What is the most Historically Significant Cartridge?

#51
ksthomas said:
The 8mm Lebel, or the 7.92x33mm. I think you could make a case for either of these.

The 8mm Lebel as it ushered in the era of smokeless propellants, an event I think most of us would agree was world-altering. It made virtually every army still using black powder obsolete, and caused a massive rearmament program for all to meet the new threat. It also allowed the greatest developments in firearms design, as the negatives of black powder was what prevented the development of better action types such as gas operated autoloaders and machineguns. The greater power afforded by this propellant increased velocity and range to what we're still seeing today, which in turn spurred the development of better bullets, etc..

The 7.92x33mm marked a sea change in cartridge design, intended to address the range limitations of modern (1940s and beyond) combat. Intended to allow the infantryman to carry greater amounts of ammo and increase his personal firepower, while still being lethal at typical combat ranges, it got away from the excessively powerful rounds like the 30-06, 8x57mm and the 7.62x54R. The rest of the world saw the advantages and copied the concept, if not always the design itself. This is what gave us the 7.62x39mm M43 and the NATO 5.56mm rounds. Important changes, all going back to recognizing the changing nature of combat from the Napoleanic tactics still lingering when most of the other cartridges I mentioned were developed.
Click to expand...
I would have to agree here, due to the fact that these two round's history is still being used on today's battlefields. I would have to say the next step will be caseless ammo, which is still in the testing/limited use stages right now. JMHO.
 
#52
hrfunk said:
My thread on cartridge stagnation got me to thinking about the most historically significant cartridge in terms of its influence on future firearm/cartridge development and/or world events. Rather than alter my previous thread, I thought I'd start a new discussion. So here we go: What is the most historically significant small arms cartridge ever developed, and why?

HRF
Click to expand...

Hi HRF
World event? That would be the round that was never sent; twice snipers were sent to terminate Adolf Hitler, twice they had to stand down(???). This would have been a historical shot; I regretfully ignore what rifles were to do the job.
Yes, this is a very controversial answer; supposedly, Hitler, by taking command of the German Army, was doing a great job bringing Germany to a military disaster. Supposedly, the Allied Headquarter feared that after his death, a much more talented Commander in Chief would be able to re-establish the situation, therefore possibly prolonging the war of several years (??)
Truth or tale? Nice story and a lot to think about; kinda like Benghazi, crappy story and a lot to think about!
I am still on the subject, right? ;)
Ombre noire
 
#53
Interesting answer. I suppose technically this should have been posted on the "Most Historically Significant Sniper Rifle" thread. Nevertheless, it is a compelling point to ponder. As I've mentioned before, the depth of historical knowledge presented in these threads is very impressive!

HRF
 
#54
ArmaHeavy said:
.32 ACP, the same round used to kill Archduke Franz Ferdinand, and pretty much start World War 1.
Click to expand...

This was my thinking as well.

In terms of influential cartridges and their parents then the early Mauser cartridges with the 473 bolt face and large primer pocket is one of the most influential in terms of "what did it spawn" and there are THOUSANDS of rifle cartridges based off of this case head geometry.

However, in terms of the course of human history the round that killed Ferdinand was arguably more important because without that we don't know what would have been the catalyst to both 20th Century World Wars, wars that through either direct action or ancillary conduct lead to the death of a quarter BILLION people.
 
#58
I'm gonna say 7.62x54r , it's the round that won ww2. You can argue all you want, I know casualties were outrageous but the ruskies beat us to Berlin. It's still in use today. I know lots of guys that have had an old Mosin for a first centerfire.
 
#59
I'll vote for the 7.92x33mm / 8kurz round as well. The intermediate rifle ammo ushered in a completely new line of guns and advancement in warfare and how warfare is fought and thinking towards ammunition development both by commercial companies and individuals.

You could pick any of the early rifle rounds and argue one or the other and you could also say whatever was the first smokeless powder round but that gets fuzzy because some of the early cartridge rounds were loaded with black powder and converted to smokeless.

Not to mention the intermediate rifle rounds led to other rounds like the 6ppc, 6BR and not to mention you see the lines of how the short mags showed up/smaller fatter cases that are more efficient than the full size rounds.

