[ EPU Foyer ] [ Lab and Grill ] [ Bonus Theater!! ] [ Rhetorical Questions ] [ CSRANTronix ] [ GNDN ] [ Subterranean Vault ] [ Discussion Forum ] [ Gun of the Week ]

Eyrie Productions, Unlimited

Subject: "dry understatement"     Previous Topic | Next Topic
Printer-friendly copy    
Conferences Gun of the Week Topic #86
Reading Topic #86
Charter Member
19032 posts
Aug-25-17, 07:53 PM (EDT)
Click to EMail Gryphon Click to send private message to Gryphon Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
"dry understatement"
   I've recently obtained a copy of John J. and Judy Donnelly's Handloader's Manual of Cartridge Conversions, Fourth Edition, which describes how to make many obsolete cartridges out of parts of others that may be more readily available. For instance, here are the instructions for making new .44 Auto Mag cases:

"MAKE FROM: .308 Win. or .30-06. Cut case to 1.298". Inside neck ream to hold .429" dia. bullet. Chamfer & solvent clean. F/L size. Tumble. Chase chamfer & load."

It also contains instructions for not-so-rare cartridges, usually with a note that you'll never need to do this, which is nice in a post-apocalyptic-prep kind of way. For example, it has detailed instructions for how you can make .380 ACP cases from .222 or .223 Remington, then notes, "Not really worth the effort - commercial cases are easy to find."

My favorite bit I've come across so far, though, is in the section before the tables of cartridge specs (which make up the bulk of the book), which contains some introductory material about techniques used in handloading more advanced than just recharging spent ammunition into a new round of the same type. Specifically, in the introduction to powder types, by way of warning that the modern versions of cartridges old enough to have originated in the black powder days are not interchangeable with their ancient predecessors, the authors note:

"There is no faster method of field-stripping a trapdoor Springfield than to load it with, and fire, a round of [.45-70 Government] ammunition designed for a Ruger No. 1 rifle!"


(Although, to be fair, that says as much about the strength of the Ruger No. 1 as anything else. One of the Ruger engineers who worked on it reported later that they never actually managed to blow up the prototype, even when they were trying to for testing purposes. :)

Benjamin D. Hutchins, Co-Founder, Editor-in-Chief, & Forum Mod
Eyrie Productions, Unlimited http://www.eyrie-productions.com/
zgryphon at that email service Google has
Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.

  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Conferences | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic

[ YUM ] [ BIG ] [ ??!? ] [ RANT ] [ GNDN ] [ STORE ] [ FORUM ] GOTW ] [ VAULT ]

version 3.3 © 2001
Eyrie Productions, Unlimited
Benjamin D. Hutchins
E P U (Colour)