If you had a spare center-fire Martini Cadet action and wanted to rebarrel it to something LESS than a .357 Magnum, which chambering would you pick?

(I have been thinking of a .32 H&R Mag. When I was young, I had one in .357 and it was "okay", but in those days many shops would not do the .357 because both they and the NRA felt the action./barrel shank diameter were only marginal for use with that pressure level of factory loads. Somehow that has always stayed in the back of my mind, so am thinking of the .32 Mag to get the greater barrel shank thickness.)

So, what would you pick if it had to be less intense overall than a.357 Magnum?

Although the Cadet barrel shank is only .750" a .357 pistol chamber will still leave a chamber wall thickness of over .185" which is a lot thicker than most revolver cylinders. I think you need more facts before accepting that the "NRA feels the shank dia. is marginal for .357 factory loads". Take a look at Frank de Haas Cadet comments in "Single Shot Rifles and Actions". They had to chamber a Cadet in 303 British and fill it with fast burning powder to blow it up.

.22 Hornet? .218 Bee?

Jon - The NRA (of that day) may or may not have been correct in their assessment. Likewise, Frank, whom I knew personally, might or might not have been correct in his assessment of the Cadet's strength.

I guess my question still is, "If you were going to re-barrel a Cadet action for something less than the .357 Magnum, what would it be?"

quote:

Originally posted by LRH270:
.22 Hornet? .218 Bee?

I have a Hornet Cadet already. Have a .218 Bee reamer, and had been thinking about it too. Just for grins, if you already had a Hornet, would that change what you might suggest?

I even thought a while about the .32 S&W Long, mainly so I could shoot rabbits, squirrels and foxes without blowing them to smithereens. So then thought of the .32 H&R Mag, or even a plain-jane .38 Special (so it couldn't chamber the hotter-loaded .357 Mag).

Thanks in advance for your insights.

I was going to suggest the Bee or the Hornet, but since LRH270 already has, how 'bout a 25/20 or 32/20? Same family as the Bee. A K-Hornet would be cool.

Forgetting the strength issue my choice is still the 256 Win. It fits the action perfectly and the easily formed 357 mag. cases are plentyful and cheap. The cases are also very strong and survive many reloadings. I DO wish the 256 Win's neck was a little longer for cast bullets but it still works ok.
I do like the 32 H&R mag for the Cadet and almost did one myself. I guess it comes down to what you're going to use the gun for. The 256 has lots more power but if you don't need it the H&R would be nice.
I think pondering these decisions is half the fun of the project. And, as soon as you decide you either have to get to work, spend money, or both!

quote:

Originally posted by craigster:
I was going to suggest the Bee or the Hornet, but since LRH270 already has, how 'bout a 25/20 or 32/20? Same family as the Bee. A K-Hornet would be cool.

Craigster- The .25-20 suggestion has a lot of merit. I once owned a Cadet in .25 ACP (it was originally a .297/.250, with the chamber sleeved down). It was a neat gun and DIRT CHEAP to load for....used less than 1.0 grain of
Bullseye with the 50 gr. bullet. (BTW, IIRC, the .297/.250 was the only English rook rifle chambering which actually had a .250/.251 groove diameter barrel...which fits the .25 ACP .251" bullet perfectly.)

I also really will have to give Jon's suggestion of a .256 some more thought. That is uncommon enough I wouldn't have to worry about someone shoving hot factory ammo in it...could just load it to whatever level I need.

BTW, my "Hornet" Martini IS a K-Hornet. I think that particular round is a nice one, but all-told my Cadet K-Hornet is the most inaccurate central-fire rifle I have ever owned.

The inaccuracy of your Cadet K-Hornet reminds me of the Ruger 77-22 Hornet that I once owned. It was dismal.

i have a cadet in 256 & that one is still a favorite

Alberta Canuck

how about a 310 Cadet. I think it's a 32-20 case.

rich

I would choose a Bee over a hornet based round, as the action will need little or no extractor modifications. If you are going to chamber the Bee, go with the Mashburn version, as brass life is better.

The orginal .310 cadet round is very clode to a .32-20, though not a duplicate round. The .32-20/.32 Special/.32 H&R Magnum-sized rounds would be fine choices since they are the size round that the action was built around. Again, with these, minimal extractor modification is needed.

Accordingto Bob Snapp, who is about as knowledgable a gunsnmith for the Martini cadet as anyone, the action is more than strong enough for factory .357 ammo, or ammo loaded using loads listed in loading manuals. In fact Bob's favorite round for the cadet action is the 7-30 Waters, which is a .30-30 based round.

With any cartridge you choose, I would suggest bushing the firing pin, as the originals tend to be too large.

This advise is free, take it for what it is worth.

