Why so damn many chamberings

Why are there so damn many chamberings especially in rifles. I mean really, really, why do we need all of this isn’t it just some reinventing of the same wheel over and over again. Now we have the new Nosler cartridges, and they just do the same thing something very similar to them already does. I think especially with the way things are going these days if we cut down on the number of cartridges, there would be not such a short supply of all these components. Manufacturers could concentrate on a smaller selection an increase the supply dramatically. I’m done ranting now have a nice day.

Because manufactures looked at the failure of Henry Ford “You can have any color you want as long as its black…” People, including myself, are too dam picky and always wants something just a little better. Human nature to tinker and experiment and try to “improve” things – and to gripe about it.

IMO the entire short magnum craze and all newer cartridges are solutions to non-existent problems. We actually need about 5 or 6 chambering’s to suit all North American situations. The risk of a new cartridge is that it does not catch on and you are left with a rifle you cannot find ammo for. Or if you do find it, it is $80/box of 20 like those Weatherby cartridges I see at Cabela’s. But what would the shooting sports writers talk about W/O minutia, lists and new gadgets? Is the .270 adequate for elk? Should I use 7 1/2’s or 8’s for trap? 10 best rangefinders for under $300. Is the 9mm enough gun for self defense? etc..

Does this cartridge make my butt look big?

All ya need is 50BMG,500 S&W MAGNUM .22 AND 12GA the .22 is for shooting mice in the house lol!

We actually need about 5 or 6 chambering’s to suit all North American situations

And who would select those 5 or 6 and what criteria would be used? I would hate like hell to have a 15 yrd brush hunter telling me that “his caliber” is the right cal for me on a 900yrd open field.

entire short magnum craze and all newer cartridges are solutions to non-existent problems
I don’t think the short mag is a craze. There are a smaller number of us that are looking for performance levels that are in-between existing cals. As an example, my 270 WSM. I already have my wife and daughters set in 270Win and that does cover 75% of our big game. But I wanted a “hunting rifle” that had the consistency out to 700 or more yrds, significantly more energy transfer for moose, bear, or what I felt was appropriate for my needs. Sure, I could have gone up to a 7mm Ultra Mag at nearly 90 gr of powder per charge and need to buy .284 bullets in addition to my .277. But, I’m producing near speed/velocity as the 7mmrum with a hell of a lot less powder. For my wants/needs I have that 1 universal rifle for anything I anticipate I will hunt. Did i knowling buy a specialty caliber – YES – do I expect components to be more $$ because it isn’t mainstream – YES. Do I like that, NO – but I agreed to it.
Now, how guys buy a rifle for hunting a couple days a YEAR for whitetail Vs. the guys that hunt a number of larger big game through out the west?

Next, take a long hard look at the history of the 30-06 brick chucker. Still a very popular cal and ammo is a dime a dozen. Thankfully, engineers knew military and others needed the energy the ’06 produced, but something that was significantly better for extended range, snipers, and law enforcement. Those experimental cals gave us the .308 & 7.62. In that same search for “better” came the 222 mag…and evolved into todays .223 and NATO 5.56. All from the dog 30-06.
Don’t forget that obscured wildcat round 22-250. Who in their right mind thought about that much power in a .22 bullet…..and its still the #1 predator caliber in the west.

Additionally, many guys will only stick with what ammo that is readily available or cheap. I personally embrace the challenges of improvement. I think the best contribution in shooting sports was the introduction of the 6mm-PPC. The 6mm holds more bench shooting records than all other cals combined. The incredible accuracy of the 6mm-PPC has led to many changes you see in other dog crap mid size calibers to improve for hunting and competition.

I say bring it on, continue to experiment and grow with technology. Thank God I can sit here and type this. It would have taken weeks for me to have communicated this with smoke signals.

22 LR, one sub .277 that delivers 100 grain bullet at around 4000 fps. And one greater than .277 that delivers a 150 grain bullet at 3000 fps. This will take anything in North America. For the testosterone driven they can have a .338. And for the nostalgic a 45/70.

castle-rock-clown wrote:

Why are there so damn many chamberings especially in rifles. I mean really, really, why do we need all of this isn’t it just some reinventing of the same wheel over and over again. Now we have the new Nosler cartridges, and they just do the same thing something very similar to them already does.

“Need,” of course, is always a slippery slope. I suspect this question has been asked and answered, and asked, and answered, and so forth starting just after somebody invented the first muzzle loader and then found someone else had made one in a different caliber…

The universal reason is that the invention of cartridge X is trying to improve on the perceived shortcomings of cartridge Y. Bigger, faster, flatter, it’s the entire history of firearms development all in a nutshell.

