|
|
Post by medicdave on Dec 3, 2021 8:02:46 GMT -5
 My impression was that the original had a 35* shoulder and a slightly longer body than later iterations. Ackley also did a hornet with a 40* shoulder and somewhere the two have gotten mixed together with a lot of the modern reamers and dies having a mish mash of the measurements usually with a 40* shoulder. Chart above shows some of the variations. |
|
|
|
Post by Encore64 on Dec 3, 2021 8:26:36 GMT -5
I knew the Ackley Improved was different. Figure the K-Hornet has long since been standardized.
Keep us posted. Learning is good!!!
|
|
brant
.327 Meteor
Posts: 520
|
Post by brant on Dec 3, 2021 9:09:45 GMT -5
I like your idea for the noise factor. I always find the vast of a 308 or 7 mm magnum “disturbing” in the woods. My 44 specials out of a 24” rifle barrel are much less so. I made a double on pigs once withe that settup. Piggy dropped at the shot and the other 2 just looked confused. I reloaded and got another.
|
|
|
|
Post by junebug on Dec 3, 2021 10:32:02 GMT -5
I typed in rook rifles' and Wikipedia has a good definition, and a list of rook calibers. It also had leads to books and other sites.
|
|
jeffh
.375 Atomic
Posts: 1,749
|
Post by jeffh on Dec 3, 2021 11:03:27 GMT -5
Stumbled on another candidate more in the groundskeeper line, a late NEF handi rifle in 22 hornet............. This is interesting, as the Hornet in a Handi was one of my original candidates, but my version of the exact idea had not yet morphed completely and the dynamic could be sudden at times as little epiphanies occurred along the way.
I had the action(s) and bought a really nice barrel, stocked up on brass, got the dies, etc., but changed gears before I ever loaded a round. let alone shot the barrel.
I switched to the 222, swapping out a gangly, 26" 722 for a CZ 527 in the same chambering. The 222 was displaced by the 30s, which was displaced by the 35s the moment Ohio decided it was OK to use "pistol cartridges" in rifles for deer. It was a long, involved evolution, and may/will culminate in a different chambering for different users depending upon their situation, but by all means a very entertaining and gratifying process.
While my own choice (357) sits just outside/teetering on the border of this idea, I really get excited about looking at load data which indicates tiny charges of powder producing useful results, and in some cases (pun intended), significant extra power if one were so inclined to "stoke it" a bit for special occasions.
Not to stray too far from the original context, given the mass of the Hornet barrel I had, and having done significant digging into how a shorter barrel affects the 222, I wonder if your Hornet might be a candidate for a "short(er), fat(ter)" barrel Rook Rifle. Given the ballistics I intend to maintain in my 222 (though not a rook rifle), I'm lopping mine at 18.5" to match CZ's Youth Carbine. Longer is quieter too though.
Somewhere I have a link to an article on "quiet" cast loads which included the Hornet. I'll try to find that.
|
|
|
|
Post by tdbarton on Dec 3, 2021 11:09:03 GMT -5
Hey gents, what’s your thoughts on the .256 Winchester mag?
|
|
jeffh
.375 Atomic
Posts: 1,749
|
Post by jeffh on Dec 3, 2021 11:13:46 GMT -5
... My impression was that the original had a 35* shoulder and a slightly longer body than later iterations. Ackley also did a hornet with a 40* shoulder and somewhere the two have gotten mixed together with a lot of the modern reamers and dies having a mish mash of the measurements usually with a 40* shoulder. Chart above shows some of the variations. Having inherited the "frugal gene," I'd be looking for the version which is most commonly manifested in stock die sets. Administering the concept of the Rook Rifle, one is not likely to be looking for a 2% or 10% increase in "power," but taking it easy on that brass is definitely within the spirit of the frugality aspect.
Then again, a larger one-time, up-front investment is sounder than setting oneself up for most cost over the long-haul too, so paying more for a set of dies isn't as of much consequence as burning 60 grains of powder each time you light a primer. Being a Hornet, long-term costs/conservation of precious and scarce resources is pretty much assured.
|
|
jeffh
.375 Atomic
Posts: 1,749
|
Post by jeffh on Dec 3, 2021 11:24:38 GMT -5
Hey gents, what’s your thoughts on the .256 Winchester mag? THIS is why we end up with more gun projects than we can manage.
This thread just became officially dangerous for me. 
