Are there any truly bad cartridges?

24 May 2001, 02:29

1894

Everyone appears to have their favourites and some have those they wouldn't touch, but are there any truly awfull cartridges out there?

To be this bad I thought a cartridge would have to be:-

Inherently dangerous and/or unable to do the job it was designed to do.

Are there any? Every time I think I've got an example it turns out some human has used it to do something it wasn't designed to do.

Perhaps I should simplify it and ask are there any which just can't cut it and why?

24 May 2001, 02:58

DaveC

Two prime examples of cartridges unable to do what they were designed for would be that winchester .351 & .401 self loader. However, both have had a following in the past and some still use them. I think that it is human nature to push the envelope and see what they can accomplish. For instance, the .22 LR has been used to kill just about every living thing on this planet that walks or flys.
In todays age of technology, there are many better choices as compared to the cartridges of the past, but someone somewhere will always be using an awfull cartridge because either that is all they have or it is what they like.

24 May 2001, 03:13

<allen day>

Do you know what the old saying is in real estate?

There is no bad piece of property, just bad ownership......

I think it's the same with cartridges. There are no bad cartridges, just owners who load and use them for inappropriate tasks, or else don't shoot the rifles they're chambered for with precision.

Allen

24 May 2001, 11:09

p dog shooter

The ones you don't have anything to load in them.

25 May 2001, 06:00

<redleg155>

To simply answer you question, NO. But, some are nicer than others - kind of like Corvettes...

redleg

25 May 2001, 14:08

<PrimeTime>

I'm not a fan of the 30-30. Millins of deer have been killed by it and untold number of rifles chambered for it. Despite this, most ammo is round nose only(not a fan of lever actions), it's lacking in energy, and it has a trajectory like a rainbow. I'd never say it's a bad round, but certainly one of my least favorites.

25 May 2001, 23:10

Karl

Some I have heard about but not used.

The 338-50BMG.

The 6mm-378Wby mag!

Some 45ACP wildcat necked down to 38 cal which took multiple difficult steps, blew up a handgun, and produced ultimately inferior ballistics.

727-50BMG

577-600 rewa(why why why?)

500NAI long magnum (electronic ignition, 40 inch barrel)

Just a few I would not own.

Karl.

26 May 2001, 05:34

Stonecreek

The .22 Jet -- a great idea with a poor design. If it had been configured with a minimal taper and a conventional shoulder like its cousin, the .256 Winchester, it would have been a great success and would have displaced the .218 Bee, .22 Hornet and K Hornet. But with its sloping taper and rounded shoulder, it was such a problem backing out of chambers in the only gun ever chambered for it, the Smith and Wesson medium frame revolver, nobody ever tried it in anything else that I'm aware of.

How about it? Have any of you fearless experimenters ever tried making a modern .22 out of the .357 case? Looks like a fine project.

[This message has been edited by Stonecreek (edited 05-25-2001).]

26 May 2001, 07:54

Sheister

I have to believe the .30 carbine was a real waste of time, regardless of what some bonehead has tried to kill with one. This cartridge is so anemic, I believe it would bounce off pop cans at the range!

Stonecreek,
A friend of mine build a .17 Ackley Jet on a .357 case in a Martini Cadet action. Amazingly efficient cartridge and cute little thing, but very expensive to accomplish, with forming dies, reamer, etc.. . Haven't gotten the final range results yet, but I believe the last forming step was to fire form the shoulders in the chamber. While accomplishing this it was a sub-MOA rifle, so there is hope!- Sheister

27 May 2001, 11:09

Gatehouse

I recall reading Jeff Cooper talk about a similar subject a number of times. He wasn't dealing with "bad" cartridges, but pointless ones.

Some I agreed with, others I was baffled by.
What I can remember:
a 45ACP necked down to .40, with an increased velocity over the .45.
I believe he said "Well that's all fine and good, but what's the point?" And "You tend to make yourself unpopular when you ask that question."

