Any one else tired of the multiple cartridges that do the same thing?

[FiREhAwk]

If some one comes up with a new cartridge that sells well, then what is the problem? If we had the mentality of why make something a little different then we wouldn't get far. The .270 for example; did we really need to neck down a 30-06 to keep on with our lives? No, but some one did and it worked out pretty good. We are lucky to have the "problem" of deciding between such a variety

 

[Coyote_Hunter_]

No more than I am of different types of motor vehicles that do the same thing. Or coffee mugs. Or...

 

[R.W.Dale]

See thats my point although your not really buying a whole gun you are still buying. I will say it was a clever ploy by remington now you can have your 223, 203, 6.8, and now 30 cal on the same lower receiver. But still it does nothing more than a 308.

Sure it does

It works on your AR15 lower that just about everyone and their dog now owns giving you performance approaching 300savage. This allows Joe 6 pack to now blastimate bambi with his AR15 in the same manner his father did with his rem700.

The just buy an AR10 argument doesn't hold water. Comparing the price weight and handling characteristics is literally like making a comparison between the Ruger mini and a M1A

Your topic is valid but your example is not. The 30rar actually does fill an unoccupied niche.

If you want to rail about stupidly superfluous cartridges pick on .30TC vs 308 or 280rem vs 270 and the infamous 243 vs 6mm

 

[eye5600]

It's not just cartridges, of course. Let's suppose you want a pistol, and decide on a 1911. Gee, you have limited the field to about, oh, 100 different makers and models. Or if you wanted to try out all the different options in a 30-06 bolt action rifle, you'd never finish. New models would keep coming out faster than you could find examples and arrange for demo.

 

[TX1911fan]

I agree with Krochus. Bad example. I was never really sold on the 6.8SPC, but the .30 RAR will be on my AR15 lower someday.

I don't really get why people complain about having choice. What is the problem with that. Just because there are a bunch of choices doesn't mean you have to get them all. "Why does Baskin Robbins have to have 31 flavors anyway. They all do the same thing, they could really just have one or two. I think it's just an excuse to sell more ice cream."

 

[GojuBrian]

Nothing wrong with having choices.

 

[ADKWOODSMAN]

More toys to load for and play with. Keep them coming.

Now Remington make a .358 Win. mountain rifle or a Model 7 in .358.

 

[Joe Demko]

At one time, I was toying with the idea of having an AR-10 barrel made up in .300 Savage and building a rifle around it. I do love that cartridge. Frankly, though, an AR upper in .30 RAR that duplicates its performance sounds like a temptingly cheaper alternative.

 

[jklinstein]

Most improvements should be in terms of projectile design instead of niche cartridges. I could get by for all my needs with those calibers that were developed within the last 47 years.

.22lr
.38spl/.357magnum
.44spl/44magnum
9mm
45ACP
.30-30
.30-06
.308
7.62x39
.223
300 magnum

 

[MMCSRET]

I am really fond of the "NICHE" cartridges. My favorites are the old ones: 38-55, 43 Spanish, 32 WCF, 7.7X58, 32S&W and Long, 32 WS, 44 Special. Just some of my favorite "NICHES".

 

[mnrivrat]

Same as automobiles realy - by changing the design a smidge they can call it a new model, and there is always a percentage of the buying market that has to have the newest one .

It's not a bad thing , keeps the stuff fresher in a sense, and once in awhile they even make a small improvement. ( maybe ?)

But I never get tired of them trying !

 

[catspa]

I'm with Gunslinger. Y'all keep chasing the "latest and greatest" at many dollars a copy if you want to. I'm stuck in 1893 with the 7 Mauser. It always kills everything I need killed. I hear that was also true for some old boy named Bell...

Parker

 

[catspa]

double tap, sorry...

 

[aka108]

Doesn't bother me. I just stick with the old ones that have been around for years. What is nice is that the buyer can get what he or she wants and leave the other on the shelf.

