Home Main Category General Firearms

Short action cartridge choices for future build.

2

Replies

  • FisheadgibFisheadgib Senior Member Posts: 5,797 Senior Member
    I'm not a big fan of the short magnums but if it's just a bench gun for the heck of it, I'd lean towards something short, fat, and fast in a 7mm flavor.
    snake284 wrote: »
    For my point of view, cpj is a lot like me
    .
  • BigboreshooterBigboreshooter Member Posts: 155 Member
    Bigslug wrote: »
    Well, if it wasn't for the varmint stock, I'd say do a .358 Winchester.

    358 Winchester!

    It's a real thumper out to about 250 yards. My re-barreled Browning BBR 358 has a 21" #3 contour barrel, so it would work in your varmint stock. The extra bbl weight keeps the recoil at 308 levels.

    P1010069-1.jpg
    "When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own house, his possessions are undisturbed. Luke 11:21
  • pardogpardog Member Posts: 423 Member
    I still think you need a fast .30 but the 7mmWSM is probably the way to go.
  • CHIRO1989CHIRO1989 Senior Member Posts: 14,201 Senior Member
    I would say go with the .338 Federal in a heavy barrel.

    Go with a 22-24" barrel, my pencil Kimber barrel heats up after 3 rounds and accuracy goes south and the heavy barrel should equal better groups AFAIK.
    Heavier bullets than your current short action list, by quite a bit, and lots to choose from.
    You have access to lots of brass to make .338 Federals.
    Me and Jerm and at least one new guy on here will be enablers to ramp up the FPS with our own projects.
    It will be a unique configuration.
    YOU will be the enabler to have us shooting it a distances we are not comfortable with.
    Once you figure out the heavy barrel, you will want it on a pistol action, further enabling others on the forum.
    You need a .338 cartridge since the .340 was used for another project.
    More as I think of em'.
    I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn away from their ways and live. Eze 33:11
  • CHIRO1989CHIRO1989 Senior Member Posts: 14,201 Senior Member
    knitepoet wrote: »
    I found what is supposedly the g7 BC of the A-max and using it, it doesn't quite make the 800 yard mark with the 2900 fps MV, 1782 (when shot @ 62* and @ 500' ASL w/ 50% RH) different temps, altitude or humidity will change that some.

    Good grief man, it is too late on a Friday night to be doing math, go get a Canadian beer and read the link on Eli's thread:jester:.
    I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn away from their ways and live. Eze 33:11
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 27,464 Senior Member
    That's what he gets paid the big bucks for. So fools like me don't have to count fingers.

    Thanks Knitepoet. You da man! And my head doesn't have to hurt.

    Basically, they are 800 yard 1,800 fps cartridges, the both of'em (w/160 class bullets). One short and one long.

    If you're feeling froggy.........how 'bout 180gr Bergers? Not like ya got anything better to do on a Friday night. :-)
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 16,244 Senior Member
    Zee wrote: »
    That's what he gets paid the big bucks for. So fools like me don't have to count fingers.

    Thanks Knitepoet. You da man! And my head doesn't have to hurt.

    Basically, they are 800 yard 1,800 fps cartridges, the both of'em (w/160 class bullets). One short and one long.

    If you're feeling froggy.........how 'bout 180gr Bergers? Not like ya got anything better to do on a Friday night. :-)
    What the hell does that have to do with the .204 Ruger? I thought we already decided for you.
    Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it.
    -Thomas Paine
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 27,464 Senior Member
    Jermanator wrote: »
    What the hell does that have to do with the .204 Ruger? I thought we already decided for you.

    In your own little world, yes. In reality.......not so much.
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 16,244 Senior Member
    Zee wrote: »
    In your own little world, yes. In reality.......not so much.
    Ouch!! So you don't want a sneak preview on my new toy do you?

    Hint: I really wanted it to be a Taurus but it sucked too bad so I had to pay twice as much for a 4" K-frame.
    Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it.
    -Thomas Paine
  • sarg1csarg1c Senior Member Posts: 1,707 Senior Member
    Zee wrote: »
    Alright, besides the long action project, I have a short action project as well.

    I have an HS Precision Varmint style stock for a Rem 700 short action. Rings/Bases and scope as well as Timney Trigger in the stash. What I don't have is something to put it all on.

    As for current short action cartridges I already have:
    .223
    .243
    .260
    .308

    Looking for options that don't overlap what I have. Well, at least not too much.

    The stock is for a heavy barrel. I could float a sporter barrel in a sea or air or choose a cartridge better suited for a heavy barrel to use up the space.

    Cartridges I'm considering:

    7mm WSM
    .300 WSM
    .338 Federal

    Obviously, this will be a handloading affair. These are just what are popping in my head right now, but I'm open to suggestions from yoose guys. So, what ideas ya got?
    The only and favorite short action, bolt gun I have is my Rem.700 in .308Win. I've had it since 1983 and would never part with it while I'm alive. (To Obama or Hillary). I would love to have a 700 in either .223 or .204 With the .204 being my preferance.....but I have those in other configerations....I'm thinking a .17 Hornet would be fun....
  • MileHighShooterMileHighShooter Senior Member Posts: 4,975 Senior Member
    Are you following your typical manta of only loading 1 at a time? Because my issue with non USRAC WSM rifles is magazine length. Every other companies SA magazines are 2.9" where as USARC rifles usually have 3.1". Especially with the 7mm WSM, that can make a big difference when talking the big 162's or even the 180gr Bergers. If you plan to use more then 1 load in the gun at a time, and are using a Rem 700 SA I would give a long hard look at the 7mm RSAUM. The powder capacity is a bit smaller, and of course will yield a bit less velocity, but the case is shorter and works better in a short action with the longer high BC bullets I know you'll use. SO, if hunting with a few down plus one in the hole is ever going to be a consideration, I'd go 7 RSAUM. You know perfectly well how to account for a bit less velocity in terms of drop and stuff anyways lol. If loading ONLY single shots, then I'd go 7 WSM. If you look at load manuals it actually does meet, and sometimes beat, the 7mm Rem Mag. The 300 can sometimes meet the Win Mag, but its usually just a hair behind it. But the 7 is every bit the equal of its bigger cased counterparts.

    Saying that, the 257 Scooter would be pretty awesome too. I think the ones built so far have been pure hunting rifles, light and handy, so you'd be venturing into new territory with a heavier style set up.
  • MileHighShooterMileHighShooter Senior Member Posts: 4,975 Senior Member
    OH! Forgot about another one that could be fun to play with, the 22-243 Middlestead! 243 AI necked down to 224. Still reigns as the fastest cartridge on Reloadersnest.com, if you have ever wanted to launch .22 bullets over 5,000 fps :jester:
  • MileHighShooterMileHighShooter Senior Member Posts: 4,975 Senior Member
    cpj wrote: »
    Wait till i win the lottery.:up:

    Custom skin colored spandex bike outfit?
  • BigslugBigslug Senior Member Posts: 9,326 Senior Member
    Honestly Zee, considering what you already have, sell the stock.

    "Short magnum" is kind of like "jumbo shrimp" or "honest politician". If you want yardage, I see little sense in using a weight-saving short action to build a heavy gun chambered for a round that won't reach as far as a long action case. You're already in that envelope with other guns.
    WWJMBD?

    "Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
  • 41magnut41magnut Senior Member Posts: 1,258 Senior Member
    I would suggest a 6.5 Creedmoor but you have a 260, so nothing to gain there
    "The .30-06 is never a mistake." Townsend Whelen :iwo:
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 27,464 Senior Member
    CHIRO1989 wrote: »
    I would say go with the .338 Federal in a heavy barrel.

