JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Gentlemen, I will admit I have a problem with the Ackley Improved line...

I have 13 rifles in AI and still not happy, I always seem to want more.

I just got my latest reamer in from Pacific just this week......7mm STW Ackley Improved. I cant wait to see what I can do with it!!

At what point do you in fact have a .50 BMG necked down to 7mm? As if the 7mm STW wasn't enough!
 

In the article, it is stated that the .30-378 has 120 grains of case capacity(WOW!). Does anyone know the comparable capacity of the 7mm STW?

BTW, Gun Tests is a poorly unappreciated magazine. For the uninformed, Gun Tests have never had a single advertisement. Unlike the other mags, their reviews have nothing to do with who bought the most ad space, but what in fact are the better firearms, ammunition and accessories by merit. They are guilty of sometimes being a little boring, but knowing that they are backing a product not because of money, but because of results is worth a lot to me.
 
Hate to drag everybody back to the original of this thread, but I' toss my hat in the ring for the .250-3000 Savage. So much so that I started a thread some months ago asking what the ideal North American cartridge would be, and finally revealed my choice while making a good case for the .250. (Adequate power for everything up to elk, and more importantly an INSTRUCTIONAL cartridge that can teach anybody complete confidence and trust in their gun).

Actually, maybe the.250 doesn't qualify for this thread's criteria, since anybody who's ever shot one harbors immense respect for it.

So, with a penchant for all things quarter-bore, my pinch-hitter would be the .256 Winchester Magnum. Talk about lack of respect! Even some self-described gun looneys don't even know it exists. (Existed?)




Left to right: .256 Winchester Magnum, .25-35 Winchester, .25 Pronghorn Pursuit Cartridge, .250-3000 Savage, .257 Roberts, .25-06 Remington

PA110042.jpg PB070109.jpg P2180011.jpg
 
Hate to drag everybody back to the original of this thread, but I' toss my hat in the ring for the .250-3000 Savage. So much so that I started a thread some months ago asking what the ideal North American cartridge would be, and finally revealed my choice while making a good case for the .250. (Adequate power for everything up to elk, and more importantly an INSTRUCTIONAL cartridge that can teach anybody complete confidence and trust in their gun).

Actually, maybe the.250 doesn't qualify for this thread's criteria, since anybody who's ever shot one harbors immense respect for it.

So, with a penchant for all things quarter-bore, my pinch-hitter would be the .256 Winchester Magnum. Talk about lack of respect! Even some self-described gun looneys don't even know it exists. (Existed?)




Left to right: .256 Winchester Magnum, .25-35 Winchester, .25 Pronghorn Pursuit Cartridge, .250-3000 Savage, .257 Roberts, .25-06 Remington

I would only say that I wouldn't use a .250 Savage for elk unless I was starving and it was necessary. That is not an indictment of your use of one, only my opinion and the limitations that I put upon myself. My next elk will fall to a 7x57 with a 175gr. SP or possibly a 7mm-08 with a 140gr. Nosler Ballistic Tip or 150gr. Partition.

While those that have fired the .250 do respect it(I'll give Elmer Keith a pass), it is generally underappreciated and even Savage only has it chambered in one current rifle, the Model 16. I believe the best quarter bore(for antelope, deer and elk sized game.) is the .25-06 and with 117's I would have no problem shooting an elk. In my collective experience, reading and discussions, I believe the .25-06 is simply like a lightning bolt on deer and antelope and probably where I personally would draw the line for elk. Given current bullet construction, I would consider taking an elk with a .257 Roberts(though I currently do not own a rifle chambered for it.), but would prefer to start with a 6.5. I would also add(and admit) that the difference between the .250 and the Roberts cartridge renders my willingness to use one and not the other on elk ridiculous and guided by the myths and ghosts conjured up by the entirety of my shooting and hunting experiences. I love the .250 for a day at the range, for instructional purposes and for the 87 grainer's deadliness on coyote's(though I haven't shot one since 2009.) and the like.

Your 62 Levermatic is beautiful. My uncle had a Hawkeye and I was fortunate to have shot it as a kid. If I had an opportunity to get my hands on a Levermatic in .256, I would purchase at least 500 cases, load my own and my back would thank me for investing in such a rifle. As far as the Ruger and Thompson pistols, I have no personal interest in the round. I'm curious, how far did that antelope run after it was hit? Can you tell us about the bullet and load used? I personally would love to hunt with a Levermatic, but for me, tracking an antelope or anything isn't in the cards simply because of the condition of my back. I need to be confident that the round I'm using will anchor the animal as quickly as possible(that's why I use 250gr. Hornady Spire Points in my .35 Whelen to shoot rabbits).

