Okay.....LEAST favorite cartridge

Borregos · Post by **Borregos** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 6:47 pm

Least favorite cartridge that I shoot for me is the 7mmTCU

Post by **Old Savage** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 7:39 pm

Ah Noah, one correction - the 270 is based on the 30-03 case. And, C Nose, the 270 is one of the most exciting cartridges of all time along with the 6mm Rem and the 25-35 Win.

marlinman93 · Post by **marlinman93** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 7:42 pm

Any of the new Short Magnums, or for that fact the new Long Magnums too! Seems like an excuse for not getting within shooting range, and learning your gun/caliber.

Bogie35 · Post by **Bogie35** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 1:09 am

223 Remington - tired of hearing about it and seeing it, and it does nothing impressive inside of 500 yards.
9mm - tired of hearing about it and seeing it, and it just looks goofy.
300 Mag - tired of hearing about it and seeing it, it does nothing impressive inside of 500 yards, and it hurts when you shoot it.

Extra Credit - Least Favorite Gun:
Any 1911 look-alike made after about 1912. HOW MANY WAYS CAN YOU DRESS UP A 1911 WITHOUT GETTING BORED?!!
They are not as powerful, reliable, or good looking as a Colt SAA (or one of ITS look-alikes).
Their shot capacity would be impressive if they could make it through a whole clip without jamming.

bogie

Jaguarundi · Post by **Jaguarundi** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 3:23 am

Anything that ends in SM,SSM or RUM.Rather pointless cartridge developments in my view!But youngsters who read gunrags seem to enjoy them(which prompts them to buy these latest greatest "marvels").

Doc Hudson · Post by **Doc Hudson** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 12:10 pm

That is easy!

Least Favorite Pistol Cartridge:
10 mm Auto

Least Favorite Rifle Cartridge:
.223 Rem (5.56 NATO)

Least Favorite Shotgun Shell:
.410 "gauge"

Buck Elliott · Post by **Buck Elliott** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 12:32 pm

Russian Nagant revolver cartridge... A pure abomination.

Wes · Post by **Wes** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 1:25 pm

I'm not much of a magnum fan either. Especially in rifles. I could never tell the difference in how dead my elk was with a 30-06 or my brothers 300 mag.
I have to say that the 270 is so common out in my country because it shoots flat and most are accurate. I do believe that it is the most gun that the average Joe can shoot well with. Most people don't handle recoil well. I'd far rather see younger kids shooting this than a 243 though. Not enough power for elk or moose, and maybe not for mule deer at long ranges.
My Dad had a 270 and had never heard of Jack O'Conner. He thought the 270 was hell on wheels after hunting his whole life with either a 30-30 or his uncle's 45-70.
My least favorite is any 7mm Magnum.

nemhed · Post by **nemhed** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 1:38 pm

I think the current fad for the short and super short magnums is a little silly, but I'm not opposed to anyone jumping on the band wagon if they get excited about some hot new cartridge. I just don't get the 450 Marlin though. If someone blows up an old trapdoor with a high powered 45-70 load it's their own darn fault!

billyk338 · Post by **billyk338** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 2:29 pm

I'm going to go with the short magnums too.What can they do that a .300 Win Mag(.300 WSM and RSUM)can't do or that a .338 Win Mag can't do(.325 WSM)?Does two extra pounds really make people that tired on a hunting trip?

Old Ironsights · Post by **Old Ironsights** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 3:04 pm

Least favorite:

The one I've got a gun for but can't get ammo for...

jjames: I know 9.3x72R is an oddball and ballistically not much better than a .357 MAX, but it is sure easy to load for once you've got the components.

I like mine.

AJMD429 · Post by **AJMD429** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 3:58 pm

Old Savage wrote:Ah Noah, one correction - the 270 is based on the 30-03 case. And, C Nose, the 270 is one of the most exciting cartridges of all time along with the 6mm Rem and the 25-35 Win.

Yep - WHY did the .243 Win survive better than the superior 6mm Rem...!

And the .270 isn't "necessary" BUT if there weren't a .280 or a .30-06, we'd LOVE it. I think the .280 can do anything either of the others can (or the 7mm Rem Mag), but of course it isn't that popular.

Hmmmm...gives me an idea for a NEW "non-OT" thread... http://www.levergunscommunity.com/viewt ... =1&t=13618

jeepnik · Post by **jeepnik** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 5:51 pm

AJMD429 wrote:
Old Savage wrote:Ah Noah, one correction - the 270 is based on the 30-03 case. And, C Nose, the 270 is one of the most exciting cartridges of all time along with the 6mm Rem and the 25-35 Win.
Yep - WHY did the .243 Win survive better than the superior 6mm Rem...!

And the .270 isn't "necessary" BUT if there weren't a .280 or a .30-06, we'd LOVE it. I think the .280 can do anything either of the others can (or the 7mm Rem Mag), but of course it isn't that popular.

