Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters terminology question re:caliber

Mr. Howell,

I carry my lack of grammar knowledge as a badge of honor. In my schooling (note I did not say education), I have taken grammar tests in Dutch, German, French, Spanish, ancient Greek and Latin, as well as English. In all that language school torture, I am proud to say I failed all but ONE: a sophomore English class in a U.S. high school, which I took as a senior.

English is by far the easiest language to learn of all the languages I have studied. It is much easier to express precisely what you want to express, not in the least because of the vastness of word choice. The English language has more words than any I know: the number is often set at 300,000 or more. Compare that to barely 60,000 in, for example, the Dutch language.

In the end, this versatility makes the English language so incredibly powerful. One can agonize over complexities, name every construct, word type and conjugation, but that is to confuse the means with the end.

The end, the purpose, of language is to communicate. It is irrelevant if the author or speaker is technically "right". Being technically right is only useful for school marms, administrators who contribute nothing but crunched numbers, and people who cannot live without measuring everything.

Many authors have used "wrong" language to make a point clearer than they could within conventions. To say one should be "right" is to focus on the means, not the end. "Wrong" is only wrong if it INTERFERES WITH THE TASK of communicating.

In the case of caliber, I had always understood "caliber" to mean "percentage of an inch". Thus a "45 caliber" was 45% of an inch, or 0.45". This would be consistent, as I do not recall anyone using "2 caliber" or "16 caliber" for 2 inch or 16 inch military cannon. Thus, I expected that caliber should be expressed as an integer. Doing so would be technically correct, in my opinion, but confusing to the reader. In order to communicate clearly, we must use the language according to the knowledge of the reader, not the knowledge of the author. JMO, Dutch.

As an aside, a review this morning of a number of ammo boxes from my factory days showed that Weatherby was the only one to flout SAAMI convention and actually use the decimal. Good for them.

RSY

I have not read every word of every reply to my original post but from what I have read you all basically missed my point. My problem is when people say they have shot multiple calibers when they actually mean they have shot multiple cartridges. For example if they have shot the 243 Winchester and the 6mm Remington and 6-284 and the 25-'06 and the 7mm-08 and the 300 Win Mag and the 30-'06 and the 308 Winchester they have by my definition shot 4 calibers and 8 different cartridges. They would contend that they have shot 8 calibers. Rufous.

the bore is .30 with a .308 groove dia. You want really confuse the issue go tell a .270 lover he's shooting a 7mm

I would like to add to my own confusion.when you say you shoot a 22-250 or 30-06 or 45-70 or any round that has two numbers what do the numbers mean?I think the first number is the diameter of the bullet ?

Oh Lord reeder, you done opened up a can of worms with American cartridge nomenclature which has no rhyme or reason that is redily discernalble to normal humans.



For your examples:



22-250 is a .22 caliber baised on the 250 Savage cartridge



30-06 The cartridge .30 caliber that was adopted by the US government in 1906



45-70 a .45 caliber cartridge the origonal loading of which was 70 grains of black powder



The first number is the nominal diameter usually. Of course there is the 38 (pistol) which is really 35.



The insanity goes on ad infinitum.





BCR

The .38s are really .36s (0.357 to 0.359 inch and occasionally 0.360 inch) -- except for the .38-40, which is a .40 (0.400 inch).

Some old .44s, IIRC, are .45s -- but I'd have to look this up to be sure. The .45 handguns are 0.452-0.454 (occasionally higher), but the .45 rifles are 0.457-0459 inch and carry designations .45, .458, .460, etc.

The .40s' bullet diameters are all over the place.

For rhyme, read good poetry.

For reason, study logic.

For cartridge and caliber designations, just learn 'em or leave 'em be -- whatever they are.

Or it is the 38-55 which is .377, of course. Then there is the 43 Spanish which is a .46 (.459) and then the great old 44-40 which is a 43 (.427) <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

As Dr. Ken says with American cartridges just learn the name and don't try to figure them out or you'll go sky winding nuts.

