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

John Barsness's latest exclusive column, "CARTRIDGE EFFICIENCY ," is on its way. If you haven't received this or previous versions, simply JOIN OUR MAILING LIST, and you'll be on board for future monthly columns.

Here are links to the last few columns:

"Binoculars and Glassing"

"The Latest Ballistic Tip"

"Getting The Most Out Of Your .30-06"

"Cartridges and Bullets for Real Buffalo"

"1-12 vs. 1-9 Twist in .223's"

"Modern Rifle Powders"

"Seating Bullets Straightly"

"Cartridges and Bullets for Whitetails"

"Rifle Cartridge Overall Length"

"The .300 Weatherby: The Best .30-Caliber Magnum?"

Don't forget to check out John's (and Eileen's ) other stuff at http://www.riflesandrecipes.com.

Many thanks, as usual, John!

Have a great Christmas season!

Another excellent article, JB.

A friend, a retired rocket scientist (really), has an old 300 Weatherby that he refuses to use or shoot because it kicks him too hard. But he won't get rid of it because he likes to say he has a 300 Weatherby. I do believe this is fairly common affliction among those of us who grew up poor in the 50's and 60's. You knew you had finally made some sort of success out of yourself when you could at last own a Weatherby, and I mean a Mark V, of course. There were no inexpensive Weatherbys back then, or synthetic stocks.
After reading the article I have one more reason to call my friend "Rocket Man".

A friend of mine has a 257 Wby., an excellent fast stepping cartridge. It shoots flat and is very tractable to handload given its super high performance nature.

But efficiency wise my bolt action 250 Savage beats it by a wide margin, delivering over 80% of the velocity with about 50% of the powder when we're both shooting 100 grain bullets.

I like them both a lot.

m

What magazine is it in fella's?

Brad,
I believe the article in question is on the 'Fire here?

Where?

I got an email a few hours ago saying the article was posted?
Maybe I got it mixed up with another article????

Check your e-mail. It may or may not be there yet, because Rick sends them out in batches, I believe.

Got mine via email a couple of hours ago. Good stuff as always John.

Good article from JB as usual.

Great read JB. Something new to ponder, helps explain why I own so many 22 rimfires.

Great article. I wasn't sure it was possible to write an article on the topic without mentioning the 308 Winchester or the 35 Whelen... but now I know it is possible. Dang, that editorial staff sure butchered it to get it in under the 1600 word limit.

The article is Here

On the article page, near the upper right hand corner, is a box that says, "Join Our Mailing List!" Click it and join the list, new articles will come to your mailbox but no spam will.

Stickied at the top of this forum.

During Religious Emphasis Week in 1956, our forestry-school class invited a local rabbi to explicate Judaism. He asked "Which Judaism?" and explained that "wherever there are two Jews, there are three opinions" about everything.

Seems that the same is true about shooters and cartridge efficiency. In Hatcher's Notebook, the general explained that the efficiency of a cartridge is the ratio between (a) the theoretical chemical energy stored in the powder and (b) the kinetic energy delivered by the speeding bullet. The actually delivered energy is such-and-such a percentage of the theoretically stored energy. That's the old more-or-less "official" or technical definition of a cartridge's efficiency.

Other shooters define cartridge efficiency in their own terms � especially when they're talking about relative effectiveness and calling it "efficiency."

To calulate efficiency as General Hatcher defined it, first calculate the chemical energy stored in the powder charge � charge weight in grains times (IIRC) 178 foot-pounds per grain (for IMR powders). Then calculate the percentage of that theoretical total energy that the traveling bullet actually delivers.

Don't be surprised to find that some of the most efficient cartridges are the least effective � the .22 Long Rifle versus the .458 Winchester Magnum, for example.

John has the disgusting habit of stating things in a common sense manner without pontificating. At the same time, his lessons make enjoyable reading.

Indeed he does.

I've settled on the foot-pounds per grain burned formula myself. It does prejudice the result towards the smaller cartridges, but that only proves its validity, I feel.

JB overlooked THE most efficient round: the CB cap. It doesn't churn up the muzzle smoosh, but it does it on less than a grain of priming alone!

I recall Bob Milek writing about cartridge efficiency many moons ago. I find myself going right down the same path. I've killed all my critters this year with a 250AI and a 300 Savage. To me the 250AI about tops out the 25 caliber line. Course it don't mean I won't use a 257 Roy.

Should add I remember thinking many moons ago that Milek was bonkers when talking efficiency, not so much now.

Kinda like when you were 18 and your Dad was the biggest moron on the planet - but he got smarter every day after you turned 30!