Because law enforcement/military does not have an endless supply of revenue to buy new firearms from the ground up, so if they can take advantage of existing platforms with a barrel swap and do it safely while increasing performance then it makes sense.
- Thread starter Mr.BR
- Start date
Because law enforcement/military does not have an endless supply of revenue to buy new firearms from the ground up, so if they can take advantage of existing platforms with a barrel swap and do it safely while increasing performance then it makes sense.
that's exact thought process is what eliminates the opportunity of greatness
thats the process that pays for the R&D while the "think tank guys" cant pay their mortgage..lol
Any company that does not expand and grow and have an R&D department is subject the catastrophic failure without growth there is just stagnant Manufacturing one must stay a couple of steps ahead of their competition. I don't know about you but I like the consumer do not want to be force-fed the same old regurgitated crap it has been fed to us basically for the past 125 years
Really not sure why this is even an argument? What is it about someone else's aspirations to achieve a goal that bothers some people so much?
Sorry, did not recognize it as an argument. I just see so many companies come up with cartridges they're just regurgitated versions of the same old thing and then touted as being something special. There is never seems to be something completely new from scratch to be utilized an existing platforms. I think it would be difficult kanae more than one are two cartridges did it come out in the past 10 years that were not based off of some parent cylinder case it already exists
I didn't see where anyone said it was something special. And obviously something from scratch to use in existing platforms is far more expensive and time consuming to plan and develop than tweaking something that already exists.
I would be willing to bet that feedback from end users played a part in this and if Ruag felt they could answer the call with what they came up without spending a fortune doing it, then why not?
What is it that you would develop from scratch to do what this cartridge is intended to do that would provide drastically better performance and still take advantage of existing platforms?
Cartridges are like automobiles.
There is nothing new to be had
Bigger motor, batteries, better brakes
You still have to fit multiple humans at a average height of 5’6” and 175 pounds
What does from scratch mean?
powder...max theoretical velocity 5500 Fps
possibly fastest you can push a bullet 220 swift 4200-4400
fit into a shoulder fired weapon system with manageable recoil
affordable ammunition
Reasonable barrel life
there’s a reason that every country has the same basic weapon systems regardless of their budget.
the juice isn’t worth the squeeze, and there is t much juice left.
if someone could cre a solid/mono that could run in a “regular barrel” and be so jump insensitive that it could be mass produced, that would be something.
the case and its origins have nothing to do with a projectile.
But until then we are hoping for the next “Berger” to increase BC by 5%
Over the last 60 years how far have newer 30 cal cartridges (new cases and bullets) surpassed a 300wm shooting a 200 grain Sierra match king. Being built with crappy equipment and components compared to today.
in reality not that much
I'm glad that someone is tested it and then it seems to somewhat work but I fail to understand any kind of benefit with this over the Lapua the smart man to use an existing platforms would have ran a slightly larger diameter web so that the case could be beefed up I still run the same H2O volume so the pressure's could be run higher to end up with a better and results the case only has about .019 case taper and considering the pressure levels that might be ok as 4300 bar is not that high i personaly would have made a larger web diamiter and rebated the case more to gain more capacity then shorten it so that it could be mag feed with heavier and longer bullets. with the lower pressures i am not sure that there will be any gain over the lapua at all. But at least thay did somthing different i guess.
This is what from scratch means not using any existing parent web Dimension cartridge making something from scratch...
Attachments
Do any of those need/have custom bolt face dimensions?
In the photo yes but its an example that can be done. Cartridges like the razor and headhunter and wolverine Are prime example non sammi based cases with no parent. But yet existing standard, magnum, lapua faces (swamplord designs ) precision rifled ordinance.
Do any of those have any worldwide, widespread military use?
Do any of those have any worldwide, widespread commercial production and use?
Do you have a realistic plan to get either of those to happen within the next 5 to 10 years?
Or will they most likely be single source, closely guarded, boutique items that most will never know exist?
In testing I believe they had a requirement to penetrate level IV body armor at 600 meters. Not sure where this requirement came from nor if any factory loaded 338 Lapua will do that because I've never tested it or know of anyone that has, but they achieved their goal and provided a cartridge that hits a lot harder down range than the Lapua without breaking the bank.
