If you could resurrect a dead cartridge, which one would you chose?

I'm kind of in the same ballpark as OP, except I'd revive .276pedersen (7x51).

Which is in a weird place in history. Had the US chosen it in 1936, it would have been a "gubmint" round, and widely used. Probably to the point that the .308 probably would not have been born. Might have eclipsed the .270, too; or allowed the .280 to come out as the "magnum" of the government caliber.

Ok, we cannot roll history back, but, I think we could build an interesting military intermediate cartridge about 7x45 size.

CapnMac said:

I'm kind of in the same ballpark as OP, except I'd revive .276pedersen (7x51).

Which is in a weird place in history. Had the US chosen it in 1936, it would have been a "gubmint" round, and widely used. Probably to the point that the .308 probably would not have been born. Might have eclipsed the .270, too; or allowed the .280 to come out as the "magnum" of the government caliber.

Ok, we cannot roll history back, but, I think we could build an interesting military intermediate cartridge about 7x45 size.

Click to expand...

Or a 6.5x45. 6.5 bullets seem to occupy a ballistic coefficient sweet spot.

RPZ said:

Or a 6.5x45. 6.5 bullets seem to occupy a ballistic coefficient sweet spot.

Click to expand...

Yes they do. The question that would be raised is whether a 6.545 would be any better than 6.8spc (and an equal number pooh-poohing either choice versus the 6.5 creedmore).

So, the only real advantage is in the wide range of bullet weights & types available in .275/7mm
The "knock" on either a 7x45 or a 6.5x45 would be the same one the brits ran up against in 1980--neither would be much suited for a LMG or Medium MG role. The brits basically dumped the LSW (Light Support Weapon) from the SA80 trial by 1982 and just adopted the FN Mag in 7.62x81. Ok, so a "Squad Automatic Weapon" could be fielded in our putative 6.5/7 caliber; but, that would face all the arguments the present M-242 SAW currently does.

Which is what it is. Really, infantry squads already have to hump belts of 7.62 for "their" MG whether it's an M-60 or an M-240. I'm not seeing anyone argue that we ought to give up the 1000-3000m beaten zone we have with 7.62 for something else.

I think a near perfect round to adopt would be a 6x45. An 80 grain bullet would push about 2700 fps in a 14" barrel. In single shot pistols some of the more popular rounds are a 6mmTCU, 6.5 TCU and 7 TCU which are all a .223 case necked up with a 40 degree shoulder.. You can compare the loading data on hodgdons website in the pistol section.

someguy2800 said:

when nobody is making a new rifle and you can't easily buy ammo, its on the endangered species list. When brass and reloading dies are no longer available, its dead.

Click to expand...

I'd like to offer the following definitions for the various stages of a cartridge's decline:
When nobody is producing factory guns for a cartridge it's obsolescent.
When none of the majors are making ammo for a cartridge it's obsolete.
When they stop cataloging the brass, it's dead.
You can buy reloading dies for just about anything if you're willing to pay for them.

None. Cartridges become obsolete or die because something else does the same thing slightly better. There is so much overlap that we already have way too many. If 75% of the cartridges still in common use were to suddenly stop being produced we not have any gaps to fill.

the .267 Remington Rimfre I showed pictures of was hampered by WW2 . It also was a little overpressure for the technology of the time. Modern rimfire cases can take 40K PSI and that would mean a 2200+ fps 75 grain bullet today. Would be a deadly coyote round to 250 yards, and a close in deer and pig round.

The 280 Remington. While it's not all dead, it is mostly dead. Velocity wise, it nips at the heels of the ever popular 7mm Remington Magnum but allows four, sometimes five rounds to fit in a magazine. Even better would be the 280 AI.

The other round I'd resurrect is the 6mm Remington. Velocities are only slightly better than the 243 Winchester, but I find the longer neck of the 6mm makes it easier to reload.

Another round I'd like to see restored to its former popularity is the 30 Carbine if for no other reason than to bring its price down to plinking levels

jim in Anchorage said:

Tapered bore barrel?

Click to expand...

Doubt it - whatever Miroku put on the .405 reissues.

If they started making 400 super barrels again, i would get on that. I think you can make brass from .308, with some work. That, and .357 max. If I really had to pick one, it would be pre dumbed down .357 mag.

256 Newton. With modern powders this would be a good factory round to have from piggies to elk-sized game. That or someone make a factory 6.5-06.

tark said:

The 280 Ross. The original 7mm Magnum. And the first cartridge to exceed 3000 FPS. In 1907. the original load was a 145 gr bullet at 3145 FPS. With today's powders it can be loaded to about 90% of a 7mm Remington Mag. Only problem is the .288 dia. bullets it uses. That could be corrected during a re-introduction.

Click to expand...

I'm with tark on this one..... but he beat me to it. And it sure qualifies as a "dead" cartridge.