 

[Noxx]

I'm fine with the classics, I don't have interest in newer pistol rounds either, being more of a pistol than rifle guy.

On the other hand, the "latest greatest" routine doesn't bother me either, I just don't pay it any mind.

 

[akodo]

I had a really good conversation with a co-worker today about all of the various calibers that dont really ad anything to the realm of ballistics and we decided most were created as just an excuse to sell more guns and ammunition. For example,

Just the opposite, most were designed to captue a very special niche...a niche you might not be part of. Some guys will say a 223 and a 220 swift are redundant, others will say a 220 swift allows them to reach a tad further, and they are right. Now if you don't sap prarie dogs often enough, these might seem redundant to you.

The various short action magnums that dont really offer anything new to ballistics per se as compaired to their big brothers. The only reason possible for their existance is to boost sales of short action rifles.

It is quite reasonable to introduce 'the same thing just a little different'

Without that concept, we'd have 30-06 and 357 magnum and that's it.

Lots of times these 'pretty much the same but a little different' are addressing shortcomings in the original...like non-belted magnums, because there is no reason for a belt on most magnums.

or a cartridge solves one shortcoming, but inadvertantly causes another one, so then a 3rd comes along that addresses both issues. To the outsider this may seem redundant

And the latest the 30 remington ar. Its just a short action 308, why not just build a 308 ar?

Just speculating here but COULD IT BE DUE TO THE FACT IT CAN BE UTILIZED IN THE AR-15 RECEIVER WHICH IS MADE BY 100 DIFFERENT MANUFACTURERS AT VARIOUS PRICE LEVELS AND QUALITY LEVELS, NOT TO MENTION THE 100,000 OR MORE IN PRIVATE HANDS ALREADY AS OPPOSED TO THE AR-10 RECEIVER WHICH IS MADE BY LESS THAN A DOZEN MAKERS, IS MORE EXPENSIVE, AND A LOT LESS ARE ALREADY OWNED BY PEOPLE?

All this can be quite confusing, which ones are better which ones can you even find? In the ammunition shortage we face today, perhaps in an effort to sell more guns the manufacturers have really come up short. If they had left it alone there would be more ammunition. Its a lot harder to make 2 calibers than it is one, and keep them in inventory.

Really? You are complaining that it is confusing? Heck, if you froze cartridge development some time back in 1920, it'd still be confusing as all get-out.

There's a solution to this. Two solutions in fact. #1 LEARN MORE #2 BE SATISFIED WITH WHAT YOU HAVE AND DON'T WORRY THAT THE GRASS MIGHT BE A TAD GREENER ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE SHOOTING RANGE

Finally, we've had thousands of different overlapping cartridges for 130 years or so. We've only had an ammo shortage now. The two items are totally unrelated.

You know what would fix the ammo shortage? BAN GUNS.

Just because something would fix the ammo shortage, doesn't mean it is a good idea

 

[akodo]

most were created as just an excuse to sell more guns and ammunition

P.S that's just blatantly false

Take a look at the new cartridges that came out in the last 10-20 years. 3 out of 4 of them were wildcats before that.

A guy who cooks up his own cartridge and takes on all the research and development himself, well, he is sure as hell isn't doing it so he can personally sell a bunch of guns.

I'd also like to address this

My feeling is that for the ordinary mortal, the .30-06,(or maybe the .308), the 243 Winchester, the .223, and rimfires in .22 or maybe .17 should complete the complement for rifles, and a .357 (yeah, OK, the .44 Mag, too, though I hate it), a .45 ACP (just cause I love it), a 9mm or .380, and .22LR orta do it for handguns. Just an old coot looking at the question

Why those? As far as rifles, nothing in North America that can't be killed with a 30-30, so why not restict us all to just that?

Right away, in your list of rifles you have the 30-06, the 243, and the 223. What about the 338 winmag? That's a powerful handy gun for the folks up in alaska. If it was legal to use, it would be just fine on all but the largest of African game animals.

