natedog
Member
In 50 years, do you think such standards today like the 30-06, 9mm, .270, .308, .223, the good ol' 30-30, and others will still be in common use?
Rifle cartridges 50 years from now...
- Thread starter natedog
- Start date
- Status
Preacherman
Member
Well, given that three out of the six you mention are about a century old right now, and a fourth is a derivative of one of them, I guess another half-century will find them alive and kicking still: and the other two are military standards, and have been for several decades, so I guess they'll be here too. I think the only thing that will change that is if they finally perfect caseless ammunition, which in my opinion will be a drawback for civilian use, as it will destroy the reloading industry, and make us dependent upon outside ammo. supply for our ammunition - something not to be desired if we fall under an anti-gun government... (easy to ban the production and sale of ammo. to civilians, which makes the guns we already have relatively useless, unless one can "roll your own").
Poodleshooter
Member
Personally, I'm hoping that in 50 years, I'll either:
A. Be pouring a Hodgdon or Alliant "premixed powder slurry" into a "cartridge mold" over a primer and a bullet of my choosing.
B. Plugging my plasma rifle into a recharging socket, while I fill the magazine with tiny copper projectiles.
A. Be pouring a Hodgdon or Alliant "premixed powder slurry" into a "cartridge mold" over a primer and a bullet of my choosing.
B. Plugging my plasma rifle into a recharging socket, while I fill the magazine with tiny copper projectiles.
cratz2
Member
I think there will still be a group of 338 Win Mag and 375 Ultra Mag shooters that put 10 rounds a year through their cannons that tell us how you need such a rifle for anything larger than a coyote. There will be another group using 30-30s, 270s and 30-06s with years of experience taking a variety of game all over the country telling the first group that such guns are rarely needed. And there will be a group of shooters that, while they own 270s and 30-06s, prefer such cartridges as the 243 Win, 6mm Rem, 257 Roberts, 6.5x55 and 7x57 to take game very effectively that tell both groups that they put up with too much punishment from the butt end of their rifles.
So, nope... probably won't change much. Plus the military keeps coming out with new cartridges that are prohibited from civilian possession and the big companies come out with new cartridges that offer the same performance as cartridges that came out in the 1900s and 1920s. The more things change, the more they stay the same. As true with rifle cartridges as anything else.
That would be an interesting thread: What is the most recently introduced cartridge that you commonly use? For me, the 25-06. But it's pretty misleading to say it was introduced in 1969 since it was in use as a wildcat back at least in the '30s. I guess 1964 - the .223.
Chuck Hawk's Cartridge Timeline
So, nope... probably won't change much. Plus the military keeps coming out with new cartridges that are prohibited from civilian possession and the big companies come out with new cartridges that offer the same performance as cartridges that came out in the 1900s and 1920s. The more things change, the more they stay the same. As true with rifle cartridges as anything else.
That would be an interesting thread: What is the most recently introduced cartridge that you commonly use? For me, the 25-06. But it's pretty misleading to say it was introduced in 1969 since it was in use as a wildcat back at least in the '30s. I guess 1964 - the .223.
Chuck Hawk's Cartridge Timeline
Caseless ammo that will have a micro chip that will identify the target as friendly or enemy. Friendly troops will wear a transponder that emits a coded signal. If the micro chip ID's a friend, it harmlessly veers away. Course, maybe they will be able to insert a heat seeker also..............
Tamara
Senior Member
Hmmm... .223 was introduced (as an experimental military cartridge) two years after .243, right?
I guess that'd make it the newest caliber I have a rifle chambered in.
Zundfolge
Member
I expect our government will make it illegal for civilians to own any new types of firearms since most new ammo types are developed to defeat body armor (much like they have done with the SS-190 5.7x28mm ... I guess they don't want us serfs perforating the body armor of their JBTs). Oh, and you can expect any exotic future weapons to be illegal too ... no plasma rifles, no railguns, no laser guns, no caseless ammo ... not for us civies. 
So I expect that the civilian market will keep these older rifle cartridges around for a long time to come since the option will be between them and nothing.
So I expect that the civilian market will keep these older rifle cartridges around for a long time to come since the option will be between them and nothing.
I used to think progress was marching along smartly...
with respect to cartridge design. Kinda got excited about the Voere caseless .223 rounds and the rifles made to shoot them.
BTW, anybody seen or shot one lately?
So, in hindsight, it would appear that drawn brass will still serve a useful purpose down the road for quite some time.
with respect to cartridge design. Kinda got excited about the Voere caseless .223 rounds and the rifles made to shoot them.
BTW, anybody seen or shot one lately?
So, in hindsight, it would appear that drawn brass will still serve a useful purpose down the road for quite some time.
Badger Arms
Member
I'll chime in with my thoughts. I feel that the only advance that will be made will be in electronic ignition and case materials. I feel that we will see polymer cases creep in, but probably in handguns first.
