Big and Light?

I have noticed with many rifle calibers that as the calibers increase, the loaded ammunition weights for them do not. 3 of them come to mind: 348 Winchester, 350 Remington Magnum, and 375 Winchester. I have all of these guns and all of them have 200 grain loads. At one time, they also had 250 grain loads, but since they have been discontinued. It seems to me that if you want to move up in caliber, why would you not use heavier bullets to go with it? Is velocity really that important or is it just a good marketing/selling point? You can get 200 grain bullets for a 30-06 and if I understand sectional density, they should penetrate better than the other 3 calibers using the same weight? As for recoil, heavier bullets would kick, but they are going slower, so that might offset the increased weight. Maybe the lighter ones are more abrupt in recoil whereas the heavier ones are a heavier push. I just cannot help but wonder why all these larger calibers (mostly 35's) are only loaded with lighter bullets instead of the 250 grain.

I would assume that the smaller bullets are flatter-shooting, thus making them more marketable to the average rifle-shooting public.

I agree with GI Joe. There seems to be a lack of higher sectional density bullets especially in the medium bore category like the .35s - the equivalent of the Old World standards like the 6.5x54mm Mannlicher-Schoenauer with 160 grain bullets, the 7x57mm 175 grain and so on; some of which where routinely used to take very large game either with heavy jacketed softpoints or "solids" (roundnose full metal jacket).

Innovative bullet designs like the Nosler Partition, Bear Claw [etc] have produced good penetration with the lighter weights at higher start velocities, which maximized the Weatherby cartridges. But there are still a number of cartridges that could benefit from longer bullets. Even small bores; the .223 being a good example. The heaviest bullets not only offer excellent sectional density for penetration, but potential better ballistic coefficients for higher retained velocity at longer ranges.

--------------------------------------------

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org

Interestingly, in Africa, you'll find the heavy-for-caliber bullets far more popular than the lighter stuff. This is because when the animal you're hunting has horns and/or teeth, and is quite prepared to make mincemeat out of you rather than join the food chain, you want something with a bit of stomp behind it . . . :D

I think part of the reason for the light-for-caliber bullets is to minimize recoil. Certainly, a .375 H&H with a 300gr. pill kicks a lot harder than a 225gr. load. In the West, recoil is a factor for many shooters: and on typical US game, the lighter bullet won't make too much of a difference.

GI Joe,

First off, I believe it’s because today velocity sells, so folks want the fastest load they can get regardless if the caliber or rifle is suited for it. Telling your friends that your 250 grain bullet lopes along at 2300-2500 FPS doesn’t sound all that impressive, even if it will penetrate completely when it gets there.

Secondly, the heavy bullets depending on rifle weight can be punishing, and have in some cases limited use. Big heavy bullets are for big heavy game, so they see limited use.

I have a REM Mod 7 (Mannlicher Stock) 20” barrel that I use for a timber Elk rifle. My normal load is a 225 grn Partition at 2700 FPS. I also developed a 250 grn Partition load for when I chased Elk in WA. That bullet at 2500 FPS in my little MOD 7 killed on both ends.

Now if you look at the ballistics between the two loads, the difference in drop at “practical” hunting range (especially wood distances) in a non-issue. Both loads will stay in an 8” kill zone using the MPBR method. I recovered one of the 225s (off side, under the hide), but never recovered the 250.

IMHO, folks just want fast, even if the cartridge wasn’t “designed” to be used that way.

Chuck