What short action std. Bolt face caliber is most versatile?

morcey2

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2013
Messages
85
Location
Central Utah
I didnt say it doesnt play a role, i said its not reasonable criteria to determine whether or not a cartridge is designed for a short or long action.

All those cartridges loaded to spec operate just fine in a short action. If you wanna throat the barrel deep and load heavy bullets out far enough so that they dont fit in a s/a magazine that is user preference. It does not change the design or intention of the cartridge.

A 30-06 loaded to spec will not fit or function in a S/A mag and may not always extract properly, making it a long action round.
I think we're saying close to the same thing, but I'm not quite sure. That's why I said that "I don't really consider 260 or 7-08 to be short action cartridges". They were designed and spec'd to function in a short action, but if I built one of either, it would be in a long action (or intermediate mauser action) and it would be throated to load long bullets out of the powder space.

I can stick rocks in my rifle, but that doesnt make it a sling shot.
It depends on whether it's a rock designed for a long or shot action sling-shot.

Matt
 

Canadian Bushman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2012
Messages
1,814
Location
Houston, Texas
I think we're saying close to the same thing, but I'm not quite sure. That's why I said that "I don't really consider 260 or 7-08 to be short action cartridges". They were designed and spec'd to function in a short action, but if I built one of either, it would be in a long action (or intermediate mauser action) and it would be throated to load long bullets out of the powder space.

It depends on whether it's a rock designed for a long or shot action sling-shot.

Matt

Ill clearify. The '08 case is in fact a S/A. The reason the 308 family exist to begin with was functionality in a S/A for the purpose of machine guns. The 308 and derivatives of the 308 function flawlessly and are spec'd for a SHORT action.
 

Trickymissfit

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2010
Messages
4,148
Location
greenwood, IN
Ill clearify. The '08 case is in fact a S/A. The reason the 308 family exist to begin with was functionality in a S/A for the purpose of machine guns. The 308 and derivatives of the 308 function flawlessly and are spec'd for a SHORT action.

to further add to you statement about the .308 family and machine guns. In 1937 (if memory serves me right), there was a get together with all the big time weapons manufacturers in Europe. The Mauser folks had done a bunch of research on what was going on inside the receiver during full auto fire. The Browning bunch was hung up on the 30-06, even though they knew there was a problem. The German concern figured it out, and determined that with a 500 to 650 rounds per minute cycle the max length usable (for case length) was 57mm in length. The length of the loaded round was secondary to the length of the case on extraction. The main part of the cycle was case extraction and not loading the round. There's also somekind of a ratio factor that comes to play, and it's been thirty years since I last read up on the subject. That's why most malfunctions can be traced to extraction or dirt.

So how does the .762x51 case come into play? Well after WW2 and very early into the Korean war we knew we had a problem. The Pentagon and the GAO were into discussion about a new squad light machine gun package. There was a committee set up, and they came back with two ideas. One was a 30-06 chambered piece of junk, that was promptly discarded. The other idea was to simply copy the WW2 MG42 in .300 Savage (no .308 yet). The old WW2 generals went nuts, and would not use a German design. Awhile later (towards the end of the Korean War) the new machine gun comes up again. The Pentagon Fact Finding Board decides on the MG42 again. The same generals knock it down. About this time there was a new Winchester cartridge, copied from the new military cartridge. At 51 mm in length it was deemed ideal for case extraction. Only problem was they put in the M60 machine gun instead of copying the MG42. Most folks think the M60 is a copy, but trust me it's not.
gary
 

Canadian Bushman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2012
Messages
1,814
Location
Houston, Texas
Tricky you are a wealth of knowledge.

I knew they were trying to match '06 ballistics in a shorter package for rate of fire, and that the 08 spawned from the 300 savage but the rest of that story is new to me.

Very interesting, thanks for sharing.
 

J E Custom

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2004
Messages
10,718
Location
Texas
There have been some good choices mentioned (243, 243 AI, 250 savage, 6.5x47 Lapua, 6.5x55.
6.5 CM, 260 Rem, 7/08 Rem, 7/08 x 40 ETC that will fit and function in a short action.

Most of these cartridges do there best with the lighter bullets (150 is about the biggest for the 7/08
to reach its performance best).

All of these cartridges have limited powder capacity and if the intent is to shoot the heaviest bullet in that caliber with the highest BC a larger case is needed and this requires a long action.

Example ; If you want to shoot a 180 grain bullet in 7mm the 7/08 will certainly shoot it but at a huge lose of velocity, where as the 280, 7mmRM, & STW and the 7mm RUM will do well.