That brings up another one...I guess us 'mere mortals' better forget ever hunting Cape Buffalo or something of that nature in Africa.

 

[22-rimfire]

I like variety and sometimes I do indeed buy the new caliber offering. The 480 Ruger comes to mind which I feel is a great caliber for hunting deer size and larger game. I don't care if it is not popular.

Same goes with the 41 mag. Other than 22 rimfires, I own more handguns in that caliber than any other.

I was sold on the 40 S&W immediately after it was offered.

There are enough popular calibers/cartridge loadings that if you aren't really interested in what is new, you don't have to buy into it. But why limit someone else's choices if the shooter or buyer feels that the new loading offers something they are interested in.

As I get older, it really doesn't bother me that I might own a gun in a caliber that is semi-extinct. Wish I would have bought a 5mm rimfire back when they were "the new thing" because I have been waiting over a year now for some manufacturer other than a TC Contender to offer a new rifle in that caliber. A lot of centerfire calibers do almost what the 5mm does and some would argue that the 17HMR or 22WMR is just as useful.

 

[earlthegoat2]

On a related note I am getting sick of all these moronic reticles on scopes these days too. Cant anyone kill things with the standard duplex anymore.

 

[22-rimfire]

Mil-dots are the rage. I'll stick with a duplex.

 

[shooter429]

I disagree

Some new calibers duplicate ballistics of older rounds, but do so, in a shorter, lighter gun, for example. Two of my favorite cartridges the .32 Mag and 10mm are new rds that have a place. The .327 can take the place of the .357 in many instances, while giving an extra shot. The 10mm ranges in power from .40 S&W light loads to hotter than the .357-all in one gun. The 375 Ruger is another specific example. If I had an H&H, I would not switch, but since I don't the new shorter case and bbl make for a more efficient, easier to carry rifle at a more affordable price. Some calibers come and go-and some fill a niche. Pick yer poison. I would rather have choices in guns and ammo, rather than just a few calibers from which to choose. That is me.

Shooter429

 

[akodo]

did we really need to neck down a 30-06 to keep on with our lives? No, but some one did and it worked out pretty good. We are lucky to have the "problem" of deciding between such a variety

Firehawk, we shouldn't have developed the 30-06 at all! Should have just stuck with the 7mm mauser, it splits the difference between 30-06 and 270 anways.

 

[Prion]

The Model T didn't become a hybrid SUV overnight, in a year, or even a decade. Small improvements, changes, big improvements, mistakes, revolutionary ideas, incredibily stupid ideas, winners, losers, led to the vastly improved auto of today.

Should we just leave well enough alone with firearms and cartridges and just ponder forever what could have been? Or should we progress one bit at a time and continue to evolve the rifle and cartridge into its ultimate incarnation?

 

[Eric F]

I will and have conceeded to the invention of the 30 rar. I understand the concept. The short verses the long action magnums I conceed also that the short actions can allow faster follow up shots and be more accurate.

But what I wont conceed on is this. The companies as a result are selling more guns and ammunition. At least they had a reason for making the round ballistics related or not. I guess in some cases the motive could have been sales.

BTW I am not opposed to new rounds that offer something new, like 500 mag cool round, if just there were a repeating rifle to go with it in mass production. I dont have a problem with wild cats either, its fun making new brass.

 

[catspa]

akodo:Firehawk, we shouldn't have developed the 30-06 at all! Should have just stuck with the 7mm mauser, it splits the difference between 30-06 and 270 anways.

Hear, hear. Although that last is only true if you're firing it out of a modern rifle with strong steel. I wouldn't fire rounds that generate '06 pressure out of a '93 or '95 mauser, but that's just me...

Why did the Army Ordinance folks settle on a .30 caliber round, anyway? So they could re-use components from 30-40 Krag?

Parker