The Accurate Reloading Forums
Efficient
06 July 2008, 07:23
bartscheEfficient
<img src="https://forums.accuratereloading.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif" alt="Confused" width="15" height="22"><!--graemlin::confused:-->RogerDoes the word efficient really have any meaningful significance to anyone when speaking of a cartridge? why?YesNo
Old age is a high price to pay for maturity!!! Some never pay and some pay and never reap the reward. Wisdom comes with age! Sometimes age comes alone..
06 July 2008, 07:34
vapodogIMO the term efficient isn't relevant to a cartridge at all.....I could care less how efficient it is.....I only care about it's performance....
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."
Winston Churchill
06 July 2008, 08:02
FlippyAs the price of reloading supplies continues to skyrocket, having an efficient cartridge is a good thing.
The .223 and 30-'06 are two examples of commonly used efficient cartridges.
Most of the new (and old) wizz-bang cartridges (Lazzeroni's slew, 7mmSTW, 30-378, 300RUM etc. etc.) do very little more than the "lesser" ones they supplant. And they do this while burning more powder, create more noise and sometimes substantially more recoil.
Performance (as it relates to speed) many times is only measured in the mind.
JUST A TYPICAL WHITE GUY BITTERLY CLINGING TO GUNS AND RELIGIONDefinition of HOPLOPHOBIA "I'm the guy that originally wrote the 'assault weapons' ban." --- Former Vice President Joe Biden 06 July 2008, 08:22
Strut10I don't give a darn about efficiency. A quick root through my gun safes would prove that. If it's been labeled "overbore"......I'll buy it or already have bought it. I'm an "end result" sorta guy.
Founder....the OTPG
06 July 2008, 08:28
vapodogI have a .177 pellet gun that shoots a .177 diameter pellet about 1,100 feet/sec with no gunpowder at all....now that's efficient!!!!
But I want something less efficient to hunt deer and other big game!
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."
Winston Churchill
06 July 2008, 18:26
Strut10quote:
Originally posted by vapodog:
I have a .177 pellet gun that shoots a .177 diameter pellet about 1,100 feet/sec with no gunpowder at all....now that's efficient!!!!
But I want something less efficient to hunt deer and other big game!
Yep. It's cool to drive a Prius to work. But on Saturday night, gimme the Z-06 Corvette.
Founder....the OTPG
06 July 2008, 21:14
AtkinsonIm in the middle of the road on the subject...I don't mind a little over bore, but like most things you can go overboard on this subject in either direction..I lean toward efficient or near efficient cartridges.
Ray Atkinson
Atkinson Hunting Adventures
10 Ward Lane,
Filer, Idaho, 83328
208-731-4120
rayatkinsonhunting@gmail.com
06 July 2008, 21:22
RaySenderoI believe understanding what makes a particular cartridge "efficient" is important - Second only to "effective"!
________
Ray
06 July 2008, 23:21
MikeyBI could care less when it comes to rifle cartridges to be honest. I don't use efficiency as a measure to judge my rifles, I judge them based on field and range performance. Damned if my magnums don't kill stuff DRT. Still though, my .243, 6.5x55mm, .270, 7mm-08, and .30-.30 are all fine shooters as well as quite efficient, but my 7mm RM is my primary deer gun when hunting out of a tree stand and my new .300 Win will be on point for moose and elk. Depending on how this new Weatherby works out for me I might spring for a .300 Weatherby in a Fibermark "just because".
________
"...And on the 8th day, God created beer so those crazy Canadians wouldn't take over the world..."
Efficiency has never crossed my mind when regarding rifle calibers/cartidges. Hell, if you want something efficient, pick up a bow. You can reuse the same arrow over and over so long as it hasn't snapped or warped, which is rare with today's carbons.
All I've had to do for the past several years is replace the blades of the broadhead. The last 7 or 8 deer I killed with archery, I used the same arrow.
How's that for efficient?
Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than my guns
07 July 2008, 04:43
CheechakoRoger
It really depends on the cartridge, rifle, powder, primer, intended use, and . . .
Oh Hell, who am I kidding. For benchrest I shoot the cartridge what groups the best. For hunting I shoot what kills the best. For wildcatting I shoot what looks the best.
That's what I call efficient.
Ray
Arizona Mountains
07 July 2008, 04:49
bja105Powder is still reasonably cheap, especially compared to the fuel to drive to the range. Price does not matter, much. Yes I'll try to do the same thing with less powder, but I don't worry much about it.
I voted no, but my favorites are 223, 30-06, and 35 Whelen.
Jason
07 July 2008, 05:14
SlamFireI think Ken Waters is the one Gunwriter who talks the most about efficient cartridges, but it was P.O Ackley who talked about over bore cartridges.
It is just another hair splitting aspect that gunwriters create worthless debates around.
