Caliber Crystal Ball - Can you predict the future?

[wind gypsy]

Reloader or not, that short throat leaves performance on the table. Part of why hornady has done well, they haven’t unnecessarily hampered themselves with outdated COAL restrictions on the PRC line.

 

[QuackAttack]

There is nothing truly new in the world of cartridge. It’s the same result, via different routes. The rest is marketing to separate you from money

 

[wyosam]

I have no affinity for the .277. I’m just looking for my Goldilocks western hunting cartridge and it would mimic the 6.8 W’s ballistics but in a short action 7mm. Similar to a 7 SAUM or 7-6.5 PRC but with all the rifle and ammo offerings of something more mainstream.

There are already so many cartridges that are already the western “Goldilocks”, what possible niche are you looking to fill? 223 to 30-06 and everything in between (and a bunch north of the 06) will work. There are literally dozens of cartridges in that realm. Pick one and go kill shit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[DisplacedHusky]

There are already so many cartridges that are already the western “Goldilocks”, what possible niche are you looking to fill? 223 to 30-06 and everything in between (and a bunch north of the 06) will work. There are literally dozens of cartridges in that realm. Pick one and go kill shit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I did pick one. The 6.5 PRC. But ammo companies won’t stop innovating if it is lucrative and the consumers keep consuming. Hence, the point of this thread. What do you see as the next new commercially successful cartridge and what factors do you think will drive its success?

 

[wyosam]

It will be a Hornady something or another. It will survive and thrive largely through successful marketing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[FLS]

25 Creedmoor is the next latest greatest.
And as much as some folks in the echo chamber would like to see the old .270 WCF die, it will be pissing on the graves of of some of the cartridges listed in this thread. It just works and there are millions of 270 rifles out there still killing stuff and will continue to as long center fire hunting rifles are a thing.

 

[ozyclint]

It's not called the finger of God for nothing. All hail .270Win

 

[OKHunter84]

I could really see the 22 Creed or something similar sticking around long term. Low recoiling, smaller caliber bullets, that have high muzzle velocity and shoot longer high BC bullets.
I think the twist rates will only get faster. Much like the 8.6 blackout with a 1/2 or 1/3 twist. The rotational energy aspect is only now coming to the fore front.

Not that I'm Nostradamus, I'm sure a lot of guys are thinking the same things, I haven't read every page in this thread.

 

[Bluefish]

I could really see the 22 Creed or something similar sticking around long term. Low recoiling, smaller caliber bullets, that have high muzzle velocity and shoot longer high BC bullets.
I think the twist rates will only get faster. Much like the 8.6 blackout with a 1/2 or 1/3 twist. The rotational energy aspect is only now coming to the fore front.

Not that I'm Nostradamus, I'm sure a lot of guys are thinking the same things, I haven't read every page in this thread.

A while ago I would have agreed on the fast twist, but recently started to work on a fast twist 25-06 and realized, there is a hard limit for bullet rpm depending on materials. This means you can’t keep fast twist and go faster velocity without limits. Start running around 4000fps and twist can’t get much faster than 1/8 for lead/copper. Pretty sure you can plot a limit of twist vs rpm by bullet type. This in a roundabout way gives you a maximum length per caliber, which can translate to max BC per caliber. While I have not done all the math, I think we are getting close to the limit of our current materials. There might be a few calibers that have not been optimized, 35+, but 30 cal and smaller sure have.

The artificial constrains of short and long action and 3 bolt faces really limits development of new cases. Although I am not sure you could do a lot better with a clean slate.

 

[DisplacedHusky]

A while ago I would have agreed on the fast twist, but recently started to work on a fast twist 25-06 and realized, there is a hard limit for bullet rpm depending on materials. This means you can’t keep fast twist and go faster velocity without limits. Start running around 4000fps and twist can’t get much faster than 1/8 for lead/copper. Pretty sure you can plot a limit of twist vs rpm by bullet type. This in a roundabout way gives you a maximum length per caliber, which can translate to max BC per caliber. While I have not done all the math, I think we are getting close to the limit of our current materials. There might be a few calibers that have not been optimized, 35+, but 30 cal and smaller sure have.

The artificial constrains of short and long action and 3 bolt faces really limits development of new cases. Although I am not sure you could do a lot better with a clean slate.

If you call most bullet manufacturers they will give you the max twist rates and RPM that each of their bullets can handle before catastrophic failure.

 

[Bluefish]

If you call most bullet manufacturers they will give you the max twist rates and RPM that each of their bullets can handle before catastrophic failure.

It’s around 300k rpm for lead/copper. Some faster, some slower. With that limit, a 7 twist can’t go much faster than 3000 fps. To calculate, 300,000 x twist /720= fps. Practically that means the long for caliber 6 and 25 cal, high BC bullets can’t be run at 4000 fps.
Either twist is too low for stability or rpm is too high for that bullet. Probably not a new concept, but was new to me as I had never put those two limits together to realize we can’t do much better than we have unless we change materials.