...and I've got this neat little 25 cal. mould and a long-standing weakness for mild-mannered "quarter-bores."
|
|
|
|
Post by medicdave on Dec 3, 2021 11:47:33 GMT -5
No issue with docking the barrel but I'll be looking more at balance and shootability. These light little single shots can get whispy and whippy quickly when the proportions aren't right.
In my contender 7/30 w/ full bull I started at 23" and trimmed an inch at a time to 20". At 20" the balance with scope, mount, and round in chamber settled right between the hands with a touch more weight to the forend which made it easy to shoot offhand and enough weight forward to be steady off of a rest. A super 16 tapered 223 barrel I had once upon a time was handy as a pocket on a shirt but the weight was biased to far back, hard to hold steady offhand and wiggled around on the bags. I'll take the longer easier shooting barrel over saving a few ounces and inches. Even with the full bull barrel and a 2-7 Leopold in steel rings and bases the 7/30 is less than 6lbs ready to hunt.
The last year of working through what works for me now vs what worked for me 20 years ago before I moved overseas and didn't get to shoot often has been an interesting journey. Loosing the ego and eye sight of a man in his 20s has led to reevaluating calibers, platforms, sights etc and makes projects and conversations like this one a lot of fun.
|
|
|
|
Post by Encore64 on Dec 3, 2021 12:29:20 GMT -5
Hey gents, what’s your thoughts on the .256 Winchester mag? It's a great little cartridge for small game. The powder capacity to bore ratio is a little high for my interpretation of a Rook Cartridge. Cases are easy to form from 357 Magnum Brass. But, in my experience, cases need to be annealed to prevent neck splitting. There is some good cast bullet data that could be used to minimize noise. A Rook Cartridge is more of a concept than a fixed definition anyways. It should work just fine if it's your choice... |
|
|
|
Post by Encore64 on Dec 3, 2021 12:40:51 GMT -5
I typed in rook rifles' and Wikipedia has a good definition, and a list of rook calibers. It also had leads to books and other sites. Be prepared to pay for those books. They're Pricey!!! I've read all that on Wikipedia too. Take it for what it is, a partial definition. I've seen plenty of Original Rook Rifles for sale in calibers other than the ones listed. I'm sure there's no way you could learn it all. In those days, I doubt information was kept like it is today. But, the level of research involved explains the high cost of those books. You could even flex on the rimless cartridges. Tolerances are so good these days that we don't generally face the same problems as they did 140+ years ago. 7.62x25, 30 Mauser, 9mm Luger and many others would work fine. I personally have been eyeballing the 357 Sig. It's small enough in powder capacity with a short burning column that it could be loaded quiet. Yet, factory ammo produces 1700 fps in an 18" Carbine. The Bottleneck Rimless Cartridges are generally easier to get in and out of the TCs. Can't afford them all, so just gotta decide on a 36 Caliber... |
|
jeffh
.375 Atomic
Posts: 1,749
|
Post by jeffh on Dec 3, 2021 14:48:45 GMT -5
No issue with docking the barrel but I'll be looking more at balance and shootability. These light little single shots can get whispy and whippy quickly when the proportions aren't right. .......................... Absolutely a point not to be taken for granted. Same contour barrels on my 18" 357 and 24" 30/30 - the 30/30 is a good pound heavier but handles better. I THINK if I'd done 20" on the 357 barrel, I'd have been better off even for the very slight gain in mass.
The Contender barrels are only .810" in diameter too. Most Handi Barrels I had were pretty meaty. smaller hole down the center factors in too.
|
|
|
|
Post by medicdave on Dec 3, 2021 15:34:51 GMT -5
On rimless cases they work dandy when it's warm but my short thick fingers have trouble with them in the cold up here in Maine. It hasn't really gotten cold yet and we were hunting in 18F weather (below zero with the windchill) for the last week.
Somewhere in my notebooks I did the math of what length a .810 cylinder of steel with a drilled hole would weigh the same from 22-45 caliber. That would theoretically give you the same balance for for any caliber based on your preferred length with a known caliber. I'll have to do some digging to find it and make it into an excel spreadsheet.
Agree the handi will be a different animal with a stouter tapered barrel and small bore. If shortening smaller cuts to avoid going to light.
|
|
scotth
.30 Stingray
Posts: 216 
|
Post by scotth on Dec 4, 2021 5:44:24 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Encore64 on Dec 4, 2021 5:54:55 GMT -5
That would sure be a heavy one. Probably be fun to shoot though.
Typically the Encore is about a pound heavier than the Contender. That looks like the heavy contour, so probably 1.5 lbs heavier.
|
|