Just my .02.

Later, Frank
Bartlein Barrels
 
#60
Well everything ksthomas has stated I would have to agree with. I would also say 22 is pretty significant since so many people have learned, and many have been inspired by it. But since only one round can be picked I think that the 32 is very significant. Had the 7.92x33 for example never been developed, something would have been developed to take its spot. In other words technology had been moving at such an astonishing rate that all those technological designs were in the works anyhow, and it was only a matter of time. Now you take the significance of the 32, the fact it was developed is not what makes it great, its the way it was used and help reshape Europe and the rest of the world. With that being said we develop some of our best stuff during war time, and out of necessity, so with out the 32 being use as an assassins tool, many other things may have not been developed for a long time, or at all.
 
#61
Coming in late... Haven't read every word. I hope no-one has said 'game changer' yet.

The minie ball is tempting, but it wasn't really a cartridge per se. So it's out.

I like the 7.65 browning (.32ACP). It started a whole ton of shit.

The killing and chaos by the 7.62x39 is hard to ignore.

The .22 rimfire (was it first a short?) is a very 'important' cartridge in history, but influential..? I dunno...

I like how someone above noted that the 'answer' to the OP question is up to each persons interpretation of "historically significant". My interpretation of that is the downstream effects of the cartridge. How much of history thus far has been created or influenced by the cartridge. I'm no historian, and I'll defer to others more in the know than I, but if the 8mm lebel was indeed the first smokeless cartridge fielded by a military. To the extent that everyone else played catch-up by developing other cartridges in response, that nails it for me. I'm not real happy that the .308 win or the .50BMG or the .45 or whatever didn't come in on top, but if the french hadn't come along first, maybe those others wouldn't have followed.
 
#62
most influential cartridge, can i pick more than one? 22 lr has trained more people to shoot than probably any other round, the 250-3000 savage was the first to surpass the 3000 fps marker (may not sound impressive now but in 1913 when it managed the feat people thought it had done the impossible) most influential cartridge to me personally though has to be the 308 winchester and its progeny, the 260 is my current focus but the 308 is what got me started in shooting centerfire and helped shuttle me into long range shooting. i guess i can thank the old '06 since its the parent case and has one hell of a background but i wont :)
 
#63
I'm mostly in agreement with ksthomas in that the 8mm Lebel was the first production smokeless powder cartridge. However, I opt to choose the 7x57 as Paul Mausers more useful brainchild as the most significant. He wanted the German army to go with this design. They took the design and necked it up to 8mm and there they were, from 1888 on. Anyways, I choose the 7x57 over the 8mm lebel because it's basically the starting point of all the modern smokeless cartridges still in effect today. The 8mm Lebel of 1884 and .303 British, of 1888, (not 1898) one starting out smokeless the other not, never had any generational offspring still on the cutting edge.

Specifically, the point you made about the 7.92x33 Kurz. It was a shortened 7.92x57, which was the German military heirarchy's idea over the 7x57. But, the basic cartridge concept was the 7x57. Paul Mauser came to the conclusion that the 7x57 was the optimal choice taking in all factors, range, ballistics, recoil, weight, yada-yada.
While I agree, the 7.92x33 Kurz was the basic format for all assault cartridges to follow it was still an offspring, once removed, from the 7x57.
 
Last edited:
#64
sandwarrior, the 8x57 (1888) predates the 7x57 (1893) mauser by five years... the 8x57 (designed by a german commission, not mauser) is the father of modern modern cases... the 12 mm case head is present in all the offspring, as well as the same basic design. Even the first 45 ACP cases were made from cut 30-06 brass (a direct descendandt of the 8 mm german) :)
 
#65
ksthomas said:
To those who answered with the 30-06, just curious' what makes the '06 so historically significant? Especially on the world stage, since the OPs question wasn't limited to US developments.
Click to expand...

Because John Browning scaled up the 30-06 to create the 50BMG. So the design itself is significant because the 50BMG is uber significant. That's my opinion.
 
