Re: OP. Need hasn't got a thing to do with it! 
Sincerely. bruce.
Sincerely. bruce.
Do we need more new "Factory" cartridges?
- Thread starter Ivan the Butcher
- Start date
I've liked some like the 204 Ruger and 17 HMR.
If they have enough of a niche market they last.
Isn't that the way it's supposed to be ?
Things can get pretty stagnant with no innovation
If they have enough of a niche market they last.
Isn't that the way it's supposed to be ?
Things can get pretty stagnant with no innovation
boatbum101
Member
Need is often proportional to disposible income .
Well it does give the gun scribes another topic to beat to death. 
Just how many 9MM Vs .45 articles can be written or the bolt action is obsolete-yes or no?
Just how many 9MM Vs .45 articles can be written or the bolt action is obsolete-yes or no?
My experience is that the 7mag has got it over a 30-06. And it ain't even close. Providing your long range shooting. The 6.5 is the 270 that millennials buy. As for the WSM they serve no practical purpose. Ammo is expensive and hard to find. Now if your a hand loader everything I just said doesn't matter because you enjoy working up loads. I get that. I have a 22mag and a 22 Hornet. Why do I need any of the .17s ????
I too am one of those guys who enjoys seeing new stuff and appreciates variety and choice. Now may seem like a poor time to introduce new cartridges, when supplies of existing designs are in short supply, but hopefully that will subside - some day. 
I think new stuff is crucial to keeping the youngsters interested. On the www I see the 20-somethings talking about the .30-378 Weatherby like it's some sort of new whiz-bang, and the .300 as a "classic." Any old rifle hack knows the .30-378 has been around for a long time, and .300 Weatherby rifles, to me, are 100% current, not revivals from a bygone era. Perspective!
The marketing guys, I presume, know all this stuff inside and out and likely are doing what they think is best to keep the money rolling in for the manufacturers. I'm not against that.
I think new stuff is crucial to keeping the youngsters interested. On the www I see the 20-somethings talking about the .30-378 Weatherby like it's some sort of new whiz-bang, and the .300 as a "classic." Any old rifle hack knows the .30-378 has been around for a long time, and .300 Weatherby rifles, to me, are 100% current, not revivals from a bygone era. Perspective!
The marketing guys, I presume, know all this stuff inside and out and likely are doing what they think is best to keep the money rolling in for the manufacturers. I'm not against that.
My uncle hunted everything from antelope to moose with a Model 70 in 30-06. Birds with a Model 12 and small game with a no-name 22LR. He didn't "need" anything else. He wasn't a gun aficionado like most of us, so "want" didn't enter into it.
I have an interest in experimenting with something new. I have a boatload of odd cartridges I load for, or did at one time. Who "needs" a 350 Rem Mag? One day, I may get to use it on an elk or a moose. Who needs a 6x47 Remington. Good for punching paper, the rifle is too heavy to carry in the field for varmints. Won't win benchrest competition anymore.
I could go on . . . I think I could be the market objective of many gun makers.
Now that I think of it, I don't have a 6.5mm. Maybe it's time to buy a 6.5mm Creedmoor. A fad? We'll probably know in the next 20 years.
I have an interest in experimenting with something new. I have a boatload of odd cartridges I load for, or did at one time. Who "needs" a 350 Rem Mag? One day, I may get to use it on an elk or a moose. Who needs a 6x47 Remington. Good for punching paper, the rifle is too heavy to carry in the field for varmints. Won't win benchrest competition anymore.
I could go on . . . I think I could be the market objective of many gun makers.
Now that I think of it, I don't have a 6.5mm. Maybe it's time to buy a 6.5mm Creedmoor. A fad? We'll probably know in the next 20 years.
The older I get, the more ridiculous it seems.
But then I'll never own a Tesla, so there is that.
But then I'll never own a Tesla, so there is that.
Except I prefer the .270 over the 30-06. Read to much Jack Conner while in barbershops when growing up.
But since the .270 is a necked down 06 I can get by provided I have a resizing die.