.280 and .338. I'm baffled by his disregard for these cartridges. Anybody know why he doesn't like them? I guess he thinks the .270 is too simialr to the .280, and maybe you should use a .375 if stepping up past .30 cal, but who knows?

My personal prejudices are most of the traditional lever gun loads, 44-40, 30-30 etc. With the exception of the 45-70. I know some of them are great, they are just not great for me. I only own one lever gun currently.

27 May 2001, 13:24

Atkinson

Primetime,
You gotta be a commie, thats the most un American statment I have ever heard, and John Wayne is rolling in his grave!!!

Shame on you!!!!

For the book the only bad cartridge I know of is the 7MM Rem. Mag.......!!but it has fooled the gunworld...

------------------
Ray Atkinson

ray@atkinsonhunting.com
atkinsonhunting.com

27 May 2001, 17:58

Ray, Alaska

Bad cartridges? No. Bad new ideas? Yes, the Remington electronic rifle. The more I think about it, the more confused I get, because I can't see anything "new" about it.

The whole idea looks this way to me: Take can and fill it with an explosive charge and a blasting cap with a fuse, then push a bullet up in front. Stick this "can thing" in a pipe (chamber with a barrel), crank the hand magneto, and... BANG! Now, if they would have developed a laser gun, then it would have been revolutionary.

28 May 2001, 00:41

<AKI>

Mr Atkinson!!! Iï¿½ve found myself always agreeing with you and since your weight in these questions is so immence compared to mine, there has been no need for adding my "opinion". But 7mm Rem Mag, hahhhahhahahhh, yes I bought one, in the superbly marvelous Rem700 furthermore, and found the cartridge to be a _very_ poor substitute for the good ol 30-06 (and the rifle to be even whorse). So Ray, you are right, again.

As for bad cartridges, I think the very slow powders now available has taken care of most of the problems as in bad=badly owerbore. AKI

05 June 2001, 13:20

John Frazer

Jeff Cooper's comment on the .280 was (I believe) in his article "The Caliber Game" in which he astutely pointed out that for each new cartridge introduced lately, there was likely already something (usually a metric something) out there that would duplicate the ballistics.

However, it was not the .280 Rem. he criticized. Rather, he criticized,

A. The .25-'06, 6.5 Rem. Mag., .257 Wby. and .264 Win. for duplicating the 6.5x68 (circa 1938); and

B. The 7mm Rem. Mag., 7x61 S&H, 7mm Wby. etc. for duplicating the .280 Jeffery and 7x65R; and

C. The 8mm Rem. Mag., .338 Win. Mag., .340 Wby. Mag. for duplicating the 8x68.

Interesting point as to the origins of different cartridges but then again, we have to live in the world of ammo availability, so the fact a person can buy 7mm Rem. Mag. ammo at Wal-Mart but probably would have to form cases for some of the others becomes more than a tad relevant.

08 June 2001, 10:06

<gamecock>

Ray, since I've held a similar opinion to yours on the 7 Rem for 30 years or more, I'd like to see your background thoughts on the subject.

08 June 2001, 11:54

<Mats>

Of course there are BAD cartridges - anything your hunting buddy has chambered, as long as it's not the same as you...

-- Mats

09 June 2001, 05:28

<'Trapper'>

I never in all my life ever thought I would write one word to defend the old GI carbine but feel that it has to be done. First off, let me say I don't like the gun or the cartridge but it did exactly what it was supposed to do - an alternative to the forty five auto for rear echelon troops. I love the 1911 and its variants, especially the Gold Cup. And I've never seen anyone that could shoot a forty five as well as they could a GI carbine say out at a hundred yards. And for the post that the round would bounce off a beer can, the 30 cabine round will punch a hole in the old style GI helmet at fifty yards - believe it!
AS to the criticisms of the 7mm REm mag, I don't like this one either. Ireally don't have anything against it, I just think you pay an awful price for vvery little gain over say the old 7x57 Mauser which to me is one of the best rounds ever.
I realize opinion and personal choice have a lot to do with what we drive what we wear and what we shoot but in reality, you can only shoot and kill something so dead so why all the overkill we seem to be obsessed with? And finally, I to would like to see what RA has to say about why he dislikes the 7Mag.
Shoot straight, shoot safe and shoot a lot!
Best regards,