#66
TiroFijo said:
sandwarrior, the 8x57 (1888) predates the 7x57 (1893) mauser by five years... the 8x57 (designed by a german commission, not mauser) is the father of modern modern cases... the 12 mm case head is present in all the offspring, as well as the same basic design. Even the first 45 ACP cases were made from cut 30-06 brass (a direct descendandt of the 8 mm german) :)
Click to expand...

TiroFiro,

Did you think that one day Paul came up with the design and then chambered 10,000 rifles for it? No, the 12mm head and body size were his concept.

The first "Mauser cased rifles" sold were to the Spanish in 1982, not 1893. And, FWIW, the 7.92x57 was from the 7x57 Paul Mauser design. The German High Commission took Paul Mauser's design and necked it up to 7.92mm. That would make sense as the Germans wanted a direct competitor to the 8mm Lebel. Also of note here, the U.S. did the same thing with it's 30-06. It was directly descended from the 7x57 because of U.S. conflict against that cartridge. You might also see that it was initially chambered in a rifle that almost directly copied the Mauser design as well. So much so that Mauser sued the U.S. and won. How much money got paid to him is still unknown except to a very few.

Added:

Regarding the 50 BMG being a sized up 30-06 case. When it goes the other way, the parent cartridge of the 5.56/.223 is the .222 Rem. A sized down version of the 30-06 case. Which, as has already been pointed out, was directly created from the 7x57. Again, all roads lead back to the 7x57 for modern cartridges.
 
Last edited:
#67
Sandwarrior, may I ask where do you get your data?

According to all the books and essays I've read, the first spanish mauser was the 1892 model... still 4 years later than the 7x57 designed and adopted in 1888 by the german rifle testing commission in spandau, whithout Mauser imput.

The first of Paul Mauser's modifications to the 8x57 was the 7.65x53 belgian, in 1889. THEN in 1892 came the 7x57 spanish :)

This is a good article on the history of the 7x57 (or 8 mm german):

8mm, Mauser, 8X57, 7.92X57, 7,92X57, 7.8X57, 7.8, 7.90, 7.92, Springfield, .30-03, .30-06. 8X57R, J, S, JR, JRS, Special, Remington, Winchester, Norma, RWS, DWM, German, Turk, Turkish, Turkey, Equador, Equadorian, Yugolavia, Yugoslavian, Czechoslovak
 
Last edited:
#68
TiroFijo said:
Sandwarrior, may I ask where do you get your data?

According to all the books and essays I've read, the first spanish mauser was the 1892 model... still 4 years later than the 7x57 designed and adopted in 1888 by the german rifle testing commission in spandau, whithout Mauser imput.

The first of Paul Mauser's modifications to the 8x57 was the 7.65x53 belgian, in 1889. THEN in 1892 came the 7x57 spanish :)

This is a good article on the history of the 7x57 (or 8 mm german):

8mm, Mauser, 8X57, 7.92X57, 7,92X57, 7.8X57, 7.8, 7.90, 7.92, Springfield, .30-03, .30-06. 8X57R, J, S, JR, JRS, Special, Remington, Winchester, Norma, RWS, DWM, German, Turk, Turkish, Turkey, Equador, Equadorian, Yugolavia, Yugoslavian, Czechoslovak
Click to expand...

Tiro Firo,

Look at the timeline. In 1888 the GPK gave authority to start building the '88 commision rifle in 8x57. In 1889, Mauser had his 7.65x53 ready to go for the Belgians. There is no way the GPK, having to use industrial resources planned out and built a successful rifle in the timeline they did without getting their ideas from the industry it depended upon. In short, they borrowed more than just a few ideas on the rifle from Mauser. I think Paul Mauser was pissed because they not only stole ideas from his rifle without consultation, they stole the cartridge, but changed the caliber. Remember, they were a commission, not their own manufacturing facility. The Royal arms factory was not in the business of making their own cartridges without permission. There is no way they can put on paper, build on paper, test on paper, and have a successful system come out of it. They needed spot on true information. The man that was ready to go with all that work was Mauser. As in 1889 he fielded the 7.65x53 Belgian, Not 1891.

Mauser had too much going too soon to have changed gears AFTER the GPK adopted the 8mm. It would make sense to me that Mauser changed gears as soon as the Swiss Commision announced it's findings in 1883 Under Rubin.
 
