Sniper & Sharpshooter Forums banner

Forgotten classics

8945 Views 17 Replies 10 Participants Last post by  spade
I don't know about you guys, but the old forgotten classic calibers fire my imagination.

Take for example the .250-3000. This round was the first commercial cartridge to break through the 3000fps barrier. The cartridge was designed by Charles Newton back in 1914.

Anyhow, the .250-3000 is ballistically slightly superior to the new 6.8 SPC.

The great thing about this round is that it is supremely accurate. It is the parent round for the .22-250.

Anyhow, I'd like to buid a .250-3000 with a ten inch twist and use it with 120 grain bullets.

The .250-3000 is 48.56mm long. With 37.0 grains of H414, it will propell a 120 grain bullet at 2500 fps. This bullet has a sectional density of .260. It has a ballistic coefficient of .435.

The whole round is short, efficient, mild, and above all it's a classic.

And the whole thing was designed back in 1914. By the way, Remington chambered the 700 for this round a few years ago.

1 - 18 of 18 Posts
It kind of funny how the manufacturers try to create there own now a days. Like ruger, the tactical 20 was not good enough so they invented the .204 ruger. You would think there would go with what is already proven. It is amazing as the rounds out there that they do not improve upon.

Isn't the 250-3000 also known as the .250 Savage? I was just examining this round a few days ago. It really looks like a nice cartridge.

The .250-3000 was first used in the Savage Model 99 rifle. That's why
it is also known as the .250 Savage.

The Savage 99 is another classic. The original Model 99 had a beautiful rotary magazine similar to that of a Mannlicher Schoenaer.

Around 1960, Savage stopped producing the rotary magazine and the last Model 99 had box magazines.

But the Model 99 is an absolute joy to shoot and own.

The .250 Savage is a case of less being more. It hardly uses any powder; it is quiet, mild of recoil and unbelievably accurate. And with a 120 grain bullet it is far deadlier than paper ballistics would otherwise indicate. The .250 Savage was also one of the first short high accuracy rounds.

It was years ahead of its time.

Finally, Charles Newton had a rifle factory in Buffalo during the early 20th century. I have always intended to search for the former site of Newton's factory. I like visiting rifle factories. Especially old factories such as the Westinghouse factory in Bridgeport, Ct. where the Moisin Nagant was made under license and the old Auto Ordnance plant, also in Bridgeport.

See less See more
A while back I mentioned that a friend's father had an un-fired Lee Enfield .303 NO5 jungle carbine..........the same old guy has a mint Savage 99 in 250-3000.......I'm going to see if he will let me try it out.......... :D
  • Like
Reactions: 1
Just for fun, here's a comparison of the 6.8 SPC and the 250 Savage:

( Note: These ballistics are for a 22 inch bbl rifle)

6.8x47 SPC--115 grain bullet, B.C. .345


0 100 200 300
2800 2535 2285 2049 (fps)

Energy: (foot/pounds)

0 100 200 300
2000 1644 1345 1075

250 Savage: (6.35x49mm) 120 grain bullet, .260 S.D. B.C. .435

0 100 200 300
2500 2299 2108 1926

Energy: (foot/pounds)
0 100 200 300
1665 1407 1184 989

The higher ballistic coeficient of the .25 caliber would allow it to retain a higher percentage of its energy down range. And that high sectional density bullet would be rough on helmets and body armor.

Just imagine this for a moment. Imagine a if Ruger were to make a version of the Mini-30 chambered for this number. Or imagine if you could shorten an M-14 and build a kinda Mini-25.....

Or shrink a FAL. Or shrink a 7.62 Galil.

See less See more
It seems like today most manufacturers are making new rounds to mimic the performance of old rounds lol...I can understand with the short magnums being slightly better than the originals though.

Those Savage 99s though...wish they could be around forever...Got my first deer with my friends great grandfathers 99...Still a sweet shooter.

Wow, 250 savage as a tactical made a really good arguement for it, Mad. And I would much rather a Ruger 25 than 14 or 30. Problem with the 30 is it can't digest all the foreign ammo that makes owning a 7.62X39mm worthwile.
maybe it would be nice as an AR-25 too
i like those ideas
what do you guys think of the .243 Winchester in an AR-10?
Springfield Armory used to offer the M1A in .243.

And I seem to recall that Armalite offered the AR-10 in this caliber.

From everything i have heard about this company they are supposed to be pretty good. Been around for awhile as well.

Seems like they deal with alot of wildcat stuff, but thought I would throw it out there anyways,

Now, I like the way you guys are thinking. The AR-.250-3000 (okay, we can work on the name :wink: ) would be a fun rifle. Heck, it sounds like its a new cartridge.

Yes, I agree, it does seem like everyone is making new rounds to mimic the old, I think its just to get their name out there for publicity.

204 Ruger
300 Winchester Short Mag
260 Remington

etc etc

Just throw some Lazzeroni style name on it, and it will sell like crazy...250 warhawk or some such. People eat that up.

I never thought of what you said about publicity before Mel, but thats a good point. My favorite so far is 450 marlin...just a full house 45-70 load for those who don't handload...Cool I guess, but only hornady makes the ammo...If they quit, people with the rifles will be reloading a load that mimics a reload of 45-70...Okay, I confused myself.
i own a rotary model 99 in 300 savage... i killed my first three deer with that thing... thats another forgotten classic..the 300 savage round.. almost identical to a 308
I LOVE the classic calibers!!!! I've owned and hunted with the 250-3000 (250 Savage), 257 Roberts, 7X57 Mauser, 300 H&H, 35 Whelen, 375 H&H, and 22 Hornet just to name a few. They are all phenomenal performers in their own right. They were ground-breakers when they first came out, and they are star performers today with modern powders and components. I am constantly on the lookout for rifles chambered in these or other classic calibers because 1) as I said, they are performers and 2) there is a great deal of nostalgia for me in using one of these calibers in the field.
I've always liked the 375 H&H and even the .300 H&H....

Another interesting thing is that .250 Savage would neatly fit into a FAL magazine. Both the .250 Savage and the .308 have the same .473" case head diameter.

So the .250 Savage will feed reliably out of a FAL magazine. And the gas system of the FAL so flexible that it would be a simple matter of adjusting the gas regulator to dial in proper function.

One would only have to replace the barrel of a .308 FAL. The .250 Savage would work in a FAL and you could the original bolt and carrier.

Now imagine that same FAL with a 16" bbl in .250 Savage. The rifle would be short and handy and loaded to 50,000 psi, it would be easy to get 2600 fps with the 120 grain bullet. Said bullet would have a high sectional density and the resulting package would be a very effective anti personnel round.

And the whole thing could be put together with very little development work. There are millions of FALs around the world gathering dust in warehouses and with very little effort, they could be put back to work.

I'm not sure that the .250 Savage conversion would be so easy in the AR-10. The lack of an adjustable gas system might require some research. But with the right gas port diameter, the system could be made to work. And then you could buy a .250 Savage upper for your AR-10.

I don't know whether the G3 would be an easy conversion. I suspect not.

I suspect that one would need to change locking rollers and springs, etc.

But the FAL would be easy. I have a FAL gathering dust at home and I'd rebarrel in at once if I could find a proper .250 bbl.

See less See more
I would have to think one of these custom barrel makers has the pattern and info for a FAL.... probably wouldn't be that expensive.

As far as i understand, Hart makes a blank for it.
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.