Sometimes there is a need for a new cartridge. Look at ones produced for the AR-15 frames, all trying to create something better than .223 in the AR rifle. I shoot a 6mm Mongoose, a necked-up, reformed .223 case. t's pretty dang potent. Why not the 6.5 Grendel or 6mm ARC, a commercially available round? Because they have limitations, IE, different (and weaker) bolt, different (and often questionable) magazines, etc. The Mongoose, based on the .223 case, needs only a barrel change.
Sure, many "new, latest and greatest cartridges are a waste of time, but not all of them.
Sure, many "new, latest and greatest cartridges are a waste of time, but not all of them.
Last edited:
bmcgilvray
Member
It's the unimaginative era of shooting at present.
I could do without a bunch of the cartridges introduced in the past 20 years, trading the attention expended on them in favor of renewed attention on some truly dandy cartridges that no longer generate a proper amount of attention from today's shooters who don't know any better.
For rifles: .220 Swift, .250 Savage, .257 Roberts, 6.5X55, .270 Winchester, 7X57, .280 Remington, .300 Savage, .32-20, .38-55, .405 WCF. I'm even sensing that the grand old .30-06 is teetering off its perch in recent years in favor of a distinctly lesser though admittedly still effective round, the .308. All these are excellent, useful cartridges that well accomplish shooting chores. So much of what we have these days is nothing more than a reformed "bottle" containing the propellant charge, a "differently dimensioned" cartridge case that does nothing special and produces the same amount of cartridge performance as the oldies can and they were here first!
But, we must have short actions you see and it must be able to feed in a semi-automatic. And, we must have compact, short-barreled rifles. Standard weight, ballistics improving longer barrels are so yesterday.
For handguns: revolver cartridges generally are languishing. The traditional straight walled magnum revolver cartridges, the mighty triumvirate of yesteryear, the .357 Magnum, .41 Magnum, and .44 Magnum aren't nearly as popular with the masses as they were when I was young. For crying out loud, the .38 Special languishes these days except for application in sniveling snubs! The .32-20 is a uniquely appealing cartridge, offering good handgun performance and endless small game, plinking, and handloading entertainment as a rifle cartridge, even as an economical stand in for the .22 Long Rifle with the right loads. Instead, we reinvent the wheel with .32 H&R Magnum, and .327 Federal magnum.
In automatics, the .38 Super sputters into life for a few seasons of popularity on occasion, but has taken a back seat to the wretched 9mm Luger of late. We touted the .40 S&W to the high heavens for some years after its introduction then turned on it and denigrated it into the ground in recent times.
Handguns too, suffer from "less is more." Shooters gravitate to 9mm or even this sniveling .30-whatever-it-is and want handguns to be ever smaller, ever lighter than last year's models.
Handloading is less popular among the unwashed masses today, less accessible too with a dearth of components available, but then so is factory ammunition at present. Few want to study their chosen cartridge and experimentally load for it to maximize its use. They'd rather just buy guns chambered for the latest and greatest cartridge that claims some sort of unique performance benefit.
Then there's the problem of "all semi-automatic, all the time." For so many, if it's not semi-automatic, whether rifle or handgun, then it's not worthy of consideration. Gotta have lots'a bullets.
There's a whole 'nother world of good shooting to be had outside of plastic pistolas and AR 15s, the 9mm Luger and the .223.
Just a feeble morning bleat from an admitted fogy.
I could do without a bunch of the cartridges introduced in the past 20 years, trading the attention expended on them in favor of renewed attention on some truly dandy cartridges that no longer generate a proper amount of attention from today's shooters who don't know any better.
For rifles: .220 Swift, .250 Savage, .257 Roberts, 6.5X55, .270 Winchester, 7X57, .280 Remington, .300 Savage, .32-20, .38-55, .405 WCF. I'm even sensing that the grand old .30-06 is teetering off its perch in recent years in favor of a distinctly lesser though admittedly still effective round, the .308. All these are excellent, useful cartridges that well accomplish shooting chores. So much of what we have these days is nothing more than a reformed "bottle" containing the propellant charge, a "differently dimensioned" cartridge case that does nothing special and produces the same amount of cartridge performance as the oldies can and they were here first!
