jeffh
.375 Atomic
Posts: 1,573
|
Post by jeffh on Aug 8, 2021 22:13:22 GMT -5
Where did the information come from that you need to "Load Down" such cartridges as the 250 and 300 Savage? They work just fine loaded to SAAMI Specs. I'm not theorizing here, I've owned both for 25+ years. My interpretation of "sensible," "sane," etc. I may be infusing what I have read elsewhere as well. I realize that the 300 and 250 are lower-pressure than later-conceived rounds, but had not realized they were low enough - given the head diameter - to load in a Contender.
|
|
jeffh
.375 Atomic
Posts: 1,573
|
Post by jeffh on Aug 8, 2021 22:18:41 GMT -5
As for downloading, silhouette matches, shootoffs, and championships have been won with the .308 Winchester downloaded................. David Bradshaw But not in a Contender, right?
I "download" too, but I'm trying to reconcile the idea of downloading a cartridge with pressures higher than what (I thought) a gun was designed to handle to make it safe to shoot in that gun.
I may be getting the totally wrong impression from what I've read in this thread too.
|
|
jeffh
.375 Atomic
Posts: 1,573
|
Post by jeffh on Aug 8, 2021 22:28:24 GMT -5
I understand downloading for accuracy and ease of shooting. That's a want, not a requirement. My question was where did the information come from that a Contender had to be downloaded (250/300 Savage, etc) so it wouldn't damage the gun? After well over 40 years of shooting Contenders in these "Dangerous" cartridges, I'm just curious. CRICKETS... I rest my case... It was not "information," it was an impression and I was very specific in that I was curious and not criticizing - trying to understand what I thought I was reading. No need to get defensive. If I am mistaken in my impression, I am open to correction, in fact, that's what I was asking for.
As for the "CRICKETS," I care for a severely disabled family-member full-time in addition to my full-time job, so if I don't get right back, I am otherwise occupied. I don't always have time to log off when called away, so sometimes I am logged on for hours without being in front of the computer.
If this is too much an inconvenience for you, please ignore my posts.
|
|
|
Post by Encore64 on Aug 9, 2021 5:17:10 GMT -5
My question was a general one. I certainly didn't quote anyone other than myself and I'm still simply curious.
There has been posts on this thread and the "Information" had been around for years.
I realize that there are manufacturers who chose not to chamber certain cartridges in Contenders. That is their right as it should be.
There are certain consumers who don't care to own Contenders chambered in certain calibers. Also something that is a choice.
But, when I read to "avoid" certain cartridges or that something is unsafe at factory levels, I simply want to know where the information comes from.
Unfortunately, we live in a world where many believe their choice is right and to be imposed as a rule or law. My beliefs can be changed or modified if I learn something new. I don't tend to alter my ways based on conjecture.
This way of thinking isn't new. Go back and read the development of 45 Colt +P Loads. Now, it's common place and loading manuals list different level loads for specific guns. Ditto on the 45-70 and others.
Even after years of shooting Contenders I'm ready to learn something new if it's fact based. But, "They Say" doesn't work if we don't know who "They" are and where the information came from.
|
|
|
Post by bradshaw on Aug 9, 2021 11:03:39 GMT -5
As for downloading, silhouette matches, shootoffs, and championships have been won with the .308 Winchester downloaded................. David Bradshaw But not in a Contender, right? I "download" too, but I'm trying to reconcile the idea of downloading a cartridge with pressures higher than what (I thought) a gun was designed to handle to make it safe to shoot in that gun. I may be getting the totally wrong impression from what I've read in this thread too.
***** Jeff.... my reference is specific: .308 Win with IMR 4895/H4895. Bottlenecks have a slower EXPANSION RATIO than a straight-wall case. I love the 7mm TCU----.284/.223 Rem with 40-degree shoulder----in the Contender of 1979, which is strengthened from from Warren Center’s original tip-open. I’m not interested in a .308 Winchester case in the .800-inch Contender barrel. Perhaps no one tested the early Contender as stiffly as Dave Ingram, whose handloads added an auto-eject feature to the Contender. Those really were the days of Rocks & Dynamite in silhouette. T/C had a standing offer to replace free a worn out Contender. Warren Center told me of a few traded in with over 20,000 rounds, still shootable. Most danger comes from * Innappropriate powder. * Double or multi-charged fast powder. * Detonation can also come from a bottleneck case with a partial charge of very slow powder. I have great respect for the improved Contender with its fine adjustable trigger, hung with Pachmayr Gripper or Signature and Pachmayr forend. David Bradshaw
|
|
|
Post by lockhart on Aug 9, 2021 17:07:47 GMT -5
A buddy & I were shooting silhouette match at the old Goliad, Texas range. He was shooting a .357 Herrett in a TC Contender. "Rocks & Dynamite" were the type of loads he had. He suddenly had the "auto eject" feature appear in his Contender. The match director happened by, and told him to take that gun off the line. I believe the match director was J.B. White, who ran the matches there with his wife. I loved shooting at that range, too. I believe David Bradshaw had taken in some of the matches there. Or maybe not.
