Too Many Different Cartridges

Status
Not open for further replies.
The primary reason we have so many is nostalgia. Hunters and shooters are a nostalgic bunch and too many hold onto old obsolete chamberings just because, even though newer and better are available.

While I agree with that somewhat, I don't think nostalgia is as big of a factor as you do. Nostalgia implies that someone is using something that is insufficient for the task at hand while better is available. If you're still hunting mule deer with a lever action 25-20, that's what I'd call nostalgia. I'm a big fan of the 57mm-length rounds from 6mm Rem to 8x57 that many have declared obsolete although they're far from it. Same with 6.5x55. Personally, I think that the 6mm Rem is quite a bit better than the 243 with a little more case capacity, longer neck, and it's loaded to higher pressure. It's also a very modern looking cartridge with a relatively sharp shoulder angle (26*, I think). Same with both 257 bob and 7x57. The shoulder angle is more "classic" at 20*, but the longer neck than many modern replacements.

The 7mm-08 and 7x57 are pretty much ballistically identical; same with 260 Rem and 6.5x55 swede. "But the 308-based ones will fit in a short action" is what I always hear. True, sorta. If you're loading long, relatively heavy bullets in either one, you have a couple of choices. Seat the bullet deep so it will function in the short action rifle or have the barrel throated deeper and treat the rifle as a single shot since the rounds won't fit in the mag. I don't view either of them as a true short-action round. Once you move past the short action to a long action, the older mauser-based chamberings make more sense, at least to me. :)

I don't think the chamberings are obsolete, but the max pressure ratings are. I'd love to see a 7x57 +P, 6.5x55 +P, and an 8x57 +P from SAAMI, but I'm not holding my breath. (maybe they could just steal the CIP data.)

Anyway, enough rambling. I'm happy to have any and all of them, at least at this point. :)

Matt
 
We all like different calibres for doing different things.....heck I have been known to go varmit shooting with a 25-35 WCF or 32 WCF simply because I felt like it.
 
That's the point - we aren't short 4990 different types of ammo.

We're short the dozen or so cartridges in high demand.

This happened in Obamascare #1, the military calibers disappeared, but you could get traditional rounds all day long from a lot of ammo retailers. 12ga, 30-06, 30-30 were still on the shelf back then all the time.

Now, even more people woke up to wonder what about ammo and bought out a bunch of that, too. And the makers have put the low demand ammo on the back burner, some even have dropped them altogether, to focus on the high demand rounds. It's more profitable to keep the machines running than change them up - the down time setting up a different cartridge makes no profit, it's labor expense with some scrap getting it right. Just run the machine and you make profit.

There is another aspect, too. Where does America shop for ammo? Usually at the place where they buy milk, and that is NOT a high volume outlet with pallets of ammo waiting to be purchased by the case. We can now buy ammo thru the internet with drop shipping to our front door, completely unregulated, and that expansion of our 2A rights means the box at a time shoppers are competing at the store shelf level.

If it looks like there's no ammo, it's because somebody is shopping in all the wrong places. It's like trying to buy a two pack of toilet paper - change your package size and you discover there's a lot of it out there.
 
A lot of the shortage can also be attributed to the fact that there are a few avid shooters that can't afford to buy a case, or a pallet, of ammo at once. I would love to be able to afford a pallet of Eley or 10X etc. but I have other obligations , so I buy what I can afford, when it is available, and accordingly have cut back on my shooting.
 
In the real world there will always be plenty of cartridges. New ones come along every year and somebody buys the gun with the new cartridge because it's a little more of this or a little less of that. Two or three companies will make ammo for it for awhile until sales drop off. Then maybe only one company makes ammo for it occasionally and the price doubles. It is then regarded as a boutique cartridge and you either reload or you don't shoot it very much.

There are really only 10 or so popular rifle cartridges and maybe 10 handgun cartridges. The rest are just there for something different and new gun sales.

Buying a gun is easy, buying ammo isn't. The ammo situation will continue to be the biggest problem and the ammo companies will stop production of the more uncommon cartridges completely sooner or later. Prices for once fired brass are going up for uncommon cartridges right now.

This is just my personal observation. I reload one of those uncommon cartridges.
 
