A "bad" rifle caliber/cartridge?

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Bear2000

Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
397
I plan on getting into 6.5x55 this fall. I've got the dies, bullets, brass, and continue to research loads, ballistics, etc., but am still having the Tikka vs. CZ argument with myself. Anyway, I made this choice based on all the good things that I've heard about the cartridge and because it will work, I think, well as a deer gun in North Carolina. I think I made a good choice (although I suppose 7mm-08 would have been just as good).

But when researching calibers and cartridges, about all I hear about just about every one is how good they are. I'm interested in what cartridges are NOT good, to stay away from (for whatever reasons), that don't have good ballistics and useful applications. I know everyone has their favorites and most calibers/cartridges have some redeeming qualities, but are there some - commercially viable - that most people would say, "They're useless." Or does the brutal logic of the market just take care of them?
 
There were some pistol cartridge "flops" in the past decade or so, but I dont recall off the top of my head any rifle cartridge flops. Im sure someone will remember a few.
 
It's more curiosity - it just seems that every thing out there is "great". I guess those that aren't (or were not) just didn't make it, so we don't hear anything about them.
 
The 260 Remington seems to have been more or less a commercial flop, with very few rifle manufacturers producing factory guns and few ammo manufacturers producing loaded ammunition. Locally I can find 260 Rem factory ammo at Bass Pro or a larger gun shop...but its nonexistent at most sporting goods stores or the smaller gun shops I've visited.

That said, the 260 has achieved nearly cult-like status among competition shooters, deer hunters, and pretty much anybody that reloads for it. I myself have a 260 with no plans of getting rid of it, and will purchase reloading components for it either this or next month.
 
.243 WSSM. I got a beautiful laminate medium weight barreled Winchester M70. The gun was absolutely perfect, I regret selling it just because of how nice of a gun it was. I did everything in my power to try and love that cartridge. I loaded almost every .243 bullet available, different weights, etc. About 80% of the 5 shot group I had would have a pretty extreme flier (pressure spike is what I theorized). a .75" group would open up to 3 inches! I burned through primers at loads that were still a few grains from max. The brass would expand so much that I had serious bolt lift problems, primer pockets would enlarge, etc. The round would jam about 50% of the time on the infeed. I loved the gun, the idea of the cartridge was great, love the 6mm bullet, but I had so many problems that I had to get rid of it. My Savage 110 in 7mm-08 is not as pretty or speedy, but it works every time and doesn't throw fliers.
 
Throat burners like some of the Weatherby and Lazzeroni Magnums are the best examples of "bad" cartridges I can think of, and there its just the trade off. barrel life vs. performance.
 
The 45-70 was a 'bad' idea. Kicked too hard. Had a rainbow trajectory. Big, fat and ugly rounds. Used lots of powder and lead so it was expensive to shoot.

The .45 Colt round is in much the same fix as a handgun round.

That is the reason that both of them didn't last very long after their inventions and you can hardly find them anymore.
 
Plenty of people will tell you about the short comings of .30-30. That it has no potential past 20 feet and deer will catch them in their teeth and all. Fortunately most people out there know better.
 
Throat burners like some of the Weatherby and Lazzeroni Magnums are the best examples of "bad" cartridges I can think of, and there its just the trade off. barrel life vs. performance.
Click to expand...

Yup. As you indicate the market pretty well takes care of "bad" ones. If it's popular, it's going to have a lot going for it. There aren't really any "bad", just different in terms of the tradeoff and the intended use. But severely overbore cartridges are the best example of not-very-useful-or-efficient ones. Very anemic ones relative to their platform size might be considered "bad", like a .32 auto in a full-sized handgun, or a .25-20 or .44 special in a rifle - they have very limited usefulness.

.243 WSSM. I got a beautiful laminate medium weight barreled Winchester M70. The gun was absolutely perfect, I regret selling it just because of how nice of a gun it was. I did everything in my power to try and love that cartridge. I loaded almost every .243 bullet available, different weights, etc. About 80% of the 5 shot group I had would have a pretty extreme flier (pressure spike is what I theorized). a .75" group would open up to 3 inches! I burned through primers at loads that were still a few grains from max. The brass would expand so much that I had serious bolt lift problems, primer pockets would enlarge, etc. The round would jam about 50% of the time on the infeed.
Click to expand...

Interesting - well there ya go - a good example of the rare truly bad cartridge, perhaps.
 
First of all, congrats on the 6.5 x 55 idea, I love mine.

I think that the market weeds out the bad ones, and that many of the new ones are wildcats that have become popular, there are many wildcats that fail to catch on.
 
All cartridges have some application and are ballistically relevant for that particular application. I would say that the only cartridges you should stray away from are those that are not common. This is not because I feel something is wrong or bad about them; Instead, it is because getting ammunition, especially at an affodable cost, will be difficult.
 
