Calibers

[7mmag6]

One thing thats always kind of bothered me is the zillions of calibers , loads for said calibers, and grain weights. It seems to me that given a certain caliber, with an idea of maximizing energy, and accuracy, there can only be a certain fomula for maximization of cartridge design and volume. for instance 30 caliber is very popular but, the velocity and energy is maximized at some volumetric capacity and geometry of the cartridge, ( within reason of recoil).
The pluthera of cartridges is amazing, but thermodynamics dictates that one load and pressure, and geometric design of cartridge, will be the best for optimization of impact energy and minimization of size, now maybe Im bieng simplistic here but it seems to me given a known mass and velocity, there can only be one best fit, as far as cartridge geometry. ---does that make sense?

[whirlwind]

all things being equal ur right. but the test is to find what load works best in your individual fire arm. the loads and cartrages could be narrowed down if all weapons of that caliber are exactly the same. well thats what i think anyway...could be wrong?

[Dennis]

NO NO NO you are missing the whole point
all the wildcatting is for people
of you want an "optimum" cartrige, Well, Define "optimum"
I would venture to say that the "M2" loading of the 3006 could be concidered optimum but thats MY opinion (and what I am used to)

150 grn fmj bt @ 2750 fps

thats the loading that millions of people got to know during the war.

[wirehunt]

What are you swatting with this "prefect" combination? Because the combination changes all the time. If your blowing rabbit's over you may not want to use a 200gr bullet, where as a moose may want a 200+ gr. And is that deep penetrating bullet for that rabbit really the right bullet to use? There's always more than one load that's "perfect" for any caliber. Comes down to the recieving end.
:nod:

[PAPA G]

read the comments by Mr. Hoots, editor of G&A magazine regardiong bullets a couple months back, what an arse, gotta get them newest corebonded bullets, any thing else sucks. despite the fact that the old guy in the editorial got his deer with Rems 180's/06 what an ares.

boils down to what has worked for years, still works, and no matter how new, isn't going to get you there any better.

[Gyrene]

The problem that enters the picture, is that even though there may be only one specific loading of powder, bullet, primer, and cartridge size & shape that is ideal for any specific cartridge, different rifles have other characteristics that must be overcome. For instance the barrel alloy, and the mix of the alloys within the barrel (just like a cake or cookie mix, there can be pockets of vanadium, molybdenum, chromium, ad infinitum), and these vary the vibrations and flex of the barrel so much that any two barrels are different at least a little. To compensate for these and many other rifle characteristics, there is no specific load that will be the ultimate for any two or more rifles. Many can be close, but no two are exactly alike. (NO Papa G cookies and cakes do not have very much vanadium, molybdenum, and chromium in them!)

OT:
I understand each person may have a favorite, or favorites, and the others are searching. For my part, for rifles, I can see three specific calibers that I favor .22 Rimfire, .30-06, and .45-70. OH, YES, I have many others for one reason or another, but if I could only have three, for rifles, those are it!!!

For handguns, it would be .22 Rimfire, .357 Magnum, and .45 ACP. Again, I have many others, but if I could only have three those would be it! AND, a 10mm is still the one I really like almost better than all three of those together!

`

[Shaun]

a lot of the new calibers such as WSM's are considered in the industry as gimmicks to creat a new buzz and get people buying another. Every time i walk into Nosler they always say - Shaun did you hear about the latest gimmick round? Even the bullet manufacturers are laughing. Yes I have wildcats and thos are for those of use who really want to experiment and have some fun with unique combinations that may not work for the application -- on the other hand they can be very useful like my 6x45mm Flat Top AR

[PAPA G]

like painting flames and adding moon disk wheel covers on the old jalopy, sounded good but didn't get you there any faster.


whadahsay???

