thanks- Delete please
- Thread starter Bryan8
- Start date
dedogs
New member
Along with your custom chamber you will need a custom die(100.00), depending on barrel taper you may have to inlet the barrel channel in your stock, then there is the cost of glass bedding, pillar bedding, or a custom stock with aluminum bedding block (300.00 avg.) then your buddy will probably talk you into a custom trigger (100.00 or more). Then you will spend possibly another 100.00 to 200.00 working up a load (at current component prices). Do you have a high quality scope that will bring out the potential accuracy of your new rifle?
I'm really not trying to talk you out of this project--just wanted to share my thoughts on the subject. Building a custom gun is FUN but it can also get expensive. It can also take many many trips to the range to work up a load for any round not just a "wildcat". Good luck.
I'm really not trying to talk you out of this project--just wanted to share my thoughts on the subject. Building a custom gun is FUN but it can also get expensive. It can also take many many trips to the range to work up a load for any round not just a "wildcat". Good luck.
Wildcats are not for everyone. First it takes a understanding of the reloading process and how to do it safely.. Once a person has got his feet wet with reloading then he could move up to a semi wildcat like an improved version of a certain cartridge fo example a 22-250 changed to a 22-250 ackley...
When chooseing a wildcat design you should try to keep it practicle, and take a look at how easey or difficult it couldbe to make and if its worth the extra effort and what is to gain by haveing one made.
Some reloaders have a wildcat built thinking they are re-inventing the wheel or they just want to have one..
If you take a look at the guys that take small cartridges and necking them down to 17 cal. most of the cartridges don't do anything better than whats already there..
For example a 17 Mink, the 17 HMR will work just as well or just step up to a 17 Mach-4..
You have to also look at what they call over bore, example a 308 necked down to 17 cal. You can only shoot a bullet so fast in each cal, the bigger the cartridge the hotter which reduces throat life..
so if you still think you need a Wildcat then look at a 223 imp. 22-250 imp, or a 243 imp.
When chooseing a wildcat design you should try to keep it practicle, and take a look at how easey or difficult it couldbe to make and if its worth the extra effort and what is to gain by haveing one made.
Some reloaders have a wildcat built thinking they are re-inventing the wheel or they just want to have one..
If you take a look at the guys that take small cartridges and necking them down to 17 cal. most of the cartridges don't do anything better than whats already there..
For example a 17 Mink, the 17 HMR will work just as well or just step up to a 17 Mach-4..
You have to also look at what they call over bore, example a 308 necked down to 17 cal. You can only shoot a bullet so fast in each cal, the bigger the cartridge the hotter which reduces throat life..
so if you still think you need a Wildcat then look at a 223 imp. 22-250 imp, or a 243 imp.
Dultimatpredator
Well-known member
Quote:
If you are looking for a hot rod... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
6000fps plus? When making a wildcat what do you posters find is the max velocities acheived in most rounds. I know once above the 4000-4200 fps mark the barrel life is normaly around 1000 rounds? I would assume if a bullet is faster than this its not going to stabalize anyways?
If you are looking for a hot rod... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
6000fps plus? When making a wildcat what do you posters find is the max velocities acheived in most rounds. I know once above the 4000-4200 fps mark the barrel life is normaly around 1000 rounds? I would assume if a bullet is faster than this its not going to stabalize anyways?
taylormade1
Member
20 Vartarg is a good one.. That will be my next wildcater
NM Leon
New member
That's a .17-50BMG. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/bowingsmilie.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/bowingsmilie.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/bowingsmilie.gif
I forget where I got the pic (maybe LRS?), but someone (for a gag) really necked a 50BMG case down to .17 caliber. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
I don't think you would never be able to actually fire a round like that with anything like a full case of powder, the pressures would be enormous.
You also reach a point of diminishing returns as far as velocity. After a while ALL you are doing by using more powder is producing more heat (instead of velocity).
Remember it's not the pressure that pushes the bullet, it's gas expansion. There is an absolute limit to the velocity achievable using chemical propellant (just over 6000fps I think). Some modern tank rounds come close to that, but ~5000fps is the fastest anybody has gotten out of a rifle (I think).
It's a very cool pic though, and I'd pay (a little) money to have a dummy cartridge like that for a paper weight. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinning-smiley-003.gif
I forget where I got the pic (maybe LRS?), but someone (for a gag) really necked a 50BMG case down to .17 caliber. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
I don't think you would never be able to actually fire a round like that with anything like a full case of powder, the pressures would be enormous.
You also reach a point of diminishing returns as far as velocity. After a while ALL you are doing by using more powder is producing more heat (instead of velocity).
Remember it's not the pressure that pushes the bullet, it's gas expansion. There is an absolute limit to the velocity achievable using chemical propellant (just over 6000fps I think). Some modern tank rounds come close to that, but ~5000fps is the fastest anybody has gotten out of a rifle (I think).
