Martini Cadet

[leftiye]

Well, finally! Yesterday I got a Martini Cadet (in my hands). Many moons ago I had one in .218 Bee. Nice wood, Shilen barrel, etc. I let a friend (?) talk me out of it and have regretted it ever since.

This one is not pristine collector stuff. Pitted, dark bore, not the military rear sight, stock has been refinished/touched up, blueing touched up. No problemo, I want another walking gun to terrorize small animals with. And I want it to be a nice modern custom job.

So, the issue that brings us here. I'd appreciate suggestions as to caliber. Will a Cadet take .225 Win.? I think I've heard of .30-30 being chambered in them. I guess I've got other guns already in Hornet, .32-20, .25-20. I've got a Smith in .25 Hornet. Maybe a companion rifle. Your ideas will be appreciated as I said.

[Bigslug]

Mine came with a good bore that had been reamed to an odd, but usable version of the .32-20 - - if usable means needing a custom diameter mold and leaving the standard .32-20 sizing die in the box. It shoots great, and now that the new Starline brass is fireformed, production is no big thing.

But if I had a burned out barrel that was going to get relined, I would without hesitation do it in .357 Magnum. It's the same length as the .32-20; is pretty close to the same base diameter; is a nice, simple, no drama straightwall case; can shoot .38's; and properly loaded and shot there's very little it can't humanely kill.

[Der Gebirgsjager]

I owned one of them converted to .32-20 WCF for years. Sold it for much more than I paid for it, but should have kept it. At the time I bought it I had a choice of .32-20 or .30-30, but thought that the .30-30 might be too much for the little fellow. Turned out it probably would have been the better choice, as the .32-20 became a handloading proposition using 97 gr. .32 cal. wadcutters; the original .310 Cadet being closer to .32 and the .32-20 factory load closer to .30 which made for inaccuracy. Since your specimen sounds like it has nothing to lose though customization the sky's the limit for whatever the action will hold and what suits your purposes. I think, personally, I'd incline toward the .30-30. You could work up some loads using 110 gr. bullets for the varmints in your life. Or, do you remember the Remington factory loaded sabot rounds? Real sizzlers for a .30-30. If you were going with light, high velocity loadings you'd want to choose your barrel and twist accordingly.

[Outpost75]

The .357 case is a wee bit long to eject smoothly and usually hangs on the breechblock and needs to be coaxed out or grabbed with the fingers. I had mine done in .38 Special with 3-degree included angle throat as used on the .38 AMU, but with standard .38 Special rim seat. Had firing pin bushed so I could push the loads a bit. With 6x Unertl small game scope drives inch, 50-yard groups with good loads, with wadcutters is nearly silent. With 146-grain +P+ law enforcement loads a deer gun.

[Hooker53]

Bigslug hit the nail on the head and BELEIVE me, he and a few others on this board, knows these little rifles. I would reline/rechambered for .357 .Mag. I would prob shoot .38 Spl in it mostly. I have one as Bigslug described in what we now call (thanks to BA Wallace) a 310 Greener Mag. I cast its own Boolit and trim the 32-20 case down abit. I have no problem in doing all that because it's an absolute joy to shoot. The prob with the 30-30 choice is the fact you will not have enough room to get a round in and out of the chamber.

Theres been some talk that a few including myself would like to try one in low powered 327 Fed Mag. Some say it will take it. Some say it won't. Don't think it would be much diff in a low powered 327 Fed and a .357 Mag. I have seen a few pack a Wollap with a .357 Mag and they hold up just fine. Whatever you choose, good luck, enjoy and let us Brotherhood Of Cadets know how it's going.

Roy
Hooker53

[Bigslug]

Outpost (having been there before) and Hooker53 have some good points. . .

Nothing wrong with taking the .38 Special route. The gun's strong enough to go the +P route, and there you're in the realm of Elmer Keith's .38/44 Heavy Duty N-frame loads that pre-cursored the .357. If like Outpost says, there is indeed a fit/angle issue to the .357 case, you might ask John Taylor (member here who very nicely relines burned out tubes for a living) if perhaps the top of the breechblock could be recontoured slightly to prevent the hang ups described.

The hot .32's have some possibilities, but it sounds like you have those covered. Seeing as action strength isn't really an issue, but action length prevents inserting the seriously flat shooters, my thinking is that the .38/.357 approach is a logistically superior way of staying with the original concept of the Cadet.

As a semi-related plug for Mr. Taylor, he relined a Ballard #2 for my father in .38 Long Colt - same diameter as the Special and .357, but shorter to prevent use of hotter ammo in the cast receiver. The result is a hundred yard bullet stacker that you have to look VEEEEEEERY closely to tell that the work was even done.

[gewehrfreund]

225 Win. is definitely not safe in a cadet. The barrel shank is too small. Stick with the classics like 218 Bee, 22 Hornet, 357 Mag., etc.

[leftiye]

So, 25-35 Win? Using .223 rimmed, maybe .25, 6.8, 7mm TCU?

[Geezer in NH]

I have had a couple in 32 WCF very iffy working as to the round is to long to be for the action. Look for a shorter cartridge option IMHO

[Ballistics in Scotland]

There are various good threads on these conversions. I don't think any of those using the .30-30 case head are good ways to go, and the very similar .225 WCF also gives too much pressure. They are all difficult to insert and extract, especially under a scope, and the .32 Winchester Special and .30-30 will give a lot of recoil for a light rifle with a small buttplate. The .219 Zipper and .25-35 would probably be a little easier to insert, due to their shape.