Dave

quote:

Originally posted by richj:
Alberta Canuck

how about a 310 Cadet. I think it's a 32-20 case.

rich

I've owned a number of Greener "Club" rifles in the .310 Cadet. They were a standard model Greener Martini, with heavy barrel, flip-up peep rear sight, globe front sight, and shot literally one hole groups at 35-50 yards with factoiry ammo. Sold my last one to a fellow in Manitoba for his young son...together with a Sauer Royal for him.

Anyway, the .310 Greener was easily the most accurate chambering I've ever seen in ANY small center-fire cartridge for lead bullets. But, ammo was a bear to come by even in the mid 1970's in Canada where stuff from England was duty free.

Oh, and the .310 is definitely not made on a .32-20 case. The .310 case is shorter and I believe the rim is bigger around, as is the bullet. The rim may also be thinner...seems to me it was, but my memory is getting weak after not having had one for 20+ years.

The most inaccurate rifles I've personally experienced in the little Martinis have been for the high intensity .22 cartridges. I once had a Francotte-built custom .218 Bee which would have been doing well to hit a full-sized pizza tin at anything over 100 yards. Have had a large number of Hornets. Only 1 was truly accurate.

It was built by Earl Burton of Vacaville, California, using a Model 416 Stevens .22 LR barrel. It was very accurate despite the "too-tight" bore, but ONLY with the U.S. Air Force issue full metal patch ball survival ammo of the 1960-61 era. Earl was a former Camp Perry Wimbeldon Match winner (1961), who was a M/Sgt. in the Air Force....wonder how it was that his personal rifle just happened to shoot Air force ammo so well? I managed to come by 500 rounds of that ammo, and really enjoyed the rifle after I had a Lyman "Jr. Targetspot" mounted on it.

AC

My list for a Cadet chambering starts with the
17 Ackley Bee then
218 Bee
25-20
32-20
in that order
Each has a paticular niche and each has its own merit. If I had a Hornet already I would probably skip the Bee even though IMHO/IME it is a better cartridge. I think the 17 is just sweet in that gun and one I used for a while was devestating on squirels, cats and called coyotes with in 100yds. Only draw back to it is the cost of dies compared to the others.

.20 Jordan Jet. Its a .22 Jet improved and necked down to .20 caliber.


Jordan

25-20 Single shot.

Brent

quote:

Originally posted by Thaine:
AC

My list for a Cadet chambering starts with the
17 Ackley Bee then
218 Bee
25-20
32-20
in that order
Each has a paticular niche and each has its own merit. If I had a Hornet already I would probably skip the Bee even though IMHO/IME it is a better cartridge. I think the 17 is just sweet in that gun and one I used for a while was devestating on squirels, cats and called coyotes with in 100yds. Only draw back to it is the cost of dies compared to the others.

Thanks for the list Thaine...

I already have a .17 Ackley Hornet, in a Kimber (Oregon) rifle. It is a nice little round. I also have a nice little handy-dandy .32-20, an engraved Rem. Model 25 CARBINE.

The one which I don't have either a duplicate of, or close to a duplicate of, is the .25-20... As is suggested elsewhere, I think the .25-20 SS would be even nicer, but I won't go the SS route. Too much hassle getting dies, brass, etc. these days...so more and more either the .25 WCF or the .256 Win are sounding pretty good. At least I fairly regularly see brass for them at the local gun shows.

AC

I think you would like the 25-20 WCF or .256 Win just fine. They both will work well with jacketed or cast bullets. I have a Win 92 rifle in 25 and it is a dream. If you are interested in a wildcat, you might want to think about the 25 Copperhead (25-222) developed by John Wooters to replace his 25-20. You could probably create a rimmed version using 357 Maximum brass or use a rimless extractor from Bob Snapp. You might want to talk to Fred at Bullberry www.bullberry.com he lists a 25 Maximum in his barrels and I understand he is a Cadet expert.

One is on my list to acquire for a summer school project. Bob Snapp is teaching a NRA singleshot course at Murray (sp) College in Oklahoma this summer and I hope to attend. I would like to hear from a master about what to do.

If I had a spare Cadet action, I would not be able to resist the .256 Max.

I have some in 17AH, 17/222 Rimmed, 222 Rimmed and 218 Mashburn Bee.
Rimless extractors can be made for them so that standard 222Rem brass can be used.

bob snap makes the extractor for rimless rounds, i have one in 222, but a warning to anyone who wants to put one together, the extractor fitting is nothing for an ameteur to do, it is a bitch to get in and working right. if you want one - send it to snapps gunshop

Had one in 25-20 Single Shot - Great rifle, but a bear to load for. It was an older English "guild" (no name) gun with a 26" barrel.

Still have some in 22 Hornet, 310 Cadet and 357 Mag. The 22 Hornet & 357 Mag are my favorites for playing around the fields near home and have dispatched many a varmint around here.

