Ack Improved Cartridges

Intheshop

Well-Known Member
The only chambering here that I would consider is the 22-250..... not so much for any "implied" increase in capacity. It would help with the case-chamber relationship, because the factory case is pretty tapered. And considering most 22-250's come with longer brrls the ability to run a touch slower burn rate on powder would help my CB effort.

Still in the plotting stages of my 22-250, 2020 CB varmint rig. Snagged a ss fluted 14T sendero take off brrl to go on an old action,yada yada. If,it doesn't behave.... and I have to set it back,will more than likely go AI.
 

Rootmanslim

Active Member
As I said before, AIs are faster because thet hold more powder and run at higher pressures.

Handloader took the same bbl and chambered it in 300 H&H and 300 WSM. With the same loads, results were the same., proving the case shape myth is ----- A MYTH.

The 300 H&H also feeds 1000% better than any AI or AI clone. Perhaps that's why I own three.

The 30-30 AI and 280 AI make sense as does the 22 K Hornet. The rest are a solution in search of a problem. BUT they do look KOOL.

I have won a fair amount of chronograph bets with guys with 22" 300 WSMs who believed it would be faster than my ancient 26" bbled 721 300 H&H. Like taking candy from a baby. Also fun to watch WSM magazines empty themselves when the bolt is operated as bolts should be. "Private I want to see you yank that bolt right of the rifle !" (old DI instructing in proper technique for rapid fire with an 03' Springfield)
 
Last edited:

Jeff H

NW Ohio
.................never understood was why when so many people were rebarreling '03 actions to hot numbers like the 257R they were advised to hold the pressure way down to Remington Rolling Block specs..................

Jeff- Sam Fadala, good writer, thanks for reminding me of him.
I don't either, but I've had a hypothesis rolling around in my head for many years.

The same thing was done to the 8x57 and 7x57. To be honest, and with a liberal application of conjecture, I have personally wondered if those rounds were not "held back" for the sake of American pride. We were behind the rest of the Western World when we trumped them all with the 30-03, then the 30-06, but the '06 was not a completely genuine or novel concept. Regarding the inferiority of those "foreign rounds," I'm not claiming there was a conspiracy, per se, rather that there was silent complicity in passively asserting the superiority of our own fine invention. I can imagine it was easy to accept the suggestion given political circumstances and our own need to successfully stand up to many much older and established nations. There was a whole lot of propaganda on both sides of the ocean, which was necessary to harness hearts and minds to a worthy cause. This is not a criticism.

In the case of the 'Roberts, I believe there were just not optimum powders for such a round (case volume/bore diameter) at the time, and many pre-98 Mausers were converted to that round, as well as the 250 Savage. Well, I've read that a hundred times anyway, but have never once ever seen one in person. Not to say they don't exist. I've never seen any of the "older, weaker" 44 Specials I've heard about all my life either, at least not so old and weak that they wouldn't have handled at least 45 ACP pressure levels of the day.

I miss Sam Fadala's work. Haven't seen anything new from him in a long time. I should borrow back some of his books from a friend I don't get to see much any more.
 

Rootmanslim

Active Member
Been a handloader since 1958. Never saw and suggestions to download the 7x57. In fact my ancient Hornady manual has 7x57 loads hotter than a 7mm08.

Metric rounds never took off because they are ---- metric. 1903 Springfield in 30-06 were available for less money than a new Winchester/Remington. They did not have to rebarreled either. You could buy one from the NRA and "sporterize" it. The NRA did not sell Mausers. Ammo was available everywhere. There was no international conspiracy at work.

As for 44 specials, a Triple lock is a weaker gun and can be taken apart with Keith loads. 45 ACP pressures are puny compared to Keith's 44 Spec loads.

Never understood the desire to "hotrod" cartridges. there is nothing a 6.5 CM will do a 6.5x55 cannot. There is nothing a 7mm08 can do a 7x57 cannot and so on (Unless you have been captured by the short action myth)
 

fiver

Well-Known Member
even as a kid looking at velocity figures and such.
I could see the problem.
the 7 mauser throws a 10gr lighter bullet about 100 fps slower than the 270.
but does it at 45,000 psi/cup versus the 270's 50,, whatever pressure ceiling.
even then I constantly wondered why they didn't just build a good rifle and round for the X57 case and be done with it.
the answer I always got was because nobody would buy it.
maybe they were right, the 284 win and 280 Rem. haven't exactly set the world on fire, and they pretty much do what the corrected X57 round would have.
 

