Run behind a buffalo for hours in 100+ degree heat caring a 10.5 lb or heavier gun and you will see why those little light guns are so nice. So what if it kicks you'll never know it when shooting animals. I like Michael's little rifles and plan on using one on my next trip.

Sam

Why don't you run behind your buffalo with a nice svelte eight pound 9.3X62, 9.3X66, 9.3X64, 9.3X74R, or a nine pound .375 Ruger, or .375 H&H. You might not notice the recoil of one Micheal's rifle/cartridges when you shoot one or two shots at a buffalo but you are sure as hell going to notice it for the other 500 rounds at the range.

Look, the idea of making ever shorter actions to shoot ever lighter rifles in cartridges designed to smash large, dangerous animals is just counterproductive. Of course stock design and gun fit help tame recoil but there are only three ways to deal with the physics here. One, make the gun heavier. Two, add a break. Three, shoot a smaller caliber. Interesting developments to be sure but even Michael can't change the laws of physics.

Dave,
Any of those 9.3's or 375's work. Hey if you do your part a 308 Win will work. You don't have to shoot 500 rounds of full house loads for practice. I shoot 210 gr pistol bullets in my 450-400 and 400 gr in my 470 for practice. I think we all know that Michael handles recoil better than most. Hey he is the man scientist. I used to not mind recoil like him but shoulder surgery changed that some. I think Michael has just made some of the coolest bolt guns out there.

Sam

I should have said MAD scientist!

Dave

The reason I don't think I will run after my buffalo with 9.3s, 375s and the like is because I don't believe they are nearly as effective as a bore size of 458 or better. And if I am going to carry a 9.3 or 375, such as our 20 inch Winchester M70s in 9.3 B&M and 375 B&M from 6.5-7.25 lbs depending on stock, these are what I would carry and certainly not an overweight 9 lb one!

Dave, how many rounds of big bore do you shoot each week? 9.3 and 375 are mediums, not big bore.

A couple of things to ponder, one does not take a knife to a gun fight. One does not take a kudu rifle for buffalo. One can fight better with a short, handy, powerful rifle that is easy to handle and fast on target, than an overweight, overlong, rifle that is unwieldy and will wear you down before midday.

One of the reasons I developed the B&M series rifles is this very fact. In 2005 I had to sort out a pissed off hippo. He was rather pissed at his bigger brother that I was actually stalking. The bigger brother had just kicked his tail, and I happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. I was carrying a full 24 inch 458 Lott and 500 gr Barnes Solids at the time. At 6 steps away the hippo ran into one of those 500 gr Barnes and had a bad day. During the entire affair I was wishing for something that was shorter, faster, more handy, something powerful enough to do the job, a proper handling, hippo fighting rifle of sufficient bore size to sort any issue out that I might run into. I found just that very rifle/cartridge/bullet. A few of them to be truthful that will qualify for that job. A 12 lb 24 inch plus gun does not cut it.

But to each his own. I dare not change the laws of physics, anymore than I can convince some people the sky really is blue! And to be perfectly honest it really is not a concept that I can put words to, nor can I even show photos that conveys the concept. One simply must lay hands on to understand and get the feel for it. Once that is done, it's very simple and very easy to understand from that point forward.

Thanks Dave, sorry I misunderstood your opening post, I thought your comment was directed to breaking the stock, not a muzzle brake.

Michael

SIZE DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE!




Not a great photo, but this shows some overall length differences.



It's ok, these rifles are not for everyone, but I won't be taking anymore big guns to the field to carry around all day and be aggravated with.

Most already know this, but on the most recent little adventure to the Arctic I took the little 18 inch gun on the bottom of this photo for muskox. Although the ammo got lost and I never got to use it, it would have been a dream rifle on this hunt, short, fast, light, easy to handle, plenty of juice for a muskox too!


Michael

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:

One does not take a kudu rifle for buffalo.

True enough but then again one does not try and squeeze a buffalo cartridge into a kudu rifle either. That's what the boys at Winchester tried to do with the .458 Winchester Magnum and as a result, we now have the .458 Lott.

Michael, like I said, I admire your acumen here. It is simply marvelous what you have managed to accomplish with these cartridges. The shorter barrels are very well thought out and that's a concept that I think that old "Pondoro" would agree with. It's just the concept that of a featherweight rifle in a buffalo/elephant caliber that I think is flawed.