Taking the Nosler example, the goal as stated by Nosler was to produce a cartridge that took advantage of the ballistic potential of the 6.5 MM bullet, placed on top of a case that can hold a boatload of powder, but in a NON-belted magnum case so it could be headspaced off the shoulder instead of the belt for improved accuracy potential. They also were attempting to solve the problem of poor feeding that has bedeviled the short magnums.

So Nosler settled on the .404 Jefferies case (heard of that one?) as the parent, and off they went.

Now like CRC, I’m automatically skeptical of anything these days that claims to be truly new. With that said, there is IMO, some wheat mixed in with the new cartridge chaff.

Randy’s already pointed out the wheat left from the Short Magnum trend of just over a decade ago–the .270 WSM. I suppose I could also make an argument for the next most successful short, the .300 short, but IMO that’s a mixed bag at best.

Now let’s talk about the chaff. With apologies to those who own rifles in these unfortunate chamberings, but take heart for your rifles may be extremely collectible someday. Maybe. But how about that .223 WSSM? And that other solution looking for a problem, the .243 short and the .25 short. Ug! Those didn’t look like good ideas even on the drawing board.

There have been tremendous successes along they way, however, so IMO the attempt to innovate is still justifiable even though it’s going to be very, very difficult to break new ground.

Keep in mind that many of what we consider “obsolete” or rarely-seen cartridges today were rendered so not because they, themselves, were bad designs! Rather it happened because something better came along. There was absolutely nothing wrong with the .218 Bee or the .22 Hornet when they came out, and in fact they were very successful in introducing the concept of the varmint cartridge. But then the .220 Swift and .223 and .22-250 came along…

The 6 MM Remington wasn’t killed (for all practical purposes) by bad design, it was killed by bad marketing. The 300 Savage was a great idea. With really bad timing as it was introduced in the middle of a slew of other .30 caliber debutantes and ended up being awarded the dubious honor of being the fourth prettiest girl at the ball.

I’m not ready to close the door to “new” because who knows? I’m sure there were lots of people who thought it had all been done before a guy like Roy Weatherby came along with designs that did it better. It still puts a smile on my face thinking about the first time I shot a .256 Weatherby Magnum, it was like having a personal laser gun that shot so flat it defied gravity.

The problem with saying there’s nothing else to improve upon is that thinking like this is based on a belief that we know everything that is possible.

Grouse

The reason is proving you can solve the same problem with more than one solution.

also in the push to find the “do it all Cal” we sometimes loose awesome cals in the mix. like the 257Roberts has started to fall to the wayside, but is one of the best long range deer rifles along with pronghorn guns. It is a flat shooting cal that packs a punch and a controllable recoil for anyone. I am all for having different calibers I love shooting and the science behind what a round does and how much goes into finding the perfect cal for what you do. You aren’t going to want a 45-70 GOV’t if you are going for prairie dogs that would be a bit much thank god there is a 223 out there. Also some calibers were made to be more affordable to us. it is like buying a car or truck you can go with the trusty rusty 30-30 or the 80k brand new truck with all the bells and whistles the 300 weatherby mag. I personally have a 22 223 257 roberts 270 30-06 30-30 and I need more lol.

Allan Davis wrote:

Also in the push to find the “do it all Cal” we sometimes loose awesome cals in the mix. like the 257Roberts has started to fall to the wayside…

This is true. There are quite a number of cartridges out there that are, if not under-rated (by those who even know about them), at least are largely under appreciated.

This is even more true now, in the Age of Magnumitius where suddenly a .300 Win Mag is seen by many as an adequate–if a little on the light side–choice for deer.

In the .25 class, the Roberts, the .25-06, and the firebrand .257 Weatherby are all under appreciated, especially as deer cartridges.

Grouse

TheFamousGrouse wrote:

This is even more true now, in the Age of Magnumitius where suddenly a .300 Win Mag is seen by many as an adequate–if a little on the light side–choice for deer.

The same can be said for needing a diesel truck to pull a 16′ aluminum boat. It’s all about selling.

Oh, dang, in my zeal to condemn all these cartridges and going through some old friends, ie empty brass, the 45/70 caught my eye. I remembered last deer season the futile attempts at keeping my scope clear while it rained and snowed. Alas I purchased a leaver action guild gun. Short, fairly light, and pretty. This is for thick woods where distances are short and brush is always in the way. I’m fitting it with ghost ring sights for miserable conditions. I’m my own worst enemy.

My dad once asked this same question. What drove his disapproval of “all this other stuff” was he simply couldn’t find his caliber in the ammo isle quick enough! “If they didn’t have all this crap, I could find what I’m after!”

