SOOO many new cartridges

Status
Not open for further replies.
"Now, if somebody wants to be elevated to shooting sainthood, somebody make a centerfire, straight walled .22 LR that's centerfire and reloadable."

will NEVER happen...
Click to expand...
Already happened, in the 1880s. The cartridge was the .22 Winchester Central Fire (WCF). In the 1920s gun nuts developed a smokeless load for it and called it the .22 Hornet, and Winchester readopted it under that name.

I have two cast bullet loads for my Hornet, one that matches the .22 WRM and one that matches the .22 LR.
 
Why go centerfire??

http://22lrreloader.com
Click to expand...
Take a look at what you get -- especially the bullet mould. It's a two-cavity mould, casting one bullet for .22 Short and one for .22 LR -- which means it's really only ONE useful cavity. Next, the handles are part of the mould blocks -- which means you better have some thick gloves when you use it.

This is a very LOW production setup. I have a 4-cavity mould (with wooden handles) for my Hornet and all four bullets are identical. I can put out a lot more ammo in .22 Hornet in any given time, and the cost is still below the cost of bulk .22 LR.
 
yugorpk said:
Except for the fact that they really can't be loaded for full function subsonic use.
Click to expand...

I really hate to rain on your parade, but both of them and many others have been around here for several decades. I think I've put a four figure number of subsonic .308:s through my rifles over the years without a hitch, only counting factory cartridges. Whenever I'm too lazy to roll my own, Lapua 200gr Subsonic is one of the most proven choices around. Utterly reliable in suppressed Saiga, R-25, Valmet Hunter, Remington 740/742/7400, Browning BAR etc., as-is. Gun mags have also been full of subsonic load info for various calibers as long as I remember, at least from the late 70's.

With .223 I rarely even bother. Aguila .22lr 60gr SSS is the ticket for heavy bullet / fast twist combo if more than 40gr at subsonic velocities is needed.
 
TruthTellers said:
Now, if somebody wants to be elevated to shooting sainthood, somebody make a centerfire, straight walled .22 LR that's centerfire and reloadable.
Click to expand...
it already exists, 25acp has close to the same rim diameter, same overall length, will basically fit the same magazines but its centerfire, reloadable, and since you can load over 28,000 rounds on a single tub of powder you can bring its costs down to .22lr prices as well
 
learn to reload, then as long as the new cartridge youre interested in shares the same brass as 308 or 5.56 and uses commonly available bullets then it doesnt matter what commercial ammo makers are doing, you'll be able to make your own, inexpensively and easily, for the rest of your life
 
"Already happened, in the 1880s. The cartridge was the .22 Winchester Central Fire (WCF). In the 1920s gun nuts developed a smokeless load for it and called it the .22 Hornet, and Winchester readopted it under that name."

this is NOT the straight walled 22 LR that TT was wishing for...
 
"It is, nevertheless a reloadable .22 and was developed with that in mind"...

with that logic....as too reloadable 22 LR.....a 223/5.56.....is a reloadable 22...
 
with that logic....as too reloadable 22 LR.....a 223/5.56.....is a reloadable 22...
Click to expand...
I won't quibble with that. But if you try it, I think you'll find the Hornet, with its much smaller case, is better for greatly reduced charges.
 
The issue with the Hornet is it's such much longer compared to .22 LR or Magnum even. Magazines have to be physically larger and that eliminates the possibility of shooting in handguns. That may not be a focus here, but it is something to keep in mind.

My whole point is something that has the greater reliability of CF over RF, reloadability to deal with panic buys/ammo shortages and dialing in loads for max accuracy.

Justin mentioned about .25 ACP is that bullet, but .25 caliber is far less popular than .22 caliber and its case is shorter than .22 which makes shooting from rifles pointless.

We can sit here and discuss the positives and negatives of a centerfire .22 LR, but until someone actually takes the initiative and makes it we'll never know.
 
The issue with the Hornet is it's such much longer compared to .22 LR or Magnum even. Magazines have to be physically larger and that eliminates the possibility of shooting in handguns. That may not be a focus here, but it is something to keep in mind.

My whole point is something that has the greater reliability of CF over RF, reloadability to deal with panic buys/ammo shortages and dialing in loads for max accuracy.
Click to expand...
Well, of course you need a dedicated rifle for the .22 Hornet -- but the first Hornets were rechambered and modified .22 Rimfires -- specifically the M1922 Springfield.

And in handguns the Taurus "Raging Hornet" was offered in .22 Hornet. I don't think they're still made.
 
6.8SPC (6.8x43) started in 2002. It's really a pretty nifty cartridge. Much more powerful than 5.56, hardy much kick in an AR, but not much larger to heft and certainly not 7.62x51 heft. Frankly it's what our troops should be using in light rifles.
 
OilyPablo said:
6.8SPC (6.8x43) started in 2002. It's really a pretty nifty cartridge. Much more powerful than 5.56, hardy much kick in an AR, but not much larger to heft and certainly not 7.62x51 heft. Frankly it's what our troops should be using in light rifles.
Click to expand...
I agree, I think it's a more effective military rifle round than 5.56, but until it gets adopted to replace 5.56, I don't think it's worth civilian shooters getting into. Chances of the 6.8 to replace the 5.56 is near zero because the military always goes lighter, not heavier.