Hmmmm...gives me an idea for a NEW "non-OT" thread... http://www.levergunscommunity.com/viewt ... =1&t=13618

Could be that more folks liked the Winchester rifle than the Remington rifle. Boy this comment is bound to start all kinds or opinions flying.

Old Time Hunter · Post by **Old Time Hunter** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 6:24 pm

.223 nothing but bad memories.

Hillbilly · Post by **Hillbilly** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 11:27 pm

I dont care for 9 mm "+P".... +P is like putting lipstick on a pig to me...espcially in 9 Luger.

444 Marlin... why? 45 long colt or 45-70 bookend it and I just never saw the need for that one

Jeff

MistWolf · Post by **MistWolf** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 8:46 pm

What can the WSM & RSAUM do that the other magnums cannot? Shed that darned useless belt. That's why I cheered when the beltless magnums came out. Belted 300 Win Mag or beltless 300 WSM? Beltless please. The other thing they can do, the 300 RSAUM in particular, is give reliable 300 Win Mag performance in an AR10 or other 308 Stoner rifle. Now if they'd take the 300 RSAUM case and neck it down to 26 caliber...

Not calibers that are my least favorites, but ones I could certainly live without

9 Wimpameter. Has it's uses but it's typically European. When it didn't work well enough they came up with the 380.

243. It's short neck is too short for easy reloading. Why is it still going strong when the 6mm gives a little better performance? Because it's case is 51 mm instead of 57. It's based on the 308 instead of the 7x57. The 243 will fit in short actions where the 6mm (and other 57mm cases) are a tight fit. Putting them in a standard length action is a waste of space. The 243 is a good caliber if you keep it's limitations firmly in mind. I dislike it because it killed one of my favorites- the 6mm Remington.

7.62x54, 7.62x39 and the 5.45x39. Commie dog rounds.

Most french, japanese and italian rounds used in WWII. Bovine of Divinity, what were they thinking??

The venerable 30-30. I have never shot a round with more painful recoil!

44 Magnum. All it'll ever be is the little brother of the 45 Colt.

22 WMR. Necking it down to 17 caliber is the best thing ever to happen to it

I will admit- I'd never turn down a chance to shoot any of them

COSteve · Post by **COSteve** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 8:50 pm

Simple, 9mm in any handgun.

Post by **Old Savage** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 9:24 pm

308, highly overrated.

Post by **Old Savage** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 9:25 pm

jeepnik - you got it.

Chris83716 · Post by **Chris83716** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 9:29 pm

I'll play. Can someone please explain the point of the .17 caliber cartridges? What will these do that a .22 LR, a .222 or .223 cant for the same or much less money?

Chris

Post by **Old Savage** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 9:47 pm

the 17 calibers will shoot flatter than the 22s to certain limited distances for things like head shots or shots at small body parts on small critters.

CEMENTHEAD · Post by **CEMENTHEAD** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 10:17 pm

Any of the short magnums for me is the kiss of death. Not useful enough for me......I like the standards. 25-06, 270, 30-30, 308Win, 30-06, 35Rem, 35Whelen, 45-70, etc, etc, etc........

Thanks, Tom

claybob86 · Post by **claybob86** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 10:48 pm

.41 magnum kind of annoys me. I just don't see the reason for it. I guess there's something out there that needs to be shot that a .357 isn't enough for and a .44 is too much for.

Flame suit on!

jeepnik · Post by **jeepnik** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 11:17 pm

Ysabel Kid wrote:
JReed wrote:
jeepnik wrote:7.62x39
+1
I imagine the reason for that may have more to do with having them sent you way in anger, rather than their performance...

Now here's an astute young man.

Alan Wood · Post by **Alan Wood** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 11:26 pm

For me it's the short magnums. Tend to be new replacment's for well established cartridges that didn't need replacing. In fact the cartridge they replaced probably were entirely unneeded in the continental US.

765x53 · Post by **765x53** » Sat Jun 12, 2010 12:47 am

claybob86 wrote:.41 magnum kind of annoys me. I just don't see the reason for it. I guess there's something out there that needs to be shot that a .357 isn't enough for and a .44 is too much for.

Flame suit on!

The .41 magnum exists because, no one wanted to admit that George Herter was right about something by legitimizing the .401 Power Mag.

papasan · Post by **papasan** » Sat Jun 12, 2010 3:05 am

Chris83716 wrote:I'll play. Can someone please explain the point of the .17 caliber cartridges? What will these do that a .22 LR, a .222 or .223 cant for the same or much less money?