Far better for the OP, who only wants a small game rifle, would be any of the rounds based on the .32-20 case, which is the one usually referred to as .32 WCF, or the .357-sized head used in the revolver cartridges and the .222 Rimmed. For cast bullets at moderate ranges I might prefer the .32-20. But in the UK we have roe deer, which provide some of the most interesting stalking and gastronomic experiences. They only go up to about 60lb. weight, and there are bullet weight, velocity and energy requirements which point to a .22 centrefire. My preference would be a fast-twist, heavy-bullet version of the German 5.6x50R.

Some people report that the .357 Maximum will fit the Cadet breechblock, and others that it won't. When you extract the action frame, you might be able to see whether non-weakening alteration to the block and the front of the lever might make it descend lower. Personally I don't think the extra capacity over the Magnum is enough to justify using a case that might disappear from the market. For any cartridge where fit is doubtful, you could pin a case to the firing-pin hole with a toothpick and melted wax, and cast a dummy barrel stub in car body epoxy or Cerrosafe alloy, to see what happens.

For high pressure rounds it may be advisable to bush the firing-pin hole of the Cadet and reduce the diameter of the pin. But I think a close fit is more important than size. Martinis are the only firearms in which I have seen broken coil mainsprings, and I believe you can still get square wire springs, made for opening plastic injection moulds, from firms like McMaster-Carr. The Cadets don't need a faster lock time, but they may reduce any tendency for the pin to bounce and reduce support for the primer..

If you are going to rebarrel, the octagonal barrels Green Mountain make for the small Winchester lever-actions are worth looking into. It is true about John Taylor's reputation for bore lining work, but it isn't beyond the capacity of an enthusiastic amateur. The liners available from TJ's will give you some idea of what is feasible.

165305

[skeettx]

My three are in 17 ACK Bee (Reed), 17 ACK Bee (Ackley), and 218 Bee(Me :)), what fun, what fun

http://www.hunt101.com/data/500/medium/MVC-065S1.JPG

Mike

[Ballistics in Scotland]

My three are in 17 ACK Bee (Reed), 17 ACK Bee (Ackley), and 218 Bee(Me :)), what fun, what fun


Mike

Those are extremely good-looking rifles. The middle one excites my curiosity, for it is shaped very much like the large Greener shotgun action, without the Francotte action frame as used in the Cadets, and yet I can't see that it is bigger than the Cadets above and below. I have seen a steady trickle of pictures, over the years, of original nineteenth sporting rifles similarly styled, probably from before Greener used that action for their police guns and sporting shotguns. But I don't know if they were the same size, and with larger threads than the usual 1in. x 14 which Greener had to use for the 12ga.

The Bee, original or modified, is an excellent choice, but your rifles, especially the middle and bottom one, show the kind of scoping job which would have made the use of .30-30 based cases very inconvenient. I have a sporting large Martini with a pre-war Zeiss Zielklein scope, made for rimfires but with a moving reticule which suggests that it will stand up to recoil as well as any. It is in obsolete Leupold windage and elevation mounts which permit keeping the reticule centred, and the eye relief is long enough to permit ejection. The same applies to a 2.5x Tasco Bantam I haven't yet used. It should permit mounting almost over the rear of the barrel, and although discontinued, should show up on eBay from time to time. The magnification on both of these scopes is low, but I once used a Weaver K1.5 for a while, and found it a lot better than it sounds.

I don't believe we have gone into enough detail on the use of the .225 Winchester. SAAMI made the pressure for this cartridge 50,000psi, and in the hands of the handloader it could easily be more sometimes. People make much of the factoid that the Cadet rifles have been "proved to 65,000psi", but what this means is that one of the early importers, with a vested interest, claimed to have tested it at that pressure. True proof demands a considerable margin over the working load. They are strong actions, but they have their limit.

It isn't simply a matter of the action, in which I have heard of no failures. People argue heatedly about whether cartridges based on the .44 Magnum case can cause swelling of the 3/4in. x 14 barrel threads, and difficult or impossible extraction. It becomes a shade less likely, other things being equal, with the .422 head of the .255 or the .30-30. But other things aren't equal with the .225. It is a lot to risk for a cartridge which may vanish from the marketplace, and although there is a recent thread on making it from brass of the .30-30 family, my Load from a Disk gives it a wall thickess of .040in. close to the head, and the .30-30 only .024in. You could find yourself having to load for no better performance than you could get with better cartridges for this action.

[BigEyeBob]

Well, finally! Yesterday I got a Martini Cadet (in my hands). Many moons ago I had one in .218 Bee. Nice wood, Shilen barrel, etc. I let a friend (?) talk me out of it and have regretted it ever since.

This one is not pristine collector stuff. Pitted, dark bore, not the military rear sight, stock has been refinished/touched up, blueing touched up. No problemo, I want another walking gun to terrorize small animals with. And I want it to be a nice modern custom job.

So, the issue that brings us here. I'd appreciate suggestions as to caliber. Will a Cadet take .225 Win.? I think I've heard of .30-30 being chambered in them. I guess I've got other guns already in Hornet, .32-20, .25-20. I've got a Smith in .25 Hornet. Maybe a companion rifle. Your ideas will be appreciated as I said.

I have three Martini cadets , one in original 310 , one in 300 Sherwood ( francotte action not BSA ) , and one in 22Rimmed .
the cadet action is good for around 60,000psi , but extraction is week at higher pressures.
The local gun plumber here has just done a 30/30 conversion and also a 357 Magnum , which seem to be the most popular conversions here.
Got my eye on a 25-20 BSA Martini ,hopefully will be in my hands soon.