Last edited:
#70
My point is, look at the history it doesn't add up. Mauser was pissed because they "didn't even consult with him". Yet, a commission, (a group of people sitting on an advisory board) developed the 8x57 in reaction to the Swiss 7.5 and French 8mm Lebel? Mind you, the commission needs time to test both the round and the rifle. How did they do that and deem it satisfactory within the short span they did without industrial help. Meanwhile, Mauser puts his own case out there less than one year later. Complete with a working rifle that he had to work the bugs out of. You get my point? The point is it was already very far along in development. Point in fact as well, Paul offered the Belgians a 7mm. They declined wanting to stay "in the caliber range of competing nations". That's in his bio if you need fact.

And, FWIW, the history you posted for us, which I have read in the past, uses a lot of the words "assumed" and apparently. Yet it's stated as fact.

You can stick to history as it is told to us today. I know for a fact a commission can't develop a round and rifle without someone on the working side to really wring it out.
 
#71
I'll stick to history, thanks ;)

Noteworthy that not even one pesky revisionistic historian (and there are plenty of them, with a passion for mauser history and endlessly discussing much more trivial tech tid bits than this one) shares your views.
 
#72
Glossing through the recent posts, I agree that the 7.92x33 is significant, and I also agree that if it wasn't invented, something similar would have been. That something was; in the form if the 7.62x39. I take it as reasonable that it was developed independently.

Regarding my own personal history, I take the 7.62x39 as very significant. It was the likeliest chambering to have killed me when I was in 'Nam. With all of it floating around here in the good old U, S, of A; that could still happen...

Greg
 
Last edited:
#73
I suppose there are as many opinions which is the most Significant round as there are rounds or people discussing them.

But I do question Greg's comment on the 7.62X39. I agree it would have been the most likely round to kill me in SE Asia, but it didn't. My 5.56 killed more of them then their 7.62X39 killed me.

Seems if that round was better we'd have gone to a similar round instead of the Russians going to a similar round to our 223.

Back to the original topic. I still vote for the mini ball, that started it all after we started rifling barrels.
 
#74
TiroFijo said:
I'll stick to history, thanks ;)

Noteworthy that not even one pesky revisionistic historian (and there are plenty of them, with a passion for mauser history and endlessly discussing much more trivial tech tid bits than this one) shares your views.
Click to expand...


Like I said, your "history" has a lot of 'Assumed' and 'Apparently' included in it. So be it. Whether the 8x57 or the 7x57 came first is matter of debate. As of 1885, when Samuel Norris split from the Mauser's (fortunately for them), Paul is already talking of a new cartridge. Which is what tells me he had already shifted gears toward the case we now know as the 'Mauser case'. That is documented in "Mausers, Walther & Mannlicher Firearms"

In either case, everything we use today descended directly or indirectly (because of) from the 8x57/7x57.
 
Last edited:
#75
My cartridge was the 7.62x51. I don't mean to say the x39 was 'better', I just mean it's the one that scared most poop outta me. 140MM rockets, 122mm arty, 152mm arty, and 82mm mortars are perpetually tied for second place in that category.

I joined 1st Amtracs at Cua Viet in early Summer 1967. Prior to that, I hade been with 11th Engr Bn at Dong Ha from late 1966, with detached temp duty at most of the I Corps Fire bases during their construction. I got back home just in time for Thanksgiving 1967.

Greg
 
Last edited:
#79
50 bmg isn't a small arms cartridge, but I would put it as significant. If I'm not mistaken, if you study the diagrams of a 50 and 30 06, the 06 appears to be a sized down 50. Now you may say that neither of these are truly significant, but the 06 led to the 308, which is a parent case to numerous other cartridges. That's what makes it significant IMO. If we didn't have the 308 we wouldn't have rounds like the 243, 7mm 08, etc.

Sent from GS3 Synergy
 
#80
.30-'06 derivatives.

...and the .50BMG (1921) was sized up directly from the .30-'06 (1903, 1906), not the opposite.

The .308Win/7.62x51NATO, despite sharing several dimensions with the .30-'06, is my idea of a replacement, rather than a derivative. That's an opinion, and of course, opinions are free to vary.