All that really matters is what is happening on target.
07 July 2008, 09:47
308SakoHow much energy per grain of powder is transmitted to the bullet... I'm in for a Yes here.
Member NRA, SCI- Life #358 28+ years now!
DRSS, double owner-shooter since 1983, O/U .30-06 Browning Continental set.
07 July 2008, 11:43
Flippyquote:
Originally posted by MikeyB:
I could care less when it comes to rifle cartridges to be honest. I don't use efficiency as a measure to judge my rifles, I judge them based on field and range performance. Damned if my magnums don't kill stuff DRT. Still though, my .243, 6.5x55mm, .270, 7mm-08, and .30-.30 are all fine shooters as well as quite efficient, but my 7mm RM is my primary deer gun when hunting out of a tree stand and my new .300 Win will be on point for moose and elk. Depending on how this new Weatherby works out for me I might spring for a .300 Weatherby in a Fibermark "just because".
Funny. Of the "overbore" cartridges you mention, both the 7mmRM and the 300WinM are considered fairly efficient in those calibers. Not as much as your 7mm-08 or 30-30, but more so than say a 7mmRUM or a 30-378.
Even the 300 Weatherby is "efficient" comparted to a 30-378 or a 300RUM.
JUST A TYPICAL WHITE GUY BITTERLY CLINGING TO GUNS AND RELIGIONDefinition of HOPLOPHOBIA "I'm the guy that originally wrote the 'assault weapons' ban." --- Former Vice President Joe Biden 07 July 2008, 13:03
seafire2eFFICIENCY???
Count me in on the efficiency side...
Do I need a Magnum of some type to hunt deer with?? NOPE.. and neither does anyone else in my opinion... but they can feel free to carry and shoot whatever they want.. they don't want my opinion and I don't want to be 'downrange' when they shoot and miss what they are aiming at..
90 % of all deer are taken at less than 100 yds, and most weigh less than 120 lbs or so..
varmints: 223, does just fine at anything under 200 yds, 22.250 or 220 Swift are more than anything you want to shoot at that are varmints within 400 yds...
backeast ground hogs...
are 243s, 6mm Rems, overkill? not really, especially when some guys are shooting them safely at 500 + yds...just hope they are not using bullets that will riccochet at that distance and I am down range somewhere...
do folks need a 7 Rem Mag for a chuck rifle?? not in my opinion.. their best use is for catering to excess testosterone the owner may have to get rid of....
but hey, I am for anyone carrying any firearm chambering they want, as long as they can shoot it and hit their targets...
its their barrel, powder and expense that they are excessively wearing out...
I can't believe what a powder guzzler a 22.250 is when I load thousands of 223 rounds and get anywhere from 500 to 700 rounds out of a pound of powder, depending on my charge weight of blue dot...
Life Member: The American Vast Right Wing Conspiracy
Jan 20, 2009.. Prisoner in Dumocrat 'Occupied America', Partisan in the 'Save America' Underground
Beavis..... James Beavis..... Of Her Majesty's Secret Service..... Spell Check Division
"Posterity — you will never know how much it has cost my generation to preserve your freedom. I hope you will make good use of it."
John Quincy Adams
A reporter did a human-interest piece on the Texas Rangers. The reporter recognized the Colt Model 1911 the Ranger was carrying and asked him "Why do you carry a 45?" The Ranger responded, "Because they don't make a 46."
Duhboy....Nuttier than Squirrel Poop...
07 July 2008, 14:38
Bent FossdalNO, most cartridges made today are way past efficiency.
But in a free world people should use whatever they want, as long as it kills clean.
Bent Fossdal
Reiso
5685 Uggdal
Norway
A car should be efficient, a wife should be efficient, a mistress should be very efficient, people on my payroll are efficient...or else.
But guns should be fun!
07 July 2008, 20:20
bartsche
From reading these comments there seems to be more than one concept of cartridge efficiency. Would someone like to level the playing field and define what they consider efficiency in this matter?
roger
Old age is a high price to pay for maturity!!! Some never pay and some pay and never reap the reward. Wisdom comes with age! Sometimes age comes alone..
As to cost of reloading, I use 29 cents worth of powder in my 338-378 Wby. I use 17 cents worth of powder in my '06. Will both of them kill an elk? Yes. Do I care about the cost difference in powder? No. Is the 338-378 way more cartridge then is necessary for normal hunting here in the lower 48? Yes. Does that mean that I prefer to use something less on elk? No. They are both accurate rifles and I just like shooting the boomer. Efficiency is irrelevant from that perspective to me.
Ken....
"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn't so. " - Ronald Reagan
07 July 2008, 22:24
CheechakoRoger
"Efficient" has two meanings.
1) Producing a desired effect.
