Winners & Losers

[270man]

Fellow Prophets:

I just read that Remington has dropped its SAUM (Short Action Ultra Magnum) line of cartridges. Seems that Winchester won out with its short magnums (300WSM, etc.). The news prompted me to dig out a 2001 article by gun writer Jon Sundra in which he predicted that the market would not support both of these manufacturer's products. He was correct. Sundra also made some dire predictions about such cartridges as the 376 Steyr, the 338-06, the 7mm STW and the 338RUM.

I only have limited experience with the 7mmSTW and none with the others. Sundra says the 7mmRUM is better than the STW and the latter will eventually die out. I haven't followed any of these to find out how well they are selling but Sundra was right about the short action cartridges that were available in 2001.

All this causes me to consider my own predictions about the "whiz-bang" cartridges that have been introduced in recent years. Seems to me that the Winchester line of SSM (Super Short Magnum) cartridges haven't done very well. There are probably others. I am currently shooting and reloading for the 260Rem and wonder if it will last.

I'm too lazy to generate a poll on this subject but if someone has the energy, it would be interesting to see which cartridges get the most votes for lasting power and those that are predicted to fail.

270man

[wrenchman]

The ultra mags were nice but i didnt thing they would last of all the shorts new rounds the 300 wsm is doing the best and might be around for a while.
I also like the fact rem is chambering the 7mm08 it is mice but then again it is based off the 308 and if you needed you cound size down some brass.

[GoodOlBoy]

I am not much on new fandangled anything. There are so many good older cartridges, why do it? Particularly if you don't see any advantage other than having a shiny new blah. When a cartridge line is described as being "as accurate as a 25-06" or "as flat shooting as a 270" then why wouldn't I buy a 25-06 or a 270?

STW cartridges have been around a long time, and they have fans, the short lines have been around a short time and have fans. The companies don't drop them due to lagging sales, they drop them so they can move on the the next ultra mega super short wide long magnum to sell more guns in new actions and new calibers. There are VERY popular calibers out there that are custom build custom load only, and there have always been fad calibers (219 zipper).

Again if I want something that shoots like a 30-30, 308, 30-06, 270, 243, 25-06, 223, 222, 45-70 then THATS the caliber I will buy. Why? Because in ten years I don't have to pay premium prices (I mean above and beyond what we pay anyway) for components to load my calibers because they ARENT oddball stuff. If I am going to shoot something oddball it will be something that likes cast lead and black powder.

Shoot what turns you on and don't worry about if it is around tomorrow, but don't whine when you buy something that disappears and has absolutely no way to form a case from something else.

That's my 2 cents.

GoodOlBoy

[Larryjk]

Many of the new cartridges have specific "nitches" they fill that are very narrow. In addition, many are not that friendly in popular actions. I mean that they don't feed well, or hardly at all, out of the staggered magazines most actions use. The PPC variations are difficult to make feed and aren 't popular for that reason. Some of the more common cartridges don't feed well in staggered box magazines. When you put a short, fat cartridge in a staggered box magazine made for a longer, slim cartridge, you will normally have problems. Remember that box was designed for the 57mm case; 7mm and 8mm. So it actually feeds a little better when you make the box a little longer and run cartridges of 06 length (62 mm) through them. And there are some cartridges that are real "zoomers" in a rifle when fed factory ammo, but you find you can't duplicate that performance with available reloading components. I also wonder if new cartridges are tested in "tight" bore barrels. They always give great velocity that can't be duplicted. Give me the velocity on a five random barrel selection and then you have believeable velocity. Then we have the old "well you can make that cartridge on a short throw action". Bid deal! Learn not to short shuck a regular length action and that fantastic advantage is lost. You do save a few ounces on the weight of the action if it is short.