[BattleRifleG3]

Having taken courses on optimization, I'd say on that subject that of all sciences it's a black art, ie it's really up to you to decide what factors have what importance. Look at the guns that fire them. The more people standardize, the more unique offerings suddenly pop up for folks who don't agree with the standard. Some folks out there decided that no one ever wants more than a 26" barrel on any big brand rifle, even the 300 RUM. Well dog gonnet, if one of those brands offered a 30" version I'd be on it like crazy. I'd take a 26" 308 for crying out loud. So far my favorite bolt action is the Mosin Nagant for many other reasons, but that's one of them.

I guess my point is that people don't agree on what an optimum is for a given rifle, bullet, case, whatever. That's the beauty of a free market.

Look at the military. They decided that the AR-15 system firing the 5.56x45mm NATO was the optimum, and folks all over the place think they were wrong. And those folks can't agree on whether 308 itself was the optimum, whether 30-06 has a huge advantage, or whether the 223 went too far in the right direction, preferring something ballistically like the 6.8 SPC or 6.5 Grendel. Some even say we should have adopted our enemies' rifle and round, the AK in X39.

[Rufus Rhastus J]

Originally Posted by whirlwind

all things being equal ur right. but the test is to find what load works best in your individual fire arm. the loads and cartrages could be narrowed down if all weapons of that caliber are exactly the same. well thats what i think anyway...could be wrong?

I have to agree. At some point, when one figures the maximum pressure vs the maximum mass, yup, there has got to be a point of diminishing return. But, applications are differant. As pointed out, what works for a rabbit won't do for a moose (well, maybe, if you hit him in the eye and blast his bran). A good example is the 9mm....remember when a FMJ 147grain was the shizzit? Then, the whiners about through and through shots...hey, two holes, one bullet, seems cool to me. Also, the 10mm! First the full power then the FBI load and finally, the 40S&W. It all seems relaitive doesn't it. So, the final answer, I'm going to guess, would be Target +outcome= caliber and load. In other words, Papa is right, if what used to work still works, then what is the big deal? :nod:

[BattleRifleG3]

When dealing with fluid mechanics, higher speed generally means diminishing returns. The question is when do the returns REALLY diminish. For example, it generally takes about 1/8 the horsepower to go 1/3 as fast in a powerboat, but who wants a jet ski that goes 20mph? (actually I do, but that's another matter)

A good comparison is the 300 RUM and 300 WSM rounds. Roughly the same width, but the RUM is much longer and takes about half again as much powder. Worth it for that extra edge?

A good example of a really efficient cartridge is the 7.62x39mm. Many militaries worldwide think it's the best cartridge for standard issue small arms. But I don't know of a sniper rifle in that round, and I haven't heard of people hunting anything bigger than deer with it.

[BattleRifleG3]

Things that help a cartridge be more efficient include a tapered case or at least a long shoulder, allowing greater volume of charge with less throttling effect for the gas pushing through the smaller bore. Tapered cases also tend to be more reliable in loading with semi-autos. I had an idea for a tactical sniper cartridge for semi-autos that would be a bit more powerful than the Win Mag (but behind the Weatherby and RUM) with a case about the length of 300 Lapua but highly tapered. Something that would launch a steel core round just fast enough that it would have maximum effect without shattering.

[Rufus Rhastus J]

in you comments about the 7.62X39 you make the mention of no sniper rifle in this caliber. I have no experiance in reloading but, i imagine, if a lighter bullet were used, the velocity would be higher and then, maybe the range would improve makeing it a viable round to snipe with. But, i like it just as it is and enjoy shooting it in it's present clothes. besides, the price is right. i tend to agree with Cooper, I have seen the 30-06 work just fine for all my needs. But, to be fair, and, not hard headed, I know nothing of the 300 RUM or WSM rounds. I will say I shot, one time, a 300 magnum...the report was deafening and the recoil was brutal. This was my experiance and I am not timid when recoil is considered. The point I'm makeing is, if it is no fun to shoot, then why bother? But, also, sniping (business) and pleasure (plinking) are two differant things. So, i guess the exception could be made. However, it is well known that if one fears/is sensitive to the recoil, one's accuracy will suffer.