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:

One does not take a kudu rifle for buffalo.

True enough but then again one does not try and squeeze a buffalo cartridge into a kudu rifle either. That's what the boys at Winchester tried to do with the .458 Winchester Magnum and as a result, we now have the .458 Lott.

Dave

The statement above is not quite on the mark. 50 years ago Winchester tried to stuff a buffalo cartridge into a Kudu cartridge, therefore was the issue. All my Winchester M70s in 458 Winchester are the same exact rifle as my 458 Lotts! So had nothing to do with the rifle, everything to do with the cartridge! 50 yrs ago powders were not suitable nor available at that time to make the 458 Winchester what it is today. It was damn near impossible 50 yrs ago to get a 500 gr 458 to 2150 fps which was the goal at the time, and probably still is today. Well in 24 inches of barrel it is rather easy with several different modern powders to get most 500 gr bullets to 2150 and a touch better. But as far as the rifle, well there was no changes there, still a 24 inch 10 plus pound gun to get to that point.

My 458 B&M is ballistically the dead equal to the 458 Winchester. The big difference I can equal the 458 Winchester ballistically in an 8 lb (Wood Stock) rifle with an 18 inch barrel and 38 inches overall length. Some 7 inches shorter, and at least a couple of lbs lighter, and makes handling superb. Shown below with another of my 458 Lotts with 22 inch barrel.



Now also very much like the 458 WInchester it is my belief that in a case of this capacity it is better served with 450 gr bullets that can be run at 2200 fps or so. In September last year I ended up shooting several buffalo in Australia with a 450 Swift up front, followed by 450 Barnes Banded solids. It proved to be an excellent combination. I did try a few 500 gr Woodleigh softs at or around 2130 fps as I recall.




These were the two rifles I took on that trip. Top is the 500 MDM and the bottom 458 B&M.


All total including shooting some wounded buffalo by another fellow I ended up shooting 27 buffalo with these two rifles, they performed flawlessly, along with the cartridge and bullets chosen for them.

But like you state, they are not for everyone and I appreciate the kind words you had to say about them. Come on by sometime and do some shooting, I will tie a couple of lead weights to the rifle you shoot!

Michael

Dave

I really hate that you retracted your comment earlier! Yes, I did see it. I am very sorry you have such a misunderstanding concerning both myself and the rifles and the concept. You see Dave, I have nothing to sell you, I have nothing to "promote" as you stated. I am not in the gun selling business and don't want to be. There is nothing to promote, except the fact the rifles/cartridges/bullets do the job that was intended of them.

I only posted the photos and pics of the rifles and cartridges to assist you to be able to understand and comprehend, I am very sorry they offended your sensibilities.

Michael

Dave I’m sorry I didn’t get a chance earlier to throw in my 2¢ before you deleted your post but here it is anyway…some of us truly enjoy gun porn and have encouraged Michael to post as much as he can so that we have the visual along with the commentary.

Michael…glad to see you had a safe trip and hunt. Definitely would have been nice to see the expansion of the 330gr HP bullets had they arrived in time for your hunt; perhaps next time. Oops, almost forgot...Nice gun porn!

Capo

I suppose you and Dwright have been out this week as I have not heard anything of either of you since I returned.

Oh man, had my heart set on using the 330 Brass Noncons, I promise I almost turned around and come home without shooting at all. Then when I did decide to move on the last two days of the hunt and shoot with the 338 I was pissed off at myself! Like RIP says, splitting ammo, lesson RELEARNED the hard way! Oh well, next time!

See the new 500?

Shoots great so far, just sighted in the irons the other day. Still using the dies for the old version and can't full length resize yet, waiting on the new version dies from Hornady.

Michael

Michael458,
Since you posted that picture here, it makes a good place to ask, and please forgive my lack of knowledge here. So, the B&M series of cartridges is based of the RUM brass, is this correct? What, if I may, is the practical difference between the B&M and the AR line of cartridges, as well as the MDM? I think this might be a question a few people want to know but never ask. You don't have to justify them or anything, and I know why you would want to, and they do make logical sense as well (I'm sure efficiency with short barrels has got to be a key point!), just looking for some definition. Thank you.

Man that little .50 B&M is sweeeeet!

Extreme

A very good question. Yes, all the B&M's and the 500 MDM are based off the RUM case. With the exception of the lever cartridge in .500 which is based off the 50 AK.

