Wildcatters in the house ?

[Tisto]

As usual, I have some really great bad ideas. I had one tonight and I started to look at it closer. Now I'm really interested in this idea and I don't know where to or whom to take it.

Do we have any experienced and capable wildcatters here ?

 

[togmaster]

@meketrefe

 

[meketrefe]

As usual, I have some really great bad ideas. I had one tonight and I started to look at it closer. Now I'm really interested in this idea and I don't know where to or whom to take it.

Do we have any experienced and capable wildcatters here ?

Yes. What is your question?

 

[meketrefe]

As usual, I have some really great bad ideas. I had one tonight and I started to look at it closer. Now I'm really interested in this idea and I don't know where to or whom to take it.

Do we have any experienced and capable wildcatters here ?

I happy to help.

 

[Tisto]

I happy to help.

I've found someone local to explore this idea with. After a bit of deep research, I don't know that it would be much of an improvement on already established cartridges. It appears that my idea isn't all that original and something similar has already been tried. Thanks anyway !

 

[meketrefe]

Thats what I was going to say that more times than not whatever idea most likely has been developed to one degree or another.
There are still a few initiatives that can be quite unique but almost impossible to bring to market even if better than existing cartridges.

The reason so so cartriges become popular and better ones not is a bit of a mistery but marketing dollars, fashions and lack of ballistics knowledge play an important role.

But there are other incentives like to produce something exclusive or just to allow an individual to fulfill a role using common components that could be interchanged and/or cost effective.

We tend to think about certaing calibers as something so special that could not be matched by others but in reality everything could be done with something like 7mm and a 35 bores. Maybe we put the 6mm as a starter too and nothing above 375 that is for sure that is a waste.

A few baseline cases in popular bolt faces and we could cover every role ever imagined.

 

[togmaster]

I've found someone local to explore this idea with. After a bit of deep research, I don't know that it would be much of an improvement on already established cartridges. It appears that my idea isn't all that original and something similar has already been tried. Thanks anyway !

Care to elaborate? Would be nice to get some gun content on a gun forum.

 

[spat]

Care to elaborate? Would be nice to get some gun content on a gun forum.

There's only so much territory between .17 and .50 caliber that can be reached with current powders.

There are thousands of rounds available in that small space. Any new round is not going to have a performance envelope that isn't almost identical to some existing offering.

If can be fun to play with novel combinations, but there is nothing groundbreaking to be done.

If you want to really innovate, then figure out how to make a man portable cartridge fed light gas gun. A 50grn .22 with a muzzle velocity of 15,000fps would be something to write home about.

 

[Acer-m14]

anyone have some .. ??

 

[togmaster]

There's only so much territory between .17 and .50 caliber that can be reached with current powders.

There are thousands of rounds available in that small space. Any new round is not going to have a performance envelope that isn't almost identical to some existing offering.

If can be fun to play with novel combinations, but there is nothing groundbreaking to be done.

If you want to really innovate, then figure out how to make a man portable cartridge fed light gas gun. A 50grn .22 with a muzzle velocity of 15,000fps would be something to write home about.

I would still like to hear the OP's idea and what his goal was with the new round.

 

[Tisto]

I won't bother going into all the tangents, but basically it is this :

I was looking at a piece of .270 Win brass that I have. I do not own a .270 but I do have a .25-06. The thought of converting one piece of brass seemed like a lot of work for one piece. But, I got to looking at it, and then I took it out to the garage and cut the shell right at the shoulder. I then put it on the trimmer to square up the end. I wound up with a shell that was 1.900" long and the inside diameter at the mouth was .411".

.41 caliber bullets are few and far between, but .400 are plentiful. A slight taper to the whole case to a .400 mouth seemed an easy task. An overall length of this combination would be right at the magical 2.250" - the very length that will fit inside a standard AR 15 magazine.

By rebating the rim of the .270 case by a mere .050", the case could use the same bolt as the 6.8 SPC. So, same AR 15 platform, same magazine although some modification would be necessary, same bolt, really only the barrel would be the big change needed.

Further, the case could be shortened to the magical 1.800" length and be eligible for big game use in states where straight wall cartridges are mandated.