Chances for the 6.8 are better if it's to replace 7.62x51. Even then, given the choice between a 6.8 or a .308 rifle, I'll take the .308.
 
uuh, again i'll mention 25acp, ballistically a tad better, centerfire, will likely fit .22lr mags and actions too, you dont need another solution to bring .22lr to a centerfire
 
TruthTellers, would you help me understand what you meant by

but until it gets adopted to replace 5.56, I don't think it's worth civilian shooters getting into.
Click to expand...

I'm certainly not a military munitions expert but the round as developed and improved to date does fill a nitch. And I'm surely not saying that no other round might also do that. For me the attractiveness for my purposes was that the 6.8 in the AR platform suited what I was looking for in a hunting rifle. The weapon was shorter and adjustable, was more lethal than the 5.56, could be made lighter than many hunting rigs, could be assembled easily from available parts in that it didn't require a gunsmith, was accurate and for the most part components were available. I assembled a dedicated, complete rifle but a guy could just buy or put together an upper and switch it out in a minute. Pop in a 6.8 mag and you're gtg.

To my thinking, it's ideal except that many local gun stores haven't stocked a good ammo selection yet. That problem is solved online though. There are several places offering complete ammo or component parts for reloaders. I just laid in a supply of reloading components that should keep me happy for a long, long time. :)

I've heard some people say that the 6.8 is dead or dying, or that is one of many new rounds that won't stand the test of time. I don't know whether it will last but it's certainly not dead. It's not uncommon to find Out of Stock banners on suppliers web pages. It looks like more and more guys are getting interested. Parts, barrels, bcgs, etc move quickly.
 
I hope 6.8 spc isn't dying. I was the first in my hunting/shooting group to get one. Since then 3 others have bought ARs in 6.8.
 
the 6.8SPC may not be dying just yet, but its not thriving or surviving all that well either, not when you figure you can get as much muzzle energy from .223 wildcats like 7.62x40WT requiring just a barrel and mags, or that you could achieve 95% of 6.8SPC performance with the same bullets out of something like .277 wolverine requiring only a barrel... figure how expensive 6.8SPC brass alone is vs once fired 223/556 brass and is that extra 5% improvement worth paying $500 more in extra parts and 3x+ the costs in ammunition?.. thats why its not thriving

once fired AKA used 6.8SPC brass is $0.40/case, i can reload an entire 5.56 or 5.56 based wildcat cartridge for less than the price of 6.8SPC brass alone and thats including the cost of 5.56 brass for each and every round of loaded ammo
 
I agree Oily, in fact there are so many bullet choices that working up loads to find out which my rifle prefers is wrecking my reloading budget. At least my wife says so... :eek:
 
It's only a matter of time before the 6.8 hits that glass ceiling of popularity. The majority of AR owners own a 5.56 and they're not going to spend the money on the mags, uppers, and ammo for a new cartridge because they're the casual AR owner/shooter.

The hardcore enthusiasts like us on a forum will be willing to invest the time and money with the 6.8, but the overwhelming majority won't and at that point the 6.8 will just become another 6.5 Grendal that's there that again fails to usurp the 5.56.
 
"...introducing new cartridges at a frantic pace..." Yep. Bring out "new" stuff regularly or risk losing market share. If it meets sakes projections, great. If not discontinue it. Who cares about the people who bought it last year.
"...Not pay royalties..." Don't think there would be any unless you used the name too. And then only if the guy TM'd the name.
"...barely find ammo for it anymore..." Lots of 7mm Mauser ammo available. Maybe not on your local gun shop's shelves, but it can be ordered with no fuss.
 
justin22885 said:
uuh, again i'll mention 25acp, ballistically a tad better, centerfire, will likely fit .22lr mags and actions too, you dont need another solution to bring .22lr to a centerfire
Click to expand...
Never has been chambered in a rifle before. Even the data from ballisticsbytheinch.com show that the .25 ACP reaches max velocity from a 7 inch barrel and is still slower than 36 grain high velocity .22 LR.

.25 ACP would become an obsolete, worthless cartridge the day a .22LRCF hits the market.
 
25acp according to BBTI from a 7 inch barrel, 50 grains at 1000fps, this equals 111ft/lbs
22lr according to BBTI from a 7 inch barrel, 32 grains at 1073fps (mini-mags), this equals 102ft/lbs of muzzle energy

and with handloads (something you cant really do with 22lr) you can get another 150fps out of the 25acp or about 150ft/lbs energy, or a 35 grain over 1550fps and 190ft/lbs which is both heavier and faster than a CCI stinger from an 18 inch barrel (these last two loads were quickload calculations with hornady bullets and unique powder loaded to the SAAMI max of 25kpsi)

the only problem of course is no one makes a 25acp rifle or a pistol with a barrel over 3 inches, the cartridge is already out there and already available you just need the tool to utilize it, with almost the same exterior dimensions, a change in bolt and barrel should be all thats needed and you will need a new bolt converting to centerfire anyway
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

G
  • Locked
  • Poll
6.8 SPC II the new end all be all?
2 3
Replies
52
Views
6K
Eric F
E
socalbeachbum
  • Locked
Cartridge Inherent Accuracy Question
Replies
19
Views
1K
taliv
T
P
  • Locked
Why the need for some new cartridges? Examples provided.
2 3 4
Replies
89
Views
4K
Ed Ames
E
Gtscotty
  • Locked
New SAAMI cartridge - 6.8 Westerner
2 3 4
Replies
85
Views
9K
Newtosavage
N
J
  • Locked
which .223 based cartridge?
2
Replies
27
Views
5K
justin22885
J
Back
Top