.308 marlin express? .30 TC ? Both new rimmed versions of .308 even though .307 Winchester was exactly that. Most of the new short magnums too.
 
The 45-70 was a 'bad' idea. Kicked too hard. Had a rainbow trajectory. Big, fat and ugly rounds. Used lots of powder and lead so it was expensive to shoot.

The .45 Colt round is in much the same fix as a handgun round.

That is the reason that both of them didn't last very long after their inventions and you can hardly find them anymore.
Click to expand...
Was that sarcasm or do you have no idea what you are talking about??

Not to be rude or anything, but you picked 2 cartridges that are still alive and kicking. You should have said something like 32 winchester or 22 hornet or 45 GAP or one of the powder-transition cartridges that was under powered. 32-40 comes to mind, but I may be wrong.

.30 TC
Click to expand...
Good example; a proprietary cartridge for the new TC Icon that was also available in .308. They built their own gallows on that one.

I disagree on the WSM line though. Some of them, yes, but not all. Loaded ammo is expensive, but the cartridge is of good design and performs well, such as the .300 wsm which barely falls short of 300 win mag velocities but uses less powder.
 
I suppose you could argue some cartridges are kinda redundant, but I don’t know how many are actually bad. For example, the 7mm-08 and .260 Remington are very similar to the 7x57 and 6.5x55, respectively. Was there really a need for these two cartridges? On the other hand, those newer cartridges have shorter actions than the old war cartridges, so you could argue there is potentially a benefit to using them.

I’m sure if you looked hard enough, you could find some cartridges that really are pretty much out-classed by another cartridge. For example, the 6mm seems better on paper than the .243 but, for whatever reason, the .243 is a success and the 6mm is just about dead.
 
I do not believe that any of the new era designed cartridges are inherently bad. It's the manufacturer's fault for introduction in less than desirable models or lack of good QC. The 243wssm mentioned by michaelmcgo is a well designed cartridge, patterned after the benchrest cartridges that are so popular now, but suffered through Winchester's money woes and perhaps the QC was not up to par. I know that some of Winchester's ammo was recalled. IMO, that rifle might have been made better by bedding the action and floating the barrel. I'm only guessing that it was box stock. The problem with some new designs though, is that they only duplicate existing popular rounds, and it takes more than that for many people to change. As mentioned before, those shooting factory ammo want it available on the shelf.

NCsmitty
 
The 45-70 was a 'bad' idea. Kicked too hard. Had a rainbow trajectory. Big, fat and ugly rounds. Used lots of powder and lead so it was expensive to shoot.
Click to expand...

I can't tell if you are kidding or serious on this on. I think plenty of folks will disagree. I can find Marlin 45-70's at all of the local gun shops. True enough about the trajectory and the powder, and the lead. But that's kind of the point isn't it? One of the closest things to chucking a doorknob at the target.


How about the 6mm Remington for a commercial flop? Nothing wrong with the caliber itself, but the .243 was already out there and Remington choose to use the metric (6mm) designation which didn't catch on. On paper, it's a bit better than a .243 (I'm not sure in the real world if it's really better or not).

You could argue the 10mm auto in a pistol round was a bit of a commerical flop as well. Didn't catch on and was basically replaced by the .40 S&W. But it's still my favorite pistol round ;-) Plenty of power and not too expensive if you reload.
 
$0.02

Travis, i'm pretty sure that Critter had his tounge firmly in his cheek!:neener:
there are a few cartridges that i personelly have no use for however even those may have collector/historic value.
ones i would not spend my money on:
.25-20
.17 hmr
.22 long or short (i do use long rifle and CB caps)
.444 malin (good but nothing my .45-70 wont do)
.22 jet
.17 remington
.222 rem. (again good but not better than .223 or .222 mag)
6.5 rem mag
there are others but you get the point, it boils down to personal preferance...
 
Fellas, the 45-70/45LC post was a joke. Notice the accent marks around 'bad'...

9mm is 'bad' because it's a .45 set on 'stun', and real men don't do 'stun'. :p

gp911
 
may i suggest one of the Eichelberger wildcats?
a 25ACP necked down to 10, 12 or 14 caliber doesnt make too much sense to me
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
The Most Versatile Rifle Cartridge For Anywhere (Everywhere) In North America Is...
2 3 4
Replies
79
Views
7K
Art Eatman
A
High Plains
New and old cartridges doing (nearly) the same
2 3 4
Replies
86
Views
2K
wombat13
W
N
  • Locked
Most "efficient" cartridge for each caliber?
2 3 4 5 6 7
Replies
156
Views
4K
Bcwitt
Bcwitt
F
  • Locked
New Rifle
Replies
16
Views
2K
cdb1
cdb1
M
  • Locked
tryin' to fill a gap with the wife's new rifle
Replies
5
Views
437
Sharps Shooter
S
Back
Top