Bret4207

St Lawrence river valley, NY
Well, as far as metric not taking off back in the day there were quite a lot of metrics around in the good old days in the USA. I forget if it was the Win 54 or 70 that was chambered in the 7.65 Mauser, and the 7x57 and 8x57 were both available in Remingtons or Winchesters, I forget which. There were also some "Americanized" metrics around although I forget just which ones they were. Of course this is back mostly pre WW2. After WW2 the 6 and 7 mms kinda took off. The 243 and 244 were 6mm's and wiped out the 25's and the 7mm in all it's varieties did in the 270 to a large degree, there were a couple 8mm too. And of course the 9 and 10mm handgun rounds took off. As far as price, yes, a new Rem or Win was a lot more than a surplus 03, but a surplus 03 was a good deal more than the surplus Mausers, Arisakas, Carcanos, etc that were offered through the mail. I've seen those ads for $1.50 Krags too, and 45 Colt New Service ex-NYSP revolvers with the holster for about $12,00 and that was in the 50's! But you are right, metrics never appealed to the US buyer compared to an "ought six".

Pretty much all my older loading manuals from the 30's on forward into the 80's anyway carry language about certain rounds having to be loaded to a lower pressure due to older surplus rifles or black powder actions, or you will find that the loads are just pretty tame across the board. I've even got one someplace that says the Arisaka is "unsafe" to reload for and should not be fired at all. Obviously pre-Ackley testing! Same with anything to do with the 250 Savage having to be loaded down for the 99 action, yet no one ever said anything about loading down the 99's in 243, 284, 300, 308, 358. Thoughts and times change.
 

Bret4207

St Lawrence river valley, NY
even as a kid looking at velocity figures and such.
I could see the problem.
the 7 mauser throws a 10gr lighter bullet about 100 fps slower than the 270.
but does it at 45,000 psi/cup versus the 270's 50,, whatever pressure ceiling.
even then I constantly wondered why they didn't just build a good rifle and round for the X57 case and be done with it.
the answer I always got was because nobody would buy it.
maybe they were right, the 284 win and 280 Rem. haven't exactly set the world on fire, and they pretty much do what the corrected X57 round would have.
There was a guy some years back that, of all things, built a 303 British to nominal standards in a strong action, a Ruger #1 IIRC. Turns out the 303 is pretty capable old girl given a decent platform to start with.
 

Rootmanslim

Active Member
Yes, and the 303 in a P-14 with that 26" bbl was generally held to be the finest sniper rifle of both World Wars. Far less fragile than our Warner-Swazy or Unertl equipped 1903 Springfields. One can only imagine how much better it would have been had the Brits adopted the 276 Enfield (7x60).
If you have a P-14 and wish to make a "sniper tribute" these folks have all the bits. https://www.accumounts.com/enfield-303.html

Here's a real one:

 

Jeff H

NW Ohio
................The 243 and 244 were 6mm's and wiped out the 25's and the 7mm....................Same with anything to do with the 250 Savage having to be loaded down for the 99 action, yet no one ever said anything about loading down the 99's in 243, 284, 300, 308, 358. Thoughts and times change.
:DThere's another thing my dad used to grouse about - that "they cheated" regarding the 308 being so close to the '06, and "they cheated" when they made the 243, because they jacked the pressure way up to achieve velocities which were supposed to compete with existing cartridges of the same claiber. He often stated that, in the same gun, the 250, 257 or 6mm/244 Rem. would run circles around the new 51mm-based cartridges if loaded to the same high pressures. I don't necessarily disagree with him on that, but I do prefer the milder-mannered 57mm/55mm-based cartridges anyway.

Other weird stuff - like the 'Roberts being initially chambered in short-actions, for whatever reason, and that some loads turned out lower velocities that the 250 Savage. I've read that the .257" 117 grain Remington RN was originally a 25-35 bullet. Some old guys (guys older than me) claimed it was "better in brush" and others denounced it for hobbling the cartridge.