Greg
 
Last edited:
#81
Greg Langelius * said:
.30-'06 derivatives.

...and the .50BMG was sized up directly from the .30-'06, not the opposite.

The .308Win/7.62x51NATO, despite sharing several dimensions with the .30-'06, is my idea of a replacement, rather than a derivative. That's an opinion, and of course, opinions are free to vary.

Greg
Click to expand...

My bad, learn something every day. Even still. Without the 06 you would be missing a lot of cartridges.

Sent from GS3 Synergy
 
#88
Greg Langelius * said:
.30-'06 derivatives.

...and the .50BMG (1921) was sized up directly from the .30-'06 (1903, 1906), not the opposite.

The .308Win/7.62x51NATO, despite sharing several dimensions with the .30-'06, is my idea of a replacement, rather than a derivative. That's an opinion, and of course, opinions are free to vary.

Greg
Click to expand...


Historically, there is a very direct line starting with the 7mm Mauser in 1898 as to why the 30-06 was designed and developed. The line from the 30-06 to the 7.62x51 runs through the .300 Savage (T-65) as that was the original development case on which that cartridge was modified to. The .300 Savage was Newtons other gift to Savage, doing precisely what the military wanted to do with the 7.62x51, provide a lighter cartridge with near 30-06 performance. This it did. In fact it is more in line with the 30-06 than Newtons previous gift to Savage, the .250-3000, in that it shares the same body taper with the 30-06. And thus, can hold pressure better than previous cartridges of more tapered design which lead to heavier bolt thrust. The shoulder angle had to be changed to allow for better feeding. The neck was lengthened to apply more bullet hold than the short-necked .300 Savage

For all intents and purposes, the lineage goes from the 7.62x51 to the .300 Savage, to the 30-06 back to the 7x57 Mauser.
 
#89
^^

That's pretty good historical info. In the Anglo-Boer war, a lot of the Boers started out with 7mm Mausers. Due to an inability to obtain ammunition though, they used Lee Metford battlefield pickups later. The Mannlicher rifles were prized for their accuracy called "Maanligters" (Moonlighters) by the Boers.

st_boermodel_201007-b.jpg

From: The Model 1893/95 "Boer Model" Mauser
Read the story there
 
#90
Quote Originally Posted by jake7.62 View Post

7.62x54R..... It's been in use for well over 100 years so far and isn't going anywhere. It's seen use in WWI,WWII, Korea, Vietnam all the way through to today's battlefields. So hands down it gets my vote. It may not be a favorite of mine but you have to respect it.

Also my vote.
Click to expand...

Most recently, my development projects have been concentrated on .30 BR, .280 Rem, .223 Rem, and 7.62x54R. Of these, the 7.62x54R has provided the most positive surprises.

I originally considered the Mosin-Nagant 91/30, and the cartridge it shoots, to be shoddy wartime expedient stopgaps, with little to recommend them beyond matters concerning collector interests. Big mistake.

The rifles are gracile, inherently accurate, and nearly 'as cheap as popcorn' to own and shoot. I am still going through the painfully slow and frustrating learning path needed to find that 'reliable' scope mounting. I may never fully succeed, but there are small incremental rewards along the path and "who knows, the horse may even learn to sing...". I'm having too much fun with the learning process to give up now.

Then...; there's that spamcan/steelcase/Berdan surplus ammo. Dear Lawdee, but that stuff shoots dirty; and it's corrosive as well, so 'extra care' must be given to render the bore immune to the rust demons dirtiest dealings post firing. In truth, either Hoppe's #9, or CLP with do that rendering alone, and running several patches through, soaked with Windex, will work with other cleaners. All methods should be followed up with final light coat of oil in the bore, which I'd be doing anyway.

OK, it's not Gold Medal, but it is composed of relatively adequate, if dirty burning/corrosive, components; and it can be collet dismantled and reassembled on a modern press, with a modern powder measure, and can render considerably better than might be reasonably expected ammo at that same spamcan cost per round. Again, still not Gold Medal, but maybe at least as good as American Eagle, and far cheaper (say $.25 a shot/$5-ish a string-tied paper package of 20 cheap - still, no..., really), with the option of doing some charge weight adjustment/load development to render a sorta match/matched load for a given rifle. I find that IMR-4064 makes a rather excellent propellant for this chambering. I think some folks might even like to combine it with SRA .311 174gr SMK's.

