'New' cartridges I'd like to see.
- Thread starter trapshooter
- Start date
- Status
trapshooter
Member
Mike Irwin and Art are right. No reason to fool around with this stuff except to say we did. But that's half the fun.
On the 408 Cheyenne. Yep. Seen it. But it's not what I'm after.
(Not that I wouldn't buy one, with unlimited funds).
Whoever mentioned the custom reamer point is also correct. Like I've said (in other threads or forums), with enough money, you can solve darn near any problem. Even a non-existant one.
I'm just thinking about something unique, but if it doesn't render a gain to the shooter, somewhere along the line, then yeah, it would be a waste of money.
Someone said that the 50 BMG is a better case to neck up, than down. Maybe true, I don't know. But as noted, you run into the DD/BATF problem (or whatever they changed the agency acronym to).
I still think there is a mid-.40 (.425-.475) caliber wildcat of the .50 BMG that would be a butt-kicker. Maybey it's larger, in the .475-.485 range. I'm looking for a weight for velocity trade that doesn't lose a boatload of downrange energy, yet is accurate at really long range. (Beyond today's extremes). Also, that doesn't burn barrels like an oxy-acetylene torch.
As a long range (pun intended) goal, I think I'm gonna clean-sheet this, from an engineering perspective. Ought to be time consuming. If nothing else, you usually learn something beneficial by finding out what won't work. Sometimes, the search takes you into a whole new, completely interesting area, that you had no intention of getting into when you started.
Heck, if someone asked me for a short definition of human existence, I don't think it would be far wrong to say it is all summed up as the search for something uncommon and 'new' (new being relative), just to say you did.
On the 408 Cheyenne. Yep. Seen it. But it's not what I'm after.
(Not that I wouldn't buy one, with unlimited funds).
Whoever mentioned the custom reamer point is also correct. Like I've said (in other threads or forums), with enough money, you can solve darn near any problem. Even a non-existant one.
I'm just thinking about something unique, but if it doesn't render a gain to the shooter, somewhere along the line, then yeah, it would be a waste of money.
Someone said that the 50 BMG is a better case to neck up, than down. Maybe true, I don't know. But as noted, you run into the DD/BATF problem (or whatever they changed the agency acronym to).
I still think there is a mid-.40 (.425-.475) caliber wildcat of the .50 BMG that would be a butt-kicker. Maybey it's larger, in the .475-.485 range. I'm looking for a weight for velocity trade that doesn't lose a boatload of downrange energy, yet is accurate at really long range. (Beyond today's extremes). Also, that doesn't burn barrels like an oxy-acetylene torch.
As a long range (pun intended) goal, I think I'm gonna clean-sheet this, from an engineering perspective. Ought to be time consuming. If nothing else, you usually learn something beneficial by finding out what won't work. Sometimes, the search takes you into a whole new, completely interesting area, that you had no intention of getting into when you started.
Heck, if someone asked me for a short definition of human existence, I don't think it would be far wrong to say it is all summed up as the search for something uncommon and 'new' (new being relative), just to say you did.
Last edited:
Gordon
Member
How are you gonna ever equal the .50 BMG it has ballistic coefficients over 1 . Nothing even comes even close in "downrange energy" retention in calibers smaller or bigger (except 20mm) that you can fire from shoulder. If barrell"scorching is an issue .338 Lapua is about as big and flat shooting as you can get. A .378 or 416 Weatherby fall far short of it as ranges exceed 600 yards. A 300grain BT .338 bullet flys flatter and retains energy better than anything bigger except .50bmg BT.
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
With all the heavier bullets now available for hotshot .22s, I wonder how one of these Short Fat Magnums in .22 would do? Push something around 70 grains as fast as a Swift does with a 40-grain?