Finally, I would love to hear your thoughts on the .25 Pronghorn cartridge. Velocities on various bullet weights? Parent case(.308?)?

Great photos, by the way.

PA110042.jpg PB070109.jpg P2180011.jpg
 
The .256 performed on this Pronghorn buck just as it has on anything else toward which it has been directed: one shot, one kill. The buck was quartering toward me at 85 yards, the 75g Hornady V-Max (modified by buffing the polymer tip to allow fitment in the Marlin 62 magazine: produces a frontal profile not unlike a Remington Power Point, with no loss of accuracy) entered left of center on the buck's brisket, destroyed the top of the left lung, ruptured the heartsack, penetrated the bottom of the right lung, broke a far rib, and was found perfectly mushroomed just under the skin. At the velocity generated by the .256 case (2360fps muzzle), the "varmint" bullet assumed perfectly the role of a big game bullet: expanding but retaining integrity and penetrating.

The Goat did what all big game animals shot in both lungs do (regardless of what they're shot with): He stiffened, turned, stumbled about 25yards, circled, went down, kicked, and was dead.

My year-plus of education and experimentation with this gun and cartridge I documented in an essay for publication, and in inexperienced exuberance I supplied that essay to Terry Wieland (Wolfe publishing) when I learned he was speculating about a Model 62. I will be diplomatic when I say he "borrowed heavily" from my work when Jim Scovill (editor) later published Wieland's compositon. (Scovill had rejected my .256 query on the basis of having "salaried/retained" writers 6 months previously). Gunwriter journalism has a measure of cutthroat aspects to it, I learned.

As to the .25 Pronghorn Pursuit Cartridge, its origins and parent case are easily deduced by looking closer at the name I selected for it. It is merely the 6mm PPC necked up to .257 caliber. With a nod to Palmisano and Pindell, hence the moniker I assigned it.

This idea was as a result of my encounter with the Mini-Mark X Mausers (the early ones, so well finished and accurate), and then discovering they were also offered in 7.62x39. Not precisely the identical bolt face as the PPC would require, but so close as to requiring no alteration there. Also no magazine or follower alteration was necessary when I had Dennis Olson of Plains, Montana rebarrel a brand new Mini-Mauser (in the Commie Cartridge) with a Lilja barrel in the .25 PPC. I thought I had broken ground, but when ordering custom dies, was told that one gentleman somewhere in Nevada had ordered a set prior. I named the cartridge anyway, with consideration toward my original purposes:

I believed this arrangement would be capable of duplicating the seminal .250-3000 velocity: an 87 grain bullet at 3000 fps. My chosen bullet for Antelope in all my .250's is the 85g Nosler Ballistic Tip. Chronograph results happily confirmed my speculation: the little gun easily matches the Savage holy grail.

I asked Dennis to contour the barrel to precisely fit the original barrel channel on the stock (since the wood was so good; fiddleback European Walnut), and yet dispense with the somewhat severe taper toward the muzzle that exists on the Mini Mausers. I also asked for a length of 21" (as compared to the original barrel at 20"). I supplied a preliminary "fabricated" cartridge with the 85g NBT seated to a maximum length to allow reliable fit in the Mini-Mauser magazine, and Dennis agreed to throat the chamber according to that precise sample. (You will note the length of the bullet exposed beyond the neck in the picture, but it is NOT seated shallowly at all: plenty deeper than the rule-of-thumb "seating depth should at least match bullet diameter").

The result is a tiny gun that (even with a Leupold 3x-9x Compact AO) weighs significantly less than my Featherweight Savage 99 (MUCH lighter than my EG's and 700 Classic)and can match them toe-to-toe for performance. My method of Antelope hunting involves doing nearly all of it on foot: I find the animals less disturbed, I meet them on their own terms, and the sense of achievement rivals that of a hard-exertion Sheep hunt. The PPC rifle carries like a wisp on the shoulder strap or in the palm of the hand during long treks, prolonged dog-trots, or brief sprints to position for a shot.
 
I would submit the .45 Long Colt. I've only recently become acquainted with it, but it is such a versatile round. Outside of the Cowboy Action world, it seems like it's just known as "that other thing you can fire out of the Taurus Judge besides .410". You can get light recoiling cowboy loads, premium defense loads, and +P "bear" loads that pack a BIG wallop, especially out of a rifle. You also have the interoperability with .410, .454 Casull, and .45 ACP in certain firearms.