RPZ said:

Or a 6.5x45. 6.5 bullets seem to occupy a ballistic coefficient sweet spot.

Click to expand...

Not just a ballistic coefficient sweet spot, but really a shooter tolerance and capability sweet spot. You can get 7mm or 30cal, or 338+ bullets of greater BC than the best of the 6.5's, but it takes a heck of a lot more powder to get them up to speed, and puts the shooter choosing between a heavier and heavier rifle, or more abusive recoil.

I will say, the long range potential of the Grendel is overstated - it's a capable cartridge, but it doesn't hang with its big brothers. The 6.8SPC falls to the same limitation, and then some, unless a guy runs it in a bolt action. I'm waiting on another barrel for another Grendel, and I'm letting my 6.8 cool right now between strings at the range, but I can run my .243AI Striker pistol flatter than either of the AR cartridges for long range steel, let alone talking about larger cases.

Varminterror said:

Not just a ballistic coefficient sweet spot, but really a shooter tolerance and capability sweet spot. You can get 7mm or 30cal, or 338+ bullets of greater BC than the best of the 6.5's, but it takes a heck of a lot more powder to get them up to speed, and puts the shooter choosing between a heavier and heavier rifle, or more abusive recoil.

I will say, the long range potential of the Grendel is overstated - it's a capable cartridge, but it doesn't hang with its big brothers. The 6.8SPC falls to the same limitation, and then some, unless a guy runs it in a bolt action. I'm waiting on another barrel for another Grendel, and I'm letting my 6.8 cool right now between strings at the range, but I can run my .243AI Striker pistol flatter than either of the AR cartridges for long range steel, let alone talking about larger cases.

Click to expand...

Agreed. I was thinking of a combat rifle application out to say 400 or so yards

RPZ said:

combat rifle application out to say 400 or so yards

Click to expand...

Exactly, the "rifleman's quarter mile."

Interestingly, as part of the discussion around the new Army trials for both new platform and ammo (which might be anything from 5 to 7 mm, per the discussion), the Army CoS actually referred to the "rifleman's 600 meters" which is an interesting distinction.

entropy said:

.22 Savage Hi-Power. A great round for Shotgun/ Rifle combo guns, I'd love to build a Martini or Sharps/Borchardt on that caliber someday.

Click to expand...

I have a Savage M24V in 22 Hornet over 20 ga 3" mag.
How does that grab ya? Close enough?

Yes. I in the concurrent "wish gun" thread, I mentioned .22 Hornet or .22 Hi_Power for a rib barrel in a Vierling. That is a nice 24V to have, Merle1; classic, practical, and collectable!

MachIVshooter said:

None. Truly defunct cartridges are gone for a reason,

Click to expand...

yeah but sometimes the reason is people are stupid. Take for example the 6mm Remington. Dead why?
Sometimes cartridges are killed by coffee talk, more recently internet lies.

Gordon said:

a modernized version of .267 Remington. One that would give a 75 grain bullet about 2200 fps in a rifle

Click to expand...

Similar to a Piper Cub: only dangerous enough to just barely kill

CraigC said:

I don't find the 1895 wanting in that regard. I was actually quite pleasantly surprised what a usable rifle it is.

Click to expand...

Well, I had one that I actually hunted with. It was a boat anchor. Some of the cartridges it was chambered in like 30-40 were less than spectacular. I'm pretty sure the carbine I had weighed about 9 lbs. I know why the Army ditched it pretty fast.

MistWolf said:

The 280 Remington. While it's not all dead, it is mostly dead. Velocity wise, it nips at the heels of the ever popular 7mm Remington Magnum but allows four, sometimes five rounds to fit in a magazine. Even better would be the 280 AI.

The other round I'd resurrect is the 6mm Remington. Velocities are only slightly better than the 243 Winchester, but I find the longer neck of the 6mm makes it easier to reload.

Another round I'd like to see restored to its former popularity is the 30 Carbine if for no other reason than to bring its price down to plinking levels

Click to expand...

I'll see your .280 and raise you the .284 win as it was a ballistic twin but with less powder. Agreed on the 6mm though.

To fit the 284 in a short action, the bullets must be seated deep in the case. If using a long action, the 280 Remington fits in the magazine better than the fat body of the 284

CoalTrain49 said:

Well, I had one that I actually hunted with. It was a boat anchor. Some of the cartridges it was chambered in like 30-40 were less than spectacular. I'm pretty sure the carbine I had weighed about 9 lbs. I know why the Army ditched it pretty fast.

Click to expand...

I have a .405 that I have actually hunted with for 12yrs and find that it not only carries well with the middle finger right in the crook in front of the magazine and is exceptionally accurate (sub-MOA) but is not too heavy for the cartridge at all.

7mm BR, it's always done everything I needed it for. I would like a model Seven so chambered so I wouldn't have to keep track of my downloaded 7-08 ammunition.