[leftiye]

I wonder what kind of rabbit round the 17 Ackley Bee would bee? Also, as it comes to saying how much an action can withstand, it is apples and oranges to talk cartridges or pressure. One must consider both the case head dimension (and therefore the "meat" left around the chamber) AND the pressure that will be used - can then be used safely. Looking at the approximately .150" on either side of the .44 cartridge would lead me to run like He!! as keeping the pressures down isn't at all guaranteed. While blowing one up with a 30-30 would probly be be pretty hard to do unless the idiot factor was involved. 60,000 psi/in\sq. is nothing in a hornet sized case (case won't like it, gun won't care) with all that metal around it. .44 mag. or 30-40 is another matter altogether. I'm likin' the .223/.357 sized cases for this. A .223 case would approximate a .357 max for capacity once it was cut off to 1.6" or 1.7" (wild eyed guess) and enable us to day dream about some other calibers. Or maybe the .357 maximum.

[skeettx]

Here is the action
http://i1086.photobucket.com/albums/j452/skeettx/MVC-017S_2.jpg

And here is the Gunsmith
http://i1086.photobucket.com/albums/j452/skeettx/MVC-015S_1.jpg

Mike

[Bigslug]

I guess I would counter the enthusiasm for seeing how large a cartridge can be crammed into a lightweight Francotte Martini with "Guys. . .the world is full of #5 Rolling Blocks, Hi Walls, and Ruger No. 1's if you're into that sort of thing."

Cadets are a great way to get our ".22LR that isn't a .22LR" via the use of low cost, low noise, low recoil, or low resource consumption approaches to the problem. If you want something that causes your socks to fall into cotton puddles around your ankles every time you touch off a round, there are better platforms to build on.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

[QUOTE=skeettx;3603636]Here is the action
http://i1086.photobucket.com/albums/j452/skeettx/MVC-017S_2.jpg

And here is the Gunsmith
http://i1086.photobucket.com/albums/j452/skeettx/MVC-015S_1.jpg


That looks like an extremely good action, just the shape of the Greener shotguns, with the same curvature under the butt socket and the same takedown system. I suppose of those could have been added after manufacture. It is interesting that Ackley chose to use the takedown action for a cartridge which, although small, isn't low-pressure. It is stronger and more precise in location than some other takedown actions. I have seen a heavily loaded .45-70 fired with the locking screw accidentally untightened, in a converted Greener shotgun, with no ill effects. Here is a barrel on which I silver soldered a piece of square high speed steel to form the little tongue on the forend block, since it needs the hardness that silver soldering to the barrel would remove from ordinary steel.
ment
165416

The Cadets certainly are good for low-powered small game rifles, which is what their original sporting use normally was. One of the qualities of a rook rifle was to reduce danger by not carrying too far, after firing at the birds in the trees. At normal angles of elevation a firearms trajectory, unlike that of your garden hose, can be regarded as rigid: raise the hundred-yard point of aim a yard, and you raise the fifty-yard point by eighteen inches. But this breaks down when the elevation is very high. A .300 rook rifle fired close to the vertical can have a trajectory as flat as the .220 Swift to the top of the highest tree, and yet be mere amusement if it falls on a normal shooting hat a couple of hundred yards away.

Still, the Cadets can be made into much more powerful rifles with a cartridge of suitable head size, and capable of easy insertion and ejection. There is seldom any really compelling need for the cartridges people have advised against here.

I would always want to avoid a rimless cartridge. Rimless extractors have been made for the Cadet, but I would doubt their reliability, and they can't be cheap. I liked my 5.6x50R, and found Sellier and Bellot cases of good quality, although much cheaper than RWS. They could also be used for making any of the shorter rounds based on the same head size, including the Australian .222 Rimmed, which is actually closer in size to the .222 Remington Magnum.

As a rabbit round the .17 would depend on what you want to do with the rabbit afterwards. If it is to be eaten you might be disappointed, but it would could hardly be bettered if you are a harassed farmer or Elmer Fudd, and are content to stay with jacketed bullets. There should be no problem with heavy loadings of the .256 Winchester, and my .255 Jeffery, easily made from .25-20 and fairly easily from .32-20, could be loaded to much higher velocities than I have done in my break-open Army and Navy Stores rook rifle.

165415

[barrabruce]

I have been seriously thinking of a 30 badgered or similar 357case necked down.
that or a 25 or 27 hornet.
although lighter moulds for 27cal would be hard to find compared to 25 or 30 cal.

Be nice rounds without a lot of recoil out of a cadet rifle.
I would guess anything bigger would start to hurt with a light rifle and skinny but plate.
easy to cast bullet sizes too.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

The .25 Hornet might be more convenient, but the Hornet fireformed straight will take bullets of the .277 diameter used in the .270 Winchester. http://www.neihandtools.com/catalog.html have a .277-100-GC gas-check mould which might be a bit heavier than some would like, but I wouldn't mind that. Possibly the main snag relative to the .25 is that most (maybe all) barrel blanks available have an undesirably fast twist, and I don't know of anyone making liners. Get your mould and the problem is gone, but a rifling twist is forever. Either can give very good performance for their size, but like a high velocity .255 Jeffery, the small case makes for very little difference between a safely hot load and an excessive one.

It takes a bit more than that to make a light-barreled Cadet recoil excessively, though.

