Parent Cases

[CAJUNLAWYER]

I know a lot of you guys already know this-but for those of us who don't this is a fascinating look at how some of our cartridges came to be
Rifle Cartridge Parent Cases

I am intrigued at differences between the 6mm Remington and the .243 Winchester. Two different approaches to the 6mm. And how Remington has two non magnum 7mm cartridges, one cased on the 30-06 and one based on the .308. Endless discussions over which is "better".

 

[venomballistics]

somewhere in my PC I have a manual covering this topic.
Brass is a rather fluid commodity

 

[LoboGunLeather]

I understand that the article specifically addresses rifle calibers, so one interesting case was not mentioned. The .45ACP was developed from the .30-06 rifle case.

 

[lebomm]

I understand that the article specifically addresses rifle calibers, so one interesting case was not mentioned. The .45ACP was developed from the .30-06 rifle case.

Which, in turn, was based on the 8x57 Mauser.

 

[Alk8944]

Which, in turn, was based on the 8x57 Mauser.

Which was based on the 7x57!

 

[Nevada Ed]

Das case, good Ya ? !

 

[fredj338]

Yeah there isn't a lot of new out there. Just about everything has been done by wildcatters & many make it to comm status.

 

[John R]

I understand that the article specifically addresses rifle calibers, so one interesting case was not mentioned. The .45ACP was developed from the .30-06 rifle case.

WOW, I didn't know that.

 

[old 1911 fan]

Then there is the Remington .222, shortened to the .221 Fireball. Boy I love that pistol! Then to make the Pentagon number crunchers happy the .222 was lengthened to the .223! I carried a black piece of junk that shot the .223. Mr. Stoner had it right in the beginning with the original .222 Armalight.

old 1911 fan

 

[papajohn428]

Then to make the Pentagon number crunchers happy the .222 was lengthened to the .223!

I could be wrong, but I think it was the 222 Remington Magnum that eventually became the 223, given its slightly larger powder capacity. The 222 RM died soon after that, but the .223 will live for a century, or until ray-guns come into vogue.

 

[model70hunter]

And back to the OP original, 243 vs 244/6 MM and the 2 non Magnum Remington's in 7mm/284.

Remington and Winchester were the big 2, and competitive with each other. Always bringing out something to counter the other guys latest.
Winchester won the 243 event.

I've read by those there that Winchester envisioned the 243 as a deer/varmint gun and used rifling for the 80 or 100 grain bullet.

Remington looked at their 244/6mm as a varmint first gun and used rifling twist for light bullets. Once upon a time many folks could afford but one gun and if it could not do both it was not bought. The 243 won out by a mile. I've owned and killed deer with a 243. I also bought dies for a 6mm and have looked for one with slower twist for 80-10 grain bullets. No luck to date.

Winchester brought out the 270 in 1925 or so. Instant deer killing classic. It did operate at high pressure. The 270 Winchester is actually .277 diameter and was a great seller.

Remington wanted some thing like this in their 742 semi auto but at lower pressure. They too necked the '06 case down and I believe lengthened the shoulder a hair to keep it from chambering in a 270. The 280 is 284 in diameter and a true 7mm.

The lower pressure 280 also was slower and did not have the WOW that a 270 did. It was a slow seller.

Win # 2 for Winchester and they were not even trying.

The 280/7mm Remington is an awesome cartridge for hand loaders. Offering many more bullets weights than a 270.

The Remington 7mm-08 is a 7mm Mauser by another name. The killer for the 7mm Mauser is the slow published velocities. It did kill very well but looked bland and due to so many old 1893-1895 actions no one would load it very hot.

Win for Remington, the 7mm-08 is a fast moving little package and chambered in short action rifles. It, like it's great uncle the 7mm Mauser, is a great performer, it is only slightly slower than the new and improved 280 and uses about 10 grains less powder per round.

This round has become my 2nd favorite behind the 270. Light recoil, light rifles and great performance.

I bought my wife a Kimber 84 in the 7mm-08 and liked it so well I bought me one. The only down side is my wife has killed a bigger buck with her Kimber than me.

The 7mm-08 was a positive move to provide a newer cartridge to meet the needs of today's shooters.

 

[Jellybean]

What about the .30-30?

Anyway, I've never met a cartridge I didn't like, even though some of them are pretty useless, or so close to something else it should have never been done.

To be honest, when I saw this post was started by Cajun Lawyer, I thought it was about paternity testing, child custody or child support.

 

[Homie]

The parent case for the .204 is the .222 Rem. Mag, and the parent case listed as the .300 Win. Mag. should read .300 Win. SHORT Mag.

 

[tops]

And back to the OP original, 243 vs 244/6 MM and the 2 non Magnum Remington's in 7mm/284.

Remington and Winchester were the big 2, and competitive with each other. Always bringing out something to counter the other guys latest.
Winchester won the 243 event.

I've read by those there that Winchester envisioned the 243 as a deer/varmint gun and used rifling for the 80 or 100 grain bullet.

Remington looked at their 244/6mm as a varmint first gun and used rifling twist for light bullets. Once upon a time many folks could afford but one gun and if it could not do both it was not bought. The 243 won out by a mile. I've owned and killed deer with a 243. I also bought dies for a 6mm and have looked for one with slower twist for 80-10 grain bullets. No luck to date.
.

I was thinking that when Rem. started calling the .244 a 6m/m they changed the twist to shoot heavier bullets. I'm also thinking a fast twist shoots heavier bullets. 1 in 9 for heavy and 1 in 14 for light bullets. Larry