Jeffe and I started working very close to the same time frame in 2005. His AR cartridges are made for standard actions and the cases a tad bit longer, on average I think at 2.55 inches or so. His 470-458-416 AR are based on RUM cases, his 500 AR on a Rigby case (jeffe correct me if wrong) also his 500 AR is .510 caliber. The ARs have higher case capacity and equal to or better than the 458 Lotts in that category.

The B&M cartridges the 50 B&M--458 B&M--416 B&M--375 B&M and 9.3 B&M based off a 2.25 inch RUM case and housed on Winchester M70 WSM actions, or short actions. All this series has either 18 or 20 inch barrels. The 375 and 9.3 being optimum at 20 inches, the 458 and 416 can go either 18 or 20, and the 50 B&M optimum at 18 inches. The 50 B&M is .500 caliber---not .510 caliber.

The B&M cartridges are equal in case capacity to a 458 Winchester.

While these cases are equal to 458 Winchester in capacity, I suppose that there is a efficiency that comes into effect here. I have shot and own many 458 Winchesters over the years, and to obtain 2150 fps with a 500 gr bullet one very simply needs to have a 24 inch barrel. While the 458 B&M case is .25 inches shorter, it is fatter, and I can get a 500 to 2150 fps in it at 18 inches of barrel. Now I was never one to buy into that efficiency theory on smaller bores (which I don't mess with anyway) but it sure does seem that the larger the bore the more efficient the short fat cases become. I will buy into that, as I can see it from 9.3 up to .500 caliber in my guns. In the 50 B&M I have one 20 inch gun, and gained zero out of it over the 18 inch guns. A friend has a 16 inch 50 B&M and lost very little, like 30 fps with the 2 inches less. All the first 458s and 416s sported 20 inch tubes and I surpassed 2150 with a 500 gr bullet in the 458, I did one in 18 inches and found I only lost 20 fps on average for the 2 inches total! Hardly noticeable. The 416 lost a little more depending on the load going from 20 inches to 18, but in many cases I can work with the 18 inches as there is a world of difference in two inches sometimes! HEH--Yeah I reckon that could be funny!

At the time we started our AR and B&M projects Jeffe and I were not acquainted and knew nothing of each others work until I listed the B&Ms over on AmmoGuide. Fortunately there is a big difference in the cartridges and rifles that we are in totally separate categories and do not interfere with each other, or cross lines. The AR cartridges are fine cartridges, as are the B&Ms, but both designed for different rifles and concepts of the rifles. So they actually "Compliment" each other as well designed (I got lucky) and thought out, but in two separate directions.

Now the 500 MDM is a bit of a different animal. I would have nothing except a Winchester M70, and all my 50s and 500s are actual .500 caliber (not .510 caliber). These fit perfectly in the Winchester M70 RUM action. The 500 MDM is a 2.8 inch RUM case, can make it from 375 RUM easy, and of course from Quality 500 MDM brass is available, as are all the B&M cartridges. Same as the ARs. Again I wanted the power of a big hammer, but still wanted a shorter, easier, faster fighting rifle than what a full length 458 Lott is. The 500 MDM fits that bill big time!

Now we go to my little Super Short series. Those are totally different animals and are in a class of their own. There is nothing to really compare with them. They are based off a Winchester WSM case, cut and trimmed to 1.65 inches. They are designed for the Winchester M70 WSSM Super Short action, rifles having 16 inch barrels. In the Ultimate stock they come in at 6.25 lbs and 36 inches overall length. The first in the series is the 50 B&M Super Short .500 caliber. I have delayed doing others because of so much work to do with what I had, but a 470 and 458 version have been on the books since the beginning 5 yrs ago. Right now, just last week I received the first 458 B&M Super Short, I am now waiting on dies to come from Hornady to get started load development with it. I will show some photos of it later in the day, and hope it does not "OFFEND" anyone by doing so? Capoward (Jim) has assisted and I think I already have the drawings needed to do a 475 B&M Super Short in the very near future. There won't be a 416 Super Short as the bullets for 416 are going to be too long to fit proper in the magazine.

