It is obvious from reading lots of posts that much of the info orginally gained by wildcatters in the 1910s, '20s, '30's, and later, has never been read by MANY modern shooters or gun/cartridge tinkerers and is in danger of being lost.

A classic which I believe every wildcatter should read from cover to cover is "Practical Dope on the Big Bores" by F.C. Ness. Fred Ness was chief technical editor of American Rifleman's "Dope Bag" for many years, and has many other laurels to his credit (as explained in the preface of the book). The book was most recently re-published by Wolfe Publishing Company of Prescott, AZ, but I have no idea if it is still available from there.

Anyway, it has far more information in it about experiments, improving cases, the development of both standard and wilcat cartridges in the first half of the 20th Century, etc., than P.O.Ackley's books ever did.

Don't think so,? Well, one example is the testing of the "improved 30-40 Krag" shooting 150 grain service bullets up well over 3,500 chronographed fps!!! Lots of other similar stuff, too...like the real history of the creation of the .257 Roberts (and why it was "domesticated" by the big companies before the .25-06).

If I had to have only one book on cartridge development, this one would be it.

Just be sure to wear your thinking hat when/if you read it. There are safety weaknesses in the development of those cartridges, the thinking involved, weaknesses in their testing equipment, etc., etc., all of which may lurk around us today too. The ways some of them stand out makes some of today's mistakes more visible too.


Get it through inter-library loan, borrow it from your older friend, Google up a used copy, Hell, break into the local State Police forensic lab and steal it!! I could not recommend it more highly to you as invaluable background knowledge.

Thanks, AC, I'll try to get it!

Myself, I learned most from Nonte's book of cartridge conversions - that was not the title, but close. I am at sea, anyone have the actual title?
Real fun to see how they did it back then - with oh, so little equipment.

AC

I'll have to look for that book.

I wrote two articles for a cartridge collecting Journal. One on the 257 Roberts and one on the 25-06. It would be interesting to compare my notes with Ness'.

I have several of Robert's original cartridges, the 25 Roberts, a couple of the 25 G&H Roberts, plus 5 boxes of the 25 Niedner Roberts, all of which preceeded the 257 Remington Roberts and 257 Winchester Roberts.

Also have a couple of the predecessor of the 25-06, the 25-50-117 and the 25 Niedner.

Ever hear of the 30-80 WCF? That's the original 308W. Did a story on that one too. And one on the 6mm Winchester.

Ray

Ray...I think you'll enjoy it. You know enough to read between the lines and may be surprised at some of the "connections" you make,

The book pretty accurately sequences how the .25 G&H and the .25 Niedner fall into line with the development of the .25 Roberts. It appears that the reason the .257 Roberts was adopted rather than the .25-06 was that with the commonly used powders of the day, the shorter case performed fully as well as the full length '06 cases at acceptable pressures in factory tests.

Also covers a number of special small game (fox,coyote, jackal, etc.) cartridges which never came on the market, like the "hi-speed" versions of the .25 Stevens rimfire and the .32 Long rimfire. They were developed pursuant to hunter surveys, complete with 1/16th" longer cases to keep them from being chambered in many of the weaker rifles of the day, but then fears of gunowners deepening their chambers enough to take the hotter versions and consequently blowing their rifles up scared off the manufacturers...even in the 1930s.

Many, many, other interesting items, some of which you & I both know but I at least had forgotten. For instance, it came clear again why many of Ackley's "improved" cartridges in his books showed such high, really unattainable, velocities. They were taken on a chronograph all right, but it was a "ballistic pendulum" type of chronograph, one of a type calibrated using factory ammo. Enough said, I guess...As you know if the factory figures for the velocity are not correct for the precise gun used to calibrate the pendulum, then it won't calibrate accurately. May actually be very, very erroneous. Ackley's was apparently wildly out of calibration.

Also is amazing some of the pressures those guys loaded to (and lived through shooting, without harm). Loads are given which in some instances have to have been at least 100,000 psi. When they were blowing primers an accepted technique was to change primer brands to find one that did NOT blow with the same powder charges!!

Very interesting book, but can also give a modern loader the chills!

quote:

Originally posted by Bent Fossdal:
Thanks, AC, I'll try to get it!

Myself, I learned most from Nonte's book of cartridge conversions - that was not the title, but close. I am at sea, anyone have the actual title?
Real fun to see how they did it back then - with oh, so little equipment.