Art
Art
Jim Higginbotham
Member
Originally posted by HSMITH
338 Win short mag, with slightly better velocity than the 338 win mag, in a Model 70 Classic Featherweight sportin' a 22" tube. Looking for just under 7 1/2 pounds with a sling, scope and 2 or 3 rounds in it. Would be BRUTAL on both ends, but the elk would need to be VERY afraid
On another note I would like to see the VERY good 284 win chambered in more rifles on the shelf.
Interestingly enough one of my favorite gunshops has a set of RCBS dies labled ".338 WSM" - an odd designation since there is no factory cartridge and the wildcats usually list as caliber/parent case.
Who knows, maybe RCBS knows something we don't
Cheers,
Jim H.
labgrade
Member In Memoriam
Lest my first brain dump be misconstrued, I'm way in favor of those out there playing with their fave pets - makes for new stuff & who knows? maybe something very revolutionary come of it. We could only hope.
Nothing else, playing is in our nature & that, in itself, is plenty good enough for me.
Maybe the next real advance will be a barrel sleeve-thing that allows a quick switch-out replacement. 'Course, we've already pretty much got that with just a new barrel .....
Trying to think of the throat erosion, etc. sits we got for the high intensities.
I can envision a home-done switch-out thermal fit though. Hmmmm
Nothing else, playing is in our nature & that, in itself, is plenty good enough for me.
Maybe the next real advance will be a barrel sleeve-thing that allows a quick switch-out replacement. 'Course, we've already pretty much got that with just a new barrel .....
Trying to think of the throat erosion, etc. sits we got for the high intensities.
I can envision a home-done switch-out thermal fit though. Hmmmm
Gordon
Member
Art I don't think it can be done practically. I have seen attempts at everything to try to get 68 or heavier bullets past 3700fps and it does not seem possible at least with 30 inch or shorter barrels. If you work with the old Powley"computor" wheel you'll see the expansion rates of powders cannot be funneled down .22 barrel to push heavy long bullets much past 3600fps. within "normal "pressure curves. Dr. Ramon Somavia of my local fame tried to get long heavy bullets going fast in early and mid fifties. Even with slow powders the best he could get .25 caliber 160 grain bullets to go was around 3600fps with overpressure rounds. 200 grainers went 3300fps with 416 rigby case necked down using .50 BMG powder. I have his .258 super condor with some of his old 160 loads which went 3550 out of 30" barrel when I last chrono'd them in 90. This is on 1917 action and it was HOT! This rifle has 20X Unertl programmer with ballistic drop setting for scope inside lens cap to 1000yds. verified by my tests.I saw other discarded barrels with notes on them . Like 416X.228 using 100 grain .228 bullets velocities were in same range 3600fps. I have friends that shoot .22-06 improved quick twist and they can only get 3600 fps from 75 grain .22 bullets with 28" barrels.:banghead:
Andrew Wyatt
Member
I'd like to see a .375 WSM , a .450 WSM, and a .300 WSSM.
max popenker
Member
exactly that actually already done. see the 9x39mm cartridge on the pic below. sub-sonic heavy bullet, not the VLD, but the AP instead
Archie
Member
I'd like to see a
"cleaner" version of the 7.62 x 39 round.
.30 caliber bore, and a rimless casing, maybe on the .308 W case size. Something like the .308x1.5 round. The idea is for a medium power hunting round, more accurate than the Russian round and better suited for a light semi-automatic rifle than the .30 WCF.
It would have to come in a new rifle. Perhaps something like a Ruger Mini, or an updated Remington Model 8. Something the size and shape of a 1894 Winchester, but semi-auto and designed to be used with modern scopes or red dots.
And to echo someone's call for a legitimized 6.5-06. That would be a long range thumper.
"cleaner" version of the 7.62 x 39 round.
.30 caliber bore, and a rimless casing, maybe on the .308 W case size. Something like the .308x1.5 round. The idea is for a medium power hunting round, more accurate than the Russian round and better suited for a light semi-automatic rifle than the .30 WCF.
It would have to come in a new rifle. Perhaps something like a Ruger Mini, or an updated Remington Model 8. Something the size and shape of a 1894 Winchester, but semi-auto and designed to be used with modern scopes or red dots.