The other 50 B&M Alaskan is easy, squeeze down a 50 AK to .500 caliber and shoot! They are based on either a Marlin Guide gun or a M71. I use 18 inch barrels with those and they are capable of shooting that wonderful 500 gr Hornady .500 caliber bullet at 2000 fps. In the Marlins that is a little hateful to shoot however, so I slow it down to around 1900 fps or so for them, or shoot mostly the 400 Sierra at 1800-2000 in the marlins. The big 500 Hornady does extremely well and holds up very well at 2100 fps, I have not tested it beyond that. At 1900 to 2000 fps it literally knocks wildebeast, zebra, kudu and such off their feet on the spot, it's a hammer! I suspect that the 50 B&M AK loaded with that 500 gr Hornady would be a superb stopping cartridge, bullet, rifle for bear and even lion, in the lever gun category!

The other two cartridges are the 50 B&M SA and the 458 B&M SA. SA for Semi Auto. Based on a DPMS AR 10 size rifle. The first gun introduced only a couple of months ago has been a great success if one is into the semi auto thing. These are based on a RUM case, cut and trimmed to 2 inches even. I have now fired around 500 + rounds in the 50 B&M SA and it is up and running 100%. I personally think the 458 B&M SA is going to be a really nice gun and have great capabilities, first gun is finished, waiting on dies, I might be shooting this in a few weeks.

Cartridges coming soon! 475 B&M based on the 2.25 inch RUM case for WSM rifles. 475 B&M Super Short, 1.65 inch WSM case for WSSM rifles.

I have all sorts of rifles based on these cartridges. I have 1885 Winchester single shots in 50-458-416 B&M. A friend has a Ruger #1 in 50 Super Short. I think I have a true .500 caliber cartridge for nearly every sort of rifle that can be had, bolt, semi, single shot, and lever.

Good question, hope I answered in this "SHORT" post?

Michael

The first 50 B&M (Which is now the 50 B&M SA 2 inch case for the semi's) as you see on the now 2.25 inch 50 B&M and the 50 B&M super short, rimless, NO SHOULDER at all, not even a ghost shoulder! Now, in theory this would head space on the mouth, just like a 45 acp correct? Well, this is true, BUT, and this is a BIG BUT, also like a 45 acp the cartridge will not go any further into the chamber than the EXTRACTOR will allow it to go!!!!! In a control feed rifle, Winchester M70, the extractor actually CONTROLS the head space. The extractor grabs that rimless cartridge, controls it, holds it in place, the cartridge CANNOT go further into the chamber, even if it is shorter than normal, and will fire 100% of the time, never an issue.

Of course, the 500 MDM is the same. We put the little ghost shoulder in for a few reasons, one is the fact that it can head space a bit on that shoulder as a backup, again on the mouth if needed, but most importantly so that other folks would think it would head space on the shoulder, while the EXTRACTOR has control of it for those who cannot understand the concept or grasp it.

I have literally fired 1000s of 50 B&M--50 B&M SA and 50 B&M Super Short in the Winchesters and there has never once, not even 1 time been any sort of issue at all. To prove it even further I have tested a 50 B&M-2.25 inch case rifle and fired hundreds of 50 B&M Super SHorts at 1.65 inches thru the guns. Accuracy is for shit, 1.65 inch case in a 2.25 inch gun, but 100% reliability, because of the extractor.

Now before I did the first 50 B&M, I am a 1911 45 acp fan to a great degree. Have many many years of experience with them. A 1911 45 acp works exactly the same way, it is a control feed handgun, picks up the cartridge from the magazine, slides under the extractor and the extractor controls everything from that point forward. Head space is actually the extractor. So I figured if it was good enough for the finest fighting handgun that has ever been devised by man, then a bolt action control feed fighting rifle just ought to be as good! Turns out I was correct!

Many have concerns about that very thing, but it's because they have a hard time grasping the concept for some reason.

Michael,

I have been away from the forums longer than I’d have thought. While you were freezing your cojones off in Canada…I enjoyed an unplanned stint in the hospital for emergency gall bladder surgery; just finally got access to a computer yesterday.

Looking at some of the side trips my luggage has taken over the past 15 years guess it’s not surprising that United would lose your ammo. You’ll have to find some pigs that need to be put out of their misery with the 330gr NonCons so that we can see how they look!

Yes I caught up on all the great gun porn you’ve posted since the hunt, the new 500 looks quite sassy in its English Walnut wrapper; you’re making things very hard as the stainless/wood look is really growing on me.

Jim

Holy Cow! I am sorry, I hope all is well now?

