Over the past couple of months, I've noticed some folks believe one Cartridge is Bad and another is Good, but they seem reluctant to say What makes it that way or Why they believe it is true.

So, what do you all think constitutes a Good (or Bad) Cartridge Design?

Good Hunting and Clean 1-Shot Kills.

Some cartridges were designed to fit available existing actions. There are compromises with this approach, but a good overall package can be acheived. Some cartridge designs are better suited to handloading with longer necks.

I think a good cartridge design starts with the case design with expansion ratio considered, but ensuring adequate powder capacity. Bench rest competition has lead the way for case design accuracy standards. Short & fat. This was the basis for the WSM & WSSM design.

It's all about context....examples:

A 30-30 is a good cartridge in the hands of a deep woods deer hunter but a bad cartridge in the hands of an Elk hunter shooting 450 yards at a trophy bull elk.

A .300 RUM is a good cartridge in the hands of a long rang big game hunter that has the skills to shoot it properly but a bad cartridge in the hands of a shooter that flinches badly because he's afraid of it.

There are a few cartridges however that I've never been able to find a use for....such as the .25 ACP and on the other end cartridges that generate way more energy than a hunter can tolerate.

Hot Core

From an accuracy standpoint, a good cartridge design is one that shoots little tiny holes.

Accuracy-wise, again, any cartridge will shoot well if the brass is uniform and consistent, the barrel and bullet are match-grade, the powder charge is consistent and fills the case, and the rifle action is well bedded.

There are Benchrest cartridges based on the 5.6x39 Russian, 25 Remington, 30-30, and 7.62x51 that will shoot those tiny dots. Many will assert that none of those cartridges are well designed.

JMHO

Ray

quote:

So, what do you all think constitutes a Good (or Bad) Cartridge Design?

a design that does (or does not) achieve the cartidge's objectives with the available resources.

the .30-30 is an excellent cartridge for lever action woods hunting using conventional propellants and bullets.

the .30-06 was an excellent cartridge for the military arms of the day and the propellants of the time. the .50 BMG - a scaled-up version of the .30 M2 - is still an excellent HMG cartridge.

other things can make an otherwise good design not-so-good, such as duplicating what is already available. if you want an excellent series of opinions on this subject, buy cartidges of the world and have a read.

Good luck with a definition

See, different people mean different things by "Good" or "Bad".... Kinda like asking someone what is a "Good" pet? Some folks think lions are good pets, others think snakes, others think rats, birds, and spiders. Still others like dogs and cats.... Then there's the "No pets are good pets" crowd too.....

With cartridges, it is the same.....

So a Good cartridge is any possible combination of = Powerful, cheap, factory, available, cutting edge, self defense, antique, military, hunting, wildcat, big bore, small bore, medium bore, quiet, tactical, Partition, Triple shock, flatter shooting, low recoil, armor piercing, old fashioned, cowboy, benchrest, muzzle loader, IPSC, long range, and it kicks so hard it makes me go cross eyed, etc.....

but IT'S SO COOL THAT I GOTTA HAVE IT.....

Every cartridge is sufficient for *someone* and either woefully inadequate or complete overkill for everyone else....

I really do need a 17 Remington fireball afterall.....

Just one more Honey, I promise.....

It can sit right there next to the 577/450 Martini, the shotguns, the 30-06, the 375H&H, the 204, the AR, the 17HMII, the 22's, the 308's, the K31, the Mausers, the Mosins, Carcanos, the AKs and SKS, the Enfields, and whatever that thing back there is...

And now, I am running out of Gun Cabinet room..
so I really need a bigger cabinet....

Oh, and I almost forgot.... I will need dies, shells, new powder, more bullets, scope bases, rings, and a new scope too.

I promise... Just one more.... Really.....

John

Sure is a good thing you never ask any hard questions........yeah, RIGHT!!!


From a semi-logical point of view (that's as good as I get even on my best days...just ask my frau), the things I look for are these:

GOOD

Feeds well and ejects well in the rifle action for which intended.

Holds enough powder to propel the bullets with a relatively easy to use trajectory for its intended upurpose from a barrel length no longer than I can handle dextrously (about 28" MAX from a SS or double, 24" from a BA). Good performance from barrels a few inches shorter is a plus.

Boxer primer pockets (because I live where Berdan primers are not commonly available over the counter).

Case head size something relatively common, so I can make cases from something else if the need arises.

Rimmed if not fed from a magazine, rimless if fed from a double-column mag. Single column mags might use either, if correctly slanted front and back.

Case construction heavy (thick) enough to withstand pressures at least 50% to 60% of the action strength...thereby adding flexibility to loading at the top end.

A long enough neck/throat that the bases of the heaviest standard bullets do not seat below the top of the shoulder. (not actually necessary, but MY preference).

Short enough overall to work well through an action which, of itself, would not weigh over about 44-48 ounces max, complete including trigger.