------------------
'Trapper'

11 June 2001, 04:56

<sure-shot>

C'mon Ray, knock that hornet's nest out of the tree! We want to see em buzzing! sure-shot

13 June 2001, 13:07

smallfry

I am new here. The 7 mag would have to be high on my list for dislike(s). I never could see a dif. in killing power to the my beloved 280.
The 357 I suppose has quite a few friends, but I am not one of them. I see more merit in the 38 spl as being a small game gun then the 357 being good for deer/black bear/hog. Even my standard 45 LC loads (260 gr at 1025) are superior to the 357. Always reminded me of the small dog with a big bark.
One could also fall asleep firing the 243s and 308 win.(s) of the world.

19 June 2001, 15:14

<Wes>

What are we calling a BAD cartridge? Will NBC be doing a nightly special "Bad cartridges, do we need them?" From their viewpoint, the 30-06 is probably bad. All a matter of opinion. I own a 30-30 AND a .32 WS, I guess one must be bad as they are so close, I just can't decide which...

Wes

WOW! Post 20, I'm a super member!! Do I get a cape or something! I feel flush with energy!

[This message has been edited by Wes (edited 06-19-2001).]

19 June 2001, 16:09

<buffalo_buster>

Ray,
Your hunting career spans over twice the number of years as my age, so I am in no position to argue about your position on hunting cartridges but I have to ask this.
Do you have a beef with the 7mm caliber in general or just the Rem Mag version?

I have never owned a 7 Mag and most likely I never will, but I don't see anything inherently wrong with it. For recoil shy shooters like myself, it gives magnum performance with mild to moderate recoil.

I do understand that there isn't anything that the good ol .270 Win can't do if compared to 7 mag, but the same argument can be made for .25-06 vs. .257 Weatherby, .338-06 vs. .338 mag, 9.3x64 vs. .375HH and .416 Rigby vs. .404 Jefferey. Does it mean that the less popular one is a bad cartridge from these pairs?
BB

19 June 2001, 22:32

1894

I'm not sure I've seen any yet which either didn't do what they were designed to or were inherently dangerous.

I thought the original .416rem mag might have been a candidate as it was reputed to have got some people into troubl and the 280Ross in a military rifle which wouldn't extract in Flanders mud even if you stamped on the bolt (maybe it was in conjunction with the rifle)

Anyhow it seems as if we've been well served by our gunmakers as despite the fact there are loads we personaly don't like, very few if any don't do what they were designed to do.

23 June 2001, 04:46

<Adirondack Joe>

I personally feel that there are quite a few bad cartridges out there. For instance, the 9mm. This is a handgun caliber designed to be a man stopper, which it is truly horrible at. It pales in comparison to the 40 S&W, which is a devestating round. As for rifle cartridges, I don't know that there are many, other than most weatherby magnums and the Rem Ultra Mags, as well as other super fast monsters that make only superflous increases in power over cartridges like the 300 Win mag. Also, the 6mm-06, 257-300 Win Mag, and other really stupid wildcats.

30 June 2001, 08:01

<re5513>

Bad Cartridge?

Hmm, that's hard to comment on for someone like me. I'm pretty open minded.

Someone mentioned the 30 Carbine. I have to tell you this is one of my favorite varmint calibers for close range. It is a fairly accurate cartridge (case taper is much greater than a conventional straight walled case thus offering consistent headspace without a rim) and with 110 gr. SP bullets it does a great job on small prey. Low recoil, good power, mild report.