My 110lb 16 y/o Granddaughter has reservations about its recoil. Fair enough, I'm working up a spamcan/TulAmmo hybrid load using collet pulled 123gr bullets from the 7.62x39 steelcase SKS fodder. When I bought it, the TulAmmo was retailing in Wallyworld for $4.97 a box of 20, but alas... But wait! Maybe yet...!

Let's consider a few points. 120 years in service (and still counting), serving Tsar, Bolsheviks, Communists, and even the current Republic, not to mention client regimes, Third World revolutionaries, pauper states, and even the Soviets' own most virulent enemies. Still slaying bears and moose, as well as lesser game, maybe even a few Snow Tigers and -Leopards; it's also still an Olympic competition cartridge, still a respected chambering in a long sequence of modern Sniper Rifles, and still a key machine gun chambering. I don't know how much more a cartridge has to do to qualify, but this one has done its teething rather thoroughly, thank ya very much.

...and in this corner, the perennial, the original(?), contender, the 7.62x54Rrrrr...

Greg
 
Last edited:
#91
hounddawg said:
^^

That's pretty good historical info. In the Anglo-Boer war, a lot of the Boers started out with 7mm Mausers. Due to an inability to obtain ammunition though, they used Lee Metford battlefield pickups later. The Mannlicher rifles were prized for their accuracy called "Maanligters" (Moonlighters) by the Boers.

View attachment 12232



From: The Model 1893/95 "Boer Model" Mauser
Read the story there
Click to expand...

Another good point. While the 7x57 was probably the better cartridge, there wasn't enough logistical support for that weapon system to really dominate.

Which might harken the question, who had the best all time logistics?
 
#92
logistics can be a nightmare or a booster:
for the Finns,a booster because they stubbornly have learned, willing or not, to obtain the best from the Russian's cartridge/rifle combo_
for the Russians,a booster because a so huge army can't take lightly this topic, and they seemly never do it_
for Boer guerrillas, we must remember that they were the FIRST to explore the "modern" warfare laws, and to make the unavoidable "first" errors_
...you can continue,of course
 
#93
wilecoyote said:
logistics can be a nightmare or a booster:
for the Finns,a booster because they stubbornly have learned, willing or not, to obtain the best from the Russian's cartridge/rifle combo_
for the Russians,a booster because a so huge army can't take lightly this topic, and they seemly never do it_
for Boer guerrillas, we must remember that they were the FIRST to explore the "modern" warfare laws, and to make the unavoidable "first" errors_
...you can continue,of course
Click to expand...

However, the Boers excelled at guerilla warfare. It took around 100 000 Englishmen to (futilely) chase roughly 10 000 Boers all over the Highveldt. In fact, The Boer fighters were the inspiration for the WWII British Commandos. Even the name "Commando" is from the Afrikaans "Komando." Therefor as far as the British Empire goes, I'd say they sprayed .303 bullets around like a cow pissing on a flat rock. From Africa, Europe to India, and everywhere inbetween.
 
#94
I am quite oriented to consider Boers, like Finns, a special kind of natural-born-guerrillas:I can't figure neither of them discharging AK's at the sky on TV, not even if they would have won_
(forgive my digression, but I hate even wastin'money on firecrackers...)
 
Last edited:
#95
OK, an off topic for you Bore War Guy in the know.

A long time ago I read a book (probably fiction) about the bore war. It was about a young kid joining one of the Commandos and an old seasoned warrior taking him under his wing.

The old warrior filled the book with a lot of advice, that helped me a lot in my time in Vietnam.

Does anyone know the name of the book and/or author, I'd love to find this book again.
 
#96
This thread seems to keep reinventing itself in ever more interesting ways. It's far beyond where I imagined it would go when I first posted it. I can't wait to read more of what you guys have to say.

HRF
 
#97
kraigWY said:
OK, an off topic for you Bore War Guy in the know.