    Go with a 22-24" barrel, my pencil Kimber barrel heats up after 3 rounds and accuracy goes south and the heavy barrel should equal better groups AFAIK.
    Heavier bullets than your current short action list, by quite a bit, and lots to choose from.
    You have access to lots of brass to make .338 Federals.
    Me and Jerm and at least one new guy on here will be enablers to ramp up the FPS with our own projects.
    It will be a unique configuration.
    YOU will be the enabler to have us shooting it a distances we are not comfortable with.
    Once you figure out the heavy barrel, you will want it on a pistol action, further enabling others on the forum.
    You need a .338 cartridge since the .340 was used for another project.
    More as I think of em'.

    Oh, you're good. You should sell used cars.

    This is very tempting. A heavy 20-22" barrel could be fun. Don't think I would do a heavy 24-26" barrel as one of my .308s has a heavy 26" barrel and one of my .243s has a heavy 30" barrel.

    But, a heavy, accurate, compact barrel on the .338 Federal launching 225gr bullets could be kinda fun. And yes, there IS that whole .308 brass thing going on.

    It could compliment my .338-06 SP and possibly use the same bullets. That would be cool. Plus, a standard bolt face short action would be easier to get cheap than a magnum one. Throat the chamber long and seat those 225s out.......ease up on the compressed loads.......could be a 500 yard rock chucker.

    Oh, you are a salesman!
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 27,464 Senior Member
    Bigslug wrote: »
    Honestly Zee, considering what you already have, sell the stock.

    "Short magnum" is kind of like "jumbo shrimp" or "honest politician". If you want yardage, I see little sense in using a weight-saving short action to build a heavy gun chambered for a round that won't reach as far as a long action case. You're already in that envelope with other guns.

    Selling the stock ain't an option. That's like tossing a useful tool!

    But, you make sense. Why go short and wish it would do what a full size case would do.

    I really can just pick up a Remington SPS in 7mm STW pretty easy and bed it in the stock I have. Replace the trigger, and be good to go. Won't be te barrel contour I want, but that can always be replaced later if the rifle doesn't shoot. Won't be able to put a bull barrel in that stock, but I could get it up to a 4 or 5 contour with some judicious inletting.

    This looks like a route to take. At least an easier one. My friend already has an STW reamer. If the factory barrel is to fickle, I can replace it.
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • CHIRO1989CHIRO1989 Senior Member Posts: 14,201 Senior Member
    Zee wrote: »
    Oh, you're good. You should sell used cars.

    This is very tempting. A heavy 20-22" barrel could be fun. Don't think I would do a heavy 24-26" barrel as one of my .308s has a heavy 26" barrel and one of my .243s has a heavy 30" barrel.

    But, a heavy, accurate, compact barrel on the .338 Federal launching 225gr bullets could be kinda fun. And yes, there IS that whole .308 brass thing going on.

    It could compliment my .338-06 SP and possibly use the same bullets. That would be cool. Plus, a standard bolt face short action would be easier to get cheap than a magnum one. Throat the chamber long and seat those 225s out.......ease up on the compressed loads.......could be a 500 yard rock chucker.

    Oh, you are a salesman!

    Maybe I should be like Paul and do some math on a late friday night, I did not think that 500 yds would be feasible without some serious hold over, a shorter 20-22" barrel would probably be a bit more balanced too. Might be worth a phone call to Ruger or Kimber to see if they played with the idea.
    I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn away from their ways and live. Eze 33:11
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 27,464 Senior Member
    I haven't done the math either. I know it will GET to 500 yards. Carrying enough velocity to get proper bullet performance on game past 400 yards could be the clincher. Will have to be determined.

    Edit: I don't think in holdover. I think in terms of dialing the turret.
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • CHIRO1989CHIRO1989 Senior Member Posts: 14,201 Senior Member
    Zee wrote: »
    I haven't done the math either. I know it will GET to 500 yards. Carrying enough velocity to get proper bullet performance on game past 400 yards could be the clincher. Will have to be determined.