[leftiye]

I think the 5.6X50r may have been mentioned earlier, but please let me bring it up again. Virtually a .222 magnum, but somewhat longer, and capable of 55000 psi operation in a contender without problem (it should be okay to run full rifle pressures in a Martini with its .375 head size). It being both shorter and smaller in rim diameter than a 30-30, it should chamber easily in whatever iteration. The Australian .222 rimmed (which is more like a .223) can be made from it as well as a bunch of other cartridges. If you want a full writeup on it see Bellm (sp?). Available through Huntington's Die Specialties. I'm going to keep this in mind.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

The rimmed 5.6x50R came first, and the CIP (French initials for the permanent international commission for the proof of firearms) specified a maximum pressure of 49,313psi. Later they gave the rimless version 55,114 psi (340 and 380 foreign things respectively). I don't know if the 5.6x50 brass is any thicker, and the difference between a rim and a groove tends somewhat in the opposite direction. I think it is just as likely that the difference in pressure reflects the kind of firearm the rimmed version was first used in, rather than the limitations of the case, for some of the German falling-block actions weren't as strong as the Cadet.

I found the 5.6x50R round did fit my rifle, which started life as a thicker-sided BSA rimfire. But from what people say, they may not all be alike and this is worth checking first. Anybody can find a .223 case, and it could be built up with a piece of plastic to check the fit. Or perhaps someone who uses the .222 Rimmed can tell us if it looks like the action will accept a little extra length.

Other rounds worth considering are the .22 Remington Jet and (better I think) the .22 Super Jet wildcat, which does away with the Jet's long, sloping shoulder. I doubt if the brass is available nowadays, and am sure it is barely available, but it can be made from .357. A point to watch is that the ,357 Magnum has thinner walls, near the head, than the externally similar small rifle rounds. But although I start to get wary in the extreme case of .225-from-.30-30, I don't think that is going to be a problem in a well chambered Cadet with its shallow extractor cuts.

[BigEyeBob]

The rimmed 5.6x50R came first, and the CIP (French initials for the permanent international commission for the proof of firearms) specified a maximum pressure of 49,313psi. Later they gave the rimless version 55,114 psi (340 and 380 foreign things respectively). I don't know if the 5.6x50 brass is any thicker, and the difference between a rim and a groove tends somewhat in the opposite direction. I think it is just as likely that the difference in pressure reflects the kind of firearm the rimmed version was first used in, rather than the limitations of the case, for some of the German falling-block actions weren't as strong as the Cadet.

I found the 5.6x50R round did fit my rifle, which started life as a thicker-sided BSA rimfire. But from what people say, they may not all be alike and this is worth checking first. Anybody can find a .223 case, and it could be built up with a piece of plastic to check the fit. Or perhaps someone who uses the .222 Rimmed can tell us if it looks like the action will accept a little extra length.

Other rounds worth considering are the .22 Remington Jet and (better I think) the .22 Super Jet wildcat, which does away with the Jet's long, sloping shoulder. I doubt if the brass is available nowadays, and am sure it is barely available, but it can be made from .357. A point to watch is that the ,357 Magnum has thinner walls, near the head, than the externally similar small rifle rounds. But although I start to get wary in the extreme case of .225-from-.30-30, I don't think that is going to be a problem in a well chambered Cadet with its shallow extractor cuts.

Pretty sure the 357 cases can be made from 222rimmed cases , I have a few with split necks and cracked shoulders ,that I am thinking of cutting down and making 357 cases from .Not any reason regarding availability of 357 cases ,Just an exercise in being el cheapo and not wanting to toss the 222Rimmed cases.
This would alleviate the case head thickness problem of the 357 case . Im sure they could be formed into the 22 Superjet . Just need to check dimensions.
I'll take a look at my cadet in 222Rimmed and see if there is more room for a longer cartridge . Ill report back .

[Goatwhiskers]

Found this thread to be most interesting and full of great advice. Just wanted to say that a while back I acquired a Cadet with the original barrel rebored to .35 caliber and chambered to .357Mag. Grabbed it because it has a lovely PH flip up sight on the rear of the frame. I had a matching front sight in the drawer to put on it. What to do with a .357Mag rifle? I rechambered to the Max cartridge, intending to shoot nothing but cast in it, tho it does quite well with jacketed. I shoot the RD359190, either GC or PP, pushed by a stiff charge of A1680, gives me less than 1" at 100 at a little bit over 2000fps. I had tried a RD170 grainer, the shorter fatter boolit is a little tricky to chamber, not so with the longer boolit. Extraction is good, tho the case sits on the breech block and I have to pluck it out due to low scope mounting. Gotta say that PP is a blast with that poof of paper out the muzzle and a nice clean bore. GW

[MT Chambers]

I really like my .218 Mashburn Bee, although it is a CPA Stevens, easy to fireform, very accurate and easy on powder.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

Found this thread to be most interesting and full of great advice. Just wanted to say that a while back I acquired a Cadet with the original barrel rebored to .35 caliber and chambered to .357Mag. Grabbed it because it has a lovely PH flip up sight on the rear of the frame. I had a matching front sight in the drawer to put on it. What to do with a .357Mag rifle? I rechambered to the Max cartridge, intending to shoot nothing but cast in it, tho it does quite well with jacketed. I shoot the RD359190, either GC or PP, pushed by a stiff charge of A1680, gives me less than 1" at 100 at a little bit over 2000fps. I had tried a RD170 grainer, the shorter fatter boolit is a little tricky to chamber, not so with the longer boolit. Extraction is good, tho the case sits on the breech block and I have to pluck it out due to low scope mounting. Gotta say that PP is a blast with that poof of paper out the muzzle and a nice clean bore. GW

That sounds like a very useful performance, although for those who don't plan ever to shoot anything deer-sized,. there may be nothing wrong with the more reliably available brass of the .357 Magnum. If you do have designs on a deer, that 2000ft./sec. becomes well worth having.