But, we must have short actions you see and it must be able to feed in a semi-automatic. And, we must have compact, short-barreled rifles. Standard weight, ballistics improving longer barrels are so yesterday.
For handguns: revolver cartridges generally are languishing. The traditional straight walled magnum revolver cartridges, the mighty triumvirate of yesteryear, the .357 Magnum, .41 Magnum, and .44 Magnum aren't nearly as popular with the masses as they were when I was young. For crying out loud, the .38 Special languishes these days except for application in sniveling snubs! The .32-20 is a uniquely appealing cartridge, offering good handgun performance and endless small game, plinking, and handloading entertainment as a rifle cartridge, even as an economical stand in for the .22 Long Rifle with the right loads. Instead, we reinvent the wheel with .32 H&R Magnum, and .327 Federal magnum.
In automatics, the .38 Super sputters into life for a few seasons of popularity on occasion, but has taken a back seat to the wretched 9mm Luger of late. We touted the .40 S&W to the high heavens for some years after its introduction then turned on it and denigrated it into the ground in recent times.
Handguns too, suffer from "less is more." Shooters gravitate to 9mm or even this sniveling .30-whatever-it-is and want handguns to be ever smaller, ever lighter than last year's models.
Handloading is less popular among the unwashed masses today, less accessible too with a dearth of components available, but then so is factory ammunition at present. Few want to study their chosen cartridge and experimentally load for it to maximize its use. They'd rather just buy guns chambered for the latest and greatest cartridge that claims some sort of unique performance benefit.
Then there's the problem of "all semi-automatic, all the time." For so many, if it's not semi-automatic, whether rifle or handgun, then it's not worthy of consideration. Gotta have lots'a bullets.
There's a whole 'nother world of good shooting to be had outside of plastic pistolas and AR 15s, the 9mm Luger and the .223.
Just a feeble morning bleat from an admitted fogy.
Last edited:
Actually we could have stopped with the 30-40 Krag, it had all the energy needed for hunting and SD use.
It was the only time that "Over Kill" came to my mind when, back in the 70's,
I shot a little Black tail buck in California, that probably only went 140 pounds, with the 180 gr RN ammo.
Just depends if you need a bowling ball or a Ball bearing, for the job at hand.
It was the only time that "Over Kill" came to my mind when, back in the 70's,
I shot a little Black tail buck in California, that probably only went 140 pounds, with the 180 gr RN ammo.
Just depends if you need a bowling ball or a Ball bearing, for the job at hand.
bmcgilvray
Member
I thought about putting the .30-40 on the list. Nothing alive and walking could tell the difference between it and .308 if fairly struck. The .30-40 produces quite pleasing velocities with lighter weight .30 caliber bullets and good ol' 220 grain round nose give it a unique flavor of stomp on big game. I've used it a bit.
I guess it would depend on what the purpose of something new would be.
I get the OP's point in that it seems that new cartridges are being developed to let the marketing guys have something different and new to sell that offers some small gains, and not a giant leap in performance.
I would consider the 30 SC to be an example of this. As a replacement for 9x19 all it really offers is 2-3 more rounds in something that already holds 12-13, really not a good enough reason for me to adopt it. Although I do see some potential for 30 SC if they marketed it for pocket pistols, to replace 380 or 32 ACP in a Ruger LCP or Beretta Tomcat. It could potentially get the people that are currently passing on the guns because they feel the smaller rounds are under powered for self defense to start looking at them, in the same way the slightly larger LC9 did when Ruger introduced it.
I get the OP's point in that it seems that new cartridges are being developed to let the marketing guys have something different and new to sell that offers some small gains, and not a giant leap in performance.