I really believe this was all they were after and they kept it simple. You don't always have to re-invent the wheel to make it go faster.
Just look at the 338 Lapua for what it was when it was developed. They wanted a 250 gr projectile to extend the range and energy from what snipers were seeing with a 300 Win Mag.
From there the 338 Norma was born to allow longer bullets to feed from a magazine.
From the 338 Norma we were given the 300 Norma, which if loaded with a 250 A Tip, makes the original Lapua with a 250 gr bullet look anemic in the wind and downrange energy, yet it's based off the same case. You just can't argue with incremental changes to take advantage of things we already have.
All of that is in the works
I am talking about a lapua case necked to the same caliber using the same bullet
If it’s based on current bolt face dimensions...their based on the same 100 year old tech.
you just changed the shoulder angle etc...truth be told not earth shattering, revolutionary or special attributes limiting barrier to entry.
That’s what I’m getting at
some of us think there is the ability to reinvent the wheel and companies are unwilling to work outside the box.
Your example is verification of that. Take the same A tip and put it in a 338lm necked down to 30 cal.
it’s a twin of the 300 Norma ballistics wise, all things being equal.
put the 300 Norma using the same generation and construction bullet as the original 338lm and the 300 Norma is nothing special.
for the record I’m buying a hoplite rifle in 300 Norma.
this discussion started because some were mocking the Swiss for not being revolutionary.
yet as we’ve been discussing nothing in firearms is revolutionary because we are using the same bolt face and same composition brass as always.
we are just tweaking every facet to the max.
Me?
Hi,
Probably going to get long so fair warning, lol...
These type of debates come up every single time a new manufactured aka factory ammunition/cartridge case comes to light.
Same type of thing happened back with the 338NM...
Same type of thing happened back with the 300NM...
Same type of thing happened back with the 300PRC...
Same type of thing happened back with the 6.5CM....
Same type of thing happened back with the 6.5SAUM...
List goes on and on.......
The wildcat crowd gets into the "well the manufacturer should of/could of done this and that".
The ammunition manufacturer typically does not even know about abc wildcat cartridge that could have been used as a better starting point for them.
The wildcat crowd gets into the "We already did this and that".
The ammunition manufacturer typically has a very specific reasoning for what/why they did it how they did it without asking advice.
The wildcat crowd gets into the "they did nothing special".
The ammunition manufacturer says "Show me who manufactured it first".
List goes on and on......
Typically with neither side having 1 inkling of understanding the other sides methods to the madness.
For example....Take the 375 Swiss P...
Could they have made the web area wider as mentioned? Sure could have and that is typically as far as wildcat gurus see it.
BUT then by doing so IF that removed even 1 manufacturers rifle from being able to switch and shoot due to ejection port not being able to handle the extra width...then RUAG program, marketing and market base just got smaller.
Could they have made the case shorter yet wider case body as mentioned? Sure could have..
BUT then by doing so IF that caused even 1 manufacturers rifle to have ejector issues due to the new cartridge weight over the international standardized 338LM weapon systems then RUAG customer base just got smaller again.
DID RUAG program accomplish exactly what they wanted and intended to do? ALL DAY LONG.
There is not a 338LM ammunition on this planet that will penetrate the level of body armor at the same distances the AP version of the 375 Swiss P does.
The 375 Swiss P program is nowhere near about ruling the cartridge world, nor being the dominate ELR cartridge of the world but name another factory ammunition option that beats it with that size weapon system platform, especially the AP side of things, lol......
Take some of Marks wildcat designs.....
Are some of them capable of ballistic wise beating the 375 Swiss P? Absolutely!!!!
Are some of them capable of being modified to fit standardized 338LM weapon systems? Pretty sure!!
Just takes time and money to go through all the certification/inspection processes and that is typically what we see wildcat crowd not do.
Sincerely,
Theis
Probably going to get long so fair warning, lol...
These type of debates come up every single time a new manufactured aka factory ammunition/cartridge case comes to light.