I think one thing that hurts it is the selection of firearms chambered in it. Obviously there are the Judge/Governer revolvers which I think give it a bad reputation for accuracy due the the inherent issue of such a long chamber that's necessary for the .410 capabilities. Then there are the single action revolvers, which many people (not me) view as "old man" or "wanna be cowboy" toys. I know at least Ruger makes a double action revolver but I've never seen one. Last, the lever action rifles seem to do ok, but are usually hard to find. Say what you will about the Judge, but I think that gun has done more for this cartridge than anything in a really long time. The only thing I currently own for it is a Rossi single shot pistol that has a screw-in straight-rifling choke tube to keep the .410 shot patterns somewhat under control. I definitely plan on picking up a dedicated revolver at some point though.

To those who have more experience/perspective, why isn't .45 Colt more popular? Is it the fact that revolvers in general aren't considered "cool" like they once were? Is it that .357 mag/.38 spl or .44 mag/spl offer more versatility?
 
I would submit the .45 Long Colt. I've only recently become acquainted with it, but it is such a versatile round. Outside of the Cowboy Action world, it seems like it's just known as "that other thing you can fire out of the Taurus Judge besides .410". You can get light recoiling cowboy loads, premium defense loads, and +P "bear" loads that pack a BIG wallop, especially out of a rifle. You also have the interoperability with .410, .454 Casull, and .45 ACP in certain firearms.

I think one thing that hurts it is the selection of firearms chambered in it. Obviously there are the Judge/Governer revolvers which I think give it a bad reputation for accuracy due the the inherent issue of such a long chamber that's necessary for the .410 capabilities. Then there are the single action revolvers, which many people (not me) view as "old man" or "wanna be cowboy" toys. I know at least Ruger makes a double action revolver but I've never seen one. Last, the lever action rifles seem to do ok, but are usually hard to find. Say what you will about the Judge, but I think that gun has done more for this cartridge than anything in a really long time. The only thing I currently own for it is a Rossi single shot pistol that has a screw-in straight-rifling choke tube to keep the .410 shot patterns somewhat under control. I definitely plan on picking up a dedicated revolver at some point though.

To those who have more experience/perspective, why isn't .45 Colt more popular? Is it the fact that revolvers in general aren't considered "cool" like they once were? Is it that .357 mag/.38 spl or .44 mag/spl offer more versatility?

Well, S&W has the Model 25, 26 & 625 in .45 Colt.

Ruger has the Stainless Redhawk, though currently it is only offered with a 4" barrel. Other barrel lengths are available in older models.

Colt made the 1878 DA and 1902/1904 Philippine Constabulary Model. Those are very old, rare collector pieces. Colt also had the New Service, a giant DA preferred by Charley Askins. It was available in the standard model, Target and Shooting Master in .45 Colt. They also briefly offered the Anaconda in 45LC. Those can all be had on the used market, but Colt's has not made double action revolvers sine '99, with a few exceptions by the Custom Shop in '02.

There really aren't many DA 45LC options. I am not a fan of The Judge type revolvers. That is only my opinion and I have no problem with those that do like them. Of the 45LC's I mentioned, I would like a Colt's New Service Shooting Master or Target. Those are $3-5,000 revolvers, so my money goes to the Ruger. The S&W will always have the finer action, but the strength of the Ruger is the clincher for me. That it can be had for $550-700 is a great deal as well, considering a $900-1,000 price on the S&W's is fair.

The direct problem with the .45 Colt happened in 1907. S&W released their New Century Triple Lock in the brand new .44 Special. At that time, Colt SAA were relatively fragile guns, severely limiting the .45's velocity. In '30 S&W released the .38/.44, built on the N-Frame allowing .38 Special loads t be driven to very high velocities. In '35 S&W released the big one. The .357 Magnum. In '56 they release the .44 Magnum and in '63 the .41 Mag.

Virtually all of the above cartridges were in every way superior to the .45 Colt, still with turn-of-the-century ballistics while being outperformed about once a decade.

Colt's itself nearly killed the .45 Colt by stopping production of the SAA in 1940. What saved it was the release of the 2nd Generation SAA's in 1956 and in my opinion, more importantly, Ruger chambering their Blackhawk in .45 Colt in 1970. What Ruger did was allow the full potential of the cartridge to be reached. In SAA's, velocity for a 250 grain bullet topped out generally at 9-950 fps. In the Ruger BH, the same 250 grain bullet topped out at 1,400-1,500 fps. Freedom Arms made stout SA guns capable of handling such pressures as are the T/C single shots.

