Remington's kiss of death

In southern Ontario at least I believe the popularity of the .270 is largely due to the fact that it is the largest rifle we could carry in the small game feilds and still take it hunting for deer or moose in the fall. When fathers and uncles do this it is natural for sons and dauhters to follow. Over the years I have read only small pieces of Jack O`conner (much more Elmer actually) and I love the .270. But now hunt mostly with big bores.[/QUOTE]

What kind of stupid law is this? A .270 is legal but a .280 isn't? Only in Ontario.
 
jeff270 said:
Although it appears Remmington designed a bunch of looser, at least they were trying.
And they got some right as well .223,22-250,25-06,7-08,7mag,416.
Winchester made some loosers too.
.219,225,220swift,256,264,7-30,284,307,33,348,356,358.
Click to expand...

I don't think 220 Swift fits in there. You must be one of the jealous ones that owns a 22-250. Almost as good as the Swift, but always just a little behind. :D

All manufacturers had duds. No one has mentioned Winchester's WSSM's.......real dandies there. ;)
 
What kind of stupid law is this? A .270 is legal but a .280 isn't? Only in Ontario.[/QUOTE]

Exactly, and a 270 is allowed but a 30-30 isn't. The rule should be about velocity limits or muzzle energy, not calibre. A 270 has a lot more smack than a lot of larger calibres
 
StevieK said:
What kind of stupid law is this? A .270 is legal but a .280 isn't? Only in Ontario.
Click to expand...

Exactly, and a 270 is allowed but a 30-30 isn't. The rule should be about velocity limits or muzzle energy, not calibre. A 270 has a lot more smack than a lot of larger calibres[/QUOTE]

There shouldn't be any rules about using a cartridge that is too large.
 
I think there is just too much out there, especially for reloaders. People are starting to keep things simple and realize that you don't need a 9.3mm Ultra Dynamic Super Shooter Magnum to take game or hit paper.

When you go to buy components the aisle is so long, and half empty these days just because there is too much out there and it is impossible to stock everything all the time except the basics.

Myself, I am seeing many people leaning towards more "standard" calibers like .223 for plinking, 270,308, 7mm Rem Magnum for hunting, just because the stuff is out there, tried and tested, and easy to work with.

How many .338 long range wildcats do we really need anyways, and how many more based on the 308. Winchester case.Of course something is going suffer in sales and popularity, not everyone wants the obscure rare chamberings.However some do and that keeps the development moving ahead.

I guess all we have to do is look at what happened to General Motors,keep it simple, not a bizillion products to try win every corner of the market.
 
StevieK said:
What kind of stupid law is this? A .270 is legal but a .280 isn't? Only in Ontario.
Click to expand...

Exactly, and a 270 is allowed but a 30-30 isn't. The rule should be about velocity limits or muzzle energy, not calibre. A 270 has a lot more smack than a lot of larger calibres[/QUOTE]

Exactly, but The BIG wheel turns slow.....in Ontario :jerkit:
 
Kelly Timoffee said:
When you go to buy components the aisle is so long, and half empty these days just because there is too much out there and it is impossible to stock everything all the time except the basics.

Myself, I am seeing many people leaning towards more "standard" calibers like .223 for plinking, 270,308, 7mm Rem Magnum for hunting, just because the stuff is out there, tried and tested, and easy to work with.

.
Click to expand...

Why is it "impossible to stock everything"? Ever look at the cereal shelf at the supermarket?

Why are those shelves empty in the components aisle? Certainly it's not because some new cartridges were released to the market. The only effect that would have on what was on the shelf would be the expectation of some empty brass. Except for brass, for the most part most new cartridges use the same powders, primers, and bullets as the older, established cartridges.

I think it starts with the retailers who don't want to stock items that don't move quickly, and snowballs from there. Not blaming the retail guys either, they are there to make money and earn a living. But it's the start of a vicious cycle. New cartridges come out, little or no ammo or components on the shelf, no one buys the rifles, no one stocks the ammo and components for rifles that no one wants........For an example, consider the 17HM2. It seems to be holding it's own in the US, but in Canada we are caught in that no ammo because there are no rifles because there is no ammo endless loop.

Unless a new cartridge offers something substantially different to the market, it is almost doomed from the start.
 
Norma said:
Exactly, and a 270 is allowed but a 30-30 isn't. The rule should be about velocity limits or muzzle energy, not calibre. A 270 has a lot more smack than a lot of larger calibres
Click to expand...