Same type of thing happened back with the 338NM...
Same type of thing happened back with the 300NM...
Same type of thing happened back with the 300PRC...
Same type of thing happened back with the 6.5CM....
Same type of thing happened back with the 6.5SAUM...
List goes on and on.......
The wildcat crowd gets into the "well the manufacturer should of/could of done this and that".
The ammunition manufacturer typically does not even know about abc wildcat cartridge that could have been used as a better starting point for them.
The wildcat crowd gets into the "We already did this and that".
The ammunition manufacturer typically has a very specific reasoning for what/why they did it how they did it without asking advice.
The wildcat crowd gets into the "they did nothing special".
The ammunition manufacturer says "Show me who manufactured it first".
List goes on and on......
Typically with neither side having 1 inkling of understanding the other sides methods to the madness.
For example....Take the 375 Swiss P...
Could they have made the web area wider as mentioned? Sure could have and that is typically as far as wildcat gurus see it.
BUT then by doing so IF that removed even 1 manufacturers rifle from being able to switch and shoot due to ejection port not being able to handle the extra width...then RUAG program, marketing and market base just got smaller.
Could they have made the case shorter yet wider case body as mentioned? Sure could have..
BUT then by doing so IF that caused even 1 manufacturers rifle to have ejector issues due to the new cartridge weight over the international standardized 338LM weapon systems then RUAG customer base just got smaller again.
DID RUAG program accomplish exactly what they wanted and intended to do? ALL DAY LONG.
There is not a 338LM ammunition on this planet that will penetrate the level of body armor at the same distances the AP version of the 375 Swiss P does.
The 375 Swiss P program is nowhere near about ruling the cartridge world, nor being the dominate ELR cartridge of the world but name another factory ammunition option that beats it with that size weapon system platform, especially the AP side of things, lol......
Take some of Marks wildcat designs.....
Are some of them capable of ballistic wise beating the 375 Swiss P? Absolutely!!!!
Are some of them capable of being modified to fit standardized 338LM weapon systems? Pretty sure!!
Just takes time and money to go through all the certification/inspection processes and that is typically what we see wildcat crowd not do.
Sincerely,
Theis
Last edited:
You are highly mistaken using a bolt face of an existing design doesn't mean that the body diameter is the same it can be rebated every one of our cartridges do not have a parent nor can they be made from any existing parent as the web dimensions are in between any of the existing cases that are available they are not Wildcats otherwise they are not modified cases they have no parents nor can they be fire formed from another cartridge
no I'm not I have not pushed my products are my designs on this post I'm just simply stating my belief system and that is why not make something new that truly exceeds expected performance
Look up the definition of retarded that's exactly what they did LOL I'm not saying what they made doesn't serve its purpose but using the same bullet necking up buy 338 Lapua would have the same end result basically the same length case and for all practical purposes close to the same capacity and clearly stated by their information operates at the same or lower pressure limits
Is your keyboard missing ALL the punctuations or just the comma and period?
always seems to be the last Resort doesn't it attack someone because they did not use punctuation because you can't win an argument based on truth I am using talk text and multitasking if you can't figure out what I wrote you're not as smart as you think you are
Hi,
O I get what you are saying. That goes back to one of the problems with the industry is that nothing is ever "made better" at one time as a singular unit.
And that is a huge problem but one that RUAG wasn't even attempting to combat, lolol....
Everyone craves increase but nobody really wants to throw out the traditional train of thought and start over completely.
From rifle design to cartridge design to barrel alloy to barrel manufacturing process to internal powder column designs........ALL needs to be done as a unit in order to make any earth shattering breakthroughs.
Send me you shortest case to house a 7mm projectile in CIP length 338 magazine operating on LM boltface and let me worry about pressures (I will run pistol powder if we need to), lolol
Sincerely,
Theis
O I get what you are saying. That goes back to one of the problems with the industry is that nothing is ever "made better" at one time as a singular unit.
And that is a huge problem but one that RUAG wasn't even attempting to combat, lolol....
Everyone craves increase but nobody really wants to throw out the traditional train of thought and start over completely.