2) Effective as measured by comparison of cost vs production.
I answered your poll question using defintion #1.
Ray
Arizona Mountains
08 July 2008, 01:36
duckboat<<<Would someone like to level the playing field and define what they consider efficiency in this matter?>>>
Efficiency to me means performance weighed against recoil. For example, I think the 257 Roberts and 270 Win are very efficient deer cartridges. And I think the 30-06 or 338-06 are very efficient elk cartridges.
These two cartridges do the job within any distance say under 300 yards, and recoil less than the cartridges with more powder.
08 July 2008, 01:57
duikermanefficiency typically means velocity per grain of powder.
In most cases the larger the cartridge gets in a given caliber the less efficient it gets.
08 July 2008, 04:25
bartsche
"Ahh Bock" and there you have it apples and tangelos.
It's hard to sing from the same hymnal.
roger
Old age is a high price to pay for maturity!!! Some never pay and some pay and never reap the reward. Wisdom comes with age! Sometimes age comes alone..
08 July 2008, 18:09
Bent FossdalI think of efficient as "good enough". A cartridge that does the job without extra long barrels, screaming velocities or painful recoil.
Like the 8x57, my all-time favourite, against anything short of the biggest brutes of Africa.
But tell us, how do YOU define efficiency?
Bent Fossdal
Reiso
5685 Uggdal
Norway
08 July 2008, 22:23
bartschequote:
Originally posted by Bent Fossdal:
But tell us, how do YOU define efficiency?
I don't when speaking of cartridges. It has no place for me in that arena. It seems to be a term developed by marketing people.
I'll give you an example of my confusion. A person will spend $850.00 on a reasonably good varmint rifle and another $150.00 dollars on a fair scope. Mounts, range costs, bullets, primers, powder to develope some accurate loads, perhaps as low as $100.00.Loads 2500 rounds at a cost of $325.00.Goes on a 3 or 4 day hunt --Lodging, insidentals and fuel perhaps $400.00.Total $1825.00 and that's on the low side and doesn't show any amortized costs of equipment, tooling, cases and such.
Because of his loading technique he saves $51.00 in powder or less than 3% of his total cost and speaks of a cartridge effiency.The truth is he could have started with a smaller cartrdge in the first place. The efficiency , if such, was not in the cartridge but in the loading and settling for less performance. Smacks of false ecconomy.
Kind a like spending $2000.00 for an International 130 VSX and loading it with 30# bargin basement monofilament because you could save $50.00
It also seems that many of the definitions of cartridge efficiency should be using terms like acceptabe,adequate,superior or stinko rather than efficient.Efficient conotates an induced cost savings to me.
After all my blather I guess what I'm saying is that cartridge efficiency is somewhat of a misnomer.
roger
Old age is a high price to pay for maturity!!! Some never pay and some pay and never reap the reward. Wisdom comes with age! Sometimes age comes alone..
Dear Mr. Bartsche:
Efficiency in a cartridge to me depends upon the volume of the expansion chamber required to move a bullet in a certain caliber barrel with a common twist rate to a peak velocity without excessive throat erosion, using commonly available reloading components.
After much research and some experimentation, I have found the 7x57 Ackley Improved and the 280 Remington to fall within the above definition of efficiency for the 7mm bore with a 1 in 9" twist barrel. As to other cartridges and calibers, I don't have any experimental data.
Nevertheless, my experimentation comports with Mr. Parker O. Ackley's findings for the 7mm bore. Of course you have to adjust his data for more modern powders, but as a rough guide his opinions on cartridge efficiency in his books bear notice.
Sincerely,
Chris Bemis
08 July 2008, 23:00
Jim C. <><A .22 RF Short is VERY efficent. But, it's not very effective.
Well I shall add fuel to the fire . .308 is an efficient cartridge as is the .223 as is the .270 WSM as is ????.
Now here is where the whole concept gets interesting .
WHAT cartridge pushes the heaviest projectile at a medium velocity ( 2500 - 2850 FPS ) with the least amount of powder ?.
Thinking caps ON ? , you may start to reply .
Shoot Straight Know Your Target . ...
09 July 2008, 03:41
bartschequote:
Originally posted by Dr.K:
Well I shall add fuel to the fire .
WHAT cartridge pushes the heaviest projectile at a medium velocity ( 2500 - 2850 FPS ) with the least amount of powder ?.
Thinking caps ON ? , you may start to reply .
660GL Sabre with a 4/0 High Speed.
Next question.
roger
Old age is a high price to pay for maturity!!! Some never pay and some pay and never reap the reward. Wisdom comes with age! Sometimes age comes alone..
09 July 2008, 04:19
RaySenderoquote:
Originally posted by bartsche:
quote:
Originally posted by Bent Fossdal:
But tell us, how do YOU define efficiency?
