Wildcat appreciation thread

[-BW-]

I think there were some long obsolete bore sizes in the .290’s. I assume manufacturers eventually migrated toward a certain array of bore sizes as bullet technology improved, as there could be more variation in bullet weight and design, that performance and application was no longer dependent on its bore size. I guess it’s the same reason .224 pushed .228 into obsolescence, .268 disappeared with the Carcano, .284 beat the .289 (or was it .287?) of the .280 Ross’ bullet, and many others.

[kip13]

@chainsaw I think @-BW- is correct. Having recently hunted down some projectiles in once of these obsolete calibers .287 for my Ross, I reckon that we are talking in such tiny size differences that there is no need for something in that 7mm to 308 gap, otherwise the Ross and .275 H&H (both use .287 pills) would still be mainstream.

If you were looking for a bullet in that size, I cant see the benefit of not just using a 7mm or .308, practically the same, and a hell of a lot easier to find projectiles for. Along those lines, it doesn't even seem like the manufacturers could agree, below is three .280 ross cases loads, my reloads with the 'correct' .287 pill on the left, a Kynoch .280 with a roundnose that measures .288 in the middle and a Kynoch .280 with a FMJ that measures .286 on the right, they all must have worked to a certain degree in their day.

Unless a big manufacturer wants to make a flash new .287 cartridge with high BC and extra low drag, to sell some guns, they might as well just focus on the calibers that have projectiles already. I guess it is just market/inventory consolidation over time.