    I am still working on getting past 50yds., I'll keep you in the loop
    I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn away from their ways and live. Eze 33:11
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 27,464 Senior Member
    50 yards is for .22s and handguns! Get with it!
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • CHIRO1989CHIRO1989 Senior Member Posts: 14,201 Senior Member
    Zee wrote: »
    50 yards is for .22s and handguns! Get with it!

    I will be at 100yds tomorrow or monday with the .338 Federal.
    I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn away from their ways and live. Eze 33:11
  • snake284-1snake284-1 Senior Member Posts: 2,500 Senior Member
    Zee wrote: »
    Alright, besides the long action project, I have a short action project as well.

    I have an HS Precision Varmint style stock for a Rem 700 short action. Rings/Bases and scope as well as Timney Trigger in the stash. What I don't have is something to put it all on.

    As for current short action cartridges I already have:
    .223
    .243
    .260
    .308

    Looking for options that don't overlap what I have. Well, at least not too much.

    The stock is for a heavy barrel. I could float a sporter barrel in a sea or air or choose a cartridge better suited for a heavy barrel to use up the space.

    Cartridges I'm considering:

    7mm WSM
    .300 WSM
    .338 Federal

    Obviously, this will be a handloading affair. These are just what are popping in my head right now, but I'm open to suggestions from yoose guys. So, what ideas ya got?

    All you need to round out that list are 1) a 7mm-08 Rem., a .338 Federal and a .358 Winchester. Of course, if you really want to fill the gaps, you could build a 25-08 and a .277-08, but that would be the ultimate in overlap.

    Actually, if I had unlimited funds, I'd buy me another 6 or 7 Yugos and I would build me a collection like that. I'd have one in either 22-250 or .220 Swift, one in 6mm Rem., I already have one in .257 Bob AI, but I'd probably build a regular Bob for the hell of it, then I'd have a 6.5x57, a .277x57, a 7x57, a .308x57, Already have an 8x57, then A .338x57 and a 358x 57, all just to have a complete collection. Overlap??? So be it. Variety is the spice of life.
    I'm Just a Radical Right Wing Nutt Job, Trying to Help Save My Country!
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 27,464 Senior Member
    Bout time you make an appearance. We were beginning to think you didn't like us anymore.
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • Ernie BishopErnie Bishop Senior Member Posts: 8,496 Senior Member
    The 7mm SAUM is a great choice here as well. Would actually let you seat out your bullets more, hence more useable case capacity.
    While you have to seat the bullet deeper with the WSM, reducing useable powder space.
    They will run about neck and neck with the WSM.
    Nothing wrong with the the WSM though.
    I have both and like both
    Ernie

    "The Un-Tactical"
  • snake284-1snake284-1 Senior Member Posts: 2,500 Senior Member
    Bigslug wrote: »
    Screw efficiency! .22-250 makes little squirrely critters EXPLODE!

    Yeah, and THAT's what I call efficiency...
    I'm Just a Radical Right Wing Nutt Job, Trying to Help Save My Country!
  • snake284-1snake284-1 Senior Member Posts: 2,500 Senior Member
    Zee wrote: »
    Bout time you make an appearance. We were beginning to think you didn't like us anymore.

    He really DOESN't like you, but he's very polite, :roll2:
    I'm Just a Radical Right Wing Nutt Job, Trying to Help Save My Country!
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 27,464 Senior Member
    It's all the cabbage. Not my fault.
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • wildgenewildgene Senior Member Posts: 1,036 Senior Member
    ...you really should consider a .325 WSM...

    ...compare the .338 Fed @ 500yds w/ this...

    .325 WSM/ 220gr. SSBT @2800fpsMV/ 200yd zero// 500yds/ 2120fps/ 2196ft.lbs./ 40.8" drop/ 13.8" drift
  • Ernie BishopErnie Bishop Senior Member Posts: 8,496 Senior Member
    I am voting for a 7mm anyway, but a 325WSM versus a 338 Fed is not close to an apples to apples comparison.
    a 338WSM comparing to a 325 WSM would be a much better comparison IMO.
    Ernie

    "The Un-Tactical"
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.

Advertisement