The 7x57, despite being "foreign" and metric, sure has held on. I wouldn't "improve" one myself again, and while my dad loves his 257 Roberts Improved, I like mine in its original form. I get 3,000+fps with 100 grain Remington spitzers and 3,300 fps from Sierra 75 grain HPs (or Hornady plastic-tipped ones) with no excess stresses imposed on the brass or the old '98 Mauser.
 

RBHarter

West Central AR
To think I'm happy with just matching 243 numbers in a 95' with 257 Roberts loaded for the old soft action running in the low 40s ........
Having a mm phobia maybe we should be shooting 275 Rigbys instead of 7x57s .
Seems to me like everybody loves that 7mm RM (except me for some reason I just don't care for it despite for some reason having a passion for the smaller 7s) . The 325 WSM fell on it's face as I recall because everyone was all ready for a 7mm not an 8mm or maybe it was the lingering 338 frenzy from the Federal ......I almost fell for that good thing I got the 358 win instead .......
Strangely enough we had several 32s in rifles which were in between the 8mms . The 32 Win is still hanging on .
 

scb

New Member
Are you doing that with your fire-forming load? I found the 7x57 and 257 AIs to shoot very well when fire-forming.

Have you been able to chronograph "before and after?" That one takes out a lot of body taper and the volume increase must be significant compared to many others.

Did I miss an intro somewhere? "scb" sounds familiar.

Welcome!
Yes that is my fire forming load. We built a new house over the last 8 months so shooting got put on the back burner. This time of year most ranges are under 2 - 4 feet of snow around here anyway. I've been kicking around here for a while. scb is the handle I used on another cast boolit site.
 

Bret4207

St Lawrence river valley, NY
If you read up on the history of guys like Newton and Roberts and the other high velocity pioneers back in the day you will find a lot of conflicting ideas, some that played out, others that died a quick death. The same thing carried on into the 40's and 50's. Who knows how many really nutty ideas were tried by guys like Phil Sharpe or Ackley or others while working for the Gov in WW2? How muh of that carried over into the commercial field? Much of that info is lost to history and a lot of it is very hard to find. IMO most of the cartridges introduced in the last 40 years were introduced for economic reasons, not to fill a need. There are darn few things you can't do with the cartridges that were available in, say, 1965.

RBHarter, matching 243 specs in a 257 built on a '95?!!!! You'll die! Your wifes hair will turn gray and your children will all get pink eye!!!!!!!!!! The very axis of the earth will be distorted by doing so!!!!! It's a FACT! I read it on the internet!!!!! ;)
 

Rootmanslim

Active Member
AND of course the 257 Bob is a superior cartridge (as is the 244/6mm Rem) to the 243. Neither of them flow brass up into the neck like the soft shouldered 243. The 243 AO makes sense as it cures that issue. Gun writers were "paid off" with booze/broads/and shoots at Olin farms to hype the 243 back in the day. Anyone who actually owns a 244 (like my 722) knows it will shoot 100gr bullets plenty well enough to kill any deer that walks within the ethical range for a 6mm --- 300 yards.

w/Balvar 8 in Stith mounts.

 

fiver

Well-Known Member
once they fixed the twist rate Remington then went to a short action to really make sure the 6mm Rem died an agonizing death.
had they got their act together and put up a fight the 6Rem could have been turned into a real nice deer round.
some good 90-95gr bullets breaking the 3-K mark by 200 fps or so would have done the job on the marketing side.
 

Hawk

Well-Known Member
I load .243 for one brother and 6mm for another brother, both in Remington 660 carbines.
The 6mm has a huge advantage over the .243.
 

Rootmanslim

Active Member
Why would anyone think a 244 would not work in a SA unless he had some 200 gr 6mm bullets ?

A 244 loaded with a 80 gr TTSX will kill any deer that walks this earth.
 

fiver

Well-Known Member
it works just like a 257 Roberts 'works' in a short action.
the X57 case length has an action length, the first action length designed for them was just fine it didn't need changed or altered or messed with.