I was never a fan of the 7Mag until I found a deal too good to pass up. I was looking for a .270 but instead found a new M70 in 7Mag at Walmart for $240. Oh well. This turned out to be a learning experiment for me. I discovered much of the 7Mag's potential is likely untapped by most shooters who do not handload. It is accurate and very versatile.

One caliber though that I believe was a bad idea is the .264 Win Mag. This caliber is just too overbore. It's easy to see why it fell into disfavor after the introduction of the 7Mag. Now the .264 does work it's just that you burn a lot of powder just to equal the performance of a .270 or 6.5-'06 and at its best it isn't a whole lot faster and often less accurate by comparison.

Another I have little affection for is the .32 H&R Magnum. I have a brother-in-law who loves it for use in IHMSA competition but I can't see how you can have .32 and Magnum in the same phrase. While better than a .32 Special it really is a far cry from offering true magnum performance.

Speaking of magnums, the 9mm Winchester Magnum seems to me like a bad idea save for the fact that the brass can be reformed into so many other useful calibers.

Regards,
Rick

30 June 2001, 14:34

<dartonvpr>

Gentlemen, I have read most everything on this site, even if it has nothing to do with what I shoot because it is always interesting to hear and see what others like or dislike. But I'm afraid I have to take exception to the bad mouthing of the 7mag. I recieved my first 7mag as a graduation present many years ago, and have been hunting with it all across the country. From black bear and elk in heavy timber to mule deer and antelope in open sage flats to hogs in cypress swamps. I have even used it for varmints and jackrabbits, and if you want a way to tune up for a hunt, try hunting jackrabbits in the open desert with your deer rifle and you'll soon learn no one is perfect. I'm not sure what everyones critiria for a hunting cartridge is, but this is mine. It must be accurate, it must be able to work for you under the most extreme conditions, from hot to cold, to heavy brush to open country. It should maintain adequate energy to effectively and humanely bring down whatever you might be hunting. It should be comfortable to shoot, and you must have absolute faith in it's ability to do these things. If it can't do these thing, then yes, it is a bad cartridge. The 7mag is able to do all these things and more, so what could possibly make you consider it as a bad round? Over the years I have hunted with people that have used everything from 22-250 to 458mag to hunt with, and not one of these rounds have outdone the 7mag, and in most cases these people are now shooting 7mags. Forgive me for being so long winded, but from my point of view, I have yet to see anything that is so far superior to the 7mag that it would warrent me to give it up for another round. I am not saying it is the best all around, but it's a far cry from being a bad round. JIM

30 June 2001, 18:19

<sure-shot>

After some thought, I would like to nominate Remington's Etron X cartridges for this thread. The concept seems great at first thought, but knowing how electronics are prone to failure just turns me off. A price tag of $97.00 for 1000 primers puts the nail in the coffin. sure-shot

01 July 2001, 02:37

<10point>

Joe with the proper loadings the 9mm is a perfectly servicable self defense arm. A wise man once told me that ,"defending yourself with a handgun should be a last resort".

Well since I cant walk around with a M-14 I guess Im stuck with a handgun. I never carry my 9mm ; I own a .45 acp and much prefer that round. But the main reason I dont like my 9mm is because I am required, by my job, to stoke it with 147 grn subsonic JHP's.

Therein lies the root's of much of the bad press about the 9mm as a self defense cartridge. With the high velocity 115grn, and 125 grn, loads its a perfectly fine self defense round and it really shines in the small, compact, packages that otherwise would have to be filled by the likes of a 32 cal, or .380. Besides, ammo is cheap, easy to come by, and you can load a bushel basket of the things in a full size auto.

I have a love/hate thing with the 10mm. It was designed AFTER the new 45acp loadings had given the "old standby" a generational lift. We already had the 41 mag so why bother with half moon clips in a wheelgun ? The 10mm has nice numbers but I never really saw a need for it ; Then again what do you expect from the Govt. when it comes to spending our tax dollars ?