Chris

How about the .17 Remington Center
Fire? Seems like an oddball to me.
Good for varmits only, and many say
a .222 or .223 is just as good or
better. Plus in many states, including
Wisconsin, a .22 Center fire caliber
is at least legal for deer. While i would never use a .22 cal, the .17 is
a complete no no for sure.

papasan

firefuzz · Post by **firefuzz** » Sat Jun 12, 2010 5:34 am

Although there are many cartridges I've never owned or shot, my least favorite cartridge is the .270 Winchester. Just never could warm up to it. A .338 would be second.

Rob

bdhold · Post by **bdhold** » Sat Jun 12, 2010 9:01 am

.25 rimfire - they wasted all those Stevens Favorites which could have been made in 22LR instead.

bdhold · Post by **bdhold** » Sat Jun 12, 2010 9:07 am

AndyM wrote:I look upon caution at the 243. The way I see it, the round is not really really good at anything.... too much for my type of varmints and too little for big game... I will say to its supporters, I have seen it kill a few black bear and an untold # of deer...

as far as the .243 goes, it's the reloaders dream. More variations than any other cartridge.
(Would I rather have a .257 Roberts? - yes)
I shot starlings with a buddy at 100 yds into his hogpen one day, he loaded 65-gr. bthp with subsonic powder loads just for the event - it went crack like a .22 and through his 20x Unertl you could shoot the leg off a starling at that range.
Toward the high end 190-gr bullets make it plenty effective for big game.

anyway, the hogs knew the drill, and were racing each other for the fallen starlings.

Post by **Old Savage** » Sat Jun 12, 2010 9:14 am

243s are pretty much perfect for small deer and antelope - well except a 6mm Rem is better.

Hankster · Post by **Hankster** » Sat Jun 12, 2010 10:07 am

Those who don't like the .270.... I agree! What can it do that the much older 7mm Mauser, or 6.5 Swede Mauser CAN'T!! Seems with guns, guys are constantly trying to "Re-invent the wheel"!! As to all the "super-mag" rifle rounds...... when you can't stalk and hunt, or make the hole exactly where you WANT it, use a "howitzer" for effect!
I've played with both over time, and find myself constantly going "backwards" in "time"... finding that "older generally is better" to a degree. Now, .357, .44 mag in rifles, You bet!!! But a .375 H&H??? For what?? I don't hunt Elephants, and for THAT matter "Karamojo" Bell dropped em, with almost boring regularity, with the OLD ( and NON magnum) 7mm Mauser!! Guess when you can SHOOT, you don't NEED to "overcompensate" with "blast"!!! IMHO..... yours may vary

brno602 · Post by **brno602** » Sat Jun 12, 2010 12:54 pm

I am voting the Short Mags I sure have alot of short mag brass though, range pick ups I use it to make fishing lures.
But I don't own a 06 have dies but no 06 because I have a .280 and everyone else has a 06 thats my reason, but it's a fine cal and the best for the one gun hunter but I have 20 to pick from so no 06 for me.

gak · Post by **gak** » Sat Jun 12, 2010 1:54 pm

+1
- .25 ACP, James Bond's first gun notwithstanding.
- .308 - give me a 7mm-08 any day, or a .270 or '06 if "more" needed.
- 7mm Mag - obnoxious
- .300RUM
- WSM or WSSM anything as othwers have mentioned.
- .17__ anything
- 7.62x39 - much respected, not particularly loved, probably for the same "non-technical" reasons others have mentioned,...and notwithstanding the fact I've long been a proponent (in hindsight) of us should-have- developed a rimless, spitzered .30-30 in a high capacity intermediate rifle/carbine format for 1/2 our troops in WWII (and beyond) versus making them cart around that low capacity, non-reloadable-clip'd Garand block of concrete--for most duty.

Streetstar · Post by **Streetstar** » Sat Jun 12, 2010 4:50 pm

I dont particularly care for the 7.62 x 39 primarilly because of all the ugly and cheap looking AK's and SKS's it is chambered in (i admit these firearms have their place and work very well --- im just a little bit of a a snob in some ways)-- although i'd buy one if ammo prices were down to 200 bucks for a big Spam can full of the stuff again

While i dont like the 7.62 x 39, i have a great deal of admiration for one of its off spring, the 6mm PPC, the winningest BR cartridge in recent history

reddnek · Post by **reddnek** » Sat Jun 12, 2010 5:09 pm

308 and its descendents

6pt-sika · Post by **6pt-sika** » Sat Jun 12, 2010 5:18 pm

I don't care for the ,

223

308

30-06

I do however like the 243 , 260 , 7-08 and 338 Federal which all came from the 308 !

And in the case of the 30-06 I do like it's offspring the 25-06 , 6.5-06 , 280 and 338-06.

encore4me · Post by **encore4me** » Sun Jun 13, 2010 4:51 am

30-06 Because everyone thinks they are the ultimate.
.45 cal muzzleloaders
450 Marlin

I like all guns but all anyone needs is a good leveraction 45-70

Matt

AJMD429 · Post by **AJMD429** » Sun Jun 13, 2010 10:58 am

9mm, unless the gun is smaller than a single deck of cards.