Hi, Bent -

I thought "Cartridge Conversions" WAS the title. Now I'll have to try to dig around and find my copy so I can post whatever it is. Will have to wait 'til tomorrow though. What with the storm from the Bering Sea arriving here today, it has been too dark out to look around easily in my poorly-lit library. We are expecting a follow-up off of Hudson's Bay tomorrow, but there should be a bit of sunshine in between (I hope).

Thanks AC, sounds good. I think I've pretty much made it through the thousand or so pages of Wildcat Cartridges, but it took about 10 years. I love books like this for reference and learn how the oldtimers developed their loads, kinda Rocky Gibbs style.

AC

Sounds like my articles were right in line with Ness' thinking. Good to know that I didn't screw up too bad.

Roberts' first wildcats were even shorter than the later factory 257 Roberts. As you said, the powders of those days simply didn't call for a longer case. The only reason Remchester went to the longer full-length 7mm Mauser case was because it was far cheaper for them to make cases with the tooling that they already had.

The same for the 25-06. Neidner got tired of shortening brass so he simply went to the full-length '06 even though he didn't need the extra capacity. It wasn't until the slow powders came on the scene that the 25-06 became a very good cartridge.

I'll go to the library tomorrow and see if I can get the book on inter-library loan.

We have started to catch the beginning of that storm. We got a snow dump last night with more expected tomorrow. I hate snow!

Ray

quote:

Originally posted by Cheechako:
AC

Roberts' first wildcats were even shorter than the later factory 257 Roberts. As you said, the powders of those days simply didn't call for a longer case.


We have started to catch the beginning of that storm. We got a snow dump last night with more expected tomorrow. I hate snow!

Ray

Yeh, the whole "modern cartridge"/improved powders thing is quite a synergistic spiral, isn't it? Which came first the chicken (improved cartridge) or the egg (improved powder)?

Lots of the old-timers started wth cases different than what the cartridges (they became famous for) wore later under the same name.

For instance I have here in my home/office a .219 Donalson Wasp loaded round which came out of P.O. Ackley's shop when he was located here in Roseburg. But it isn't rimmed! it is made on the .25 Remington case drastically shortened, then necked down with about the same shoulder angle as the later Donaldson Wasps.

In the search for accuracy in those days one of the beliefs became, at least temorarily, that maintaining perfect headspace was a significant measurable contributor to perfect accuracy (consistency).

As it was thought to be much easier to maintain headspace with rimmed cases than with rimless ones, the rimless case had to go. So the .219 Wasp design was moved to a rimmed basic case then new on the market...the .219 Zipper.

I guess we pretty much all have read how well the rimmed .219 Wasp old Harve ended up with did in Benchrest venues up until the advent of the .222 Remington of Mike Walker came along.

Enjoy the book. Some of it reads like good history, other parts are just jumbles of test data of individual rifles presented as if they represented all rifles of that chambering.

The saddest part is that there appears to be insufficient understanding yet at that time of writing to really sift the significant from the purely anecdotal by the author. Still, I think we owe him a heck of a lot for his aglomeration of all his info. (So we can skew it with our "believed now to be" knowledge...)

F.C. Ness PRACTICAL DOPE ON THE BIG BORES Leather Ltd!
$49.99
8d 5h 58m

On eBay right now............r in s.

Home Guide to Cartridge Conversions; Nonte, George C.; Gun Room Press; 1967; HB

quote:

Originally posted by HockeyPuck:
Home Guide to Cartridge Conversions; Nonte, George C.; Gun Room Press; 1967; HB

Thank you for posting that. I've looked three times for my copy now, and can't find it. I've got waaaaay too many books, old catalogues, shooting correspondence, and similar stuff filling three rooms upstairs and two downstairs.

Luckily I have a nephew in the RCMP who will be moving all that stuff to the Canadian North when I go for the big red hunt in the sky. Also hope he can get in at least most of my guns.....

Thanks again.

AC

I would also suggest a copy of "Wildcat Cartridges" by Richard F. Simmons, William Morrow and Company 1947. I think this is one of the best books written on wildcat cartridge history.

quote:

Originally posted by Cheechako:
AC
The same for the 25-06. Neidner got tired of shortening brass so he simply went to the full-length '06 even though he didn't need the extra capacity. It wasn't until the slow powders came on the scene that the 25-06 became a very good cartridge.Ray

Niedner (not Neidner) got tired of shortening what brass? When did the .25-06 come out?