That is my view of it. If anyone has anything to add or flat out disagrees with me, this is only my opinion and you can value that for yourselves. I like the Colt cartridge, though I only have use for a 6&1/2" BH. A far as the rifles go, I will eventually own one. I very much prefer having a lever action to match each revolver round I own. I believe their existence is relative to the popularity of the cartridge. They are out there.
 
The .256 performed on this Pronghorn buck just as it has on anything else toward which it has been directed: one shot, one kill. The buck was quartering toward me at 85 yards, the 75g Hornady V-Max (modified by buffing the polymer tip to allow fitment in the Marlin 62 magazine: produces a frontal profile not unlike a Remington Power Point, with no loss of accuracy) entered left of center on the buck's brisket, destroyed the top of the left lung, ruptured the heartsack, penetrated the bottom of the right lung, broke a far rib, and was found perfectly mushroomed just under the skin. At the velocity generated by the .256 case (2360fps muzzle), the "varmint" bullet assumed perfectly the role of a big game bullet: expanding but retaining integrity and penetrating.

The Goat did what all big game animals shot in both lungs do (regardless of what they're shot with): He stiffened, turned, stumbled about 25yards, circled, went down, kicked, and was dead.

My year-plus of education and experimentation with this gun and cartridge I documented in an essay for publication, and in inexperienced exuberance I supplied that essay to Terry Wieland (Wolfe publishing) when I learned he was speculating about a Model 62. I will be diplomatic when I say he "borrowed heavily" from my work when Jim Scovill (editor) later published Wieland's compositon. (Scovill had rejected my .256 query on the basis of having "salaried/retained" writers 6 months previously). Gunwriter journalism has a measure of cutthroat aspects to it, I learned.

As to the .25 Pronghorn Pursuit Cartridge, its origins and parent case are easily deduced by looking closer at the name I selected for it. It is merely the 6mm PPC necked up to .257 caliber. With a nod to Palmisano and Pindell, hence the moniker I assigned it.

This idea was as a result of my encounter with the Mini-Mark X Mausers (the early ones, so well finished and accurate), and then discovering they were also offered in 7.62x39. Not precisely the identical bolt face as the PPC would require, but so close as to requiring no alteration there. Also no magazine or follower alteration was necessary when I had Dennis Olson of Plains, Montana rebarrel a brand new Mini-Mauser (in the Commie Cartridge) with a Lilja barrel in the .25 PPC. I thought I had broken ground, but when ordering custom dies, was told that one gentleman somewhere in Nevada had ordered a set prior. I named the cartridge anyway, with consideration toward my original purposes:

I believed this arrangement would be capable of duplicating the seminal .250-3000 velocity: an 87 grain bullet at 3000 fps. My chosen bullet for Antelope in all my .250's is the 85g Nosler Ballistic Tip. Chronograph results happily confirmed my speculation: the little gun easily matches the Savage holy grail.

I asked Dennis to contour the barrel to precisely fit the original barrel channel on the stock (since the wood was so good; fiddleback European Walnut), and yet dispense with the somewhat severe taper toward the muzzle that exists on the Mini Mausers. I also asked for a length of 21" (as compared to the original barrel at 20"). I supplied a preliminary "fabricated" cartridge with the 85g NBT seated to a maximum length to allow reliable fit in the Mini-Mauser magazine, and Dennis agreed to throat the chamber according to that precise sample. (You will note the length of the bullet exposed beyond the neck in the picture, but it is NOT seated shallowly at all: plenty deeper than the rule-of-thumb "seating depth should at least match bullet diameter").

The result is a tiny gun that (even with a Leupold 3x-9x Compact AO) weighs significantly less than my Featherweight Savage 99 (MUCH lighter than my EG's and 700 Classic)and can match them toe-to-toe for performance. My method of Antelope hunting involves doing nearly all of it on foot: I find the animals less disturbed, I meet them on their own terms, and the sense of achievement rivals that of a hard-exertion Sheep hunt. The PPC rifle carries like a wisp on the shoulder strap or in the palm of the hand during long treks, prolonged dog-trots, or brief sprints to position for a shot.

I never liked Terry Wieland' articles in Rifle and other magazines and his books are boring. I'm also sorry to hear Jim Scovill did that(I do like Dave Scovill, however and SomeDude should check out his new book on the SAA.), though I can't say I'm surprised. I can say first hand that gun writers are an odd bunch.

I never would have figured the .256 could get to .250 territory. So, when are you gonna sell me the Levematic(trade for a Saiga? Ha!)? I honestly now must have one. My back would LOVE that rifle.