Bob Snapp is just finishing one up for me in 32-40. Shot one hole groups with lead cast ammo we put toether for it for testing. It's now off for final finishing and case coloring. Can't wait to get it back and do some shooting with it.

Bob also did the 357 Mag re-barrel on my Cadet so chambered. He's the one to talk to about Cadets if you have any desire to try something new or different.

Good luck.

Thanks for all the suggestions, guys. I still have a couple of spare extractors lying about. I bought them back in the late 60's and they are (so far) blanks...that is, not machined to fit any particular cartridge head yet.

Think I will stick with a rimmed cartridge, whatever the rest of the case looks like. Too many advantages to the rimmed case in single shots to bother fussing with rimless, at least in my individual circumstances.

What's "a bear" about loading the .25-20? Just drop in 17.5 gr of Swiss 1.5fg or Goex 3fg and compress a bit, add a 0.03" fiber wad and seat a 65-85 gr bullet and you are good to go.

Brent

my last one became a 32-20 with a left over .308" barrel. Got a 6X Leupold on it and it is just a hoot to shoot. Laser-Cast offers a 115gr 32-20 bullet and the 1600fps load is a 2" grouper at 100 yds.

Rich
DRSS

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
my last one became a 32-20 with a left over .308" barrel. Got a 6X Leupold on it and it is just a hoot to shoot. Laser-Cast offers a 115gr 32-20 bullet and the 1600fps load is a 2" grouper at 100 yds.

Rich
DRSS

There's no doubt the .32-20 is a good, workable chambering in the little Martini. If I was going that route I'd use the .32 H&R Mag case because I like the completely straight case better (no little bottleneck), and because I have almost 1,000 rounds of new brass on hand.

But that's just personal bias...the .32-20 is still a sweet round and I haven't been without at least one on hand in some rifle or pistol at all times for the past 50 years.

Another good reason for that particular round, for me, is that I have close to a dozen different bullet moulds for it. Also over a ton of linotype....wish I would live long enough to shoot it all up.

Hi AC -- I get the impression, from your past postings, that there's nothing new under the sun for you, nowhere you haven't been gunwise. So... why not barrel that Martini to prove a point rather than to duplicate something you have or had. Try to make a tack-driver out of a ho-hum cartridge. Take the 218 Bee -- Winchester didn't do anybody any favors by bringing out a varmint round in a flip gun. I for one always suspected it was capable of far more performance in a good bolt or single shot. Might be true of its parents, the 25=20 & 32-20, as well. Think that would be worthwhile?

Bud W

I've owned three small frame Martini centerfires - a .218 Bee, a .256 Winchester and a .20-20 Kiel Centerfire (essentially, a .20 Mashburn Bee). All three were acquired already completed. Each would consistently shoot under 0.8 inch 5-shot groups at 100 yards with the right components. The .20-20 was closer to a 0.6 inch shooter at that distance.

I actually bought another small frame action with the intent of having a .32 H&R built, when I discovered that I could rebore a Browning Lo-wall from .22 Hornet to .32 H&R (after setting the barrel back one thread). As a result, that's my .32 H&R rifle. It shoots well, but not nearly as well as the three Martinis did.

What to chamber for depends in part on what you use you intend to make of the rifle. For a walk around varminter, any of the .218, .25-20, .256 or .32-20 will work fine. The .218 will give you the most range. The .256 will give you the most longer range killing power (a 75 grain bullet at 2400 fps is possible in that cartridge).

If you really want something different, take a look at the .20s. You could do a .20-.357, a .20-.257 Maximum or a .20-222 Rimmed and give yourself an honest 3000-3500 fps varminter. Todd Kindler at the Woodchuck Den (Google it for the web site) is the .20 caliber guru and he loves to talk about them. With the advent of the .204 Ruger, there are a host of quality .20 caliber bullets available (none of which existed when I owned mine).

Whatever you choose, if it operates at pressures higher than the .25-20 or the .32-20, you'll likely need to bush the firing pin. If you don't, the primers back into the breechface and the action locks up ever so tightly.

Have fun with making the decision and enjoy whatever you finally settle on.

quote:

Originally posted by Bud W:
Hi AC -- I get the impression, from your past postings, that there's nothing new under the sun for you, nowhere you haven't been gunwise. So... why not barrel that Martini to prove a point rather than to duplicate something you have or had. Try to make a tack-driver out of a ho-hum cartridge. Take the 218 Bee -- Winchester didn't do anybody any favors by bringing out a varmint round in a flip gun. I for one always suspected it was capable of far more performance in a good bolt or single shot. Might be true of its parents, the 25=20 & 32-20, as well. Think that would be worthwhile?