Exactly, but The BIG wheel turns slow.....in Ontario :jerkit:[/QUOTE]

Just for interests sake I'll mention the rules I encountered when I lived in SE Wisconsin. During deer season, in the counties in SE Wisconsin, center fire rifles were NOT allowed. It was understandable because everywhere you looked there was a house and an acreage. It would have been very difficult to get a shot where you had a clear background. You were allowed to use shotguns with slugs, black powder and HANDGUNS! There was no shortage of hunters or deer taken. I can imagine the liberals spitting coffee on their keyboards if we proposed similar legislation in heavily populated areas here!

John
 
StevieK said:
What kind of stupid law is this? A .270 is legal but a .280 isn't? Only in Ontario.

Exactly, and a 270 is allowed but a 30-30 isn't. The rule should be about velocity limits or muzzle energy, not calibre. A 270 has a lot more smack than a lot of larger calibres
Click to expand...

You are now inventing additional stupidity. :mad:
 
bearkilr said:
All manufacturers had duds. No one has mentioned Winchester's WSSM's.......real dandies there. ;)
Click to expand...

Ok. I'll mention WSSM's!

Had a 243 WSSM. It was a real dog!
I don't know for an absolute certainty if it was the rifle or the cartridge but it sure didn't work for me in terms of grouping.(eg. 2 1/2" at best.)
It was replaced by a Browning Stainless Stalker in 25-06 and I am now living happily ever after.
I am academically interested in hearing how WSSM's have worked out for other shooters but I doubt I'll ever risk another one.
Comments??
 
Lex said:
I am academically interested in hearing how WSSM's have worked out for other shooters but I doubt I'll ever risk another one.
Comments??
Click to expand...

The WSSM case is getting revived in Indiana, with new regs that allow pistol calibres, but with short OAL. The law was intended to allow for .357 lever actions during traditional shotgun hunts, but guys are building .358 WSSM's with success...:cool:

Ron AKA said:
Some done well by Remington:

22-250 Rem
.223 Rem
6BR (standardized by Norma, but originally Remington)
25-06 Rem
260 Rem
7mm-08 Rem
7mm Rem Mag


Not a bad list of winners.
Click to expand...

I often wonder if Remington would have had the smarts to come up with these, if someone else had not made the parent case. They are good at necking up and down other people's cases, but when they design their own, it flops.
 
Happy to report that I do not own a single "dud" or "flameout" chambered for Remington cartridge. Same for any other brand (got rid of 300 WSM years ago).

22-250 me likes
7mmRemMag me likes
25-06 Rem me likes lots and lots and lots

Me favorites is still the Holland &Holland and the 338 Win Mag.:)
 
warrenb said:
You are now inventing additional stupidity. :mad:
Click to expand...

Not at all, shotgun hunts and bows are only allowed in southern Ontario because most areas are farmland with houses and residents in somewhat close proximity. This makes sense because a shotgun slug does not have nearly the same velocity as a centrefire bullet, therefore a missed shot will not travel as far.
So limiting the velocity of a bullet while hunting coyotes in that same area does make sense, but a caliber restriction does not achieve this goal. The idea of a muzzle energy limitation would only be in place so that we could continue to shoot things like 22-250's that have a very high velocity but low energy
 
Remington is noted for their poor marketing.Whether it is a good cartridge that is underpromoted,or a successful rifle that is discontinued,Remington will do it.It's obvious that they don't listen to their customers.However just because they won't support one of their chamberings doesn't mean it isn't a good cartridge,I am very happily shooting a 7SAUM,an 8mmRemMag,and I'm building a 6.5RemMag.I have plenty of brass for all three. Mur
 
Last edited:
bearkilr said:
I don't think 220 Swift fits in there. You must be one of the jealous ones that owns a 22-250. Almost as good as the Swift, but always just a little behind. :D

All manufacturers had duds. No one has mentioned Winchester's WSSM's.......real dandies there. ;)
Click to expand...

And then there's the .22-250AI,which equals the Swift with longer barrel life and less case trimming!:D Mur
 
For me, Remington lost me when they stopped making bolt action rifles with a detachable magazine. Too bad really, they were my favourite at one time. Mmmm, so how come my only bolt Rem is a Model 7 with a drop plate in 7 SAUM LOL :confused: Because I love the little sucker. To me that platform made sense for a short action mag.
 
blargon said:
The WSSM case is getting revived in Indiana, with new regs that allow pistol calibres, but with short OAL. The law was intended to allow for .357 lever actions during traditional shotgun hunts, but guys are building .358 WSSM's with success...:cool:



I often wonder if Remington would have had the smarts to come up with these, if someone else had not made the parent case. They are good at necking up and down other people's cases, but when they design their own, it flops.
Click to expand...

That pretty much describes most case designs for the last 90 years, not just Rem. - dan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom