The Rise and Fall of Calibers

[Mitch Rapp]

It strikes me as interesting how calibers come and go. As far back as the 1930s and even earlier I am sure but that's where I will start. I know I am not the only one who has a profound appreciation for the good ole 30-06, but if John Garand had gotten his way or Gen MacArthur had kept quiet Americas favorite deer cartridge could very well be the good ole .276 Pedersen, and 30-06 would be about as common as 30-40 Krag, or .303 British. Some cartridges get flat out replaced by things that are better, 218 bee or 22 Hornet anyone?, while others find a niche and seem to establish themselves as being as American as Bacon. For instance, I would not be surprised to jump hundreds of years into the future and see lasers, and fancy pulse cannons, but if you are going deer hunting down south well, here's you a lever action 30-30. Then there are rounds that come and go that I feel we are all worse off for. Like the 10mm, is there a better all around self defense round? What caused it to fail? what caused the 30-30 to persist? Other cartridges like the 357 sig. offer similar questions. If it wasn't for the LEOs who use it would we even see it anymore? I really liked the .45 GAP, but refused to buy one since I was afraid it wouldn't last. Glad I made that call. How about all the different calibers to replace the 223/556 in ARs? Seemed like a sure thing that it would be replaced by the 6.8 or one of the various others, then the call for it faded. Was it the popularity and success of the 77gr bullets that helped end or at least quiet the debate? When the 17s came out, seems like more than a few people proclaimed the 22 mag obsolete. I am happy to say it's not going anywhere, since it's one of my favorite calibers.

This is definitely a random rambling, but I find it fascinating. Seems some come and go on a whim, others persist for reasons not easily specified. What are some of the calibers you have liked only to be disappointed by their untimely demise or that are popular for no reason anyone can understand? Which ones are currently on the bubble that you are cheering for, or betting against?

 

[dennishoddy]

I have a 7.7Jap that has been rebarreled into a .300 Savage. In its day, it was considered a wildcat round. The ballistics are Identical to the .308 that came around later.
Why go with the .308?

I know why the WSM and WSSM rounds faded.
Was at the BassPro fall festival in Springfield Mo a couple of years ago and struck up a conversation with a VP of Savage Arms about the WSM. He said Savage never has and never will produce a WSM gun as a couple of years after they first came out, some guy said he had already invented the concept and tried to market it to the gun makers. He was unsuccessful, but came back to sue the gun makers, and won the case in court. He currently gets 3% of every round produced, and every gun sold that is chambered in a WSM cartridge.

The rounds are extremely expensive, and the guns had to be upcharged to cover the 3%, resulting in lower sales.

The WSSM'S got a bad rap from the start. Before they even hit the market, "all knowing gun sages" determined the velocities would reduce barrel life to a few thousand rounds.
Chrome lined barrels put this argument to rest, and actually proved they lasted longer than the same caliber in non WSSM rounds. (.223, and .243)but the public ran away from the caliber, and the high prices of the ammo.


Danged old 06, and thirty thirty continue to march on.

 

[Mitch Rapp]

Forgot all about the WSM and WSSMs! (proof that this is a ramble, and not a research page) I actually bought a 300 Win Mag when the WSM was getting popular. Several people tried to talk me out of it, and into the WSM. My leeriness of things that are new paid off again.

How about the 5.7? seems to me it's over hyped unless you are in LE and have to worry about armor. I do like it though.....

 

[dennishoddy]

Most of the WSM's only offered a 100fps improvment in speed, but the short action was sure nice.
In fact, the 25-06WSM was the same velocity as the long action, so shooters did not have any reason to buy a more expensive gun, and pay more for ammo.
I own a .243WSSM in the AR platform. Its accounted for many deer. Thank goodness I reload, as $40.00 for a box of 20 rounds gets expensive to plink with.

The 6.5 Grendel, and other calibers trying to make the big time only match velocities of current rounds, and the general public doesn't want to pay. $$ is what drives the market. The average shooter MIGHT shoot 40 rounds or less a year.
My ex FIL has a Marlin 30-30 and has hunted 18 years with the same box of 20.
He is going to have to buy another box pretty quick. Sticker shock will ensue.

