Failed cartridges

5mm Remington Rimfire Magnum anyone?

Every bit as good as the 17 HMR, but Remington doesn't introduce new cartridges well. There is nothing wrong with the RSAUM family either, ballistic wise..

Jimro
 
I used to hang on a forum where one poster signature was something to the effect: " all I need is my 7x57 and 375HH". (lost my password) Today we have so many choices, I am less surprised by the occasional drop out, than the amazing proliferation of cartridges. In reality the real differences and advantage are either an exaggeration or out right lies from newbie fan boys. And naturally self serving marketing baloney. Now, I am not complaining in a day and age where I can satisfy any whim or fancy that strikes me. I would be hard pressed to name anything I want that I cannot acquire and shoot. Or, I can move 1/2 mm or 0.01 inch caliber up or down to find an alternative.

Old stuff too, who would image factory 44 Schofield ammo. You can find ammo for ALL the failures some are claiming or pretending in this thread. The odd ball stuff is expensive and the choices of common factory guns are limited to the top 20 or 30 or 40 or 50 rounds.
 
I don't believe that there is anything "wrong" with any of the cartridges mentioned. Just bad timing/ failure to advertise/ newer cartridges/ and faults in relation to firearm to cartridge.

Remington has done it several times with the wrong twist rates in their barrels.
With the 6.5mm Rem Mag it was an 18" barrel, for a round that deserved a 24".

Winchester did the same with the 284 Win. Putting it in their lever action guns, instead of a bolt rifle.

Anyone remember the 7-30 Waters??
What about the 30TC??
257 Kimber??

I'm looking at rebarreling one of me Stevens 200's from 308 to 250 Savage. Just waiting for the barrel to get here. (it's in the mail. lol )
 
When was the last time you saw or heard some one talking about the RSAUM, or an RCM; or even just asking where they can find ammunition?
Too many magnums. Not enough buyers.
Click to expand...

A little historical note on the WSM's that many don't know. The 300 WSM was never intended to compete with the 300 WM. Rick Jamison, a gunwriter somewhat popular in the 1980's and 90's developed a wildcat round he named the 300 Jamison. It was designed to work in a lighter weight short action rifle to be used in steep, rugged terrain. It developed speeds much faster than 30-06, but less than 300 WM. But since it needed considerably less powder recoil was substantially less than 300 WM making it a better option for lightweight rifles.

He tried to sell the idea to Winchester who declined the offer. But within months Winchester introduced the 300 WSM which was close enough to Jamisons wildcat round that Jamison won a lawsuit. The terms of the suit allow him to receive a royalty on each rifle and box of ammo sold for a specified number of years.

Since manufacturers must either sell WSM's at a lower profit margin, or charge more for the guns and ammo they have been reluctant to manufacture them. The ONLY reason Remington and Ruger attempted their own short magnums was to avoid paying the royalty to Jamison. If not for that I believe they would have simply chambered WSM rifles and the rounds would have had more success. Once the terms of the lawsuit settlement expire, less than 10 years I believe, I wouldn't be surprised to see the WSM's to make a comeback.

The WSM concept is a good one, but one that was marketed poorly. Jamison envisioned lighter mountain weight rifles in his chambering and never wanted the "magnum" label attached to the round. Putting the "magnum" label on the round created unrealistic expectations. Most people don't really understand what the rounds are good for. Neither do most manufacturers. There is no reason to offer 300 WM and 300 WSM in the same weight and style rifles.

Ruger chambered the 300 WSM for a while and were one of the few that seemed to "get it". They offered it in a 22" barrel and 16.5" barrel. The round is pretty efficient in shorter barrels and even the 16.5" guns are pretty fast. Their RCM's were all offered in 20" guns and easily beat 22" barreled 30-06's with very little more recoil.
 
I don't believe that there is anything "wrong" with any of the cartridges mentioned. Just bad timing/ failure to advertise/ newer cartridges/ and faults in relation to firearm to cartridge
Click to expand...