And to echo someone's call for a legitimized 6.5-06. That would be a long range thumper.
Regarding necking down the .50 and barrel erosion: One partial cure is to design your case with a sharp shoulder and a LONG neck. There is less "sandblasting" effect in the throat (and more in the case itself) with this setup. My 6mm Ackley barrels go twice the rounds of those for my .243 Ackley.
Regarding necking up the .50 and getting a DD: Maybe not. The rule is "Military-type (or nonsporting) weapons with bores over 1/2 inch." A .577 or .600 Nitro is not a military type weapon. Neither is my 4-bore (1.000") or 2-bore (1.325") Your wildcat based on the .50 case might not be, either. You'd have to write ATF to get a ruling, but I think they'd have a hard time saying a single shot that fired cast bullets was a "military type (or nonsporting) weapon."
JR
Regarding necking up the .50 and getting a DD: Maybe not. The rule is "Military-type (or nonsporting) weapons with bores over 1/2 inch." A .577 or .600 Nitro is not a military type weapon. Neither is my 4-bore (1.000") or 2-bore (1.325") Your wildcat based on the .50 case might not be, either. You'd have to write ATF to get a ruling, but I think they'd have a hard time saying a single shot that fired cast bullets was a "military type (or nonsporting) weapon."
JR
cheygriz, I also would like to see a souped up lever action round. I'm thinking something like .30-40 Krag +P would be cool, or maybe a .30-40 necked down to .25 cal, they could call it the .25 Krag or something...
If ya want to get really crazy, how about .30 Carbine necked to .17 cal?
If ya want to get really crazy, how about .30 Carbine necked to .17 cal?
Mike Irwin
Member
"maybe a .30-40 necked down to .25 cal"
That, IIRC, used to be a fairly popular wildcat, actually.
There was also a British version using the .303 as the base.
That, IIRC, used to be a fairly popular wildcat, actually.
There was also a British version using the .303 as the base.
mtnbkr
Member
With the winking smiley, I'm not sure if you're serious or not, but I think there's a Whelen cartridge that is a .40 based on the 30.06 case. I think it's called, oddly enough, the 40 Whelen.
Chris
mtnbkr
Member
I love my Mod 70 Featherweight in 6.5x55. With a Leupold 2-7x33, it is just about right for "fun" shooting and hunting (or so I hope, this will be my first season with it). I took a leap of faith with the 6.5 swede based on what I read here and on TFL. I'm glad I did.
Chris
Mike Irwin
Member
The .400 Whelen never made it for one very specific reason -- controlling headspace was nearly impossible.
The shoulder was far too small to be effective.
The shoulder was far too small to be effective.
Kobun
Member
Wyobuckaroo:
Really nice rifle. One of the quietest I've ever heard. Sounds like a powerfull airgun when fired.
I have a .458-2" at work. It is a internally supressed mauser, based on a .458 Win Mag that is cut down to 2".
Really nice rifle. One of the quietest I've ever heard. Sounds like a powerfull airgun when fired.
I'd like to see a 6.5X60 with an "AI" type shoulder on the shortened 06 based case. The case volume would be just right for the expansion rate of normal propellants.
It would not be so far overbore as the 264 Mag. The projos would be of sufficient length and diameter to take advantage of the very latest in bullet technology. Very high BCs would be easily obtained. Recoil would be moderate. Long barrels and actions wouldn't be necessary.
I think we should call it the 260 AAR (All Around Rifle). Ooops, I think P.O.Ackley thought of this one!
It would not be so far overbore as the 264 Mag. The projos would be of sufficient length and diameter to take advantage of the very latest in bullet technology. Very high BCs would be easily obtained. Recoil would be moderate. Long barrels and actions wouldn't be necessary.
I think we should call it the 260 AAR (All Around Rifle). Ooops, I think P.O.Ackley thought of this one!
- Status