A 1.800" case would hold roughly 40 grains of IMR 4198. I picked that powder because it seemed a natural place to start. It has applications for similar sized cartridges. 40 grains of IMR 4198 should produce around 2000 to perhaps 2300 FPS with a 200 grain bullet and a 16" barrel. Those numbers are just calculations on my part - an educated guess at best.

The resulting cartridge would have to headspace on the mouth. This would make trimmimg it to exact lengths much more critical when reloading it, but any capable reloader should be able to accomplish it.

The final result is a hard hitting round suitable for short to moderate range big game and can be chambered in bolt, lever, auto, and break actions. It would not have the power of a .450 Bushmaster or it's competetors, but would be much more powerful than typical pistol caliber cartridges used in rifles for hunting.

Look at it as a scaled down .45-70 without the problems of a rimmed case. Look at it as a scaled up version of the .350 Legend.

These are the things that keep me awake at night.

 

[spat]

I won't bother going into all the tangents, but basically it is this :

I was looking at a piece of .270 Win brass that I have. I do not own a .270 but I do have a .25-06. The thought of converting one piece of brass seemed like a lot of work for one piece. But, I got to looking at it, and then I took it out to the garage and cut the shell right at the shoulder. I then put it on the trimmer to square up the end. I wound up with a shell that was 1.900" long and the inside diameter at the mouth was .411".

.41 caliber bullets are few and far between, but .400 are plentiful. A slight taper to the whole case to a .400 mouth seemed an easy task. An overall length of this combination would be right at the magical 2.250" - the very length that will fit inside a standard AR 15 magazine.

By rebating the rim of the .270 case by a mere .050", the case could use the same bolt as the 6.8 SPC. So, same AR 15 platform, same magazine although some modification would be necessary, same bolt, really only the barrel would be the big change needed.

Further, the case could be shortened to the magical 1.800" length and be eligible for big game use in states where straight wall cartridges are mandated.

A 1.800" case would hold roughly 40 grains of IMR 4198. I picked that powder because it seemed a natural place to start. It has applications for similar sized cartridges. 40 grains of IMR 4198 should produce around 2000 to perhaps 2300 FPS with a 200 grain bullet and a 16" barrel. Those numbers are just calculations on my part - an educated guess at best.

The resulting cartridge would have to headspace on the mouth. This would make trimmimg it to exact lengths much more critical when reloading it, but any capable reloader should be able to accomplish it.

The final result is a hard hitting round suitable for short to moderate range big game and can be chambered in bolt, lever, auto, and break actions. It would not have the power of a .450 Bushmaster or it's competetors, but would be much more powerful than typical pistol caliber cartridges used in rifles for hunting.

Look at it as a scaled down .45-70 without the problems of a rimmed case. Look at it as a scaled up version of the .350 Legend.

These are the things that keep me awake at night.

That's like real engineering right there.

Great thinking.

 

[Tisto]

Perhaps an easier approach to the same general idea would be to take the .40S&W case and lengthen it to 1.800", thus more than doubling the case capacity of a 10mm auto. The rim diameter is only .003" different than a 6.8 SPC , so that modification would be minimal. This would result in a case with slightly less capacity than the one derived from the .270 case I started with, and the resulting cartridge may have more chambering and extraction problems because of the lack of taper. These are of course just suppositions. I think my design could easily produce the velocities I projected. Imagine a 200 grain Gold Dot at 2300 fps. Almost 2350 foot-pounds of energy. Far more powerful than a .300 Blackout with comparable bullet weight. Of course, the Blackout round was designed to be subsonic and easily suppressed.

Is this really such a bad idea ?

 

[Xae289]

Perhaps an easier approach to the same general idea would be to take the .40S&W case and lengthen it to 1.800", thus more than doubling the case capacity of a 10mm auto. The rim diameter is only .003" different than a 6.8 SPC , so that modification would be minimal. This would result in a case with slightly less capacity than the one derived from the .270 case I started with, and the resulting cartridge may have more chambering and extraction problems because of the lack of taper. These are of course just suppositions. I think my design could easily produce the velocities I projected. Imagine a 200 grain Gold Dot at 2300 fps. Almost 2350 foot-pounds of energy. Far more powerful than a .300 Blackout with comparable bullet weight. Of course, the Blackout round was designed to be subsonic and easily suppressed.