Last edited:
When ever a cartridge comes out with a different size base new wildcat rounds will be developed. Some wildcat cartridges will become commercial . That has ben going on for years. The 30-06 has had the neck resized to 27, 25, and other diameter necks == 25-06 Rem 270 Win. The shorter 300 Savage round (same base as the 06) body was changed a bit and the 308 Winchester became very popular . Change the neck diameter and body a bit of the 308 Win and the 243 Win cartridge came out with a bunch of other calibers. It dident take the wildcat cartridges developers very long to use the 222 Rem base size case and the commercial 222 Rem Mag case to come out with some fine rounds . I like the 17 Fireball, 223 Rem, 204 Ruger which has the same base diameter as the good old 222 Rem. As long as there are wildcat developers we can have a good selection of Many Different Cartridges..
 
The OP's question then goes to, why be limited in access to finished ammo and subject to the whims of a fickle public? Look at the .22 situation right now - it's for sale, but you have to jump thru hoops to find it at retail, and that means purchasing it before it will even get to the shelf. Hence, the line at Walmart on "Ammo Morning."

No difference whatsoever to the Cabbage Patch doll craze. We'd get a shipment in at the retailer I worked at, the land lines would start ringing after the first sale, in three hours they would be gone. The resourceful consumers who made an effort to network with like minded people got into their cars and made an effort.

They didn't complain about it not being their next week Wednesday if and when they might swing by to pick up a gallon of milk and loaf of bread. That is a recipe for failure during high demand times.

So, those complaining the most are really directing their anger at others who have more resources and cash, who can buy the ammo by being in line first. No different than showing up at the grocery store prepping for a hurricane to discover the shelves bare. Somebody needs to elevate their priority - or get used to doing without.

First come, first served. Cash talks. Don't ask if they can hold a box for you. Not happening. It's presumptuous to think you could jump ahead in line, even more so to place an exceptionally large order at numerous outlets to influence supply. All that happens is that demand increases - not the amount they are already shipping. Retailers and makers expect most of those orders to cancel later. They have the actual numbers. They are not going to increase production for ghost purchases. That is a recipe for disaster, they know better.

It's really about a lack of knowledge about economics and factory production. Just because someone wants something doesn't mean the rules of fair play require others to cater to their needs. It's the unspoken retail policy, the customer always thinks he's right.

Don't limit yourself to hard-to-obtain calibers and a restricted supply. Again, during the first Obamascare, all the traditional calibers were frequently on the shelf. It was the military calibers in short supply. This time, once the dust settled on the first wave of buying, did you notice what calibers showed back up first? Go look in the ammo shelves right now at a better stocked store.

I may not be able to get .223, .308, or 9mm, but I can buy 6.8SPC, 6.5Grendel, and .38 Special. They aren't that popular.

That's where the expression, observe the masses, do the opposite protects you. Kit out in a cartridge they don't find obsessively popular, and you will be able to buy it. Don't restrict your purchasing to a highly restricted source that can presently sell only one to three boxes at a time. Order online. Reload.

Break the chain of dependency and you are no longer enthralled to heel at the foot of the makers. Very few people like owning a car they are forced to only get parts and service at the dealer. Learn to fix it yourself, and dig for sources. They are out there. I can't tell you how many times a week I suggest buying parts from the salvage yard and consumers give me a quizzical look. They are trapped in a retail world of new, new, new.

The real issue is when we deliberately choose something that only appears to elevate our status by it's rarity. Later, we discover that we've sold our soul to the company store to keep it running. Nobody forces us to do it. The reality is that we get seduced by marketing. It's really just desserts for playing to our ego.

Those of us shooting one of the 4990 other calibers don't have a major problem with ammo supply right now. It's the masses trapped in dependency who do.
 
Personally I think that if you can load your own, you should be able to get any caliber gun you want. But does it pay for ammo companies to keep making some of the calibers that hardly anyone uses anymore? I think not, and if it somehow monopolizes equipment that could be used on making ammo for the great majority of us, then it's kind of a nuisance other than to those few who use it. But thee things have a way of working themselves out.
Survival of the fittest. Or in this case the most popular. If you can make your own ammo for some of these oddball sizes you won't have a problem.
That's why I stick to 45 ACP and 9mm, and 223/556, and 12 gauge for long guns. I really don't hunt, but in a pinch could use slugs or the AR. If I were younger perhaps a 308 or a 338 Lapaua Magnum,, just for long range sniping.
 
The ammo makers might be cutting back on a few rare cartridge loadings, but they aren't cutting off an entire type. They would just lose market share to another maker who does offer it.

Competition keeps a lot of them on the shelf, but strangely enough, they sell. That is because there are buyers who want it. As long as there are working older firearms that need the ammo, the makers will sell it.