BCR

That's why I feel and think that all should NOT use the decimal point in the NAME of the round. Because it implies a measurement which is not accurate with the true dimensions of round.

I'm done saying it's wrong, but it 'just ain't right' either.

What gets me is how the English language can evolve, but who is there to oversee it? There must be SOME rules?

Hey to all

I read al the post and i have an answer to all of you. who named a dog a dog or a cat a target. If you invented the thing you can call it any thing your heart desires. If it is no good than people will rename it and call it crap.

Bearbeater

Ahhh! The sweet delusion of "reasoning" by starting with one's conclusion as one's premise -- guaranteed to evolve into the desired conclusion. Works every time but isn't logical.

If you want to omit the decimal because it allegedly implies a level of precision that isn't there, then the same "logic" advises that you omit the numbers, too, because they imply precision that is much looser without the decimal, much closer with it. If we don't use the decimal, the numbers are false in their entire implication of precision. The .270 is a lot closer to being 0.270 inch than it is to 270.0 inches.

Implication of precision merely begins with the decimal. It increases with the number of digits to the right of the decimal. So while .270 and .308 are insignificantly misleading (relative to 0.277 inch and 0.3085 inch), their flaw rests in the third digit, not in the decimal. The fact remains that .27 and .30 provide far tighter precision than 27, 270, 30 or 308.

Might as well use letters or words. We already have the Ace, the Bee, the Hornet, the Wasp, the Velo-Dog, with no implication of precision whatever -- and no clue of caliber in any of these names. Maybe we should rename the .270 Winchester the ABC Winchester or the 1927 Winchester, or the .30-06 the 1906 Springfield and the .45-70 the 1873 Springfield -- if numbers are acceptable as long as they don't imply a caliber precision that a micrometer doesn't agree with.


Yes, there are rules inherent to the language. You use the rules in everything you say or write -- else no one could ever understand what you say. You use the rules of the language in your very thinking -- in the formation and mental storage of your thoughts. But how many times does one have to point-out that this isn't a matter of language before you get it?

Conventions of writing and printing are adjuncts to language, not inherent elements of language. Conventions evolve logically as readers' misunderstandings and intrusive clutter inspire revisions of certain printing conventions -- such as the conventions of printing abbreviations, for example. Thus there are two widely acceptable conventions for printing abbreviations. One, which is sometimes confusing and very often needlessly cluttery, uses a period after the initial letter of each referent word or each truncated word in the abbreviated expression (for example, e. g., F. B. I., U. S. A., r. p. m., mi./hr.). A neater convention for abbreviations omits the period except when the result is a word -- ft for feet but in. for inch, and e g, FBI, USA, rpm, mi/hr but lb/sq in., for example.

Thanks Ken,
You've put it very clearly and I think I see the light now. So speaking of now, I must get back to the bench to finish loading up some rounds for my Two-Seventy. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

I REALLY like the 'name them all' implication. Just kidding!

Thanks for the info, this has answered a few questions that I had and has made a lot more! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

Actually this subject is very simple.

A .308 equals a 308 and is named that because it is 30 caliber.

A 30-06 is 30 caliber and was invented in 1906.

A .338-06 is a 33 caliber not invented in 1906.

A 30-40 is thirty caliber and was invented in 1892 (obviously).

A 38-55 has a wider bullet and more powder than a 30-40 and therefore is less powerful.

A 250-3000 goes 3000 feet per second.

A 30-378 doesn't go 378 feet per second.

A 6.5-54 uses a 6.5mm bullet and is 54mm long.

A 6.5-06 uses a 6.5mm bullet and is 2.494" long.

A 6.5-08 uses a 6.5mm bullet and is shorter than this.

A .308 bullet is the same as a 7.62mm bullet and is 7.92mm wide.

A 7.62mm NATO cartridge can be fired in a .308 chamber.

It can also be fired in a 30-06 chamber--exactly once! Shrapnel must then be removed from forehead.

410 gauge means .410" diameter.

Therefore 12 gauge means .735" diameter, of course.