In the early 1900s, the 30-40 Krag case was the favorite of wildcatters. But guys like Niedner, Mann, and Newton were also playing with the new Cal 30 M1906 case, particularly with 25 caliber bullets. The most promising wildcat was the 25-50-117 which was a shortened '06 case. Newton was thinking "big game" and wanted something bigger than the 25 cal and so he took the case, modified it slightly, and his 256 Newton (actually 6.5mm) was the result. Mann had died in 1916 leaving further development of the 25-50-117 to the likes of Niedner. He started chambering rifles for the shortened case which he called the 25 Niedner. As was customary in those days, rifle builders furnished their customers with a supply of hand formed cases and loading dies but Niedner had so many orders that he decided to simply neck down the '06 case without shortening it and chambered new rifles with the longer case, which he also called the 25 Niedner. Because he didn't put a new name on the new cartridge the only way to tell one of the short-cased rifles is a chamber cast.

There were several other versions of the 25 Niedner with names like G&H 25 High Power, 25 High Power Special, and 25 Whelen High Power. They differ only in small ways such as shoulder angle, etc.

Following WWII several other 25 cal wildcats of the 25 Niedner appeared. 25-06 Ackley, 257 PMVF-CCC, for example. Remington finally made the cartridge legitimate in 1969.

Roberts, as we know, took a different approach, using the 7mm Mauser case. He shortened it slightly and used a 15 degree shoulder. Niedner chambered rifles for it which was called the 25 Niedner Roberts or simply the 25 Roberts. The case was left full length in the 25 G&H Roberts and, in 1934 the original 7mm Mauser shoulder angle was brought back when Remington introduced the cartridge as the 25 Roberts and, later, the 257 Remington Roberts. Then came the 257 Winchester Roberts. Finally, everybody quit fighting for naming rights and the 257 Roberts emerged.

Ray

quote:

Originally posted by Michael Petrov:
Niedner (not Neidner) got tired of shortening what brass? When did the .25-06 come out?

This question is exactly why in my original post of this thread I said something to the effect that much of this information is in danger of being lost. The book I recommended has about two chapters+ on the time-line & players in the development of the varous .25 caliber cartridges which later became legitimized and are now "old favorites".. Plus there is a chapter on the .25 Magnums. There are chapters on just bout every bore size, again with time-lines, who did what to which, and loading and ballistic data.

I think pretty much everyone who is interested in rifle performance, wildcats, or anything more to do with reifles other than how to hunt with them, owes it to himself to get, read, and keep a copy for his own reference use.

(Mike - The book also contains specific references to the beginnings, ownership, work, and eventual shut-down of many of the companies who made the very rifles your books cover.)

Thanks,
That book has been in my library for some time. I was interested in how others saw the history of the .25-06. I think the history of the 25-06 is already lost.

Michael

The 25-06 history is lost only to those who don't want to look for it. History is like the hard drive on your computer - all the information is there, you simply have to dig it out.

I'm sure that there are more than one of those original 25 Niedner rifles still existing in collections. But I'd bet that few of the owners know what they have. I know that the cartridges still exist because I have some, as do other cartridge collectors that I know.

What's your take on the development of the 25-06? This Forum is not the best place to record it, but it's better than nothing.

Ray

quote:

Originally posted by Cheechako:
Michael
What's your take on the development of the 25-06? This Forum is not the best place to record it, but it's better than nothing.
Ray

My take is that Niedner started necking the 06 down to .25 about 1910 using the full length case.

Michael

You could be right. But there are Niedner rifles chambered for the cartridge on the left and stamped "25 Niedner". They appear to predate rifles chambered for the full length case.

Ray

A.O. Niedner was located in Malden, Massachusetts from 1906-1919 doing gunwork. I have NEVER seen a rifle made by A.O. Niedner made at Malden with the caliber stamped on it. He continued this practice at the Niedner Rifle Corporation. Rifles made at NRC from 1920-1937 do not have caliber markings, Caliber markings at NRC show up circa 1938.

F C Ness wrote a book on .22 calibre wildcat cartridges as well " Practical Dope on the .22. " Some great historical information in there .

Symonds "Wildcat Cartridges" is likely the best early reference for a large number of cartridges.