I dont consider the 40 S&W to be "awsome". If you dont put it in the boiler room its no more effecient then a good 9mm loading. But like the .357 Sig it has found a well deserved niche. There are a lot of woman who have decided they are not sheep to wait for the slaughter, we also hire a lot of itty bitty cop's, and both can realistically move up to a 40 S&W from a 9mm and thats probably a good thing.

Of course in the hands of experienced shooter the 40 S&W is a fine load also, perhap's retaining a bit more punch then the "9", and also retaining the mag capacity.

I have always hated and loathed the 25acp. Why "Hate" a cartridge you ask? Well if you "love" one then you should be able to "Hate" some also. Life would be boreing without emotion anyway.

I have always been a "closet Loather" of the 7mm RM. Since Ray led the charge I am now "coming out". I know its a perfectly lethal catridge on game it was intended for but I also think it was the biggest flim-flam on riflemen ever caused by a gun manufacturer.

I will add a legal clause here "I do know there are 7mm RM shooter's out there that can outshoot me, and outhunt me, with their 7mm RM's" ; But , Tell me how you can load it to outperform my 100yo 3006 cartridge ,WITH, practical big-game weight bullets.

Please keep the comments about "SD's" to a minumum because I only require my '06, or .308, to go thru one animal at a time.

Now when I see a 7X57,.280, or 7mm-08, on the shelf my eye's widen, mouth salivates, and I start digging into my pocket to see how much money I have on me.

But the 7mm RM ? And good Lord, Rem has made a fortune off it !

Well, I said it. Please dont take it personaly but one can only hold things of that nature in for so long a time, then it spills out.

good shooting..........10

01 July 2001, 12:55

Gatehouse

Why does everyone hate the 7RM? I guess I'm not old enough to understand about how it was some marketing scam- maybe someone could enlighten me. The cartridge-politics aside-is just one of those great "allrounders." It does what it's supposed to, which is kill stuff. Just like a 3006, 300 mag, .270, whatever. Different people like different stuff-like chocolate and vanilla.

10 point-
Why do you have to use the 9mm rounds that don't work as well? I would think that cops would want to use the best available. Is it an over penetration thing?

01 July 2001, 20:11

<Slamfire>

Ever tried to shoot through a metal garbage can lid with a .25 ACP? I haven't figured out what the proper use of that cartridge is.

02 July 2001, 02:27

<10point>

Gatehouse the Politicians dont want us killing someone "to dead". Also when the load was adopted it was raved about all over Police cirlces.

Now, after enough dead cop's, its no longer raved about and Im sure that within 50 years my Dept. will catch up to the rest of the country.BTW we lost another officer yesterday............good shooting..............10

05 July 2001, 06:26

<Ol' Sarge>

Okay Ray,

Let's hear it. I have been shooting a 7mmRemMag since 1966. My mother bought it for my Dads birthday in '61. It is not a true magnum though - kinda the opposite the .25-06 - which is. Belt/no belt. Bore/Overbore

I rank the big 7 right up there with the 7x57, .270, .280, .308, .30-06(almost) and the .300 Win. (I'm sure I left out a bunch)
One of the best.It is no better, nor no worse than any of the others.

Every year the RMEF lists the elk rifle survey in Bugle. The Big Green 7 is always at the top or near the top every year.

------------------
Ignorance is curable but stupidity is terminal.

05 July 2001, 10:07

KuduKing

quote:
Originally posted by 10point:

Also when the load was adopted it was raved about all over Police cirlces.
Now, after enough dead cop's, its no longer raved about and Im sure that within 50 years my Dept. will catch up to the rest of the country.