 

[Jefpainthorse]

we see a lot of "new" calibers cause.... you need to sell NEW guns to stay alive in the gun business. Of course. a few specific cases/cartridges have had to been developed to work in lever guns and never made the jump as bolt and semi-auto actions gained popularity. Black to Smokeless transition kept a few old cartridges around into the late 30's ... and rendered a few obsolete on the spot.

38-55 and 25-35 Winchester may be among the finest examples of the black to smokeless era cartridges that never made the jump into the bolt gun era.

 

[mike cyrwus]

calibers come because theres potential to sell them

calibers stay because enough people buy them to make it profitable (profitable doesnt necess. equal popular)

calibers go because it is no longer profitable.

10mm is by no means a dying cartridge. niche, yes.

my 02

 

[ToolBox]

I bought a 7mm wsm several years ago and love it. The rifle is lighter than a standard 7, kicks less and i load my own ammo to keep the cost down.
This is one that will stay with me for a long time!

 

[Mitch Rapp]

What about the 357 sig? Did the popularity of the +p 9mms push it away?

 

[technetium-99m]

I've always thought 357 sig was a dumb cartridge.

No capacity upgrade, not all that more stank than hot 9mm, and expensive ammo that requires more effort to reload.

I will have a SS in 9X23 someday though.

 

[bsdubois00]

I have a 300 wsm and 270 wsm and can say the 300 wsm has much less recoil than the 300 win mag. The 270 wsm also has some pretty slick ballistics.

 

[dennishoddy]

Let me ask a question. If one already had a .300 Win Mag, or a .270, would you have sold them to buy a WSM in the same calibers?
I know some did. A little lighter, a little more velocity in some cases.

Here is a link to Winchesters ballistic tables for a comparison to long action rounds in the same caliber.


http://www.winchesterguns.com/library/articles/detail.asp?id=45

The difference in the .300 win mag vs the .300wsm is 10 fps.
Difference in the .270 LA vs the WSM is better at 225 fps.
Difference in the 7mm mag is 125 fps.

Using Winchesters online ballistic tables comparing the .270, same bullet, same design of bullet, same weight of bullet, 130 grain ballistic Silver tip, results in a difference of 6.5" at 500 yds. At closer ranges its insignificent.

 

[bsdubois00]

If I had them. Probably not. However the energy in the 270 Wsm vs 270 is a difference. Also the thing I like about the 300 Wsm is the recoil difference. If you already had one sure it's not a replacement but if you are in the market for one for me it was a better solution

300 Wsm vs 300 mag = almost same ballistics with considerable less recoil
270 Wsm vs 270 = improved energy performance with no noticeable recoil difference.

 

[dennishoddy]

If I had them. Probably not. However the energy in the 270 Wsm vs 270 is a difference. Also the thing I like about the 300 Wsm is the recoil difference. If you already had one sure it's not a replacement but if you are in the market for one for me it was a better solution

300 Wsm vs 300 mag = almost same ballistics with considerable less recoil
270 Wsm vs 270 = improved energy performance with no noticeable recoil difference.

The difference in recoil is contributed to what? Slower burning powders that contribute pressure for the full barrel length vs a quicker powder that launched the bullet quicker? I've been around some elk hunters with the .300 win Mag with my 06 in the same rack. Their barrels are longer by 4".
I don't know. I'm asking a question.

 

[steak]

It seems as though those very unpopular are the coolest.i have always had a bit of a man crush on some of those more unique rounds. .257 roberts, 223 wssm, 300 weatherby magnum, and the 45-70 have always had a special place in my heart.