I understand what you say about getting the case out - and agree that picking it out is better for consistent shooting than removing the buttplate from your shoulder to tip it out.) But I have heard contradictory reports about whether the length of the .357 Maximum case can be chambered at all. So it might be useful to somebody, if you could tell us the make of your rifle.

[Outpost75]

My BSA Cadet does not cleanly eject .357 Magnum, which hangs on the breechblock, but does pop .38 Special nicely clear of the gun when you snap open the lever.

[Goatwhiskers]

It's a BSA Cadet. I should add that to get decent extraction I have to cycle the lever all the way down and hold it there or the block will come back up a hair and bind the case. Guess I'm not terribly picky about the function, it works. GW

edit: Guess I should say that I have to hold the lever down for ease in loading, too. Maybe the Max really is maximum for that frame.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

Ideally it should only be that last final movement of the lever that unsticks the case from the chamber. If you mean the rim is hitting the curved surface of the block some way back from the front, there isn't a lot that can be done. But if it is hitting the top of the breech face on that first movement which ought to be ejection, perhaps something can.

Note just how the block contacts the ejector. First it presses on the rear extremity, producing high leverage. Then as the case unsticks, it impacts much closer to the ejector hinge pin, with much less leverage but imparting high velocity to the moving case. This is a sequence you don't want to lose. But you could slightly lower the extreme of the block's downward movement by removing a small amount of metal from the top of its rearward arm, and if necessary from the bottom front corner of the block which also contacts the extractor.

[BigEyeBob]

222Rimmed cases can be made from the 5.6 x50R , but end up .100" shorter than the 222R case , not to mention that they are expensive and hard to get in Australia . Loaded 5.6x 50R is available after a long wait for importation , and at around $90.00AUD for 20 rounds makes it a non event.
I have been using Bertram 222R cases and find them of good quality , I just purchased another 100 of them , they are nicely annealed at the factory.
100ea x 222Rimmed and 20ea 500 x 3" NE cases came to $200.00 Aud .
One thing missing on this batch..... both lots of these new cases have no head stamp.

[leftiye]

Goatwhiskers-
It's maybe more about the 357 max. being a very straight case, and the opening of the rear of the chamber being the same diameter (the max has no taper) as the rest of the chamber. The cartridge has to be almost perfectly in line before it can enter. A 30-30 in spite being much longer overall - a 2" case plus a lot of boolit - is very tapered so there is crosswise room for the cartridge to "arc" in.

A .22 high power thus becomes another less ball (er-pocketbook) busting option to the 5.6X50r. You can even make your own out of 30-30 cases. OR you could turn 30-30 cases down to make 5.6X50 cases.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

Cartridge reference books sometimes parrot one another with incorrect dimensions, but isn't the .222 Rimmed case 1.85in. long? Fifty of those foreign things are 1.96in.

Cases vary a lot in price from country to country. The UK is in a single market with Germany, where the 5.6x50R is used quite a bit, and when I decided to use it many years ago, it was quite expensive as mass-produced brass goes, but nothing outrageous. I used Sellier and Bellot, which was cheaper and perfectly satisfactory. .222 Rimmed Bertram brass is available at £1.47 apiece. In the US here is a Huntington Die Specialities page dated 2014, so I don't guarantee price or availability, but it makes RWS 5.6x50R brass $31.98 per twenty.

https://www.huntingtons.com/store/product.php?productid=20189

It is indeed the shape as well as length of the .357 Maximum that means its use in the Cadet should be approached with care, although people's reports here are encouraging. The .22 Savage High Power or .219 Zipper would be easier to insert than the .30-30 or. .32 Winchester Special, since they are narrower in the shoulder and the Zipper is usefully shorter.

It is really, seriously dangerous to turn down the .30-30 case (.422in.) to make the 5.6x50R (.376in.) Sometimes it is possible to size down the case right to the beginning of the solid head in a powerful reloading press, and turn down what is left in a lathe. But .046in. is too much, especially with a case which is already quite thin in that area for a .22 centrefire.

Possibly you heard something said about the 5.6x52R , which is the European designation of the .22 Savage High Power, and can be made with sizing alone. But that one needs .228 bullets, or your rifle could harbor a nasty surprise for High inusers yet unborn. The Zipper uses ordinary .224 bullets, but I still don't see any good reason to go beyond the .222/5.6x50R head size for a .22 centrefire Cadet.

When I first did the conversion Barnes's "Cartridges or the World" listed a .224 RC Maxi wildcat, made in .222 Remington dies with .004in. ground off the top of the shellholder to put that much extra into the short neck. I left the shellholder alone. since although the neck was shorter than I liked, I thought .004in. wasn't going to improve that significantly. It worked, but there is no need to go that route now.

[leftiye]

.22 Hornet is turned down to .246' from .300" to make .22 CCM, Almost twice the reduction as is reducing from .420 to.378. Is .225 Winchester any thicker walled? The only loss of strength would be if extreme downsizing were to cause cracks at the junction of walls and web of head, I don't think this would actually be the case. There is no loss of thickness to the walls. Also of interest would be producing a new case with say .400" headsize. I've read about cases where the whole head is actually sized down and the primer pocket re-drilled.