Electronic primers will need to overcome three factors. First, they have to be COMPLETELY compatible with current primers. That is, we should be able to fire the cartridges in current guns, but in an "E-gun" we will have virtually no lock time. The second factor to overcome is with battery technology. We need a battery that will:
1) last for 10 years stored in a rifle.
2) require no switches other than the trigger
3) tell the user when they will run out and how many rounds are left before they should be replaced
4) or perhaps they can be NUCLEAR POWERED!!!?
The final factor is a bias in the gun buying public for things made out of metal. Gun owners feel safer if they don't have to rely on electronics. All this being said, Electronic ignition is a reality and has been used for a while on military arms. The same cannot be said of caseless ammo. A few attempts have been made, but nothing on the scale of electronic ignition.
Electronic primers will need to overcome three factors. First, they have to be COMPLETELY compatible with current primers. That is, we should be able to fire the cartridges in current guns, but in an "E-gun" we will have virtually no lock time. The second factor to overcome is with battery technology. We need a battery that will:
1) last for 10 years stored in a rifle.
2) require no switches other than the trigger
3) tell the user when they will run out and how many rounds are left before they should be replaced
4) or perhaps they can be NUCLEAR POWERED!!!?
The final factor is a bias in the gun buying public for things made out of metal. Gun owners feel safer if they don't have to rely on electronics. All this being said, Electronic ignition is a reality and has been used for a while on military arms. The same cannot be said of caseless ammo. A few attempts have been made, but nothing on the scale of electronic ignition.
Zundfolge
Member
Badger Arms, electronic primers and "E-guns" have one other issue they must overcome, and that's outside interference.
Imagine an army with nothing but E-guns in the field ... you could shut down an entire army with one EMP weapon and then come in with your hammer fired rifles and mop them up.
The problem for us civilians is that I believe the FCC requires all electronic products sold in the US to accept interference from outside sources, so if the military solves the interference problem, then we're back to my original point that they won't be legal for us serfs.
Imagine an army with nothing but E-guns in the field ... you could shut down an entire army with one EMP weapon and then come in with your hammer fired rifles and mop them up.
The problem for us civilians is that I believe the FCC requires all electronic products sold in the US to accept interference from outside sources, so if the military solves the interference problem, then we're back to my original point that they won't be legal for us serfs.
Badger Arms
Member
I think that the power of EMP weapons to disable electronics has been greatly exagerated. Never thought about the FCC though. Imagine the FCC summarily banning all "E-Guns" and "Emmo" because they make lines across Channel 13!!!
cabinetman
Member
50 years from now??
I'll be looking for the big "spam can" opener to access some of the 8mm so I can continue to shoot some of my old beasties. The ammo in them will be good as new! LOL!
Rome
I'll be looking for the big "spam can" opener to access some of the 8mm so I can continue to shoot some of my old beasties. The ammo in them will be good as new! LOL!
Rome
Owen
Moderator Emeritus
I don't think they will ever put a Friendly transponder on a soldier...it gives the other side something to aim at.
the problem with caseless ammo is that someone will have to create an entire new operating system, or the propellent will be as strong as brass. The propellants have been relatively fragile, and therefore impossivble to extract a round to clear the chamber, etc. Also, the propellent scrapes off of the cartridge and turns the action into a time bomb. Oh yeah, cook off is a biatch if there is no case to provide some insulation.
In my experience, it costs about 1.5 million to develop a new pistol with a browning action. Add half a million, if the action isn't identical to one you already make. What would it cost to make an entirely new novel action? my guess is 10 to 20 million, plus another 20 to 40 million to perfect caseless ammo. That is not an acceptable risk to most gn companies.
The metal storm thng shows some promise, but you throw away the barrel to reload...that seems like a waste to me.
Plastic and/or combustible (non propellant) cases may work out, but its too soon to say.
the problem with caseless ammo is that someone will have to create an entire new operating system, or the propellent will be as strong as brass. The propellants have been relatively fragile, and therefore impossivble to extract a round to clear the chamber, etc. Also, the propellent scrapes off of the cartridge and turns the action into a time bomb. Oh yeah, cook off is a biatch if there is no case to provide some insulation.
In my experience, it costs about 1.5 million to develop a new pistol with a browning action. Add half a million, if the action isn't identical to one you already make. What would it cost to make an entirely new novel action? my guess is 10 to 20 million, plus another 20 to 40 million to perfect caseless ammo. That is not an acceptable risk to most gn companies.
The metal storm thng shows some promise, but you throw away the barrel to reload...that seems like a waste to me.
Plastic and/or combustible (non propellant) cases may work out, but its too soon to say.
six 4 sure
Member
Well if I had to pick something it would be a rifle/cartridge that Gale McMillan was working on. It was a .50 that if IIRC the cartridge was a necked down 20mm shell. The cool thing was he was shooting 2" groups at 1000 yards. The bad thing the rifle was only good for about five rounds before the barrel fouled horribly or melted I forget which.
