Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Ask John Barsness Questions About "CARTRIDGE EFFICIENCY"

I always thought dad was smart, unfortunately he never saw me turn 23, but I follow.

As a layperson and a factory ammo buyer I'm more interested in energy/recoil & muzzleblast instead of energy/grains of powder. That makes the 250 Savage very attractive. As a father of a young boy I can't think of a better starter cartridge that could be an experienced rifleman's cartridge as well.

Ken, I wonder what I would have thought of the 250-3000 as an 18 year old. I bet I would have scoffed at it. I remember wanting a 270 Weatherby 'round that time.

My take too has always been energy delivered/energy input. I'm rich though, so it's not something I worry about with my firearms.

Sort of like the Lady Astor line to justify the gold fixtures in her rail car. "Saves all that polishing."

I think the argument in itself about cartridge efficiency is flawed.

A cartridge is an assembly of components - hull, powder, cap and bullet.

Each component has specific properties. Gearing these components and balancing their properties first only in between themselves and then ultimatly with the driving assembly (chamber, barrel, ultimatly rifle and shooter) decides how well the cartridge performs it task.

One can well argue the efficiency of each component in a given system but comparing two systems means switching more than one component (variable) at once making analysis difficult.

Neat article; no surprise there!

Another way to look at efficiency is energy generated from a given parent case. Getting in over my boots here, but I belive the term "expansion ratio" describes how larger bores are more efficient (at least by this definition).

This is why a .358 will hurl a 200-gn bullet damn near as fast as a .243 will hurl a 100-gn bullet.

The 358 has a lot more area for the gas pressure to work on than a 243. A larger diameter piston, if you will.

Yep.

For gits and shiggles, I'd argue that since most game is killed from 200 on in... and given the efficient nature of the .308 parent case... and .358 is the most efficient use of that case... .358 is the most efficient medium-game cartridge!

John,

I liked your comment on the .250 Savage, and am sorry they aren't as common as when I was young. I have one in a tang safety M77, and was thinking I could make additional grandkid guns by doing a rebarrel on a .22-250 or three.

Which .22-.250 bolt guns do you like for the starting rifle?

please and thank you...jim

Hard to beat the short-action versions of any of the bolt rifles. One of the nicest .250's I've owned was the short-action version of the push-feed Model 70 (can't remember the exact model name) from the 1980's. A short-action M70 Classic would make a real neat one, but then again so would a short Re, 700 or Ruger 77, or any number of others such as the Howa or Sako. Come to think of it, a really nifty litle .250 would result from rebarreling a Remington Model 7.

I just bought a Rem. 700 Classic in .250 and am anxious to wring it out....

My 700 Classic 250 needed some bedding work, but after that it has been fantastic. You're going to love yours.

"Come to think of it, a really nifty litle .250 would result from rebarreling a Remington Model 7."

It does. Did just that, with a "youth model" for my wife. Cool gun.

Good article...BTW.

Jeff

John,

Thanks for the commentary. I have a Rem M7 Youth and a second barrel in .260 Rem. A .250 Savage would work really well on that rifle too.

Now all we need is a .250 Savage is way cool article for each of the magazines you write for, and voila...instant demand!

jim

I have done some writing about the .250 before, but will again!

�Cartridge efficiency� can be defined a lot of different ways. Most of them are of little or no interest to me.

Here�s mine: �Cartridge efficiency is the measurement of a cartridge�s ability to put the bullet of my choice where I want it, with the energy, velocity and recoil level I want.�

It must be the universe, but I just ran into a Remington M799 in .22-250 Rem...jim

I hope you didn't hurt it......yet.

Great article! JB made the not so common sense ,common again.

Thanks!

And, apparently as a reward from The Hunting Gods, I picked up a Rem. 700 Classic in .250 from the 24hour Classifieds that only weighs 7-1/2 pounds with a 2-7x Leupold Compact, despite the standard medium-weight 24" barrel. Any guesses on how it will shoot?

John,

If you touch up the bedding and trigger and the crown is good I'd bet you can get it under 3/4 MOA for five shot groups pretty dang quick.

mathman

Nothing on the classifieds weighs more than 7 1/2 pounds field-ready and everything shoots at least MOA, if not 1/2 MOA. You know that!

I don't see why people are so wrapped up in cartridge efficiency. I'd like to see everyone out there with "efficient" cartridges and compare them to their vehicles. That would be interesting.