles floating around and might stay current in one location more than another.

What about New wildcats that have not made it to SAAMI spec yet? 22 creedmoor for example. Not exactly obsolete as its new. But exactly the same situation as obsolete cartridge's

Originally Posted by Makros

Components are quite easy to obtain and I probably reload over a thousand rounds of 44-40 every year.
Hunt and target shoot with one.
I do have some factory Winchester Ammo in the cabinet that was $140 per 50 rounds - I'll probably either never fire it or just use it and use the brass.
H&F in Hamilton has the factory ammo quite regularly for some reason

I'm on the waiting to be called list with H&F and gun city for some but good to know! Thank you