[jplonghunter]

Larryjk

All good info,however, a 30-06 case is 63mm in length.

jplonghunter

[Jack]

I agree with Larryjk- the niches for new cartridges these days are quite narrow. A lot of companies introduce things to have their own headstamp on them, on the theory that promoting their name will eventually lead to more sales of guns, ammo, or both. Hence you have Hornady introducing a 30 cal cartridge for lever guns that is a ballistic duplicate of the 307 Winchester. Slightly different case, but it doesn't do anything the older cartridge didn't- except say Hornady on it.
I don't mean to pick on Hornady- they all do it. The Remington SAUM line is another example.
On paper ballistics can sell some rifles- like the ultra mags and the STW's. These cartridges have a narrow niche, but I bet a lot of them get sold so someone can have the biggest/fastest/baddest. That's fine- but, after the buyer shoots them a few times, they get rid of them- too noisy, too much recoil, too expensive.
There are always some big bores being introduced, too, for the folks that think bigger is better. Most of those won't last, either. Some of the big monsters would be excellent on an African Safari, but how many people do you know that go on african safaris? I see a whole lot of the really big guns at gun shows, with a partial box of ammo, and no sign the bolt has even been worked much. A few shots at the bench and the buyer discovers his 270 wasn't so bad a rifle after all.
Woods cartridges in bolt actions have a long history in the US of not selling. I expect the 376 Steyr will go the way of the 358 Winchester- we all talked about what a good round the 358 was, but we didn't buy one (me included).
Firearms makers and ammo makers will introduce anything they think will sell, and keep it in their line as long as it is selling. When it doesn't sell, they'll drop it.
An example of a narrow niche for a new cartridge is the 450 Marlin. There may be a demand for that round for people that don't handload for their Marlin lever, but, time will tell if there is enough demand to keep that one afloat. A handloader can get the same performance from the much more common 45-70.
The truth is, there is very little need for any new cartridges.

[Mr. 16 gauge]

My experience has been if there is a small niche, then a small company will fill it.....not one of the big boys. They are usually too busy and will eventually loose money on the deal, then discontinue the product, leaving the user stuck with useless products and scrambling to find something else that will work......this goes for just about everything: cars, medical devices, & guns and ammunition.

It's kind of a revolving door: gun shop owner doesn't want to stock guns/ammo that's not going to sell; buyer doesn't want to buy gun/ammo if it isn't available locally, ect.

Also, as someone else has said, these guns look good on paper, but are usually more gun that most folks can handle, esp. if they only shoot 'em a couple of times a year. Case in point were two fellows I met while mule deer hunting in Montana a few years ago. One had a .300 Remington Ultramag....empty case looked like a small soda bottle! He couldn't hit a 4x8' sheet of plywood at 100 yards with that gun! He finally managed to gut shoot a small buck and they found it the next day. The meat was useless, but he got to go home with a small set of antlers. His buddy was shooting a 7mm Rem. mag....he made a nice neck shot on a buck at about 70 yards. Unfortunately, he admitted that he was shooting at the chest!

Same thing is going on with ammunition nowadays......now you have to pay top dollar for ammo that is loaded with polymer ballistic tip boat tail bullets and 'special' powder, otherwise you can't kill a whitetail.....good thing the deer in my freezer can't read the advertisements, otherwise they wouldn't know that they were kilt with a regular old flat based, soft pointed bullet!

And I don't know why ammo companies are reinventing the wheel. Case in point: the .260 Remington. My 6.5 Swede will do everything that the .260 will, so why not invest your time & efforts in promoting a cartridge that is already available, instead of bringing out a new one that most likely will fall in the obsolete rack in a few years?

Bottom line? Stick with what has been proven......

[Larryjk]

jplonghunter, You are correct! The 30-06 is 63mm. There is another reason for all of the new cartridges. Someone thinks they can make the old bullet go a little faster with a new case of a different shape or higher pressure (which does work). A friend used to give me heck for all of the old cartridges I lked to try. He said "why do you try all of those old cartridges when we found out long ago these new ones were better". I told him I didn't get a chance to find out for myself.