I just laugh…….. for some reason, we all get set in our ways and become resistant to change…… unless of course it’s a change WE want to make for ourselves!

I like the varieties. There’s always something to discover and learn about. Does it mean I’ll want one or get one? Probably not……. but then again, you never know.

The caliber I wish would regain some momentum is the .41 magnum. .44 performance with a .357 recoil. I just don’t see how this one keeps losing interest and desire when the only thing you really gain in a .44 is recoil.

stillakid2 wrote:

I just laugh…….. for some reason, we all get set in our ways and become resistant to change…… unless of course it’s a change WE want to make for ourselves!

I, as you might guess, am the exception. Mrs. Grouse says it a different way, she says I’m one of a kind, but anyway…

I would quite happily test drive any new rifle, in any new cartridge, that anyone buys me, at any time.

I’m like Jesus, I love them all.

Grouse

I to am a “Picky Bast_rd”! I started out with a 6.5 Swed, then went to a 257 Wby, then to a 6.5 Creed. Then I found the gun that made, even me, Happy. The 6.5×300 Wby. Now it doesn’t like any of the factory loaded junk, but, when I started reloading my world changed. The gun is a Wby Vanguard First Lite with a factory brake. With factory ammo it was grouping around 2 inches at 50 yds. I wanted to wrap it around a tree! Then with the first hand load, it went to 3/4″ at 100. Second load 1/2″ and third 3/16″.It really liked Barnes Match Burner 140 gr and US 869 powder. I stopped there due to my age and failing eyesight, it couldn’t get much better than that! For those of you that are worried about match bullets performance, I busted a ground hog and put it into several pieces. Didn’t seem to have a problem with hole in/ hole out. I have a Mk 5 257 Wby also. The recoil on the 6.5 with a factory brake is less than the 257 with aftermarket brake. I love this gun! I would recommend it to anyone, male or female, for anything on the North American Continent.

Because if there were only 2 different calibers manufactures would only sell each person 2 guns.It’s all for more sales.

Why don’t you drive the same vehicle as everybody else. Or have the same house, cell phone, boat etc… the list goes on forever. Everybody has different needs, tastes and likes. Myself– I enjoy building different caliber bullets for all my rifles. They all have similar but very different capabilities @ different ranges and targets.

Why are there so many different kinds and styles of fishing lures? A couple different size Mepps spinners, one real small and one real big, is really all we need.

Why to golfers have all those different clubs in their bags, couldn’t they just use one?

We are humans and we like stuff; mainly stuff that is different from what someone else has.

Buffalo Fishhead

This all hits really close to home! I have a lot of the unicorns mentioned.
.41 magnum, 257 Roberts and a 6.5 diesel suburban to pull my 16ft jon boat.
Would give up a single one of them!

All of this reminds me to give my 243, 308, 3006 ,a good cleaning .

Robert Russell wrote:

Shotgun are just for play-time. Nobody has to hit moving small game or flying birds. Those critters all stop moving sooner or later, cause they can’t be wasting calories. I’ve taken a truckload of birds and small game with a .22lr and another truckload with .22lr pistols. If it’s not serious foraging, then the .22lr pistol is plenty of gun and load.. If the foraging is serious, then the sound-suppressed 22lr auto-rifle beats the shotgun all to hell.

Uhhhhhh, among a few other red flags I see in that comment, taking of migratory waterfowl with any rifle/pistol is illegal.

OMG.

Ralph Wiggum wrote:

OMG.

My thoughts exactly. Which MLB ballpark has the longest left field, because that is where this had ended up.

Way out in left field.223 worthless.

chuck100 wrote:

Way out in left field.223 worthless.

Left field??? I don’t think so!!!! This guy isn’t even in the ballpark.

James Donaldson wrote:

I’d not hesitate to take elephant with it, in fairly open, flat terrain, cause elephants can’t run as fast as men can.

Don’t know much about Africa or its game species then, I take it?

An elephant can easily outrun a man. It’s not even close unless you’re Usain Bolt. An African elephant can easily top 15 MPH for sustained distances and studies of films and video of elephant attacks on people and other predators show that some can top 20 and even 25 MPH in a sprint.

An elephant can mow down a man in a full run with ease. That’s why they are rightly thought of as one of the most dangerous species in Africa.

Grouse

Of all the things to complain about. The abundance of rifle calibers one can choose from is not one i expected to see on an outdoor website.

James Donaldson wrote:

223 AR’s have won nearly all the 600 yd rifle matches for 20 years now. Your ignorance is appalling.

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=800m+with+a+223+AR

what 600 yard rifle matches are you referring to? I just watched a local PRS match with 52 entrants and not a single person was shooting 556/223.