It's a very cool pic though, and I'd pay (a little) money to have a dummy cartridge like that for a paper weight. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinning-smiley-003.gif
I'm not positive, my memory just isn't that good anymore, but I think that is a case that Shawn Frame made years ago. I know he made one just like that, anyway. If it's the same one, it isn't even an actual case, it's a lathe turned piece of solid material.
Even just necking down a .50 case to .17 is a lot of work. I've done it. It requires either a good (and expensive!) assortment of forming dies, or something like the neck reduction plate that my buddy Blaine makes.
My friend is working with necking down the Jeffrey and Gibbs cases lately. I think he's going to end up doing a .30 caliber with a 40 degree shoulder on the full length .505 Gibbs case. But just for grins, he did neck down a Gibbs case all the way to .17 using his plate. Using good forming dies from someone like Huntington, that would have required more than $600 worth of dies to do (or about $100 for Blaine's plate and a shell holder).
Anyway... I do think (but am not 100%) that picture is the case that Frame made some years ago, and isn't real at all, nor even necked down.
- DAA
Even just necking down a .50 case to .17 is a lot of work. I've done it. It requires either a good (and expensive!) assortment of forming dies, or something like the neck reduction plate that my buddy Blaine makes.
My friend is working with necking down the Jeffrey and Gibbs cases lately. I think he's going to end up doing a .30 caliber with a 40 degree shoulder on the full length .505 Gibbs case. But just for grins, he did neck down a Gibbs case all the way to .17 using his plate. Using good forming dies from someone like Huntington, that would have required more than $600 worth of dies to do (or about $100 for Blaine's plate and a shell holder).
Anyway... I do think (but am not 100%) that picture is the case that Frame made some years ago, and isn't real at all, nor even necked down.
- DAA
williamwjohnson
New member
Here a couple of interesting ones I found on wikipedia.
Ackley was not just a wildcatter, he was a researcher as well, often testing firearms to destruction in the search for information. He also produced a number of experimental cartridges, not intended to be practical, but rather to test the limits of firearms. One of these experimental cartridges was the .22 Eargesplitten Loudenboomer. This humorously named cartridge was developed by Ackley for Bob Hutton of Guns & Ammo magazine, and was intended solely to exceed 5,000 ft/s (1,500 m/s) muzzle velocity. Ackley's loads only managed 4,600 ft/s (1,400 m/s), firing a 50-grain (3.2 g) bullet. Based on a .378 Weatherby Magnum case, the case is impractically overpowered for the bore diameter, and so the cartridge remains a curiosity.[6] Another humorous round, the .17 Flintstone Super Eyebunger, based on the .22-250 necked down to .17 caliber, has been used by Australian gunsmith Bill Hambly-Clark, Jr. to achieve velocities of 4,798 ft/s (1,462 m/s) out of a 52-inch (1,300 mm) barreled gun.[4]
Ackley was not just a wildcatter, he was a researcher as well, often testing firearms to destruction in the search for information. He also produced a number of experimental cartridges, not intended to be practical, but rather to test the limits of firearms. One of these experimental cartridges was the .22 Eargesplitten Loudenboomer. This humorously named cartridge was developed by Ackley for Bob Hutton of Guns & Ammo magazine, and was intended solely to exceed 5,000 ft/s (1,500 m/s) muzzle velocity. Ackley's loads only managed 4,600 ft/s (1,400 m/s), firing a 50-grain (3.2 g) bullet. Based on a .378 Weatherby Magnum case, the case is impractically overpowered for the bore diameter, and so the cartridge remains a curiosity.[6] Another humorous round, the .17 Flintstone Super Eyebunger, based on the .22-250 necked down to .17 caliber, has been used by Australian gunsmith Bill Hambly-Clark, Jr. to achieve velocities of 4,798 ft/s (1,462 m/s) out of a 52-inch (1,300 mm) barreled gun.[4]
The friend I just mentioned above broke the 5000 fps barrier with one of his .22-284's using a light (but I forget exactly how light...) bullet, many years ago.
I've pushed 32 gr. .204 bullets to 4600 fps, pretty easily, actually. Out of a couple different wildcat cartridges. The 4600 fps load in my first .20BR was "reasonable" enough that I used it for a couple days of shooting prairie dogs, even.
- DAA
I've pushed 32 gr. .204 bullets to 4600 fps, pretty easily, actually. Out of a couple different wildcat cartridges. The 4600 fps load in my first .20BR was "reasonable" enough that I used it for a couple days of shooting prairie dogs, even.
- DAA
Verminator2
Active member
That's worse than the .308 /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Quote:
Quote:
If you are looking for a hot rod... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
6000fps plus? Hey I have one of these rifles they are really accurate and really fast I shot a coyote with it at 3000 yards on saterday morning and it DRT on friday afternoon. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif
Sorry I just got caught up in the sprit of the thing. If you believe me this time I promise to never lie to you again. Jim
Quote:
If you are looking for a hot rod... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
6000fps plus? Hey I have one of these rifles they are really accurate and really fast I shot a coyote with it at 3000 yards on saterday morning and it DRT on friday afternoon. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif
Sorry I just got caught up in the sprit of the thing. If you believe me this time I promise to never lie to you again. Jim