Shoulder sharp enough (barely) to keep firing pin blow from forcing case into a situation of creating excess headspace when struck.

There's likely more, but those come right off the top of my falling hair-line.

Best wishes in your quest, HC...

Hot Core, sir,

I don't think there are too many "bad" cartridges. Most are better than a stick, rock, spear, etc.

I assume the 6PPC must be a good cartridge for benchrest.

I think the .30-'06 Springfield is an excellent design for a hunting rifle.

Good cartridges - Those that I want.

Bad cartridges - Those that I don't want.

I think Alberta Canuck and I were born under the same star. well stated AC. I think ,however that the sholder angle need not be greater than 26 1/2 degrees. roger

Just my opinion, but it needs to start with a caliber and a speed number. The next thing is powder selection.
A 101% loading density makes any cartridge fairly accurate, consistent on the chrono; and a classic. Witness the 25-06. It took the ammo companies years to find a powder that let it shine.

Rich
DRSS

Study the 7 X 57 case, then study a 140 Nosler Partition bullet. These two utilizing the powder/primer that enables you to make repetitive shots(precision shots) is the best of the best. The others are wantabes.

"Good" design features tend to include being short and fat, being beltless, having a relatively sharp shoulder, and a not-particularly short neck.

"Bad" design features include being a belted case, being long rather than short while holding a similar powder charge, and being tapered with little or no shoulder (a'la .300 H&H Magnum).

However, this does not mean that a "poorly designed" cartridge cannot perform well. Many can and do. Whether a cartridge performs well or not depends more on the precision with which the gun was built to use the cartridge, and the precision with which the cartridge was manufactured than it does on the cartridge's size and shape.

quote:

Originally posted by bartsche:
I think Alberta Canuck and I were born under the same star. well stated AC. I think ,however that the sholder angle need not be greater than 26 1/2 degrees. roger

Roger- I agree with you on the shoulder angle...except that I require only maybe 15-degrees or so. Just enough to keep the case from being driven forward in the chamber by the strike of the firing pin. And, yes, I think maybe we are very distant shooting blood-relatives. I certainly like your practical, thoughtful approach anyway, so maybe it is just bragging to say I hope to be the same.

quote:

Originally posted by John in SC:
Hot Core, sir,

I don't think there are too many "bad" cartridges. Most are better than a stick, rock, spear, etc.

I assume the 6PPC must be a good cartridge for benchrest.

I think the .30-'06 Springfield is an excellent design for a hunting rifle.

I'm with John.
'Good' and 'bad' are relative terms. If I can hit the groundhog or squirrel every time with a 22 rimfire, it's a 'good' cartridge.
If can not hit a deer with my 458 Win Mag, because I'm flinching it's a 'bad' cartridge.
I suspect it's more the case of 'good' or 'bad' shooters and rifles.
Jim

Question 1: What case design wins world championships?

Question 2: What hunting case is close to the world winning competitive cases?

A good cartridge is one which will consistently do that which you require it to do, depending on the task.
A bad cartridge is one which will not.

Give us something technical to consider......

In the current world, cartridge accuracy is defined as:

6mm PPC

Darn shame I can't "Beam ya'll up" and put you in a big circle, comfortable old logs, a fire going and a few to keep the discussion going. I'm really enjoying all the responses and when each is read by itself, I agree with 99.99%. And that last 0.01% included a Disclaimer, so actually I agree with it too.

Especially enjoyed the "Humor"!

Hey Buliwyf, I'll try again on the Tech aspect in a different thread.

The cartridge is only part of it for me.
The other part is the designed clearance between the cartridge and the chamber.
While not a bad cartridge as a stand alone, the .303 British is a real turkey when it comes to case head separations. This is due to the excessive diametral clearance and the springiness of the Lee-Enfield action.

.22 Hornet chambers tend to be sloppy compared to the size of the small case.

Another case is the typical twist used with a cartridge. The 38" twist used with 44 cal cartriges is a stinker.

The typical 3/4 inch long throat seen in most .30 Herretts is not so hot.

Lack of brass is a killer for many.

While not all of these are design features
they can certainly kill an other wise good design.

Excellent points!

quote:

Originally posted by Ole Miss Guy:
Study the 7 X 57 case, then study a 140 Nosler Partition bullet. These two utilizing the powder/primer that enables you to make repetitive shots(precision shots) is the best of the best. The others are wantabes.

Amen to that! With the 6.5 X 55 & 140gr a close second.

Anything that I can shoot well is a good cartridge. Anything I can't shoot well is obviously a bad cartridge. If you can't shoot it well how can it be a good cartridge?

Came back to edit/add. Obviously there is more to a good cartridge design than simply my ability to shoot it well. For hunting I prefer cartridges that are known to have little or no feeding issues that I can shoot well.

In fact there are too many variables, all important, to make any sweeping statements.

A good cartridge sends a bullet down the barrel with sufficient velocity to reach the target and do whatever it is you think it should do. A bad cartridge is any I don't really care to shoot!