Sorry, 10point, but I can't let this misinformation go. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the 147 grain JHP load in the 9mm. Sorry to burst your bubble, but there is no police handgun cartridge (.38, 9mm, 10mm, .45) that offers instant stops. The only instant stops are CNS hits, and you should know that, unless your department is not giving you the right info, or you are not listening.

The 147 grain load, when adopted, was superior to any other 9mm loadings available. It STILL is a good choice. Most of the higher velocity/lighter bullet loadings offer less penetration and are defeated by some of the obstacles usually present in shootings.

If you are hooked into the kinetic energy - temporary cavity mythology as a part handgun wounding effectiveness, there is nothing more I can say to you. That line of reasoning has been discredited so many times over by forensic scientific community as to be dead issue (pardon the pun).

To blame officer deaths on the 9mm 147 grain load is irresponsible and unprovable. This load is used by SCORES of agencies with success. Your viewpoint is in the minority.

We might agree that the 9mm bore has measurably less effect than a .40 or .45. But compared amongst themsleves, the various 9mm loadings have only one relevant basis of comparison, and that is penetration. The round that will go 18" against all targets and make the bigger PERMANENT cavity wins. The 147 grain load does that.

05 July 2001, 12:15

Gatehouse

I'll take a guess as to why Ray dislikes the 7mmRM. Is it because of your long throated 7x57 that you have mentioned before?

Kuduking and 10 point
I don't know a hell of alot about handguns and police work. I do know that if I was a cop, I'd want a .45ACP. 10 or more rounds of ammo, and a big chunk of lead!

05 July 2001, 12:58

<10point>

Kudu the load is currently being used by very few agencies and has had a very poor record of stopping offender's. Im not going to get into this in a big-game forumn but the failure of this load to live up to expectations, in Law Enforcement circles, is so accepted and well documented that I wouldnt bother argueing it anywhere........10

05 July 2001, 15:21

KuduKing

10point, I dont know what law enforcemnt circles you run in, but the 147 grain load has been the standard in law enforcement since 1988, and has been used by the FBI and many many others since that time with no bullet failures. The load is only a failure in the gun comic book press, and among several other free-lance writers using flawed, and sometimes completely misrepresented data, since several of these "writers" have a financial interest in peddling some pet load.

There are lots of 9mm agencies out there, and many different loads are in use. Naturally there will be differing views of what situations face a particular agency, determining the type of load. But your own personal opinion, or what you may have read in the pop press, of the 147 grain load is not shared by the consensus of law enforcement, nor obviously by your own firearms training section. Nor is it by my agency.

05 July 2001, 15:51

<10point>

Kudu take a good look and see how many FBI officers there are running around with 147 grn subsonic 's, even if they are carrying 9mm's at all, which I doubt.

I dont care how many inches of ballistic geletan a bullet can go thru, when you hold the gun against it. In real life the geletan aint all the same, the gun is different distances from it, and at different angles, and the geletan is not only shooting back at you but it might be wearing 5 layer's of clothing, some of it heavy.

Its a question of physics. You have to have penetration and you can get in one of two way's, or with both. You either have mass , or velocity, or both. The 147 grn subsonice really doesnt have much of either. Its no better then the 38 grn LHP Plus-P it was meant to replace.

Clothing not only stops penetration but it hinders expansion, so you BETTER have penetration to count on.

There are simply to many variables for anyone to count on "one shot stop's", most of them are outside of your control, and most of those are in the offenders head.

But one constant is you have to have penetration, and Im not talking about B-geletan at head-on angles. The 9mm 147 SS is just a poor choice for punching thru, its a poor one in general ,and a poor choice for the 9mm. I carry a .45, and would rather have a .308.

Im not going to comment on this anymore. This is a big game forumn and dont think Im being rude by not responding, go ahead and post one last time if you need the last word.

But the FBI hasnt thought much of the 9mm since Miami, when they abandoned it in droves. The same thing has happened with the 147 SS with much of Law Enforcement.

BTW the .270 suck's for Elk...just joking.....10