Same for car parts - just because Pontiac, Mercury, and Suzuki aren't on the market anymore, it doesn't mean there's no parts to sell. Far from it. Limiting yourself to the most common calibers because "they" might stop making them is far fetched and faulty justification.

"They" have been making .30-30 all along, a really old cartridge. .270 Winchester came out in 1925. .30-06? .303? I could name dozens.

Basing a cartridge on it being in common use by LEO's and military has some pro's, but the con's of it being entirely unavailable in a panic seems to be getting ignored in that conversation. And taking it to the next step, those that think it will be laying around free for the taking have to assume two conditions: they are still alive at the end of the firefight, and that it wasn't left behind booby trapped to kill them.

Very few armies deliberately leave ammo lying around. You are taught to retrieve it and pass it around. Your buddy doesn't need it anymore, you do. It's NOT a video game where you run to a wall locker and stock up. Nope. Complete fantasy. You run out of ammo, you are now a defenseless target.

What the real motivator of using "issue" cartridges goes to is having the same thing. "I have it, too, so I must be equal to you!" Entirely the reason aggressive perps choose handguns the same or similar to what their local PD uses. It's a status ploy. Really nothing to do with having better or superior firepower.

If it boils down to that, it's embracing parity, and not taking advantage of a tactical edge. I question that. We all (should) know not to show up at a gun fight with a knife, but how many do show up with just a gun? Why leave the rifle in the rack?

You use a gun to fight to your rifle, right?

Why keep choosing the same cartridge "they" have? Choose what you need to shoot your specific target at the ranges you plan on encountering it. What range, what target should drive the decision making for that firearm more than "it's cheap and popular and everybody is shooting it."

Cheap is exactly that, surplus and reject in many cases. Are we buying a cartridge because of financial reasoning? Reload.

Observe the masses, do the opposite.
 
Last edited:
You use a gun to fight to your rifle, right?
No. That's one of those "truthy" statements that only makes the most superficial kind of sense. The idea that a civilian in the peacetime USA would find him- or herself in a shooting situation wherein they would engage bad guys with a sidearm, retreat (or advance? ... maneuver, at least) to a supply position, retrieve another more potent weapon, and carry on the fight is so far-fetched as to boarder on insulting to serious-minded students of violent encounters.

We aren't in post-apocalyptic times, and even those who live in borderlands frequented by drug traffickers would be incredibly hard-pressed to point to situations where they'd literally fight their way back to a long-gun and engage in a firefight with some invading gang.

I don't mean to be overly blunt, but that's one of those "old saws" lifted from military combat jargon (and the plots of our beloved knuckle-dragging action films of the '80s) and blindly misapplied to civilian self-defense in a way that can't possibly help anyone understand that important subject any better.

I'd really like to see that one go the way of the "throwdown gun" and "drag them back inside," "shoot, shove, and shut-up" and other great maxims of jingoistic misinformation.
 
It would probably be worse if everyone had the same caliber. Then you would be competing with everyone for ammo. As it stands you are only competing with those who shoot the same thing as you do.

This. My local Walmart has plenty of ammo in niche calibers, but the more common calibers (.22LR, 9mm, .223) are gone.
 
Not all of those cartridges are in constant production. A lot of them are only done in infrequent production runs, sometimes every other year or so it it's lower on the sales chart. And then there are the ones that are strictly the province of the reloaders. I have some in my collection that haven't been commercially produced for decades.
 
The great thing about life is you pays your money you takes your chances. To me less is more but having choices IS the American way, will that continue in the future? I don't believe so and that's why I have just a few standard calibers.
 
No. That's one of those "truthy" statements that only makes the most superficial kind of sense. The idea that a civilian in the peacetime USA would find him- or herself in a shooting situation wherein they would engage bad guys with a sidearm, retreat (or advance? ... maneuver, at least) to a supply position, retrieve another more potent weapon, and carry on the fight is so far-fetched as to boarder on insulting to serious-minded students of violent encounters.

We aren't in post-apocalyptic times, and even those who live in borderlands frequented by drug traffickers would be incredibly hard-pressed to point to situations where they'd literally fight their way back to a long-gun and engage in a firefight with some invading gang.

I don't mean to be overly blunt, but that's one of those "old saws" lifted from military combat jargon (and the plots of our beloved knuckle-dragging action films of the '80s) and blindly misapplied to civilian self-defense in a way that can't possibly help anyone understand that important subject any better.

I'd really like to see that one go the way of the "throwdown gun" and "drag them back inside," "shoot, shove, and shut-up" and other great maxims of jingoistic misinformation.