Some intermediate length cartridges will also work in the short action, but will require lots of mods to the mag and in some cases be to long and need to be loaded one at a time and will not eject
a loaded round without bolt removal.

So My question is ,Why chose a short action to shoot heavy bullets in it for hunting? Use the bullets that get the most overall performance from the cartridge.

Any of the cartridges mentioned will work. Some may require extensive Smithing and some will require none except a barrel change. and as usual the choice is yours to make and live with.

Just a thought, and my opinion.

J E CUSTOM
 

Trickymissfit

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2010
Messages
4,148
Location
greenwood, IN
Tricky you are a wealth of knowledge.

I knew they were trying to match '06 ballistics in a shorter package for rate of fire, and that the 08 spawned from the 300 savage but the rest of that story is new to me.

Very interesting, thanks for sharing.

I became too acquainted with the M60 in 1968, and didn't hand it off till early May of that year. I still lugged it on CA's till Feb. 69. I was the number one man on a recon team, and did 17 CA's (I count 17, right hand man says 23, and First Sargent says 25. Kind of a blur in my mind now). I did get the chance to run a couple belts thru an MG42 (probably a G3) chambered in .308. It was love at first sight!

Honestly, and thinking about how the extraction works. The shorter neck of the .300 Savage case might have been a little better in extraction. Plus shooting four hundred yards and less; nobody's gonna know the difference. Weight wise there's very little to gain by using the Savage case, and asking anybody the lugged the hog, you'll learn that it's way too heavy. By the way the MG42 ready to go weighs about 22lb., and the 60 starts out at 28lb.

Back to my cartridge choice. The .250AI is often regarded as his best. I really like the 7x57AI, but the loaded rounds are going to be a little too long in my opinion. Face it! The short Remington action is really almost too short, and should have been .156" longer. Yet the .250AI necked upto .264, and shooting 125 grain bullets might just be as good as it gets
gary
 

g0rd0

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2012
Messages
610
Location
New germany, NS
7mm08
you can have 120 right up to 175grn pills for differant jobs. And with 150 grn etips it should be deadly on antelope, deer and elk.
Since you are doing a build 1 in 10 twist 25" barrel :D
 

Timnterra

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2012
Messages
1,643
Location
Rapid City SD
I'm down to two the 260rem and the 6.5 creedmor does anyone own one of each and have a side by side comparison? Is one easier to develop an accurate load for? What barrel twist would be best I'm thinking 8 or 9 twist...
 

Outlaw6.0

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2010
Messages
3,100
Location
Gillette, WY
I have the Creed' but not the Rem. They are nearly identical in performance, similar case design & capacity; loading for either is very easy.

Run the 1-8" as it will stabilize pretty much anything you decide to shoot in it.



t
 

Trickymissfit

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2010
Messages
4,148
Location
greenwood, IN
food for thought:

a Remington 700 short action is designed too short for a lot of big time rounds that will shoot in other short actions. My personal choice for the other short actions would have been something like the 6.5x57AI or even the 7x57AI. But we also know that a loaded round is really too long for the action unless you opt for a single shot. The 6.5x57 built off a necked up .257AI case will do 2950fps with a 140 grain bullet. A shame it's too long. A 6.5x55AI would be better, but probably still too long. This makes the case for the .260, or maybe the 6.5x47 Lapua (assuming we got to just have a 6.5 caliber). This also helps the case for the 25 caliber, as the bullets are noticeably shorter. You might be able to make a .257AI work in the Remington, as Remington once chambered the short action in 6mm Remington. But expect to seat 100 grain plus bullets deeper into the case. With the 250 case, it would be the opposite. Interestingly, the COL of the .257AI is .025" shorter than the .260 Remington. Where as the .250AI is over .200" shorter yet. In the too short action the over all length becomes critical. Then there is the well known issue with the .308 case family. The neck length is marginal, and with long bullets in a short action you end up seating bullets deeper into the shoulder area. This is totally wrong
gary
 

AZShooter

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2005
Messages
2,786
Location
Tucson Az
Timnterra,

You whittled it down to a couple of 6.5s. Here is an excellent article comparing the 6.5 Creedmore, 260 Rem and 6.5 x 47 Lapua :

https://demigodllc.com/articles/6.5-shootout-260-6.5x47-6.5-creedmoor/

One comment in the article is an important consideration:

"Anyone with a rifle in any one of these three calibers would be silly to ditch a working system to switch to another of them-- they are that similar. Make your choice based on component availability and price."
 
Top