I would consider the 30 SC to be an example of this. As a replacement for 9x19 all it really offers is 2-3 more rounds in something that already holds 12-13, really not a good enough reason for me to adopt it. Although I do see some potential for 30 SC if they marketed it for pocket pistols, to replace 380 or 32 ACP in a Ruger LCP or Beretta Tomcat. It could potentially get the people that are currently passing on the guns because they feel the smaller rounds are under powered for self defense to start looking at them, in the same way the slightly larger LC9 did when Ruger introduced it.
As others have said, "need" has little to do with it.
As others have said change and innovation keep the industry moving and the money flowing.
A lot can be done with a good 30-06. That was true fifty years ago and is still true today.
But part of the fun is seeing what the industry comes up with next.
As others have said change and innovation keep the industry moving and the money flowing.
A lot can be done with a good 30-06. That was true fifty years ago and is still true today.
But part of the fun is seeing what the industry comes up with next.
that's exactly what I inherited from my father and grandfather, plus dad's JC Higgins 9 shot (High Standard) .22 LR revolver, and his JC Higgins/High Standard Flight King 20 12 gauge.
They brought home a LOT of game and birds with those.
30 Super Carry? 115 gr. Gold Dot at 1150 fps. Higher magazine capacity than 9mm. "New and improved" semi-auto cartridge seems to fit the 25-32 "hole". Some may like it, some may get one just because it's new...
Or 7.63x25 Mauser, 7.62x25 Tokerev?
Last edited:
I don't care about the latest and greatest cartridge they are pushing. What frosts me is they can't seem to keep up with demand for many of the classics. Not even just brass.
How much profit do they need to run, 35 Rem, 32 Win, 300Sav just to mention a few. Cartridges like 25/20, 32/20, 38/55 are almost impossible to get. They don't want inventory, they want sales off the end of assembly line. That computer that was suppose to give buyers many more choices is a lie. Computer says they can sell all the 5.56 they cam squeeze out, they arent going to shut down line to make something of less demand.
It's a sellers market of supply & price.
How much profit do they need to run, 35 Rem, 32 Win, 300Sav just to mention a few. Cartridges like 25/20, 32/20, 38/55 are almost impossible to get. They don't want inventory, they want sales off the end of assembly line. That computer that was suppose to give buyers many more choices is a lie. Computer says they can sell all the 5.56 they cam squeeze out, they arent going to shut down line to make something of less demand.
It's a sellers market of supply & price.
We are spoiled in today's America. Years ago most people had a shotgun, a rifle and maybe a pistol and it did everything they needed.
Today we could all really still do the same thing but what fun would that be? I do enjoy wringing out a new caliber, but in the end most don't really do anything that much better than the others.
Today we could all really still do the same thing but what fun would that be? I do enjoy wringing out a new caliber, but in the end most don't really do anything that much better than the others.
racoonbeast
Member
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2014
- Messages
- 188
- Reaction score
- 395
I always like to see a new cartridge. I don't like most of what I see, but, I am never going to see something that I like if they don't keep bringing out new cartridges.
What I get a chuckle out of is that everything that is old becomes new again. If you take hard look at many cartridges that have come out in the last few years and labelled the latest and greatest whiz bang, you will probably find something ballistically identical, and pretty much the same round somewhere in the past. And often, those rounds never made much of a splash in their time. An example is the 6.5 x55 Swede. It has been around and available in this country since probably 1898 when it was invented. No one really seemed to care much about it. Enter the 6.5 Creedmoor which is essentially the same round. The shooting world has gone nuts over it. Go figure.
What I get a chuckle out of is that everything that is old becomes new again. If you take hard look at many cartridges that have come out in the last few years and labelled the latest and greatest whiz bang, you will probably find something ballistically identical, and pretty much the same round somewhere in the past. And often, those rounds never made much of a splash in their time. An example is the 6.5 x55 Swede. It has been around and available in this country since probably 1898 when it was invented. No one really seemed to care much about it. Enter the 6.5 Creedmoor which is essentially the same round. The shooting world has gone nuts over it. Go figure.
Similar threads
- Locked
Sold/Withdrawn
Vintage ammo--CHEAP AMMO (DFW area)