[jplonghunter]

I believe that everything could be done with 6.5 x 55, 7 x 57, 8 x 57, 7 x 64, and 9.3 x 62. All 100 yr old cartridges. However, it would eliminate an awful lot of conversation.

jplonghunter

[buckhunter]

I'm waiting for the new bunch of Ruger, Hornady and Federal to go away. Only one that interest me is the 338 Federal but doubt it will survive either.

Just a little longer and the only WSM you will find will be the 300.

[bigbrother]

While I can agree with just about everyone's comments, we all have to keep tinkering and experimenting and creating to advance. I don't have a use for most of the new calibers either but I built a 6.5x284 before they were the "in" thing. (and I love it I might add lol) And most of you own or shoot regularly calibers that may be "standard" today but when they first arrived most people didn't think they needed them or that they would die out. Your 270, 25-06, 22-250, 243, and lots of others were wildcats and extremely experimental at one time. My favorites were all actually billed as either "too much" or "not needed" but now pale in comparison to what we can acheive with brass, bullet, and powder.

Am I going to rush out and buy the next new caliber....heck no! But the future improvements and innovations in our sport lie in those who stretch the envelopes and spend the money to determine if a 35deg shoulder shoots better than a 37deg.

Keep shooting!

[Catfish]

There is really no reason for any new cartridges as what we have now will due anything we need to do. Infact there is so much over lap in rounds that we have several that are so close any 1 of them would interchange with many other. A difference 0f 100 fps is a difference of 5 yrds in max. point blank range, apx. 500 fps would only be 25 yrds., and the target will not be able to tell the difference in valocity, so why do we have they all???? Because it is easy to prove that 1 has so definate advantages on paper, it just becomes imposible in the field. AND, even though I know and understand this well I am still an aviod wildcatter. I at present have a .17 AH as my smallest and a .411 Hawk as my largest wildcats. At present I have wildcats in .17, .22, 6mm, .25 and .411 cals. It`s just human nature to want something no one else has.

[Jack]

Wildcattting, like the desire for a new rifle in a new caliber, is an "I want" rather than an "I need".
And that's coming from someone who slakes the "I want" fairly often.

[Larryjk]

The "I want" for a wildcat and the final price after dies, etc., can become quite a bit more than a comparable "off the shelf" firearm. But I understand the "I want". About 5 years before the .204 Ruger came out I had to have a .20 caliber rifle. I had Dave Manson make me a reamer for a .20/223 Ackley Improved. I was going to use the 222 Magnum, but it was hard to find brass. So I went with the .223 because there was only 1 1/2 grains difference between that and andd the 222 Mag. It is a deadly accurate rifle I call the Death Ray. But I was going to set the barrel back and rechamber to the ..204 Ruger when I built one for my son. He asked me to leave my rifle as a wildcat.
At the time this one didn't have a commercial double. But I understand and have a .22 K-Hornet, a 25-06 Ackley Imp. and a .280 Ackley Imp. I "needed" them. I know if I ever want to dispose of them I have to find a reloader who "needs" them and sell them with the dies.

[skeet]

I've been kinda stayin outta this one.. But have to say..I'm not of the opinion that there is going to be anything new and improved that will actually be as touted. None of the new breed of cats here has shown themselves to be any better than existing cartridges. Yep I have a couple 'cats but none of the new super duper unbelievable rifle calibers that are or were supposed to be sooo much better than those that came before..Some actually do gain as much as 100 ft a second over some of the older calibers. But that is supposing that you use the 26 in bbl that they use and load to the same incredible pressures. What will we do when those same rifles are 80 yrs old..and suspect because of the materials they were made of and their ages.. The same reasons pressures have supposedly been reduced in such suspect calibers as the 30-06..270..257 Robts etc etc.. I guess it's always nice to see and have something new..but to have new calibers just so they can sell more new guns is ridiculous.. I for one refuse to buy them..they really show me nothing over the older calibers..Good riddance to their passing...Ain't I a stick in the mud??? hehehe