Six
Six
Cosmoline
Member
The last big changes came between the Civil War and 1890, with the advent of the centerfire cartridge and smokeless powder. Since then it's all been refinement, no matter how you dress it up. The centerfire cartridge is just so darn handy, it's hard to imagine a superior replacement. Caseless ammo sounds cool, but ends up leaving too much heat and crud behind. Cartridges have the advantage of taking away a lot of heat and a lot of crud.
The big change will be in the propellant. When someone comes up with a propellant that can do what smokeless powder does with less space and consistent, controlled pressures, that's going to free up a lot of magazine and chamber space. Imagine a cartridge with the power of a .30'06 but with only ten grains of propellant.
The big change will be in the propellant. When someone comes up with a propellant that can do what smokeless powder does with less space and consistent, controlled pressures, that's going to free up a lot of magazine and chamber space. Imagine a cartridge with the power of a .30'06 but with only ten grains of propellant.
jar
Contributing Member
IMHO, if you suddenly got dropped into 50 years from now, you would still see something that was very familar. There will be a few more options, refinments in materials, perhaps even non-metalic casings. But other than that, I don't expect to see much change. Remeber, the bullet itself functions because it is a dense mass. If a synthetic could be made that had greatter density than what we can get with current metals, then it will be adopted.
Powder will continue improving. I expect that certain things like tagints and tracers will become common, but overall, it will be something that you would recognize and rapidly become comfortable with.
I believe we'll see electronic firing systems fairly soon, certainly within the next ten years or so. They will just be so much cheaper to make and require nearly NO hand work. I'm not looking forward to that but I do believe it's inevitable.
But the big thing is that the vast majority of guns avialable, in the general population, 50 years from now will be the very same guns that are in circulation today. When I look at the firearms I personally own, almost all are over 20 years old, about half are over 50 years old and several are nearly 100 years old. They all still work and I shoot them regularly. I see no reason that trend wouldn't continue.
Powder will continue improving. I expect that certain things like tagints and tracers will become common, but overall, it will be something that you would recognize and rapidly become comfortable with.
I believe we'll see electronic firing systems fairly soon, certainly within the next ten years or so. They will just be so much cheaper to make and require nearly NO hand work. I'm not looking forward to that but I do believe it's inevitable.
But the big thing is that the vast majority of guns avialable, in the general population, 50 years from now will be the very same guns that are in circulation today. When I look at the firearms I personally own, almost all are over 20 years old, about half are over 50 years old and several are nearly 100 years old. They all still work and I shoot them regularly. I see no reason that trend wouldn't continue.
cabinetman
Member
Quote from JAR: "
But the big thing is that the vast majority of guns avialable, in the general population, 50 years from now will be the very same guns that are in circulation today. When I look at the firearms I personally own, almost all are over 20 years old, about half are over 50 years old and several are nearly 100 years old. They all still work and I shoot them regularly. I see no reason that trend wouldn't continue."
.........and the 91/30 will still be selling for $89!! LOLOL
But the big thing is that the vast majority of guns avialable, in the general population, 50 years from now will be the very same guns that are in circulation today. When I look at the firearms I personally own, almost all are over 20 years old, about half are over 50 years old and several are nearly 100 years old. They all still work and I shoot them regularly. I see no reason that trend wouldn't continue."
.........and the 91/30 will still be selling for $89!! LOLOL
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2002
- Messages
- 22,516
Notwithstanding the caseless electronically fired ammuntion or gas propelled or personal electro-magnetic rail guns that will be here in fifty years time, the 45-70 will still be around and there will still be buckskinners loading from the muzzle. Archer will still go "poink" "poink" and kids will still have sling shots too.
H Romberg
Member
Yeah, They'll still be in use, but mostly by civilians, because the newer technologies will be tagged LE/military Only as soon as they come out. I've already seen 2 good examples of this from HK and FAL at the AUSA convention in DC. Cool new cartridges that span the pistol/carbine gap nicely are simply not offered to civilians. Since they both offer a pistol in the same caliber, and the rounds will go through vests, they're automatically tagged as "COP KILLER BULLETS", and so the manufacturer doesn't offer a civilian version. They may develop a plasma rifle in the next 50 years, but what do you think the odds are a civilian will be able to buy one? I can see the hand wringing now.
Crimper-D
Member
I expect there will be changes
More powerful (for the weight/mass ratio) propellents. The use of sub caliber sabots, maybe flechettes in the projectiles, increased range for lighter projectiles due to improvements in bullet matereals, not necessarially melallic. Electronic or pneumatic ignition systems. Lotsa Stuff!
The projectile will still be coming out of the little hole in the front end. The Armed services will still be mounting Bayonets on their service rifles - whatever they shoot
More powerful (for the weight/mass ratio) propellents. The use of sub caliber sabots, maybe flechettes in the projectiles, increased range for lighter projectiles due to improvements in bullet matereals, not necessarially melallic. Electronic or pneumatic ignition systems. Lotsa Stuff!
The projectile will still be coming out of the little hole in the front end. The Armed services will still be mounting Bayonets on their service rifles - whatever they shoot
- Status