 

[Mike D Texas]

It’s around 300k rpm for lead/copper. Some faster, some slower. With that limit, a 7 twist can’t go much faster than 3000 fps. To calculate, 300,000 x twist /720= fps. Practically that means the long for caliber 6 and 25 cal, high BC bullets can’t be run at 4000 fps.
Either twist is too low for stability or rpm is too high for that bullet. Probably not a new concept, but was new to me as I had never put those two limits together to realize we can’t do much better than we have unless we change materials.

It seems that the 300k rpm value came from bullet designs and poor quality barrels from long ago.

I’m shooting a 90 grain A Tip 3300fps from a 7 twist 22-250AI and I’ve not experience any bullet blow up issues to date. 339,000+ rpm on that one.

I’ve also shot 50 grain Vmax at 3950 with no vaporizing of bullets.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Bluefish]

It seems that the 300k rpm value came from bullet designs and poor quality barrels from long ago.

I’m shooting a 90 grain A Tip 3300fps from a 7 twist 22-250AI and I’ve not experience any bullet blow up issues to date. 339,000+ rpm on that one.

I’ve also shot 50 grain Vmax at 3950 with no vaporizing of bullets.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

Like I said it depends. The sierra blitz kings are supposed to do 350k without exploding. 300k seems to be a common limit. Also people say barrel length effects the rpm. Longer barrels have more issues. Seems heat from friction lowers the rpm. I guess my point was you can’t just push faster twist forever. There are limits and when you look at what is offered you can see how cartridges were designed around those limits.
25-06 for example, for light bullets at 4000 ish fps, 1:10 works. Same for a 25 CM where it’s running a 130 ish at 1:7 and 2800.

 

[OKHunter84]

A while ago I would have agreed on the fast twist, but recently started to work on a fast twist 25-06 and realized, there is a hard limit for bullet rpm depending on materials. This means you can’t keep fast twist and go faster velocity without limits. Start running around 4000fps and twist can’t get much faster than 1/8 for lead/copper. Pretty sure you can plot a limit of twist vs rpm by bullet type. This in a roundabout way gives you a maximum length per caliber, which can translate to max BC per caliber. While I have not done all the math, I think we are getting close to the limit of our current materials. There might be a few calibers that have not been optimized, 35+, but 30 cal and smaller sure have.

The artificial constrains of short and long action and 3 bolt faces really limits development of new cases. Although I am not sure you could do a lot better with a clean slate.

That's really interesting. I guess maybe bullet material or design would have to be the next thing to innovate.

 

[CMP70306]

That's really interesting. I guess maybe bullet material or design would have to be the next thing to innovate.

Lead is the limiting factor, monos generally do not have that issue which is why you can only shoot monos supersonic in the 8.6 Blackout.

 

[wyosam]

Lead is the limiting factor, monos generally do not have that issue which is why you can only shoot monos supersonic in the 8.6 Blackout.

Faster twist (beyond what is required for stable flight) has been shown to aid terminal performance by a lot of testing by the guys at Hammer. I’m a little surprised nobody over there has taken one of these 1:3 barrels and chambered it in a spicier 338. I was tempted for my 338-284, but wanted to be able to shoot cast lead for plinking. I may do one next year just to see what it does. Probably something a little hotter than the 284 case, but it will be in a sub 8 pound rifle, so probably something like a 338 Sherman (270 based) as opposed to going really big.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[OKHunter84]

Faster twist (beyond what is required for stable flight) has been shown to aid terminal performance by a lot of testing by the guys at Hammer. I’m a little surprised nobody over there has taken one of these 1:3 barrels and chambered it in a spicier 338. I was tempted for my 338-284, but wanted to be able to shoot cast lead for plinking. I may do one next year just to see what it does. Probably something a little hotter than the 284 case, but it will be in a sub 8 pound rifle, so probably something like a 338 Sherman (270 based) as opposed to going really big.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah there's a garand thumb video where he's testing the 8.6 blackout. It was cooking through 3 gel blocks with subs even after he stepped back to 50 yards.

 

[CMP70306]

Faster twist (beyond what is required for stable flight) has been shown to aid terminal performance by a lot of testing by the guys at Hammer. I’m a little surprised nobody over there has taken one of these 1:3 barrels and chambered it in a spicier 338. I was tempted for my 338-284, but wanted to be able to shoot cast lead for plinking. I may do one next year just to see what it does. Probably something a little hotter than the 284 case, but it will be in a sub 8 pound rifle, so probably something like a 338 Sherman (270 based) as opposed to going really big.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ButterBean overtwisted one of his for that reason and couldn’t get the speeds he wanted so he stepped back down to a slower twist. Since he is one of the biggest voices in that space that may have something to do with it.

 

[wyosam]

ButterBean overtwisted one of his for that reason and couldn’t get the speeds he wanted so he stepped back down to a slower twist. Since he is one of the biggest voices in that space that may have something to do with it.

I must have missed that one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Bluefish]

Yeah there's a garand thumb video where he's testing the 8.6 blackout. It was cooking through 3 gel blocks with subs even after he stepped back to 50 yards.

The cool thing on subs is they can lose almost no velocity with distance. Thus performance is the same at 10 yards or 200. I would like to see the 8.6 compared to a 500g+ 45-70.