Ackley's "Handbook for Shooters and Reloaders" is another good source , and the "Wildcat Cartridges - Combo Edition" from Wolfe Publishing is another that has good information.

Unfortunately no single volume exists that covers them all. Interstingly the things tried back "then" are as relevant now as ever before , the better barrel steel , projectile design and powder availability makes it easier now , plus accurate chronographs have the edge on theoretical calculations of velocity and pressure.

Great thread , hope there is more to come.

Michael

My source for the Niedner rifles is someone whose name and reputation you would recognize immediately. My notes read, ". . . Niedner stamped 25 Niedner on the barrels. . ."

I have not personally seen the rifle chambered for the short cartridge.

You may be right. My notes from that source are nearly 30 years old and memories do get dim with time.

Ray

quote:

Originally posted by Alberta Canuck:
Hell, break into the local State Police forensic lab and steal it!!

Thanks for the look up.

A serious problem was that because they didn't have reliable chronographs, they would "extropolate." ie; If the factory cartridge gave 2850fps with 55gr, and 2900 with 56, then blow out the case and use 61gr, you'll get 3150!
PMVF (the predesessor to the Weatherby) was figured this way.
Have fun,
Gene

Gene

Agreed that there was a whole lotta guessing going on but the more informed experimenters used devices such as ballistic pendulums, penetration tests, etc to arrive at their estimates of MV. Case capacity measurements helped then the same as they do today. Some of the insiders even fanagled access to military and commercial chronographs.

Agreed that there was a lot of over enthusiastic hype, but that is still true today, even coming from our own major manufacturers. And it will always be so.

Ray

Gotta agree with ya there...If it wasn't for the skeptics, we wouldn't have developed the equipment today, that we take for granted.
I don't know that I'd want to live without my Oehler M33(unless I had an M43!)
People like Powley and Eichhorn and the practical people like Ackley, Mashburn, and Gibbs are my heroes.
Have fun,
Gene

quote:

Originally posted by Nevmavrick:
A serious problem was that because they didn't have reliable chronographs, they would "extropolate." ie; If the factory cartridge gave 2850fps with 55gr, and 2900 with 56, then blow out the case and use 61gr, you'll get 3150!
PMVF (the predesessor to the Weatherby) was figured this way.
Have fun,
Gene

The MVF, PMVF, CCC, and Weatherby cartridges were actually chronographed by people who knew what they were doing, early on. Those chronographers included the U.S. military, Winchester, and numerous others. They were all interested in what the wildcatters were doing.

At first they were chrono'd using the often rather inaccurate ballistic pendula of the day. (The ballistic pendulum is not inaccurate in design, but it was often calibrated inaccurately.) A little later they were chrono'd on rather simplistic electrical chronographs.

As most may already know, the CCC series was fathered by what was orgiinally the PMVF series, which derived from the MVF series, and was pretty much concurrent with the earliest Weatherby cartridges. That is not surprising, in that some of the major players hung out and shot together in the L.A. area...at least occansionally, while all the development was in its prime.

The CCC cartridge series rights (and reamers) were sold to Hollywood Gun Shop, which would make any suggestion about the those makers "guessing" at CCC bllistics a little amusing. Hollywood Gunshop was also the builder and one of the major marketers of electrical (not electronic) chronographs. They could chrono their cartridges if and as needed. I bought one of their early chronos and used it, so I do know that as a fact.

Early buyers and users in the field often wrote in to the NRA and others about their "magic" cartridges, and they are the ones who put most of the fantasy in the lore we read about sometimes these days.

But that is still done. I remember getting into a rather heated discussion about the .17 Hornady Rimfire Magnum at our local range with a guy who very angrily (at the end) insisted that the .17 HMR has absolutely zero drop out to 150 yards. I'm sure he is probably teaching that line to some of his younger relatives too.

Though some of their velocities are clearly not correct, depending on who was talking about them, the big difference with a lot of the developers was not an inability to chronograph, but the inability to grasp the pressure levels
at which they were often working.

At pressures none of us would even consider trying, of course sometimes velocities are going to be "fantasy high", but even so they weren't always inaccurately determined.

Hindsight without access to all the facts is not a perfect science. Unfortunately, that's all most of today's shooters have available from the past...part of the facts, but not all.

BTW, I am not criticising any person's posting, just trying to give another view of what life was like as a shooter then.