[Hamish]

.30 Badger. Uses .38 Spl. Brass in .30 Mauser/Tokarev dies, Manson Reamer. .32-20 case capacity but the .38 brass will take higher pressures. Squirrels to deer.

BTW, nice rifle porn Skeet,,,,,,,,,:razz:

[BigEyeBob]

I believe that after forming the 5.6 x 50R case become shorter , no experience with that but it's what Ive been told.
I don't have to gin about forming them up so Ill never find out. It's more efficient buy the Bertram brass of which I now have plenty to last me for a long time.
Bertram will ship directly overseas I believe .
For me to buy brass from overseas is a big hassle with customs and local police getting involved and adding to the cost .

[Ballistics in Scotland]

.22 Hornet is turned down to .246' from .300" to make .22 CCM, Almost twice the reduction as is reducing from .420 to.378. Is .225 Winchester any thicker walled? The only loss of strength would be if extreme downsizing were to cause cracks at the junction of walls and web of head, I don't think this would actually be the case. There is no loss of thickness to the walls. Also of interest would be producing a new case with say .400" headsize. I've read about cases where the whole head is actually sized down and the primer pocket re-drilled.

I don't like the idea of forming the .22 CCM from the Hornet either, and that is a cartridge which develops about 2/3 the velocity of the 5.6x50R. The Hornet is also more likely to let you get the sizing-down onto the beginning of that solid head, but with larger cases a reloading press is unlikely to let you do that adequately. A rimless case sized by pushing it all the way through a special die is another matter entirely. 6mm. Lee Navy, for example, can be made from .270, although mine doesn't have a good enough bore to make that worthwhile. But there is no chance of doing that with a reloading press.

I've never tracked down the source of the figures I quoted earlier, for a wall thickness of .040in. near the head for .225 Winchester and .024in. for .30-30, for it isn't in the ordinary SAAMI drawings. Perhaps the compilers of "Load from a Disk" actually sectioned sample cases. The same source shows greater thickness for the small rifle cases compared with the revolver ones.

The 7.63 Mauser actually has about 3/4 the capacity of the .32-20, and cases made from .38 Special, which isn't significantly stronger than .32-20, can't make up anything like that. The creator of the .30 Badger recommended that pressures be kept within 35,000psi. At that level the slight swelling caused by .38 cases being smaller in diameter than 7.63 will make do no harm. David Manson used to recommend making a reamer for it rimless, so that Magnum or even Maximum brass can be used to give it a longer neck. It still won't be a deer rifle, but better for cast bullets and (like many an off-the-peg cartridge) a perfectly good small game one.

The Law of Conservation of Matter says, more or less, that everything has to be somewhere, and if anyone has reason to form a 1.96in. case into a 1.85in. one, it doesn't have to come out under 1.85in. I'd have no difficulty getting cases into the UK, but Americans might. The sale out of the US by mail of rifle and handgun cases was recently prohibited. I know I got 24ga shotgun cases from Buffalo Arms only because they were for shotguns (and in my case going to stay that way, rather than turned into fair Snider or bad Martini-Henry ones.) The same might apply in the opposite direction.

[Hamish]

"The 7.63 Mauser actually has about 3/4 the capacity of the .32-20, and cases made from .38 Special, which isn't significantly stronger than .32-20, can't make up anything like that. The creator of the .30 Badger recommended that pressures be kept within 35,000psi. At that level the slight swelling caused by .38 cases being smaller in diameter than 7.63 will make do no harm. David Manson used to recommend making a reamer for it rimless, so that Magnum or even Maximum brass can be used to give it a longer neck. It still won't be a deer rifle, but better for cast bullets and (like many an off-the-peg cartridge) a perfectly good small game one."

Actually,,,,,,,,

The volumetric capacity of the .30 Badger and the .32-20 are are essentially the same, differing by one grain of water. And as to its capacity as a a deer rifle, the Badger has killed several deer, in at least two different states, by at least three hunters in the last couple of years that I am personally aware of. (One of which was documented on this forum.). To pronounce the .30 Badger incapable as a deer cartridge is to pronounce the .32-20 incapable as a deer cartridge, which is to pronounce ANY bullet at ANY velocity that will puncture vitals on whitetail that is used in the .32-20 as incapable, is patently both ludicrous and false. Which is to say that ANY of those bullets at those velocities that are used in other cartridges than the .32-20 are incapable of killing deer.

Ultimately, the brass that holds the propellant is meaningless. The ONLY thing that matters in the discussion is the projectile and its velocity. When I see someone say that one propellant receptacle is suitable and another is not, when both are capable of propelling the same projectile at the same velocity, it just dumbfounds me.

BiS does bring up one valid point though, eventually the .30 Badger brass will develop enough of a slight bulge in the mid case to cause difficulty or inability to chamber a loaded cartridge due to a difference in the internal die dimensions between the .38 and the .30 Mauser/Tokarev. This has been found to be easily solved by putting the loaded cartridge through one last pass through the .38/.357 FL die. Easy.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

I got my figures on case capacity from John J. Donnelly in his "Handloader's Manual of Cartridge Conversions", to whom the remarks you have edited out can hardly be applied. Cases are made up of cylinders and truncated cones, and from the external dimensions of the cases, deducting a slightly arbitrary 0.2in. at the rear for the solid head, published dimensions for the .32-20 case suggest a volume of 1.65cc., and the 7.63 Mauser 1.229cc. One is 0.7448 of the other. The figures are borne out by the WW .25-20 cases I have and use, and by Donnelly's figures for the almost identical 7.62mm. Tokarev. If some Mauser cases have more internal space, they have less brass.