[Shaun]

Ruf the lighter bullet is more suseptable to drift based on wind for long range accuracy a heavy bullet is the preffered choice -- when I shoot 1000 yards I use a 190 grain instead of the 168

[BattleRifleG3]

I guess I'm just wierd. I find 300 RUM to be substantial, but perfectly manageable. Not too long ago I fired a 458 Win mag comfortably... standing up of course.

My concept for a tapered long range round would be chambered in a heavy enough rifle with a semi-auto action that recoil would be much less than say a light weight Winchester rifle. I fired a 7mm Rem Mag in a Win M70 and a 300 RUM in my Savage 111G, and I must say the RUM in the Savage had less painful recoil. I was also surprised at how much a Ruger #1 in 270 Win hurt my shoulder.

[Rufus Rhastus J]

Originally Posted by Shaun

Ruf the lighter bullet is more suseptable to drift based on wind for long range accuracy a heavy bullet is the preffered choice -- when I shoot 1000 yards I use a 190 grain instead of the 168

But, just out of couriosity, I note the .223 is considered to be accurate out to 400 yards, or so I have read. The same is also said of the 30-06 and, frankly, more believeable. The 7.62X39 is said to have an accuracy range of about 250 yards. Also, most recently, I was reading that the 30-30 was considered a heavyer version of the 7.62X39. When I made my comment/guess-ti-mation, I reconed the reason for the .223's added range was velocity. It is reasonable to assume wind or folage (as was reputed in VN days) could deflect projectiles of light weight. I believe the 7.62X39's projectile weight is 128 grains vs the .223's weight at 55-60 grains. Clearly, the 7's weight gives better trajectory and pentration but, the lighter weight of the .223 allows added velocity which "fools" mother nature into thinking the 55 grain projectile is actually heavier. This, as I understand, explains the added range and accuracy of the .223. So, when I made the comment, I was thinking the lighter weight, added to the added velocity might, once again "fool" mother nature into thinking the bullet was heavier than reality and add some range and accuracy. another way to explain my thoughts would be the humble nail. If you place the pointy end in your palm and stand the nail up, it does not hurt. But, place a brick on top of the nail head, with the pointy end in your palm and we got pain. What has changed is we added mass. That nail, shot from the nail gun has velocity which adds the "mass". But, i think you understand my train of thought. But, just for the fun of it, if all things were to remain equal, and, we change the 7's projectile weight from 128 to say 70 grains....the velocity would be up and, i wonder what the effect would be on energy and range. Shaun, your thoughts?

[Mick]

if the .223 is considered accurate to 400 yards, then they must have been aiming very high and shooting inside a large shed bacause mine definitley won't shoot that far, I have gone out as far as 300 yards but I don't make a habit of it.

I agree with wirehunt, it's the target and situation that defines the cartrige-projectile combination.

A mate of mine told me that the best cobination he's ever seen is the 4 pound (I think) Bofors Anti Aircraft gun as far as range and velocity and recoil, but you arn't going to drag one of those up a mountain to shoot billy goats.

[Shaun]

Ruf you are somewhat on track with deflection - then you have to look at the design of the bullet -- I have yet to find a boattail round for the 39 the boattail travels through the air better and then you have the velocity issue the 39 is about 2Kfps and the 308 is 2600fps(168gr) and the 06' is near 3000fps (150gr) as you increase bullet weight you have to reduce the powder charge in order to keep from compressing powder and creating an overpressure situation.


Think about it this way if you are hunting deer in heavy wooded areas where you may have to shoot through a twig you want a heavier bullet as the small one would be deflected. The 400 yard range is for open flat areas no wind and perfect conditions for extreme accuracy yet the 30 cals can deal with light crosswinds at greater distances.

[Rufus Rhastus J]

Thank you Shaun and Mick. I got some education from you guys. I appreciate it.

[BattleRifleG3]

The 280 Ross looks like the shape I was going for just expanded in every direction.