Hello,

Getting back to the point of the thread; I was reading in one of the gun rags that the new Ruger round was advertising a 200 fps gain over the redoubtable H & H. However, the article went on to dispute the claim citing some test or other. The basic gist was that in order to get the additional 200 fps out of the new cartridge the psi would have to be around 95,000 versus the 62,000 or so generated by old faithful. Would this not result in potentially sitcky (no pun) extraction problems under certain conditions? If so, would someone please offer a reasonable explanation why such a cartirdge is actually needed? BTW, please do not cite time required to operate a standard versus magnum length bolt action or the supposed greater efficiency of a shorter, fatter powder column in light of the H & H's exemplary field record.

I just don't see it. And if it should be that no reasonable argument exists then why don't we simply say enough is enough? Who was the writer who put it to paper a while ago and suggested we reduce the number of cartridges out there rather than increase the number simply because some fool believes a cartridge should be develped to fill a perceived performance gap between a couple of magnum whatever whiz bang cartridges?