From rifle design to cartridge design to barrel alloy to barrel manufacturing process to internal powder column designs........ALL needs to be done as a unit in order to make any earth shattering breakthroughs.
Send me you shortest case to house a 7mm projectile in CIP length 338 magazine operating on LM boltface and let me worry about pressures (I will run pistol powder if we need to), lolol
Sincerely,
Theis
I learned everything I needed to know about you and your company when you posted that anytime you have problems with your product, the customer is the number 1 cause.
You realize you are debating that changing a piece of tooling to a slightly different dimension in the same manufacturing equipment makes it special.
(From the hide)
Is this not RCC?
I think you're highly confused as to who you're talking to my company? who do you think I am and who I work for??
For the hide:
I have no arguments with anyone on this thread and I’m not attacking you or your products.
The way you post is tiring to read, often never uses sentences or paragraphs, and doesn’t read as very professional as I would expect from someone who develops the products that you have posted.
My wife‘s phone does punctuation on voice texts. You should use better software.
For badassgunworks:
I have no arguments with anyone on this thread and I’m not attacking you or your products the way you post is tiring to read often never uses sentences or paragraphs and doesn’t read as very professional as I would expect from someone who develops the products that you have posted my wife‘s phone does punctuation on voice text you should use better software.
just for you, I am so excited that you clarified yourself. You would not want anyone to think that you somehow we're being condescending. Yes I am a redneck with an engineering degree I am pleased to announce but I have not lost what makes me who I am.
I have an engineering degree, strike one. I’m have a bit of dislexsia, strike two. I’m a pilot, strike three. Therefore I only passing command of the English language. But I do know what it sounds like for someone who wants to express his opinions professionally. You don’t do that. I hope you choose to do that in your business communications.
Last i have seen .338LM AP can't punch through Level IV even at 200y/m .
Data specific to AP in .375 is not known yet
How the AP .375Swiss P is outperforming the .338LM AP by considerably margin is not known yet . Typically you would brute-force it with high MV.You see AP penetration performance,is sort of limited by penetrator length (sectional density of the penetrator if you will) ,so considering .375 bullet is no longer than .338bullet obvious gain would be through higher MV , .375 bullets are rather light for caliber and AP is typicaly even lighter so MV could be high.
But with RUAG things are kinda tuned down as they aim to make different ammo in same caliber have same POI at 300m so, there are often tradeoffs in performance to gain ease of use for end user. So some voodoo in bullet design is likely.
So will have to wait for AP bullet details and load numbers to see where the gain comes from.
I agree and was thinking the same thing its a bullet change as the cartridge performance alone is nothing special.
Lapua will probably also sell ammo. Maybe release brass to the commercial market.
Hi,
Whatever anyone does, do not order your 375 Swiss P stuff from PT&G, lol...
What a fucking joke..........
Anyone that ever suggest PT&G for anything or has PT&G make anything for them need to sit down and rethink your friend/company alliances.
Sincerely,
Theis
Whatever anyone does, do not order your 375 Swiss P stuff from PT&G, lol...
What a fucking joke..........
Anyone that ever suggest PT&G for anything or has PT&G make anything for them need to sit down and rethink your friend/company alliances.
Sincerely,
Theis
Yea, I knew as soon as PT&G was involved it was going to be an issue.
RUAG needs to talk to JGS or the other reamer and tool makers that actually care about their product and reputation.
Hi,
All my comms and issues with PT&G, including Dave posting stuff for sale as "on shelf" on Facebook last night to RUAG liaison in Thun.
What is even funnier is that about 8 weeks ago RCC called me out of the blue...Talking about Dave told him I was interested in 375 Swiss P brass and I could not help it...I just busted out laughing because not 3 weeks earlier I had played phone tag with Jeff at RCC in regards to where my standard 300NM brass order was because it was constant this and that too...... all to end up canceling that order.
Sincerely,
Theis
Would not touch PT&G with a long stick in the future
Have an order for some rather niche stuff ,that was supposedly on stock ,since November, as far as i am seeing will be 1 year before anything moves if it moves at all.
Similar threads