Bud W

Bud -

Sorry to respond so late. Have had three fistsful of hot coals to juggle for the last while.

There is a lot in what you say/suggest. I still want to do a few more experiments with the rifle in its current chambering (Hornet) to see if I can't get it to shoot in that.

Then, a real fun gun for me would be the little .32 H&R. I wish the gun was strong enough for a .32 Miller short, but I don't think it is. With a Jones mould and a breech-seater, that could be a very interesting gun to 200 yards. So, maybe would the .32 H&R be, with a somewhat lighter bullet and either fixed ammo or breech-seated rounds.

I've never had an itch for a .20 of any variety. I find the .14s interesting, but so finicky as to be more of a pain than a challenge (to me).

One thing I might find attractive, but hardly worth all the effort to keep it running, would be the Aussie .222 Rimmed, but shortened to .221 neck and body lengths....a .221 Rimmed, in other words.

The longer I think about it, though, the more interested I am in a rifle chambered for a relatively large diameter, relatively slow-moving, very "relaxed" pressures round, of a case size appropriate to the Cadet action. If it is accurate, whacks small game without blowing it up, and is relatively quiet, what more could one ask for out in the back 40?

If I want more distance or more power, I've already got the .17 Hornet, a couple of .22 Hornets, a nice .221, two .222s, two .223s, a .220 Russian, a couple of .22-250s, another couple of .220 Swifts, and more in the .22-bore. Ditto sort of arrays in all the bore diameters up through .458".

So this is really just intended to be a relaxed, no particular goal, woods-loafer's pet & toy.

You know, if it wasn't for the problems of brass & not much variety of heeled bullets, I think I'd just put it back into .310 Greener. Have had several of those and they are just the sort of thing I'm thinking of...though the .256 is probably a complete fill of that bill too....

I'm new to the Martini Cadet fold with a 222Rimmed AI. I'd love another in a small 30cal like a 218 Mashburn Bee necked up for playing with light cast projectiles and 110gr plinker projectiles. With a set of 300Whisper dies in the cupboard, I've also considered the 30/221Rimmed idea using 222Rimmed brass cut-down.
Cheers...
Con

I don't know if he can do this to the Cadet but Bob Snapp has put trigger guard safety catches onto two BSA Martinis for me.

310 Turbo (my name )

Run a 30Whisper or 20vartarg reamer into 1.6",cut a 30 neck and throat if useing the 20vt reamer.

You then use 357 max cases that cost about a third of the 222R cases, and are better quality.
This can be done with the original 310 barrel and will let you shoot cast or Hornady 123gn 7.62x39 (.310").
I have the Martini in bits and 357max cases coming next week-should be a fun project.

Cheers

P.S. Some of the 310 cadet barrels were a bit sloppy so you could probably shoot the 32 (.312") 85gn pistol bullets also

AC,

Just another hat in the ring. Dad made this one a 17BK wildcat. He used a 357 maximum case. He has used 17gn. berger bullets and was getting over 4000 fps. It's just a fun gun for dusting crows.

I was really haveing a senior moment last night

If you use the cadet barrel you would need to use the 32 special .321" or .323" 125 gr projies.

If you used a 303brit take off barrel you could use the .312" 32cal pistol bullets.

And a 308 barrel would give you a huge range of projies.
The bottom line is that any of the above could be easily done on a 357max case in the Martini and of course you can shoot cast in it as well

Cheers

T-bolt -

Appreciate your comments. Have lots of both .32 H&R and .357 Max cases on hand, so could go either way. I really don't want to run .357 Max pressures in this little gun. None of these guns are getting any younger or easier to replace or find parts for, if damaged.

I know Martinis are very strong in some senses and pretty good at handling gas, but I have also had some "interesting" experiences with a few of them over the years. One for instance in .219 Imp. Zipper, over about 300-400 shots, actually set the head of the case back into the face of the breech block enough to make it very difficult to open. Why that block was so soft, I have no idea, but then I have no idea what the metallurgy of this particular specific action is either.

Your comments though will be filed away for future Martini projects, as they are really quite useful to me.


Edited to add: Originally missed the part about 1.6" length. That could be a useful length. I have 6-to-12 or so new .30 barrels lying around, so even with .32 H&R cases will likely use a .300/.308 barrel. Will probably shoot 100 gr. Speer plinkers and 110-130 grain cast bullets most of the time, as it is to be a loafer's gun, not a serious varminter.

quote:

Originally posted by daleatkins:
AC,

Just another hat in the ring. Dad made this one a 17BK wildcat. He used a 357 maximum case. He has used 17gn. berger bullets and was getting over 4000 fps. It's just a fun gun for dusting crows.

That is a beautiful looking gun. If I did not already have a .17 K-Hornet, it might even tempt me out of my intended wood's-loafing mode.