Or simply too many boutique cartridges that do the same thing that 4 other cartridge do fine?
 
I have one of those Marlin's in 375 Win, and yes Savage ran it in the 99, Ruger in the #1, and Winchester 94, Big Bore version.
The Big Bore also ran the 307 & 356 Winchester's, two cartridges that should have flourished.
The 280 Remington was released to long after the 270 Winchester established itself, the 280 is a superb killer with heavy bullets
and suffered from low pressure due to the release in the 740 Remington rifle. I would love a 338 Federal but have too many calibers already.
I'm still using a 7.65x53, 7x57, and 8x57, they have all served me well. All of these over 100 years old, and the good ol "06" as well, is tough to beat !!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G925A using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
I agree that .307 Win isn't a complete dead-end, and back my opinion with the fact that I'm currently building a Marlin/Glenfield 336 in .307 Win (Glenfield 30 getting a rechambered 336 .30-30 barrel).
And it's always nice to have additional options.

But... at least in the U.S., I don't think it really gave enough over .30 WCF and .300 Savage to entice people into dropping their current rifles in favor of the new, or even just get people to think, "I need one!"

I think a lot of people saw .307 Win as a gimmick to sell more rifles.



.338 Federal, while a decent cartridge that's still somewhat holding its own, I think fell into a different trap:
It was aimed at a bit of a niche market to begin with. Too many other options already established on the market. Not enough rifles chambered for it, at release. It came at a time when we were seeing a new cartridge every other day. And then it got absolutely pounded into submission by lack of ammunition during the Barackalypse.
It simply got lost is the chaos.
That being said... I have several friends that own, or want to own one; and I have two family members either planning or actively working on .338 Federal builds (one AR, one bolt action).
 
The 280's history is a sad one if you can imagine the alternate outcome if Remington would have had the 700 available when it came out. Kinda like Winchester not having a proper SA M70 for the 284. As a comparison, the 7mm-08 has had a much more successful go of it due to the amount of short action bolt guns out there. Remington did do their best:o to trip it up at the start by only offering it in the 788 carbine and 700 BDL Varmint Special.:confused: I wonder how much better it would have taken off in a short action sporter 700 BDL or 700 ADL?
 
Some great cartridges that are rare these days:

220 Swift
6mm Rem
257 Roberts
264 Win Mag
284 Win
280 Rem
358 Win
375 Weatherby

So many repetitive and useless new ones...
 
Yes but the 721/725 wasn't the hit like the 700. As a teenager in the 70's it seemed the 700 Remington was the gun to have. Pretty much Top Dog until recent quality issues. Didn't Remington re-name the 280 the 7mm Express with the introduction of the 700?
 
The 721/722 were a big hit indeed. Cheaper than Winchester M70, and accurate as all get-out, but really plain-Jane rifles. The 725 was a different beast, just the Model 30 renamed, and it was only made for a few years. The 721/722 were so popular that they made Winchester design their new Model 70 with fewer machining steps (with awful results). Remington introduced the 700 in 1962, and it was an immediate hit and finalized the need for Winchester to revamp the Model 70.

The 280 was initially introduced in 1957 as a standardized 7mm-'06 (slightly longer body to keep it from being fired in a 270 Winchester chamber) in the Remington 740 auto-loader and 760 pump gun (later in the 721). It was accordingly loaded to lower pressures to be nice to the 740 action. In 1979, it was renamed 7mm Express in an attempt to "re-launch" the cartridge, now loaded to slightly higher pressures. 2 years later, it was once again the 280 Remington.
 
Allegedly Marlin is developing a .338 Marlin Express. I cannot see why. The .338 Federal is out there and barely catching on. Another lame attempt to make a lever action shoot like a bolt action. People are begging for handgun cartridge lever guns and Marlin just ignores them.
 