I don't when speaking of cartridges. It has no place for me in that arena. It seems to be a term developed by marketing people.
I'll give you an example of my confusion. A person will spend $850.00 on a reasonably good varmint rifle and another $150.00 dollars on a fair scope. Mounts, range costs, bullets, primers, powder to develope some accurate loads, perhaps as low as $100.00.Loads 2500 rounds at a cost of $325.00.Goes on a 3 or 4 day hunt --Lodging, insidentals and fuel perhaps $400.00.Total $1825.00 and that's on the low side and doesn't show any amortized costs of equipment, tooling, cases and such.
Because of his loading technique he saves $51.00 in powder or less than 3% of his total cost and speaks of a cartridge effiency.The truth is he could have started with a smaller cartrdge in the first place. The efficiency , if such, was not in the cartridge but in the loading and settling for less performance. Smacks of false ecconomy.
Kind a like spending $2000.00 for an International 130 VSX and loading it with 30# bargin basement monofilament because you could save $50.00
It also seems that many of the definitions of cartridge efficiency should be using terms like acceptabe,adequate,superior or stinko rather than efficient.Efficient conotates an induced cost savings to me.
After all my blather I guess what I'm saying is that cartridge efficiency is somewhat of a misnomer.
roger
bartsche,
I get your point!
________
Ray
I like efficiency.
My definition is getting more or at least equal velocity with less powder when comparing cartridges of the same bullet & bore.
Take a .300 Win Mag and .300 WSM: Barnes #4 lists 180 grain bullets with RL 19 same velocity produced with 3 grains less powder in the WSM. 4 grains less with IMR7828ssc. Same length 24" Krieger barrels.
I'm not looking at the penneys of powder difference. I just think a well designed case is cool. Kicks less too. In the big picture it doesn't mean a pinch of shit, but I like it.
Stu
09 July 2008, 08:14
duckboat<<<A .22 RF Short is VERY efficent. But, it's not very effective.>>>
A know a few squirrels and rabbits that would disagree that its not very effective.
09 July 2008, 08:24
Doctor DIf you're talking efficiency of powder to velocity. No. Why would I care. If you're talking efficiency of killing. Heck yes! That's why I use a .30-06, a .25-06 and a 7x57. I pull the trigger and stuff hits the ground. That's all that matters to me.
My dad told me once that if you're gonna kill a rattler with a chainsaw, use the top of the bar.
09 July 2008, 14:25
Bent FossdalYea, so we are surronded by idiots, whats new?
Bent Fossdal
Reiso
5685 Uggdal
Norway
We shall stay in the .30 cal bullet selection .
What is a heavy weight bullet in .30 cal ?. 220 grain !.
What cartridge pushes it the fastest ,
With the least amount of powder ?.
Now repeat above exercise only this time use a .224 6mm , 6.5mm , .277 , .284
That by definition is an efficient cartridge .
Rim fires are not allowed ( As they are to efficient ) .
Shoot Straight Know Your Target . ...
09 July 2008, 22:33
AtkinsonI think some of us get carried away with therory and crap in general, I know I did, but as you age it will go away by itself, you just get overloaded with the
after awhile, and it dawns on you that most of the gundome world is big boy toys, and we really tend to make something out of nothing
...
Ray Atkinson
Atkinson Hunting Adventures
10 Ward Lane,
Filer, Idaho, 83328
208-731-4120
rayatkinsonhunting@gmail.com
10 July 2008, 02:40
bartschequote:
Originally posted by Atkinson:
I think some of us get carried away with therory and crap in general, I know I did, but as you age it will go away by itself, you just get overloaded with the
after awhile, and it dawns on you that most of the gundome world is big boy toys, and we really tend to make something out of nothing
...
Him smart feller that Ray Atkinson.Yata hay,Ray.
roger
Old age is a high price to pay for maturity!!! Some never pay and some pay and never reap the reward. Wisdom comes with age! Sometimes age comes alone..
10 July 2008, 09:15
KabluewyEfficient - yea I like efficient. That's why I use a 338 Win Mag rather than a 338 RUM or 340 Weatherby. I mean really, why burn all that extra powder and suffer the extra muzzel blast and recoil for hunting sitka blacktail? After all, surely the 338 WM will do the job just fine if I do my part.
And besides, the 338 WM fits into my standard length magazine much better than the longer cartridges anyway.
Another benenfit of all this efficiency is that I can down load the 338 WM just a bit, to the 338-06 or 338 Fedeal velocity, and enjoy that level of efficiency. It's really effective on those water oak bottom Georgia whitetails and hogs, and works almost as good on the Texas variety too.
What a 200 gr nosler ballistic tip 338 bullet does to an irritating armidlillo is most satisfying.
So yes, I really believe in efficiency.
KB
~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~