I didn't even notice the PPC in the name until you pointed it out, I'm sorry to admit. Commercial Mauser's are a beautiful thing and I hope to own several before I'm finished. I applaud you for making your own cartridge. I can only imagine the time and effort involved, though I can also imagine that being the better part of the fulfillment.
 
"I never would have figured the .256 could get to .250 territory. So, when are you gonna sell me the Levematic(trade for a Saiga? Ha!)? I honestly now must have one. My back would LOVE that rifle."

NO! NO! The source of confusion is my responsibility. The .256 lounges around at 2300-2600 fps (depending on bullet, etc.). It is the .25 PPC that matches .250 velocities.

And another error on my part: it is Dave Scovill. A guy that knows his stuff when it comes to cast bullet/revolver stuff, but a crusty, close-minded guy when it comes to articles about cartridges lost to the ages.
 
"I never would have figured the .256 could get to .250 territory. So, when are you gonna sell me the Levematic(trade for a Saiga? Ha!)? I honestly now must have one. My back would LOVE that rifle."

NO! NO! The source of confusion is my responsibility. The .256 lounges around at 2300-2600 fps (depending on bullet, etc.). It is the .25 PPC that matches .250 velocities.

And another error on my part: it is Dave Scovill. A guy that knows his stuff when it comes to cast bullet/revolver stuff, but a crusty, close-minded guy when it comes to articles about cartridges lost to the ages.

That all actually makes sense, so, WHEN ARE YOU GONNA SELL ME THE RIFLE?? I'm joking, of course. I can't imagine you'd let that Levermartic go.

Well, Scovill was cool when he was a K. Falls guy, but now he tries to look all rugged, posing for the camera with his eyes squinted as if in the Arizona desert, not a LA photo studio, while wearing vintage $150 hankerchiefs around his neck over a western shirt he paid no less than $200 for. That he made his wife Managing Editor of the mags doesn't help anything.

I read Handloader, Rifle and Successful Hunter magazines. All of which, of course, are Wolfe Publishing mags. Scovill DOES know his revolver/casting stuff and that stuff is worth gold to me. I read those mags for Venturino(my favorite cast bullet nerd), Barsness(one of my favorite rifle writer's. His stuff in Sports Afield, Rifle, Handloader and Guns is great. An unashamed fan of the 7x57 and I love him for it.), Ken Waters, John Haviland, Clair Rees, Brian Pearce and Ron Spomer. Wieland, Sengel, Trzoniec and VanDenburg Jr. do nothing for me.
 
+1 on the Hornet and the .280 Rem! Also I'd like to throw the .6mm Rem. into the mix, it makes the .243 look like a sissy, if it wouldn't have been for American shooters and gun writers hating anything with millimeter attached to the name at that time, the .243 would have faded, and not became quite the darling it did. And the .25-06, now there's an underrated cartridge.

Something about the 25-06 makes me giddy. I also agree with you on the .244, that's a screamer and fun to load.
 
Something about the 25-06 makes me giddy. I also agree with you on the .244, that's a screamer and fun to load.

I'm a huge 30-06 fan, but almost anything based on the 06 case has me intrigued. I first heard of the 25-06 shortly after Remington introduced it and have always had the thought of owning one in the back of my mind... Seems like a great antelope/coyote cartridge if there ever was one. Who needs Weatherby for speed?
 
.30-06 AI is to. 30-06 as .35 Brown-Whelen is to. 35 Whelen. In other words no appreciable gain. Nowdays it is hard to find something that really buys you an advantage over a factory cartridge or even rifle for that matter. To me unless it's a 350 fps gain or so, honestly, why bother?

I shoot a '06 AI, it is my lightweight mountain rifle. While you do not get very much velocity gain, what you do get is almost no case stretch due to the reduction in case taper. It is the bees-knees for handloaders, I neck resize and go for it with mine.
 
In the article, it is stated that the .30-378 has 120 grains of case capacity(WOW!). Does anyone know the comparable capacity of the 7mm STW?

BTW, Gun Tests is a poorly unappreciated magazine. For the uninformed, Gun Tests have never had a single advertisement. Unlike the other mags, their reviews have nothing to do with who bought the most ad space, but what in fact are the better firearms, ammunition and accessories by merit. They are guilty of sometimes being a little boring, but knowing that they are backing a product not because of money, but because of results is worth a lot to me.

97 grains, I believe.
 

Upcoming Events

Tillamook Gun & Knife Show
Tillamook, OR
"The Original" Kalispell Gun Show
Kalispell, MT
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top