Gunplummer, don't waste time worrying about Marlin. Remington can't build a lever gun to save the brand name, and, unless something changes, Marlin will be sold off or relegated to the annuls of history sooner than later.

Until Remington can build a decent Marlin lever gun, there's nothing there worth thinking about buying, anyway.

Marlin firearms, at this point in time, could fall right into the theme of this thread, with obsolescence.

They were good. They were popular.
Now they're crap.

...Because of cost-cutting measures and lack of quality control.


I'm taking your .338 ME comment as tongue-in-cheek, since the cartridge has been around for eight (nine?) years now.
But, again, it will only truly fail because Remington won't support it like Marlin did before the buyout.
 
The .338 Marlin Express was news to me. I really do not buy new guns because they just suck. If I want a lever gun, I go to one of my 99 Savages. I have a .358 Featherweight. I was thinking about .338 Federal. I picked up a .308 at a reasonable price online recently, but it turned out to be an early Featherweight in pretty decent shape. I think I will let it alone and look for an economy model to re-barrel.
 
jmr 40 the 7mm WSM was used by the army rifle team and set a new record at 1000 yds. I would have thought that would save it being it is a good round
 
So many that were designed to "improve" the 5.56mm will also die slow deaths but won't be missed by most of us.

450 Bushmaster or 458 SOCOM might have a chance but the rest are useless IMO. 6.5 Grendel? 6.8 SPC? 7mm Valkyrie? All are neat but useless.


I don't see the 450 Bushmaster or the 458 surviving. Limited in range and the price of ammo is working against them. But the 6.8 SPC has large following especially for hunting with an AR. The 6.5 Grendel also has a large following. People are migrating to one of those cartridges when they realize their .300 Blk isn't all it marketed to be and is not a good choice for hunting.

The 7mm Valkyrie, isn't even a cartridge at this point. Just a wildcat. But when it comes to power, both the 7mm Valkyrie and 270AR are probably the most powerful AR15 calibers available. For hunting, both are hard to beat.
 
ed308 said:
The 7mm Valkyrie, isn't even a cartridge at this point. Just a wildcat. But when it comes to power, both the 7mm Valkyrie and 270AR are probably the most powerful AR15 calibers available. For hunting, both are hard to beat.
Click to expand...
7mm Valkyrie, with the currently advertised numbers, is over-pressure and can't keep up that pace if it's going to succeed in an AR-15.
If it is to be SAAMI-approved and mass-marketed, the pressure level (and performance level) will need to be reduced.
The repeated statements about cases being toast after 2-3 firings should be the first hint to interested parties.
Even a .458 SOCOM loaded to 50k psi (way, WAY over the 35k psi max) won't kill brass that quickly.


Something to keep an eye on, designed from the ground up to work with the pressure limitations and timing of a standard AR-15, and still achieve similar velocity figures with even heavier bullets, is .375 SOCOM. Everyone that touches it thinks it's one of the best cartridges they've ever worked with.
It still faces the challenge of SAAMI approval. But if that happens and it's marketed correctly, the economy of scale should bring the cost of ammunition down for the weekend warriors that don't reload.
 
Franken Mauser as an owner and shooter of the 7mm Valkyrie I sure would like to know where you are seeing reports of cases only lasting 2-3 firings. I know 15-20 of the guys that have them also and I have heard ZERO reports of short brass life when using the Lapua 6.5x47 brass (brass the round was designed to use)

My brass has 6 firings on it already and I have no signs of the brass failing anytime soon. Also about the 62000 pressure limit the reason that it is possible is because of the proprietary bolt and barrel extension that allow those pressures. With that supplier no longer able to provide those to us. Olympic Arms is now supplying the bolt and barrel extensions. It the same ones they use for their WSSM uppers so pressure won't be an issue.
 
In a sense the M1903's original chambering, the .30-03 was a failed cartridge as it caused erosion of the bore of the service rifles, and it was not a long range performer. It was not much of an improvement at all over the .30-40 Krag. It was dropped for the -06.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top