You seem to be basing the capabilities of the Badger on the supposed capabilities of the .32-20. I don't doubt the .22LR has killed more than several deer in the last couple of years, and the .25 ACP has undoubtedly killed more people than any other pistol, in the hands of Stalin's notorious General Blokhin who at 300 executions per night, didn't want to be bothered checking for vital signs. Veterinarian and stockyards frequent use a .32 humane killer on horses and cattle, by going to extreme lengths to achieve proper bullet placement:
:



165871

But the ability to kill a deer doesn't make a suitable deer rifle. Winchester, in the early days, did market the .32-20 as suitable for both small game and deer. But Frank Barnes, to whom the remarks you have edited out can hardly be applied says in "Cartridges of the World" that "It s much too underpowered for deer-size animals, and will wound far more often than it will kill, even with a well-placed shot."

[Von Gruff]

Go Hamish, some of us have seen the results of the badger elsewhere but it seems there are doubters

[Ballistics in Scotland]

Of whom one has written a book. I don't doubt that the .30 Badger can be an excellent small game and target round, although that is hardly a field devoid of production cartridges. But it doesn't equal the .32-20 or .30 Carbine and neither of these are satisfactory deer cartridges. Here is a thread where its creator, Badgeredd on this site, says it should be kept to 35,000psi, and doesn't dispute a similarly minded member's statement that primers were found to loosen at higher pressures. He also says "The cartridge was not intended by myself to be a barn burner, just a fun, cheap to shoot, plinker and small game cartridge." I have the impression that both of them have used it somewhat.

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?256118-30-Badger-30-Reece

[leftiye]

Sayin' something doesn't make it so. And we all have opinions and opinions will differ. (are any of us right that often?) Most of the ever ready to flare wars in our field are encompassed in these two. Whatcha all think about the .32 H&R mag. as a rook gun/small game ctg.?

[rbuck351]

If it were mine it would be a 256Win.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

Saying something isn't so doesn't make it not so. No US state with an energy requirement for deer hunting sets it anywhere near as low as the .30 Badger.

[Hamish]

Sayin' something doesn't make it so. And we all have opinions and opinions will differ. (are any of us right that often?) Most of the ever ready to flare wars in our field are encompassed in these two. Whatcha all think about the .32 H&R mag. as a rook gun/small game ctg.?

Thats a dandy idea! The selection of boolits has never been better, no matter what distance/velocity you might want to shoot.

[swamp]

I think it is a great idea. I would like a Cadet in 32 Mag.
swamp

[Ballistics in Scotland]

If it were mine it would be a 256Win.

Another excellent choice. The short neck isn't ideal for cast bullets, and you would probably have to make cases from .57 Magnum nowadays, but it is likely to be more satisfactory than a cast bullet .22 centrefire.

[Texinoz]

I have an original .310 [Francotte] in really good nick that will remain original, one in 222 Rimmed (my fox gun), one in 2LR, and a project gun that will be chambered in the old 32 Ideal (also called 32-25-150) - because I want to say I have a .310 magnum... Friends with cadets in all the hornet variants are happy with them as are those with cadets in 357mag. Have not ever heard of those stories of 357mag having trouble ejecting. The concensus in Australia is that while the action will hold 30-30, a barrel in the original profile is too thin for the 30-30 base size.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

The .32 Ideal is a good cartridge, and may well suit the original Cadet bore dimensions, although these do vary, and should be checked. If it is to be rebarrelled, the S-bore 8x57 will probably be fine. What you would get by using a .30 Carbine reamer and dies and an 8mm. barrel is also worth looking into.

The Francotte Cadet action is just as good as the British ones. I have a pretty derelict .297/.230 which isn't worth restoring and in which someone has ground the sides thinner than I really like for a more powerful conversion, doubtless to remove pitting. I have just got back a piece of D2 air hardening tool steel in which I had a suitable mortice spark eroded for its replacement. It is pretty good practice with most things that have holes in them, to start with the inside and put the outside around it.

It is a project for the future, but should make the perfect heavy small Martini action. The sides are 7mm. thick (unless I thin them with beading at the ends like a lever-action Winchester), and the corners are sharp, with satin textured surfaces which wouldn't disgrace the outside of a firearm. It should be possible to incorporate a scope base into the slightly lengthened receiver ring, and/or make it better adapted to an aperture sight. I planned to use the Francotte internals, but am not so sure I won't make the entire action, possibly with a side lever.

166054

[MatthewVanitas]

After the mentions of the TCU series, and multiple mentions of the 5.6X50R, I was also about to mention Bellm, since he has the 6.5 Bellm wildcat necked up from the 5.6, basically a rimmed equivalent of 6.5 TCU with slight more potential.

http://www.bellmtcs.com/store/index.php?cid=75

[Ballistics in Scotland]

I have just received the May catalogue of the Australian auction house where I have bought numerous firearms, including a couple of Cadets.

http://www.australianarmsauctions.com/cat_online_1.html (wlmailhtml:{88738A09-391F-41B8-A4E8-C6FC870CB95D}mid://00000005/!x-usc:http://www.australianarmsauctions.com/cat_online_1.html)

They are well used to exporting firearms of all kinds, including those that require a licence in Australia. I expect a ban on guns by Australia Post is still in effect, but they dispatch items in bulk to importing agents in the principal importing countries, and you pay another fee to the agent. In the UK it is efficient, and still works out a pretty good deal in the UK, where our legislation causes some guns to carry a premium as uncontrolled antiques which don't elsewhere. I understand US Customs, or some officers in some places a few years back, know the Francotte Cadet may be pre-1899, but the British Australian issue ones can't be. You would have to find out for yourself how much trouble that could be.