Yes the 500 looks pretty good. I only noticed a couple of years ago that it seemed that a lot of my rifles were stainless and wood. After taking notice of that stainless and wood has become my preference now! Funny how that works!

Dwright

Glad to see you are back too! I was wondering where you two were all week this week? I hope you have not been in the hospital too?

Michael

Michael,

Energy tank still runs out quickly but I’m doing much better the past few days. Wife is in Dennis’ back yard taking care of the in-laws and likely won't be home for a few more weeks.

Tis truly funny how the metal color and wood preferences change...stainless and wood is looking very nice.

The .458 cartridge makes some sense but Michael's 50 caliber cartridges have no place to headspace but on the extractor.

Jeffeosso's line are cartirdges are also based on the shortened RUM brass except for the 50 caliber which is based on a shortened Rigby case. Here is Jeff's explanation of his concept:

"The 416, 458, and 470 are shortened and improved 375 RUM brass, 2.55" long cases, 3.35 OAL max length. These are slightly larger capacities than the 416 rem, 458 Lott, and 470 capstick, accordingly."

"The 500 is a shortened and improved 416 rigby, 2.65 case, 3.4" oal. it is more or less 130 grain of water capacity."

Jeff's 500 has nearly the case capacity as my full length .450 Dakota! My .450 Dakota was built by AHR and I had Wayne Jacobsen build it at around 10 pounds with a 23 inch barrel. The stock design is excellent and it handles very well. Scoped and loaded, it will probably come in at around 11 pounds. I have shot many, many big guns over the years so heavy recoiling guns are not new to me. Trust me on this when I say that even in a ten pound gun, when you start pushing 500 grain bullets over 2200 fps the recoil gets to be a genuine concern. I can't imagine what it would be like in an 8.5 pound gun with a stubby barrel without a break. I shot a 600 OK that Wayne Jacobsen had. That gun was very light as well but I was amazed at how effective the break was. While the concept of trying to squeeze a big bullet into a tiny case eludes me, if for some reason you wanted to build a rifle using one of Micheal's cartridges, you might consider sending the gun to AHR and letting him put a break on it for you. Be sure to wear something to protect your ears!

Of interesting note...

The 475 Turnbull with the same casehead is 2.2" long or 50 thou shorter than the proposed 475 B&M



Michael... what do you think about the .500" super Alaskan with the 2.25" case for those 71's???

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:
The .458 cartridge makes some sense but Michael's 50 caliber cartridges have no place to headspace but on the extractor.

Jeff's 500 has nearly the case capacity as my full length .450 Dakota! My .450 Dakota was built by AHR and I had Wayne Jacobsen build it at around 10 pounds with a 23 inch barrel. The stock design is excellent and it handles very well. Scoped and loaded, it will probably come in at around 11 pounds. I have shot many, many big guns over the years so heavy recoiling guns are not new to me. Trust me on this when I say that even in a ten pound gun, when you start pushing 500 grain bullets over 2200 fps the recoil gets to be a genuine concern. I can't imagine what it would be like in an 8.5 pound gun with a stubby barrel without a break.

… While the concept of trying to squeeze a big bullet into a tiny case eludes me, if for some reason you wanted to build a rifle using one of Micheal's cartridges, you might consider sending the gun to AHR and letting him put a break on it for you. Be sure to wear something to protect your ears!

Dave,

Lack of shoulder for the 50 B&Ms…a quality CRF rifle does not need a shoulder or a belt for the cartridge to be safely retained in the chamber…the full length extractor maintains the headspace right nicely. In fact, Ed Hubel recently designed a 585 caliber cartridge that headspaces off the extractor just as Michael’s 50 B&M cartridges do, it appears that it works just as safely as do Michael’s cartridge.

I truly believe that Michael has gone well beyond any concept with his compact light weight rifles chambered in his B&M and MDM cartridges; some like their guns long and heavy while others like theirs short and light. One small light weight rifle that I enjoyed shooting many years was an original M600 Remington in 350 RemMag…I think fully loaded with a 1x4 power scope and sling that it weighted under seven pounds. The stock was short for me by an inch or so but I had no problems firing factory 250gr loads in the middle of the summer wearing a tee shirt. I no longer own PF rifles so the little Remington went to another owner a few years ago. Probably still today the worse gun I’ve ever owned/shot was #4 12-gauge magnums out of a single barrel H&R shotgun; piss poor fitting stock caused no enjoyment shooting it at all but I wasn’t traumatized by it either.

