Cartridges that don't make sense.

Originally Posted By: GMAN_RThey have been saying this same thing for generations. Probably been true for the most part too!

True enough right there.

Actually, it all makes sense to me. To a large degree the change from lighter, faster bullets to longer heavier bullets is due to advancements in range finding technology. In the past you needed a flat short range trajectory because any kind of ranging was more or less a guess. And after about 300 yards it was a bit of a stunt to shoot at game.

Now we can tell to the yard how far something is with the push of a button. And dial scopes with precision in the field. The long sleek bullets make hits in the field much more predictable when ranges get long. And barrels need to be twisted correctly for those bullets. And as much as I love the 243 Win, you can't just stuff a 115 gr dtac in a 243 case and call it good, because joe hunter would buy it and try to use it in his model 70 with a 10 twist and it aint gonna work lol. So a new cartridge is born with rifles made for the new bullets.

Make sense now?
 
i dont see what all the hate is about.

if it weren't for "new" cartridges - we'd all be stuck shooting single shot blackpowder 45-70's and .45 Long colts... or even flintlocks.

without innovation we're stuck with whatever happens to be available. we'd be stuck back in the firearms dark ages.

without "new" cartridges that dont make sense, the ability to have "old classics" 30 (or 100) years down the road that are still around and popular cant be a thing..

how many people claimed the .308 did not make sense because we already had the 30-06? "why do we need *another* .30 cal that fires a 150gr bullet 2700 fps?" because you know.. those words were never uttered over a tasty beverage or two around deer camp.


so be thankful that there's seemingly a cartridge out there for everyones needs/wants.... and if not the next one is just over the horizon.

because the next new cartridge that "doesnt make sense" to someone else may be the holy graile you've been looking for your whole life.
 
Same reason everybody doesn't wear the same kind of boots, jeans or whatever else you want to name.

It would get kind of boring if you didn't have something else to talk or think about not mention buy.
 
Question: If no new cartridge had been invented in the last 50 years, how many fewer animals would've hit the dirt? My guess is a single-digit number!
smile.gif
 
I would like to note, in addition to my post above, that the 6.8 Western actually looks really good, at least on paper. It will rival 7mm Mag performance with modern propellants and similar bullet weights but fit in a standard action and doesnt have a belt so you dont need a $120 collet die to help preserve the life of the brass. It wont be immediately and you can all call me what names you wish but I certainly am interested and want to try one out. That said, I wont be getting rid of my custom 7mm Rem Mag anytime soon
 
Originally Posted By: WyodoggerQuestion: If no new cartridge had been invented in the last 50 years, how many fewer animals would've hit the dirt? My guess is a single-digit number!
smile.gif


Perfect! Same thing as what I have said for quite a number of years now. While there were some voids that were filled during that time, there was nothing that had to be filled. Cartridges that were perfect for prairie dogs or coyote or deer or moose or cape buffalo a half century ago and still just as good for them today. Rifles have gotten a wee bit more accurate, nice clear and affordable scopes have become more abundant as well. But is there anything made today that is head and shoulders better than what you could buy in 1971? Nothing that I can think of. Certainly nothing that is on my got to have list. Actually, that's a pretty good feeling right there.
 
Originally Posted By: CoyotejunkiOriginally Posted By: tripod3Sure looks like the 6.8 Western will solve all hunting needs.
If it stays around for 5 years it may knock one of the boring old mainstays out.
Somehow I doubt it though and a couple old calibers will be staying around here.

Why 6.8, I would believe the 7mm would have more and better bullets selections?

Hmmmm The 6.5 and 7mm bullets both have a high bullet coefficient, which I do understand. Also I have requested a lighter weight Scirroco bullet built. So far not enough demand. JMHO sometimes resources play a part in success of a cartridge or even a new rifle chambered for a specific cartridge. I shoot a 6.8 SPC a lot for hogs but I dang near threw the rifle away when I went through [beeep] with Remingtons screwup on the chamber and the twist. In discussions with Mr. Emory,, the 6.5 Creedmoor was right from inception.
Hornady was right there with ammo.

I read all of the threads and enjoyed them. The one thing I noticed no one mentioned, was recoil. That actually played a small part in designs too.
Look at our economy. We for the most part have more money than we did 50yrs ago.
We can afford to increase our number of specialized cartridges, and or rifles.
 
I wonder how the 6.8 would fair on a moose?

Would it outperform 300win-mag or 7mm mag?

How dead is dead?

I use a .223rem for coyotes because the rounds are (usually) readily available and if needed it would be a legal whitetail rifle in MN.

But a .204 would be mighty tempting.

What others have said rings true. All of the old standbys were once new to the market. Right now long distance shooting is driving the market. BIG was the rage not so long ago. 450bushmaster, .500smith, even the .338 was looked at as overkill by most.

It’s all marketing and new toys.
 
there can and will be NOTHING ever built again that will replace whats already been built thats better.
I don't own a .223 but if I did, I feel I could kill 95% of the coyotes I kill with a .17_204, 22_250.

The "new" this in a new cartridge [beeep] near sickens me.
 
Back
Top