A long time ago I read a book (probably fiction) about the bore war. It was about a young kid joining one of the Commandos and an old seasoned warrior taking him under his wing.

The old warrior filled the book with a lot of advice, that helped me a lot in my time in Vietnam.

Does anyone know the name of the book and/or author, I'd love to find this book again.
Click to expand...

I think you might be referring to this one?

Amazon.com: God Does Not Forget: The Story of a Boer War Commando (9781935585831): Deneys Reitz: Books

Here's a freebie, as well:

The Project Gutenberg e-Book of My Reminiscences of the Anglo-Boer War; Author: Ben Viljoen.
 
#98
My vote would go as followed:
45 long colt didn't that win the old west
30-06 1903 Springfield in world war 1 and 2 (spring field was used in WW2 at the beginning with the marines and continued through out has a snipers weapon) and of course we all know it was used in the Grand, and is still being used by hunters around the world
7.62x54r 100 years in service from dozens of counties and it is continued being used.
7.62x39 right at the end of ww2 in the SKS and then AK-47 which is adopted by basically the whole world (haha)
5.56x45 we all know it has been in service since Vietnam to present day.

So I think there is a couple of different calibers we have to give credit to they have all done there job and they are all still be used today in the military or sportsman weapons
 
#99
#100
experthunter017 said:
My vote would go as followed:
45 long colt didn't that win the old west Contrary to popular belief, neither the .45 Long colt or the 1873 Winchester "Won the West". What won the
West was the buffalo gun. It deprived the indigenous peoples of their primary source of food. And, FWIW, .45 Cal was not as popular as Hollywood would have you believe. A lot more guns were made in .32 - .38 cals. Many famous people like Hickok only carried .36's. And in the .45 cal. arena the Schofields outnumbered the Colts about 3-1.
30-06 1903 Springfield in world war 1 and 2 (spring field was used in WW2 at the beginning with the marines and continued through out has a snipers weapon) and of course we all know it was used in the Grand, and is still being used by hunters around the world Again, it was directly because of going up against the 7x57. Do note the rifle it was chambered in is also an almost exact copy of the Mauser
7.62x54r 100 years in service from dozens of counties and it is continued being used. A great round with a lot of history. But, it was only front-line for 50 years, not 100. It has hung around like other rounds of its ilk ( 7x57, 30-06 .303) because of their usefulness. But, not as their top end. In fact the .303 is really THE longest running "front-line" cartridge ( to have seen multiple conflicts).
7.62x39 right at the end of ww2 in the SKS and then AK-47 which is adopted by basically the whole world (haha) Developed as a direct result of the 8mm Kurz, which in turn was directly descended from the Mauser. The only reason the 8mm Mauser still isn't a front line cartridge is post WWII, they finally made the Germans not be able to build it. It wasn't supposed to be built after WWI, but Hitler had other ideas.
5.56x45 we all know it has been in service since Vietnam to present day. Descended from the .222 Rem a direct scaled down version of the 30-06 (except shoulder angle)...which again was brought about by the 7x57. If you care to know, ballistically, the 7x57 is superior to the 30-06. Or at least how we built it.

So I think there is a couple of different calibers we have to give credit to they have all done there job and they are all still be used today in the military or sportsman weapons
Click to expand...

All modern rounds point back to the 8mm Lebel, with no offspring, the Mauser case, which everything is based on, one way or another, and the .303 British, which doesn't have derivatives but has hung on to serve a useful purpose longer than any other modern cartridge.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

cuirc
Load in the 7.62 NATO Long Range Cartridge
Replies
10
Views
591
Doom
Doom
USMCSGT0331
Original Army SF 5th Group used LaRue Stealth uppers!
Replies
14
Views
2K
Defender3
Defender3
V
Advice on Cartridge and Rifle (and a lot of other stuff) for High Accuracy Bolt Action Rifle
Replies
21
Views
516
Dead Eye Dick
Dead Eye Dick
V
New Guy from SW Texas
Replies
3
Views
65
stello1001
stello1001
lash
China Restricts Export of Nitrocellulose and Antimony
Replies
74
Views
3K
Edsel
Edsel
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Merch
Alerts