|
|
|
Post by dougader on Aug 9, 2021 17:19:56 GMT -5
Even though the gun can take it, I quickly found that full hop loads weren't necessary to knock over 200 yard rams with a Super 14 Contender in 30/30. The 150 grain Nosler BT's at 1800 fps did just as well as the torque-twister BT's at 2100 fps. I fared better, though.
|
|
|
Post by Encore64 on Aug 9, 2021 17:23:39 GMT -5
A buddy & I were shooting silhouette match at the old Goliad, Texas range. He was shooting a .357 Herrett in a TC Contender. "Rocks & Dynamite" were the type of loads he had. He suddenly had the "auto eject" feature appear in his Contender. The match director happened by, and told him to take that gun off the line. I believe the match director was J.B. White, who ran the matches there with his wife. I loved shooting at that range, too. I believe David Bradshaw had taken in some of the matches there. Or maybe not. You make a great point. That being that common sense always has to be used. The 30-30 Case is ideal and my personal favorite in the Contenders. But, it doesn't mean you should load ammo carelessly. I saw a Type II Frame stretched at the web by the 7mm TCU that David mentioned above. Also, a 357 Magnum barrel that was broken loose from the lug. A guy used powder he bought at a gun show. It was a partially used container and apparently not in the correct container. Thanks for posting this...
|
|
|
Post by bradshaw on Aug 9, 2021 22:32:59 GMT -5
A buddy & I were shooting silhouette match at the old Goliad, Texas range. He was shooting a .357 Herrett in a TC Contender. "Rocks & Dynamite" were the type of loads he had. He suddenly had the "auto eject" feature appear in his Contender. The match director happened by, and told him to take that gun off the line. I believe the match director was J.B. White, who ran the matches there with his wife. I loved shooting at that range, too. I believe David Bradshaw had taken in some of the matches there. Or maybe not. ***** JB White was present at Goliad when I showed up with the first Dan Wesson Arms M-44 .44 Mag to see daylight in a match. When I offered the gun to anyone to try on the steel, JB White threw to the head of the line. I had a Redhawk for folks to try also, but the shooters flocked to the Big Dan. I loved the Goliad matches, made a rattlesnake omelette for my daughter the morning after one of ‘em. Daughter brought the snake’s head to grade school for show & tell, it’s mouth propped open with fangs extended. Sensation of the day, the kids passing around the snake’s head. After school she brought it home. School’s out, daughter hands me the rattlesnake head. Grasping rattler’s head between thumb and forefinger, big drops of semen-looking poison drip from its fangs. Thought I’d milked all the venom.... David Bradshaw
|
|
|
Post by potatojudge on Aug 12, 2021 11:45:55 GMT -5
My question was a general one. I certainly didn't quote anyone other than myself and I'm still simply curious. There has been posts on this thread and the "Information" had been around for years. I realize that there are manufacturers who chose not to chamber certain cartridges in Contenders. That is their right as it should be. There are certain consumers who don't care to own Contenders chambered in certain calibers. Also something that is a choice. But, when I read to "avoid" certain cartridges or that something is unsafe at factory levels, I simply want to know where the information comes from. Unfortunately, we live in a world where many believe their choice is right and to be imposed as a rule or law. My beliefs can be changed or modified if I learn something new. I don't tend to alter my ways based on conjecture. This way of thinking isn't new. Go back and read the development of 45 Colt +P Loads. Now, it's common place and loading manuals list different level loads for specific guns. Ditto on the 45-70 and others. Even after years of shooting Contenders I'm ready to learn something new if it's fact based. But, "They Say" doesn't work if we don't know who "They" are and where the information came from. Any word on the 250AI in a Contender? I've heard the arguments about how increased performance is mostly just running the pressures up, but also how the straightened case causes less back thrust. I don't know. Some of this stuff is like BBQ techniques: redneck musings given and taken as gospel. For that matter, 6.5-250 AI. The 250 AI case being dimensionally nearly identical to the Creedmoor, that's a lot to get out of a Contender.
|
|
|
Post by Encore64 on Aug 12, 2021 12:25:54 GMT -5
Both the 250 Savage and the 250 Ackley are acceptable in the Contender. The SAAMI Specs for the 250 Savage caps it at 45K CUP. Since there are no SAAMI Specs for Wildcats, common sense tells handloaders to keep the Ackley Improved at the same pressure.