Well stated. I'm a pistol guy. I don't believe in the gov't take over/roving bands of looters scenarios that I see in the movies. I'm not saying it can't happen but I'm old enough to know that the chances are about the same as dying in a plane crash. I've got more pressing things to worry about.
 
Well, I'll be the first to acknowledge that if you are a person who's duties or vocation, or even some specialized situation as a civilian requires you to go armed with a long gun, then the idea of "fighting your way back to your rifle, that you shouldn't have left behind makes perfect sense.

But as workaday citizens going about our lives, rifles aren't part of our daily accouterments, and the sorts of violent encounters we as citizens are going to encounter must be solves with the weapons we have on hand at the moment. The idea that we've failed somehow if we don't have a rifle in reach is ludicrous. The idea that we might retreat to some place where that rifle is, and then re-enter the fight is suggestive of very bad ideas regarding the law and use of force.
 
No. That's one of those "truthy" statements that only makes the most superficial kind of sense. The idea that a civilian in the peacetime USA would find him- or herself in a shooting situation wherein they would engage bad guys with a sidearm, retreat (or advance? ... maneuver, at least) to a supply position, retrieve another more potent weapon, and carry on the fight is so far-fetched as to boarder on insulting to serious-minded students of violent encounters.

We aren't in post-apocalyptic times, and even those who live in borderlands frequented by drug traffickers would be incredibly hard-pressed to point to situations where they'd literally fight their way back to a long-gun and engage in a firefight with some invading gang.

I don't mean to be overly blunt, but that's one of those "old saws" lifted from military combat jargon (and the plots of our beloved knuckle-dragging action films of the '80s) and blindly misapplied to civilian self-defense in a way that can't possibly help anyone understand that important subject any better.

I'd really like to see that one go the way of the "throwdown gun" and "drag them back inside," "shoot, shove, and shut-up" and other great maxims of jingoistic misinformation.
I think it was an old Clint Smith quote that people just took and ran with (ie: "A handgun is for fighting your way to your rifle which you shouldn't have put down in the first place"). It was meant to apply to LEOs who could carry a long gun in their cars/cruisers.
 
The thing is, there are only a dozen or so "standard" ones that the manufacturer's care about in a crunch. When things really get hairy you can bet that about all they'll be making in any quantity are:

.22LR
12ga
20ga
.223 Remington
.243 Winchester
.308 Winchester
7mm-08 Remington
.30-06 Springfield
.270 Winchester
7mm Rem Mag
.380 ACP
9x19 Luger
.40 S&W
.45 ACP
.38 Special
.357 Magnum

Despite the myriad of other cartridges out there everything else will take a back seat.
 
A few thought.

1. Three different areas of the world account for about 98% of that. USA, USSR, and Western Europe. That is one reason for the redundancy.
2. If the world took that approach, a lot of development would have ended with the 30-06, a 100 year old invention.
3. Guns last a lifetime, and in order to get people to buy more manufacturers have to shake things up.
4. The idea that the shortages would be lessoned if there were less options is false. In fact it is the opposite. Variety ensures availability.
5. If the world thought that way, why are there so many options for golf clubs, or bikes, or bullets.
6. I understand gun ownership was highly restricted(though not completely) in the USSR. That being said, the Soviets essentially did exactly what you suggest.
7. Free market.
 
The thing is, there are only a dozen or so "standard" ones that the manufacturer's care about in a crunch. When things really get hairy you can bet that about all they'll be making in any quantity are:

.22LR
12ga
20ga
.223 Remington
.243 Winchester
.308 Winchester
7mm-08 Remington
.30-06 Springfield
.270 Winchester
7mm Rem Mag
.380 ACP
9x19 Luger
.40 S&W
.45 ACP
.38 Special
.357 Magnum

Despite the myriad of other cartridges out there everything else will take a back seat.
Replace 7-08 with 30-30 and I agree with you.
 
I agree there is a excess of choices. dozens of different rounds that are almost identical. I don't believe a cartridge should be discontinued unless there is pretty much no demand for it anymore. lots of dying rounds that are still made. one that comes to mind is 22 long... not 22 long rifle... 22 long.
 
While I like choices/variety...

In my area I can easily get by with a beefy .22 cal pellet rifle, .223 Rem and .30-06 Sprg plus (for HD) 12ga and 9mm Lug. These could easily be replaced by innumerable combinations of others but I chose them for ease of finding factory loads and prices of the same. My current, and likely forever, financial situation has forced me to be far more frugal.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top