Exclusively for hunting cartridges

[Von Gruff]

If we look at the OP's question he wanted to replicate his battery with non military cartridges and didn't mention cartridges that have been based off military cartridges so the 6.5x55 would be replaced by the 6.5x57, the 30-06 by the 300H&H and the 375 stads on its own so the battery would be equal in every way and may even be superior with the H&H replacing the 06 (marginally )
Which ever of the two you batteries you chose, you would be well placed to hunt most places although if going into DG territory I would still be inclined to have a decent 40 in the mix.

 

[Pheroze]

I did start by musing about whether I could demilitarize my cabinet but then got to thinking about the hunting cartridges of the world that have no military application. As this develops I am wondering if there was a pattern that would show a difference between designing a hunting cartridge as opposed to a military one. If so, would this make hunting cartridges some how better for the purpose?

 

[Ryan]

Since my first picks wouldn't really be classics I got to thinking what would under these conditions. While not my cup of tea, to a certain group the Weatherby rifles and cartridges would all be classics meant strictly for hunting purposes. All the cartridges were designed in the 1940's using .375 H&H as their parent brass so they have the age and aren't even based on military brass. And they are all available in factory ammo, though you will pay dearly in the wallet.

In this case I'd say the 257 and 300 Weatherby Magnum would fit the light and medium bore. For something heavier it would be the 340 Weatherby Magnum if it wasn't dangerous game and the 375 H&H Magnum if it is for a relative parralel to your three.

 

[Clayton]

@Pheroze forgive me for asking, but are we participating in a collective Exercise In Futility?

 

[Pheroze]



@Pheroze forgive me for asking, but are we participating in a collective Exercise In Futility?

I was on the Norma, @Norma-USA, site trying to figure out a combination with Norma proprietary cartridges when this question came into my email.

Seriously, I am actually genuinely interested in this. The folks a century ago were very cleaver in developing our main cartridges. I am just musing this through. I also suspect this is more evident to you folks who have more knowledge than me about cartridges. Cartridges designed for hunting have a specific purpose built into them and that would be interesting to know when selecting your battery.

 

[Clayton]

I think I understand. I also think much of what's listed today was designed to do no more than the fill gaps between existing cartridges, Military or Sporting.

 

[Von Gruff]

The thing to keep in mind about the non DG hunting and that is that most of it can, and has been done with military cartridges from 6.5 through to the 8mm with the understanding that the military cartridges were designed to be effective from up close to 'way out there' and with an understanding of trajectory, good sights and non military bullets are still very capable of doing just that which is why they have been very effective for hunting small, medium, to heavy medium game. It is without doubt (at least in my mind) that almost every sporting or hunting cartridge that has been developed since the the turn of the 20th century has done no more than one of any number of military cartridges could do just as well. With the exception of the magnum cartridges to give higher velocity which is not necesary in a great many instances a military cartridge will do very well indeed.
It is sadly true that many countries will prohibit the use of a military cartridge and in that case there is a very close, of not almost identical performance to be had from a cartridge that was introduced to tempt the gullible into something that was "new" and supossedly better but seldom offers much in the way of improvments.

I have said many times that it we were to make our choices from cartridges that were introduced before 1920 and with todays powder and bullet improvements, we would still have a more than suitable rifle and hunting crtridge to hunt anything on the face of the earth.

 

[larry4831]

Since my first picks wouldn't really be classics I got to thinking what would under these conditions. While not my cup of tea, to a certain group the Weatherby rifles and cartridges would all be classics meant strictly for hunting purposes. All the cartridges were designed in the 1940's using .375 H&H as their parent brass so they have the age and aren't even based on military brass. And they are all available in factory ammo, though you will pay dearly in the wallet.

In this case I'd say the 257 and 300 Weatherby Magnum would fit the light and medium bore. For something heavier it would be the 340 Weatherby Magnum if it wasn't dangerous game and the 375 H&H Magnum if it is for a relative parralel to your three.

Love the 257 Weatherby....300,s a great round too

 

[spike.t]

.22 hornet, .350 Rigby, .416 Rigby or .404 Jeffery. .500 NE...............sorted

 

[IronCowboy]

Count me in the camp of those who don't get the point?

There are hundreds of cartridges out there which were not developed for military application, so if you arbitrarily resign yourself to only that list, or even to the list of cartridges which don't even have a military parent or grand parent, you have a lot to choose from. And then you fall into a futile discussion of how many firearms make the minimum battery for hunting, which is a can of worms all unto itself. And then, finally, since you used the word "classic," we fall into yet another layer of pointless debate as to what constitutes a "classic" - which the recent .458win mag post has taught us is nothing more than a subjective bout of conjecture, about as productive as a circle jerk.

For me, a .22 Hornet, .220 Swift, 7mm rem mag, and .416rigby would treat me just fine for rifles. I'd have a hard time with shotguns, I suppose, since 12ga is a military round, as has been 20ga if I recall, and 16ga is just too expensive and hard to come by. Although I do enjoy a SxS 16ga. For handguns, .32H&R, .44rem Mag, and .475linebaugh. Pretty easy, as only the .357mag, .45colt, and pistol cartridges have been military cartridges, and my list certainly should qualify as classics, although two are largely not that popular or common.

So I suppose let the debate begin over which on my list are classic or not. They're all highly effective, and I have killed game with all of them. I don't currently have a .220swift, and ALMOST listed a .22-250 in its place, but since I wanted a .22 hornet on my list for fox and bobcat, I wanted a bit more gap to my higher end 22cal than the .22-250 offered. I ALMOST stuck a .257 Robert in there, but I figured parentage mattered, and I can tone down the 7mm mag enough to cover that gap when needed.

 

[Pheroze]

Count me in the camp of those who don't get the point?

It was to get a discussion about

... the list of cartridges which don't even have a military parent or grand parent, you have a lot to choose from.

And that may be. And, a debate may be

... a futile discussion of how many firearms make the minimum battery for hunting, which is a can of worms all unto itself.

But i thought it could get people chatting, perhaps about

yet another layer of pointless debate as to what constitutes a "classic" -

Which may be

about as productive as a circle jerk.

And, although a distasteful image, can at least get people talking on a hunting site about their thoughts on firearms through history, so

I suppose let the debate begin over which on my list are classic or not.

But, not if it will offend or waste your time at all.

 

[Dwight Beagle]

7x64 Brenneke

 

[Dwight Beagle]

7x64 Brenneke

 

[dchamp]

I think of Classic Cartridges as originating before 1960 and mostly before 1930. If thats what you have in mind for a three gun arsenal and also want it to have a non military origin then I like the 6.5x68, 8x68s and either the .375H&H or .416 Rigby. All started in the early 1900's.

 

[Scrumbag]

This is actually a more common problem than you might think.


Several European countries (France, Belgium and Italy come to mind) didn’t allow ownership / hunting with military chamberings (Think Italy still doesn’t) so there’ quite a list you could use:


.222 Rem springs to mind as was trialled by the US but not adopted

22-250 derived from the Savage was never intended for military use

8x64 and 7x64 were developed speculatively by Breneke but never adopted by the German Army (Don’t know if that counts)


To be fair most of the Rem Mag and WM stuff was commercial before any military picked it up (.300 WM is used by quite a few militaries but I think was commercial first)

And hello: .22lr!!!

 

[CAustin]

I've posted mine before, 7x57, 9.3x62 and .404 Jeffery



Top is BRNO ZKK 600 7x57 with Kahles 3-9x40. Middle is a 1924 Mauser Oberndorf in 9.3x62, bottom is a custom FN commercial in .404 Jeffery

I like your set of three @stug