Is this really such a bad idea ?

Whether it's a bad idea or not depends on what you want out of it. If you want an interesting project to occupy some spare cash and brain power getting to work right, then no, it doesn't sound like a bad idea, it sounds like it could be a really fun project.

I like the original idea of cutting down a .270 Winchester case better. The taper is a big selling point to me, especially assuming you want to run at rifle pressures. On top of that, you'll need reloading dies either way. If you get custom dies made up, you can make brass from .270 brass rather than having to get custom brass made like you would have to if you went for a lengthened .40 S&W case. Kind of a drop in the bucket cost, but it may save you some money on an already expensive project.

Big Problem to Solve: An issue that I would be very concerned about is terminal performance. You want to get a .40 caliber bullet up to 2300 fps, specifically citing a 200 grain Gold Dot. I seriously doubt that bullet or any other designed for the .40 S&W or 10mm performance envelope could handle those velocities. You could go the cast bullet route with a very hard lead alloy wearing a gas check. After a quick search, I can't find a gas checked .40 cal bullet for sale anymore, though I know Beartooth Bullets used to make them since I still have some. Sourcing a useful .40 cal bullet that could handle that power is going to be very difficult.

 

[togmaster]

Whether it's a bad idea or not depends on what you want out of it. If you want an interesting project to occupy some spare cash and brain power getting to work right, then no, it doesn't sound like a bad idea, it sounds like it could be a really fun project.

I like the original idea of cutting down a .270 Winchester case better. The taper is a big selling point to me, especially assuming you want to run at rifle pressures. On top of that, you'll need reloading dies either way. If you get custom dies made up, you can make brass from .270 brass rather than having to get custom brass made like you would have to if you went for a lengthened .40 S&W case. Kind of a drop in the bucket cost, but it may save you some money on an already expensive project.

Big Problem to Solve: An issue that I would be very concerned about is terminal performance. You want to get a .40 caliber bullet up to 2300 fps, specifically citing a 200 grain Gold Dot. I seriously doubt that bullet or any other designed for the .40 S&W or 10mm performance envelope could handle those velocities. You could go the cast bullet route with a very hard lead alloy wearing a gas check. After a quick search, I can't find a gas checked .40 cal bullet for sale anymore, though I know Beartooth Bullets used to make them since I still have some. Sourcing a useful .40 cal bullet that could handle that power is going to be very difficult.

Speer offers a tmj in 180 grain that would solve the gass check problem. 40 Caliber .400 Diameter 180 Grain Total Metal Jacket 400 Count

I don't know if the bullet profile would be the best.

 

[Tisto]

I have in fact considered that bullets for such a round would all be constructed too lightly. If such a round actually showed promise, the cartridge could be brought to market in a partnership. Hornady makes the XTP series of hollow point pistol bullets in a magnum form. Heavily constructed to withstand extreme velocities. They do not offer an XTP MAG in .400" diameter at this time, but I believe they could easily use a thicker jacket and harder lead to create one. They may also be willing to create one of their FTX bullets if partnered in. Barnes already makes solid .400" bullets. A slight modification to one of their offerings to make it more suitable to the higher velocities seems rather easy. Possibilities are out there.

The first idea, to use the .270 as a parent case came about simply because I had one. The parent case of the .270 is the .30-06. The .30-06 has been the parent case for dozens of cartridges.

The big problem with using the .40S&W or 10mm Auto as a parent case other than lengthening it is it's thickness. The pistol cases are considerably thinner walled. They would not likely hold the pressures well enough to be reloaded. And, as stated before, I believe that they would lend themselves to chambering and extraction problems.

As far as bullet profile goes, this is designed to be a short to moderate range gun. Ballistic coefficients really don't concern me all that much. I have no desire for this round to use a pointed bullet. That defeats the purpose of making it fit into every type of action. Tubular magazines on lever guns was a higher priority than extending the useful range of the round. I think a pistol bullet profile would be suitable for 200 yards and closer.