 

[Corey]

Remington came out with the .260 but try finding a rem 700 in that caliber. Hornady has marketed the 6.5 creedmore but i wonder where both calibers will be in 5-10 years. The 30ar I feel was dead before it started. I still would like to have a 300 WSM or 270 WSM and the 450 marlin. I got a 30.06 rem 700 from granddad when I was 16 it was a premier grade with jeweled bolt very good finish. I have always used it never had any reason to upgrade always thought about it though. I had to have the formidable 3.5 inch 12 ga it is cool to blow small wrist sized limbs off a willow tree using a turkey choke. More than 2 shots seam to wear on my cheek bone.

 

[Rodshoot]

Most of the "trick" new guns with "improved" cartridges are sold to inexperienced hunters who get all excited about 100fps more in the ballistic tables and fail to notice the 26" barrel required. Not a slam, just a marketing fact. Sure, the ideal combustion chamber is a sphere, and a longer barrel allows slower powders and higher MV.......but who wants to carry a deer rifle that is longer and heavier than a Goose 10ga shotgun? And that 100fps more just gives another 15 yds of "point blank" range, so now it's 280yds instead of 265. In other words, all ballistic advantage is negated by simply getting 15yds closer.
Unfortunately, some shooters want "more power" to try to make up for poor hunting and shooting skills.

But some folks will just buy anything that is "new and improved" and some of the new stuff catches on and becomes the next ole reliable. In the final analysis, the market rules.

For anything in the lower 48, a 22" barrel .270 is more than enough for me, and it did OK on caribou too. Course, I learned to hunt with a .22 in the KY squirrel woods, and I guess that's all the hunting I really know how to do. When they recorded my cow elk at the Wichita hunt, several marveled that I shot it at 60 yards......I hope long range blasting does not become the only thing in hunting.

 

[Dux-R-Us]

I'm still trying to figure out why Disco died......

 

[Scott Hearn]

The difference in recoil is contributed to what? Slower burning powders that contribute pressure for the full barrel length vs a quicker powder that launched the bullet quicker? I've been around some elk hunters with the .300 win Mag with my 06 in the same rack. Their barrels are longer by 4".
I don't know. I'm asking a question.

Dennis, I think it's because they are burning a lot less powder. I read a few years ago that they are much more efficient because of the fat case and steep shoulder. The powders are pretty slow but there is a good bit less of it than the big mags. I have a .270 WSM and like it pretty well. I wish I would have waited and got a short action but I couldn't find one in stock that didn't have a 21" or 22" barrel. So I got the 24" barrel that I wanted but also got a standard action length.

 

[dennishoddy]

Just another thought. I'm wondering if the recent additions like the 6.5, .30ar, and so on are an attempt to get into the Government market. The original AR was designed for jungle warfare, using the 5.56, as a soldier could carry a lot more ammo, and firefights happened at 20 yards at times, with combatants clad in silk jammies.
Recent conflicts have drawn lots of complaints from the troops about the ineffictivness of the 5.56 in desert/long range battles. The M-14 (.308) was brought out of retirement for some special forces units that can specify the gun they want to use. Oh yeah, they also specified the .45 ACP.

Every ammo manufacturer would love to have the "magic" bullet to get a Government contract for billions of bullets.

 

[Dux-R-Us]

My Grandfather's deer rifle was a .35 Remington, which I think was popular in the 1950s and 60s.. Probably a better deer cartridge that the 30-30, and it could be utilzed in lever and slide action rifles. I don't think I have ever seen a slide 30-30. Is it because of the rim? .35 Rem. is rimless, and pretty much non-existent these days. I think Marlin might still offer it, but I can't say I have ever seen a new one for sale.

I believe the above discussion about recoil is invalid. Recoil is a factor of the weight of the projectile, it's velocity, and weight of the gun. Case capacity and powder burn rates have nothing to do with recoil. Recoil can be estimated knowing these parameters (look in your reloading mauals for the models.)

One might think recoil is less even though the data don't support it. This is the elusive perceived or felt recoil, which is subjective. In the case of two rifles with different stock dimensions felt recoil could easily be different.

I had the opportunity of firing a friend's .500 Nitro Express double rifle. My wife video taped me and you could easily see my left foot actually lea ve the ground. Now that is some recoil!