Back in the 90s, JD Jones and I discussed this a lot. He offered the Savage as an option for those who didn't handload. I still picked it over his 25 on the 225 Winchester Case.
I used my SSK 250 Savage Barrel for 20+ years on a Type II Frame and never had a problem. Today it has it's own G2 Frame just because I believe it a better fit.
You're correct on the 6.5-250 Ackley too. The 6.5 Creedmoor is nothing new. It's exactly what you described. A factory name on an old Wildcatter's Idea. A friend has an old, old rifle in 250 Ackley. He buys 6.5 Creedmoor Brass and necks it down .007" and avoids the shortening that improving a cartridge causes.
The problem is when the 6.5 Creedmoor was standardized, the Specs were set at 63k PSI. Actually, it's not a problem, it was just intended for strong rifles.
The Contender is just hard for some folks to figure out. It's a combination of case head area, pressure and combustion area...
|
|
|
Post by magnumwheelman on Aug 12, 2021 13:34:36 GMT -5
reading along with interest... I own 4 Contender frames all inherited from MRS dad ( who often was a rocks & dynamite loader... I also inherited a Monson Dan Wesson 44 Magnum that was shot loose ) none of these guns saw the rounds of competition... but I'm sure they saw "max" loading from the manuals... perhaps a bit more, & none of the Contenders shows signs of fatigue
as I built up the collection, I found my most abusive with factory level loading was the 375 Winchester in a 14" unported barrel ( & I had quite a few barrels ) it was always my general observation... hopefully taken as from just from a guy with a lot of Contender stuff... that most cartridges pretty much mirrored what the AR at the time could handle, pressure wise, but rimmed cases & chamberings found their way into the Contenders, where the rim was often not to friendly with the AR platform...
the general design has limitations, at least for sure in dimensions... I know there are some 50-70 barrels out there, & more than a handful builders that won't make a 50-70 barrel for the Contender, because it's "too tight" up top... I have a Martini in 50-70 & always wanted a Contender barrel... now that I've finally fallen into that "rabbit hole" I may have to get an Encore barrel to play with...
... & it's been my observation, that there are many "new" AR cartridges, that are just either basically renamed Contender chamberings, or rimless cases of Contender chamberings...
I'd have loved to have been "in the game" back during when competition was in it's hey day, as I really enjoy sitting at my bench, & informally shooting the Contender, revolvers & bolt action rifles at the target backers on my personal range, that increment 50 yards, I out to 300... the only long range steel I've played with at all, was in a long range steel buffalo competition, I shot with my 40-65 Rolling block... it sure was a lot of fun... wish there was more silhouette in my area...
|
|
|
Post by Encore64 on Aug 12, 2021 13:46:30 GMT -5
When TC introduced the Encore, the first batch was sold to TCA Members. They were all 15" barrels chambered in 7mm-08. I ordered one and called JD Jones.
The two calibers I wanted most were the 6.5x55 and 50-70. I had the 50-70 in a Contender, but wanted an Encore.
The 6.5x55 was the first production (for sale) barrel to leave SSK. It was marked SSK Barrel #1.
JD refused to sell me the 50-70 SSK Barrel #1, because he kept it for himself and had every right to do so. However, he did ship me out my 50-70 barrel marked SSK Barrel #2.
|
|
|
Post by bradshaw on Aug 12, 2021 21:14:35 GMT -5
The Thomson/Center Contender defined the Production category in handgun silhouette. Versatility of the action with no-fit interchangeable barrels made a blue collar pistol with tuxedo performance. Sure, T/C gun drilling & rifling didn’t always made grade, but you could boil water @ 200 meters with a good one. The company was shooter-friendly, something we took for granted in the late 1970’s. I am not an authority on the limitations of the Contender, but I trusted the gun in my hands and the company that made it. More expensive single shot Production guns came along to challenge it----the fronstrap lever-actuated falling block MOA by Richard Mertz, the RPM ((Rock Pistol Manufacturing) Jim Rock’s improvements on Rex Merrill’s striker-fired tip-open, Eban Brown’s tilt-block BF, and the Wichita tip-open with 1911 grip by IHMSA vice president and former IPSC shooter Bert Stringfellow. All of which featured fast lock times, faster than the Contender. Possibly excepting the Wichita. Among production category guns, none filled more hands, none advanced marksmanship across so broad a base, Thompson/Center. Everyone knew it then, and everyone still kicking who saw it happen knows it today. David Bradshaw
|
|
|
Post by Encore64 on Aug 12, 2021 21:28:19 GMT -5
I think the same is true with hunting handguns. I don't think any other handgun will ever match it's great record for taking game.
As far as the gun's limits, I think the learning continues.
I don't even believe there is an accurate list of all the cartridges that have been chambered in the TC Contender...
|
|