A Calico 9mm with a 3-shot-burst option and the 100-round magazine would be ok though.

Markbo · Post by **Markbo** » Sun Jun 13, 2010 11:32 am

9mm parabelum. Wait no... the .380 auto!

NO... the .32 auto!! Ah heck... any of those puny semi-auto rounds. They do nothing for me.

roundup · Post by **roundup** » Sun Jun 13, 2010 12:40 pm

Bullard4075 wrote:OK I'll wade in. .......................... 30 carbine .

Worthless little cartridge. My dad told stories of the south pacific (he was a CB) of the Japs taking shots to
the chest with no effect. They threw carbines into the ocean as soon as something better was found. He managed
to get a Navy issue 1928 Thompson . Now there was a weapon.
A friend has one I've shot and reloaded for extensively. Shooting anything is fun ...... but it is still a worthless cartridge.

On further reflection Ruger chambered their Blackhawk in 30 carbine. That might be fun.
Did hear though it had a terrible muzzle blast.
And what does it do you can't do with a 357 mag.

I stick with my first thought ................ 30 carbine ........ worthless.

plus 1

Old Ironsights · Post by **Old Ironsights** » Sun Jun 13, 2010 12:48 pm

I won't keep a gun/cartridge I have no use for... so I can't say I really have a "least favorite" other than "any cartridge I don't shoot regularly".

I would have to agree that the .30 Carbine is pretty much pointless though.

In Pistols, I'd have to say .357 Sig - not because it's a BAD cartridge, just that it's bloody expensive OEM and a PITA to reload...

765x53 · Post by **765x53** » Sun Jun 13, 2010 3:46 pm

Anything hot, new, or popular. I've always been a contrarian.

N40W111 · Post by **N40W111** » Sun Jun 13, 2010 4:52 pm

For me it's a 30-06. It was my first exposure to "high-powered rifles" as a kid and I hated it. I detest the noise and the kick. I can't imagine having to fire one all day without hearing protection like my dad's generation did in WW2. I realize that if you were the enemy and got hit, you were a dead man, but I think it was total overkill (pun intended). The Germans and the Japanese had similar weapons firing back at us...I find it hard to believe that anyone survived with any hearing left. I mean, war is war, and the Garand, for example, got the job done admirably, but it was heavy and noisy.

I'm a levergun kinda guy...357 mag is my favorite in a '92 action.

1894cfan · Post by **1894cfan** » Sun Jun 13, 2010 5:09 pm

Tycer wrote:.25 ACP

While I do own a Colt .25, and it's accuracy is pretty good, I kinda have to agree with you on this one. It's such a PIA to reload and get the powder charge JUST right, besides being too small for a centerfire cartridge, not to mention that more often than not it just PO's the person that gets shot with it.
It's kinda a hoot to shoot, though.

1894cfan · Post by **1894cfan** » Sun Jun 13, 2010 5:12 pm

jeepnik wrote:7.62x39

+1! Rather go with a Win 94 30/30

buckeyeshooter · Post by **buckeyeshooter** » Sun Jun 13, 2010 5:15 pm

if I can pick just one--- its a .223. But honestly, I have no use for any centerfire under 30 caliber.

1894cfan · Post by **1894cfan** » Sun Jun 13, 2010 5:19 pm

Ysabel Kid wrote:
TedH wrote:
Tycer wrote:.25 ACP
+1 Although I do own one.
+1 +1

Got one, and it is probably my least favorite. Expensive, wimpy, better than nothing but not much. I think guns in this caliber give their owners too much confidence...

I've got one also, but know what it's good for, punching holes in paper!!!!! I'd much rather use a .380ACP for defense, got one of those too.

Malamute · Post by **Malamute** » Sun Jun 13, 2010 5:27 pm

I can't really get too excited about the 41 Swiss Veterli. The French pinfire rounds have never been on my want list either.

Never really had a desire for a 460 Weatherby either.

1894cfan · Post by **1894cfan** » Sun Jun 13, 2010 5:52 pm

Wes wrote:I'm not much of a magnum fan either. Especially in rifles. I could never tell the difference in how dead my elk was with a 30-06 or my brothers 300 mag.
I have to say that the 270 is so common out in my country because it shoots flat and most are accurate. I do believe that it is the most gun that the average Joe can shoot well with. Most people don't handle recoil well. I'd far rather see younger kids shooting this than a 243 though. Not enough power for elk or moose, and maybe not for mule deer at long ranges.
My Dad had a 270 and had never heard of Jack O'Conner. He thought the 270 was hell on wheels after hunting his whole life with either a 30-30 or his uncle's 45-70.
My least favorite is any 7mm Magnum.

The only magnum I like is .357!