 

[Xae289]

Speer offers a tmj in 180 grain that would solve the gass check problem. 40 Caliber .400 Diameter 180 Grain Total Metal Jacket 400 Count

I don't know if the bullet profile would be the best.

Yea, it would be a fine plinker and practice bullet, but nothing I'd want for defense or hunting.

I have in fact considered that bullets for such a round would all be constructed too lightly. If such a round actually showed promise, the cartridge could be brought to market in a partnership. Hornady makes the XTP series of hollow point pistol bullets in a magnum form. Heavily constructed to withstand extreme velocities. They do not offer an XTP MAG in .400" diameter at this time, but I believe they could easily use a thicker jacket and harder lead to create one. They may also be willing to create one of their FTX bullets if partnered in. Barnes already makes solid .400" bullets. A slight modification to one of their offerings to make it more suitable to the higher velocities seems rather easy. Possibilities are out there.

The first idea, to use the .270 as a parent case came about simply because I had one. The parent case of the .270 is the .30-06. The .30-06 has been the parent case for dozens of cartridges.

The big problem with using the .40S&W or 10mm Auto as a parent case other than lengthening it is it's thickness. The pistol cases are considerably thinner walled. They would not likely hold the pressures well enough to be reloaded. And, as stated before, I believe that they would lend themselves to chambering and extraction problems.

As far as bullet profile goes, this is designed to be a short to moderate range gun. Ballistic coefficients really don't concern me all that much. I have no desire for this round to use a pointed bullet. That defeats the purpose of making it fit into every type of action. Tubular magazines on lever guns was a higher priority than extending the useful range of the round. I think a pistol bullet profile would be suitable for 200 yards and closer.

Good call regarding Barnes. All-coppers would be a good fit for this concept, though expensive.

I definitely agree regarding case design. My point was that cutting down a rifle cartridge is more versatile. If this stays a tiny project that ends up with a cartridge that you're the only one who reloads for, it would be great to be able to take any cartridge in the .30-06 family, cut and prep the case, then be good to go. You already have strong walls, a rifle primer, good-to-go. If you go with a [pistol-based] design, you pretty much will be limited to placing a bulk custom order from Starline whenever you want new brass. [Edit: So you can have things you'd need like thicker walls and a rifle primer pocket]. I was considering the same limitations on bullets. If you're stuck on a handloader island, where you and maybe a few others are the only ones reloading this ammo, you'll have to rely on what the market makes in .40 caliber, which is pretty lacking in suitable JHPs and cast bullets, leaving you with only coppers for terminal ballistics and TMJs for practice.

 

[kev74]

I like the idea.

A hard cast lead bullet with powder / Hi Tek coating would likely hold up. No gas check needed.

 

[Tisto]

I think an appropriate bullet for both hunting as well as defense is already available. Lehigh Defense makes a series of solid lead free bullets called the penetrator series. They already have a .400" on the market. They have a flat front, therefore suitable for tubular magazines, and they deliver an excellent wound channel.

I tried to attach a picture, but could not.

 

[Tisto]

 

[spat]

Perhaps an easier approach to the same general idea would be to take the .40S&W case and lengthen it to 1.800", thus more than doubling the case capacity of a 10mm auto. The rim diameter is only .003" different than a 6.8 SPC , so that modification would be minimal. This would result in a case with slightly less capacity than the one derived from the .270 case I started with, and the resulting cartridge may have more chambering and extraction problems because of the lack of taper. These are of course just suppositions. I think my design could easily produce the velocities I projected. Imagine a 200 grain Gold Dot at 2300 fps. Almost 2350 foot-pounds of energy. Far more powerful than a .300 Blackout with comparable bullet weight. Of course, the Blackout round was designed to be subsonic and easily suppressed.

Is this really such a bad idea ?

Sounds good except for the little detail that it's a hell of a lot easier to shorten a case than lengthen it.

If you were going to produce them from scratch, sure, but at that point you can choose any dimensions you want.

 

[spat]

View attachment 150665

I've always thought those looked like someone ran out of bullets and raided their toolbox for some phillips head bits.

I bet they work pretty well though.