Jump to content
tanknet.org

Firearms of note and ridicule


Recommended Posts

Is the length Vs diameter of these cartridges a consequence of the propellants characteristics?

In other words, do more modern formulations allow for wider cases?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 4.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

On 10/18/2020 at 7:08 PM, bojan said:

.22 Hornet is ill suited for a larger magazines since it had way too long neck and was rimmed. IIRC also brass was pretty fragile. .250 savage was the 6.5x55 Swedish level so no real intermediate. .25 and .30 Remington were probably best of the bunch, but those also suffered from too long cartridge (they were early 20th century cartridges...). Europe before WW1 also had few comparable ones, 8.2x45mm Krnka for example, but due the WW1 those have remained obscurities.

Remember an ex-sailor is asking this but what is the difference between "rimmed" and "not-rimmed" cartridges and why does it matter in magazines and automatic weapons?" Thank you. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rimmed cases have a rim extending past the major diameter of the brass. 7.62x54R, .303 British. They headspace on the rim.

Non-rimmed are the ones where rim does not protrude past the major diameter of the case - 30-06, 7.62x51, 5.56, 7.62x39 and practically any modern ammo intended for pistols or other automatic weapons.

There is also a semi-rimmed, which combines extractor groove of the non-rimmed with a small rim. 6.5x50 Arisaka, .32 ACP, .38 (not .380!) ACP/Super are the examples that survive.

Rimmed ones have problem functioning in the magazine fed (semi)automatic weapons, it is possible to do, but magazines are generally harder to design, have more curve, are longer and heavier etc. This was known since at least 1880s when first non-rimmed ones appeared.

For a machineguns using belts and pull-push feed (Maxim, Vickers, Brownings, PKM...) rimmed is not a problem however, in fact it can be seen as an advantage since extractor has more area to grab onto.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DB said:

Is the length Vs diameter of these cartridges a consequence of the propellants characteristics?

In other words, do more modern formulations allow for wider cases?

I think it has more to do with what is considered acceptable chamber pressure in the "modern" times vs early 20th century.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am really struggling with this one.

I mean, there doesn't seem to be anything wrong with it, except there is absolutely no reason for it to exist. Just use a standard .45, there can't possibly have been enough Webley auto pistols around to make it impossible to just replace them all.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

.455 Webley Auto was already in the system for Webley Scott automatic pistols.

 

Edit:  If you mean why develop .455 Auto in the first place instead of just adopting .45ACP for the British pistols, it seems they were parallel developments so the Colt round wasn't already available.

Edited by R011
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...