Just my 2¢.

Boomy

Sam is bringing some gear down next week that will allow me to take the 348 up better. Let me see what I can come up with next week when I get his dies.

Michael

Capoward:

I agree with everything you have said about Michael. He seems like a painfully nice guy and his work with bullets has been nothing short of extraordinary as has his ingenuity with these cartridges. However, now is the time to really talk about the design. First, the 50 B&M needs to be killed. A cartridge headspaces on the shoulder, the belt, or the rim. The .50 B&M does none of those things. The design of Michael's fifty in seriously flawed. I have a hunch he already knows that.

The .416 and .458 B&M make more sense but before passing judgment on those, I would like to see case capacities and pressure data. My .450 Dakota will shoot 450 grain TSX bullets at 2400 fps without even breaking a sweat using 94 grains or Reloder 15. Michael claims to shoot those same bullets in the .458 B&M at 2200 fps. Give us some pressure data.

With respect to Michael's super short cartridges, my only question is why?

All B&M series rifles are built by SSK Industries. They are quite capable of adding a muzzle brake if anyone ever requested one, which only one ever has. There are many other owners of B&M rifles and cartridges and several rifles have been built over the last 5 yrs, there is only one fellow that had a brake installed on a 50 B&M out of all those rifles. I have heard of no others. I also have not heard anyone complain about the recoil being so substantial they could not handle it. In fact many who shoot the rifles nearly always state that it was not as bad as they thought it was going to be.

Dave, no one wants to sell you a B&M rifle, you don't have to choose one. I personally would not have a 450 Dakota from AHR myself either, so we all make choices and that is just dandy. Please by all means shoot and enjoy your "Oversized" guns, I will be more than happy to keep, shoot, and enjoy my "Stubby" little "Big Bullet" "tiny case" "experimental" "exercise" "flawed" "counterproductive" "interesting endeavor" "concept" rifles. Let's see, did I forget any other little smart ass remarks that you have made in the last day or so? Oh, yes, I forgot the post you came back and deleted, I can only assume you were ashamed of what you had said, something to the fact that why did I have to post photos of the rifles and or myself with the rifles and that some folks (not YOU of course) might see that as "self promoting" and I think it went on to some other snide little remarks that I either forgot, or simply ignored?



Thank you Dave for all the great insight, and the little snide remarks that you think I missed!

Michael

The 50 B&M is a proven design, there are rifles chambered in 50 B&M (built by SSK Industries) owned by no less than 10 or more individuals and there has never ever once been an issue. I have fired literally 1000s of the 50s as stated earlier and there is nothing flawed about it. I have carried the 50 B&M to africa, have shot elephant and buffalo and there are no flaws in the system. But I don't want you to worry with it, nor do I want you to have one. Do you really believe that in a control feed rifle that your actual head space is on the shoulder, or the belt or the rim?

I am very very sorry to inform you, "Your Hunches are WAY off Base".


""Michael claims to shoot those same bullets in the .458 B&M at 2200 fps.""

Michael "Claims"? Are you calling me a liar sir?

Michael

Michael, how did you arrive at this pressure data?

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:
Michael, how did you arrive at this pressure data?

I suppose dave I just made it up and pulled it out my tail since your last post, as you would insinuate!

Michael

You can also just buy 50-90 or 50-110 brass from starline. No necking up. Just trim and form. A rimmed 50 B&M
500 Kenai sounds like a good name.

http://www.starlinebrass.com/index.php?cPath=1

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:
Boomy

Sam is bringing some gear down next week that will allow me to take the 348 up better. Let me see what I can come up with next week when I get his dies.

Michael

Michael, I am not suggesting anything with respect to your pressure data. I was just curious as to whether or not this was from a computer generated program of from SSK industries from actual pressure tests. The test for the 450 Barnes and Swift bullets appear to be within acceptable limits.

Dave,

Your comments haven’t been directed at me but I do wonder if you have a hidden agenda based upon your comments and questions.

First you basically piss in Michael’s cereal bowl by stating his 50 MDM is a “flawed design” as it doesn’t headspace off the rim, a belt, or a shoulder. Now you question whether his pressure readings are fantasy. I’d likely just put you on ignore were I Michael…but I’m not he so who knows.

I’m not using my personal laptop so I cannot give you manufacturer and model number but I can say that he has shared that information as well as photographs of it with me so I am aware that he has purchased his own pressure testing equipment. It does uses electronic leads attached to the rifle in one or more locations. He also uses more than one chronograph screen so that he can capture muzzle velocity readings as well as impact velocity readings. If you haven’t yet I’d recommend that you read this thread which has some very nice photographs of Michael’s laboratory setup:
http://forums.accuratereloadin...4711043/m/2861098911

Perhaps to turn things away from an adversarial commentary you’d perhaps share your range setup, or indoor laboratory should you have one, along with the pressure and chronograph equipment that you use for load development etc. Some of us like gun porn and as range stuff falls into that category please feel free to share your photographs also.

I personally use the QuickDESIGN, QuickLOAD, QuickTARGET products, along with a few other computer programs extensively but I do plan to purchase pressure testing equipment along with a new chronograph setup in the very near future...as we all know that computer solutions are close but not exact.

Capoward:

I apologize if I have offended either you or Michael. You both seem like absolute gentlemen. However, this thread has now gone on for more than ten pages and almost one year and most of it has been dedicated to Michael promoting his cartridge designs. I was unaware that a dissenting view was not permitted. I shall, as they say, take my leave. No offense to either of you. Good luck and good hunting.

Dave...
While extractor headspacing is not wide spread it is not unheard of. For those who would want a belt I designed the 500 Kill All to add a belt to the RUM case but brass will not be cheap if you were looking for a .500 on a RUM conversion. Dies and reamer already made.

500 NE and 500 Kill All with Barnes x and Hornady

Dave

With all the crap you receive for the Blaser and 500-416 I surely thought you would be more open minded about something new and different.

Nothing wrong with asking questions about designs or ideas but to call these designs counter productive and flawed is not right.

Thousands of rounds fired with no problems is good enough for me to take a second look. I may end up with the first left hand 500 MDM.

I guess I expected better from somebody who owns a K-Gun.

Dave, I agree with Mike about it not being right. . . . . But what really got my attention the most is any insinuation that Michael's rifle's need a 'fish stringer attachment' on the front of the barrel. (brake) They are just wrong!
I also want to mention that we all need to be a little easy on Michael for awhile. After all, I see he has had to stoop to using a frickin' sub-caliber .338; and in a damn Browning A-bolt, to top that off! Crap!
Sorry Michael, but keep your chin up buddie. We'll keep that amoung ourselve's here.
Nice Musk Ox by the way!

At least it was Barnes X bullets in the 338. Had it been Woodleigh solids, Michael may have not recovered.

quote:

However, this thread has now gone on for more than ten pages and almost one year and most of it has been dedicated to Michael promoting his cartridge designs. I was unaware that a dissenting view was not permitted.

Dave,

This particular thread was started by Michael and it does relate to his B&M series of cartridges…which is pretty much self explanatory from the title.

Jeff also has a thread relating to his AccRel (AR) cartridges which has run well beyond one year in duration and is 60+ pages in length; I believe it also intensely focuses primarily upon his cartridge designs.

I would think it somewhat presumptive that once a cartridge designer initiates a thread to discuss his cartridge designs that the thread will instead upon and discuss other cartridges or other individual’s ideas about cartridge design while not focusing upon the intent of the thread.

If you were looking for a thread that covers a wider range of cartridges including many off the shelve cartridges then the hyperlink I posted earlier should satisfy your informational desires…but is has run well beyond 50 pages so no light reading there.

Dissenting opinions or views…everyone has one, feel free to present differing views as you feel the need. But do not worry, you’ve not offended me…no need to apologize. Have a good one.

MM and I are friends, and are carts are kinda simular (never could spell that word) ... and its all fun

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:
Capoward:

I apologize if I have offended either you or Michael. You both seem like absolute gentlemen. However, this thread has now gone on for more than ten pages and almost one year and most of it has been dedicated to Michael promoting his cartridge designs. I was unaware that a dissenting view was not permitted. I shall, as they say, take my leave. No offense to either of you. Good luck and good hunting.

Dave

A dissenting view is welcomed, then that followed by an explanation, then followed by understanding and comprehension, and then one can make up their own mind. This is the way these things normally work.

What is extremely offensive to me is your choice of words, before even an attempt and understanding. Do you have any earthly idea of how much work is involved in developing a cartridge, rifle, or bullet? Do you think I just made these up yesterday and presented them here? I have news for you, I do test work here, everything I have presented has had literally 1000s of rounds shot through them, testing loads, powders, pressures, bullets, brass life, case measurements, the works. I have most likely shot more .500 caliber rifles and loads in 1 year than you have shot big bore rifles your entire lifetime! There is hardly a week goes by, unless I am in the field, that there is not 150-200 or more rounds of big bore rifle shot here weekly. When developing the 50s from the end of 2005 during an 18 month period I used up 8000 Fed 215 Primers! Now not every one was in the 50s, but a vast majority were, but 90% or more were all shot in bore size 416 and up, mostly 50 and 458 B&Ms doing test work, loads and such. Now that has slowed some, but in November of 2008 I bought another 5000 Fed 215s and two months ago they were gone, I was lucky to find some and bought another 8000 to get me through a little while. When I test I test everything, feed, function, velocity, pressures, terminals, everything. I wring something to the max degree, when I find fault, that is sorted out, and go again. Even when doing simple load data, magazines are loaded full, bolt is snatched and slammed hard to check feed, function, and retain. There is no free ride here, and I have seen far more rifles of other manufacture fail than the systems I came up with.

If I tell you it works, then by god you can take it to the bank that it damn sure does! Not only do they go thru the wringer here, they go thru it in the field. This is what I do, this is what I enjoy doing. This is a hobby to me, I am a shooter and nothing more. I don't have anything to sell anyone, I am not in the gun business and do not wish to be. I have a job, don't want another one. SSK Industries (JD Jones and Company) do all my work, build the rifles, have the reamers, and have the experience and my express permission to build the entire series for anyone who wants one. I get zero commission and don't want any. One deals direct with SSK Industries when building a rifle, I have nothing to do with it. I have taken it upon myself, at my own expense, to have all the dies made by both RCBS and Hornady, I always have extras on hand and in stock at my expense, I have brass made and in stock at my expense, and I have all the load data for all the cartridges when someone builds a rifle then I provide all these things for them at no extra costs or charges. Dies and brass cost you what they cost me, and I send an invoice of what it cost me so you know it too.

Do I promote the rifles, cartridges? Of course I do, at my own expense and with no return in $$ value. Why? Because I believe in them and I know they work, and I know there is nothing on the market like them. Had there been something out there like them, or something that would have suited me as well, they might not exist today, but there was not, so I went in search of!

The rifles you have seen posted are all my personal rifles. I am a nut case sometimes, I figure if one is good, then 3-5 should be real good. So I have several versions of each cartridge, different stocks that suit me and so forth.

I dare say that it was truly your intention to be offensive. If not, then you need to polish up on your speaking and or writing skills. When one puts as much effort, expense, work for years into a project and someone uses words such as these;
"flawed" "counterproductive" "exercise and experimental" (in the way you used it) "tiny case" "concept"
and I can go on and then the one post you deleted in addition to this.

Yes, offensive to say the least! Then this to top it; ""Michael claims to shoot those same bullets in the .458 B&M at 2200 fps. Give us some pressure data.""

To insinuate with your word "CLAIM" that I am a liar to boot! Damned offensive to me!

Then "GIVE US SOME PRESSURE DATA"----I do, and then "WHERE DID YOU GET THIS FROM?"" Another insinuation!

And you expect no one to take offense?

You sir are slightly out of touch. Your motives and agenda are not to learn or even be dissenting, they evidently lie elsewhere. Thank you for at least being gentleman enough to take your leave!

Michael

Jeffe

Indeed we are friends and will be for the duration!

For all to know, Jeffe is the one who brought me over here to begin with, and introduced me to a fine bunch of fellows, that I am in his debt for doing so!

While our work is close, and "SIMILAR", our cartridges are made and fit in different rifles all together. Therefore, they do not cross any lines at all! And in fact I think complement each other very well!

I support the entire line of AR cartridges that Jeffe has developed, and I know he does the same and we cross post with each other all the time. As you see above!

Jeffe, I appreciate your friendship, your patronage, and your support, and you will always have the same from myself in any endeavor! Thank you!

again (similar)

Oh, and you guys have a big day today, you and Mike get together and talk crap for me too!

Guess what I get to do this morning? I have to get cleaned up and go to a "Dance" competition! NO, not me, I can't dance (roll around in bullets naked yes) but can't dance for crap. My 6 yr old daughter! What a glorious day I have!

HEH>

Michael