Does the 5.56x57 (22-06) cartridge exist?

[MudRunner2005]

I'm still confused on whether the "x 57" number indicates length or grainage capacity. It almost look like it exists in BOTH realms. TMF's explanation doesn't seem to clear anything.either. I'm getting so confused by it all that I'm starting to pick up a headache!

Hey MR05, make sure you keep us filled in on what's going on with your project. It is very intersting.

Found this quote online and though it was the best and simplist explaination for you...

"Sometimes, instead of one simple number, the ammunition size and type will be represented by two groups of numbers. In such cases, the first number usually indicates the bullet diameter, while the second number often (but not always) represents the length of the cartridge, measured from base to case rim."

And there you go...

Will do Max...It's just a little side-project I figured that since I was building a switch-barrel on a standard action, I might as well find a used .22-250 barrle and ream the chamber out and see where this might could go...

I am not designing this wildcat to be a lightspeed land record setter....It's just so you can efficiently push the big heavy .22 caliber bullets at speeds as fast a .22-250 with the lighter bullets, like the 50-55gr bullets.

 

[LONGSHOOTER]

Let's see.

6.5 x 55 Swedish Mauser.

1" = 25.39mm.

55/25.39 = 2.165"

voila!

 

[benchracer]

I'm still confused on whether the "x 57" number indicates length or grainage capacity. It almost look like it exists in BOTH realms. TMF's explanation doesn't seem to clear anything.either. I'm getting so confused by it all that I'm starting to pick up a headache!

Hey MR05, make sure you keep us filled in on what's going on with your project. It is very intersting.

FYI, cartridge designations stopped including case capacity at the end of the blackpowder era. During the blackpowder era, cartirdges such as 44-40, 45-70, 45-110, etc. all referred to the bullet diameter followed by the case capacity in grains of blackpowder. This designation system was primarily an American system. The British and Continental Europeans each had their own systems of nomenclature.

In the smokeless powder era, the metric designations all refer to bullet diameter followed by case length in millimeters.

 

[Max Heat]

In the smokeless powder era, the metric designations all refer to bullet diameter followed by case length in millimeters.

OK. With the [(but not always)] disclaimer aside, I can accept that, and do stand corrected on the issue. I think what threw me was that the back powder era had transformed into [what I thought was] the "water" era, after smokeless powder took over. By that I mean that smokeless powders are typically very simiar to water (1.0), in terms of their density. Case "capacity" actually IS measured that way in modern times. But that sounds like a recipe for a mix-up right there.

What I don't like about the "length" measurement is that it fails to take the diameter of the case into account. So that means things could become VERY misleading, in terms of comparing 1 case to another using those numbers. Going by that system, an SSM or SAUM (etc), could (actually DOES) end up APPEARING to be much a smaller case, compared to it's long-action equivalent. When your dealing with stuff that explodes, that just doesn't strike me as being the best, or smartest approach. But hey, it is what it is. At least now I am aware. Thanks.

-steve

 

[Technologist]

Double post

 

[Technologist]

Hmm, I thought the 30 carbine (kalashnikov, or is it kalishnakov?) was 7.62x39, the .308 was 7.62x51, and the 30-06 was 7.62x57. But according to chuck hawk, the 30-06 is about 10 grains more than that. And the x57 round does appear to be the 7.21x57 (7mmx57) mouser case. Maybe THAT be the .284 case you refer to with the 22-284? I have decided to put this on the back burner and concentrate on getting some maximum barrel into my ultra 7 for now, anyways.

.30 carbine fits the US WW2 era m1 carbine. In some european settings it is referred to as 7.62x33. The 7.62x39 is a different, much more powerful cartridge.

The .308 and the 7.62x51 are very close and in most cases interchangeable.

The .30-06 is called 7.62x63 in the european technical way of designating cartridges, the x57 case you keep referring to is most likely the 8x57 Mauser (not mouser, it's a German name), which is actually sometimes referred to as the 7,92x57 mauser. That cartridge was used by the Germans in ww1 and ww2.

There is another Mauser cartridge using virtually the same case but with a 7 mm bullet that is called 7x57. It is absolutely not the same as the .284 winchester, although they do use the same diameter bullets.

There is no 100% consistent method for naming cartridges! Us europeans usually call the cartridges diameter of bullet x length of case.

There might be several different types of cartridge with the same caliber and the same length of case, so our system is not perfect either. The .284 Winchester is not as popular here in Sweden as the .284 winchester necked down to accept 6,5 mm bullets. This wildcat is usually called 6,5-.284 Norma. The police refers to it as the 6,5x55, which is extremely confusing as 6,5x55 is the name of our old military cartridge, which is not similar to the 6,5-.284 Norma at all!

I hope I've cleared out some fog.

 

[tinkerer]

How about the 220 Swift?

Larry
Tinkerer

 

[Bob the nailer]

I just finished a 22-284 build, 1-9 twist. Before load development I searched for any data I could find and have collected several pages of loads from shooters. When I did start range testing an accurate load was found with the first (H1000) powder I tried.

An interesting article was printed in "Guns & Ammo" August 1964 by Bob Hutton titled "6000fps worlds hottest .22" fun to read and good load data too!

 

[benchracer]

That's COOOOOOOOOOL!!!!!!! I'm betting that rifle will be fun to shoot!

 

[benchracer]

I think what threw me was that the back powder era had transformed into [what I thought was] the "water" era, after smokeless powder took over. By that I mean that smokeless powders are typically very simiar to water (1.0), in terms of their density. Case "capacity" actually IS measured that way in modern times. But that sounds like a recipe for a mix-up right there.


-steve

I believe this is another area that is confusing you. Water is used to measure case volume because it takes the shape of the container. Measuring case volume by filling the case with water and re-weighing the case allows a consistent and useful basis for comparing the case capacity of different brands of brass and different chamberings.

Water capacity in grains does not directly translate to powder capacity. It is used solely as a means of volumetric comparison.

Different smokeless powders have different bulk densities, meaning that the same weight of powder takes up a different amount of volume depending on powder type. Generally speaking, slower powders will take up more volume versus their weight in grains. Ball powders will typically provide greater load densities (case fill) than an equivalent extruded powder.

As an illustration of the effects of powder bulk density, pour 45 grains of H4350 into a .308 case. Then, try doing the same thing with 45 grains of Trail Boss.