I looked a bit more closely at a Cadet action, and it is the relationship of the top of the sear with the firing-pin and possibly its threaded sleeve which controls where the block comes to rest with the action open and your hand removed. Filing or welding to adjust this is tricky and probably of limited effect.

But how low the action of the lever, or forcing home a large diameter cartridge, can move the block against spring tension, is controlled by the block contacting the lower front end of the sear. That could be lowered by filing or grinding the sear, as long as you don't weaken the notch, which might be handy with a large diameter cartridge.

A point worth checking on any Martini is the sides of the firing-pin where it is pierced by the sear slot. I have seen a large Martini action in which one side was cracked, and it was waiting for the other side to give way. My guess is that it would happen when the firing-pin impacts the front of its tunnel, and the gun is welcome to go off then. But checking is better than guessing on this one.

[BigEyeBob]

Australia Post moves firearms with in Australia , must be registered mail package .
Nor sure about overseas though.
They certainly wont move live ammo , primers or powder internally or over seas.
these must all be sent by Dangerous Goods couriers at a exorbitant cost

[Ballistics in Scotland]

I don't know whether the ban is still in force. It was lifted and reimposed soon after its introduction, I imagine because legislation had to be redrawn. But it always applied only to overseas mail.

[BigEyeBob]

I don't know whether the ban is still in force. It was lifted and reimposed soon after its introduction, I imagine because legislation had to be redrawn. But it always applied only to overseas mail.


Plenty of other couriers that will move goods over seas instead of Australia Post . .
I have my eye on a couple of firearms in that auction , could be grounds for divorce if I'm successful in bidding .
Nice Rook rifle and a Martini in 450cal

[Ballistics in Scotland]

Dohhh! Most of the good Cadets went for respectable but less than gunshop prices. But there was one with a dark pitted bore, and an estimate of $300 to $600 Australian. I decided even $300 wasn't quite cheap enough for me to add another Cadet project to a long backlog... and it went for $160. There wouldn't be much grounds for divorce in that. Maybe a week or so of cholesterol control.

[Bill Torzsok]

I have a Martini cadet in each of the following;
.22 Hornet, .218 Bee, .222 Remington (not rimmed), .25-20 Winchester and an original .310 Cadet.
They are all brilliant shooters with J boolits, .222 Remington tips the scales at 6 lb with an old V9 Weaver with fine crosshairs and will average 3/4". What a rifle! The extractor was designed by a local gunsmith, it only extracts, it does not eject the shell. I am not concerned about it,it is a
single shot, and I usually do not need a second shot.
The 25-20 is a lot of fun with j or cast and so is the 218 Bee and the Hornet.
The 310 does 1" at fifty yards with its CBE boolit.
Cadets Rule!

[Hooker53]

Bill I bet that 25-20 is a hoot to load and shoot with. If I ran across one I would jump all over it. If the price was good anyway. Ha. Which Boolit do you cast for the 25-20? The 25-20 is one of my Fav's.

Roy
Hooker53

[Bill Torzsok]

Bill I bet that 25-20 is a hoot to load and shoot with. If I ran across one I would jump all over it. If the price was good anyway. Ha. Which Boolit do you cast for the 25-20? The 25-20 is one of my Fav's.

Roy
Hooker53
Hi Roy !
I am almost embarrassed to admit that I am not casting my own, but I get ready made Hawkesbury River Bullet Company 85 grain round nose flat point in .257 lots of 500. They group right on 1" at 50 yds with peep sights using 6 grains of h4227 with WSR primers. It has been responsible for demolishing a large lime stone "targets" on my 75 acres bush block. By the way I load the rounds with a Lee Loader as I shoot.
I own a number of loading presses but somehow it feels better using the little loader. It is my number one fun gun.

[BigEyeBob]

Dohhh! Most of the good Cadets went for respectable but less than gunshop prices. But there was one with a dark pitted bore, and an estimate of $300 to $600 Australian. I decided even $300 wasn't quite cheap enough for me to add another Cadet project to a long backlog... and it went for $160. There wouldn't be much grounds for divorce in that. Maybe a week or so of cholesterol control.


Just checked the selling prices on that auction , the Tisdal 450 Martini sold for 1000AUD and the nice Hooton 297/230 Martini sold for 575Aud could have slipped both of them in with out the missus noticing .
The Westley Richards Howdah pistol in 15 bore sold for 5,000AUD ,,,,,that would have caused the divorce.

[barrabruce]

Hi Roy !
I am almost embarrassed to admit that I am not casting my own, but I get ready made Hawkesbury River Bullet Company 85 grain round nose flat point in .257 lots of 500. They group right on 1" at 50 yds with peep sights using 6 grains of h4227 with WSR primers. It has been responsible for demolishing a large lime stone "targets" on my 75 acres bush block. By the way I load the rounds with a Lee Loader as I shoot.
I own a number of loading presses but somehow it feels better using the little loader. It is my number one fun gun.

Nice and casual shooting and fun.
I've done it at the range with a lee loader too.
People think I'm potty.
But you would be surprised how many rounds you let of in a session.
No stress about having to load a bunch up for a shoot.
Change parameters on demand.

Cheers

[Ballistics in Scotland]

Just checked the selling prices on that auction , the Tisdal 450 Martini sold for 1000AUD and the nice Hooton 297/230 Martini sold for 575Aud could have slipped both of them in with out the missus noticing .
The Westley Richards Howdah pistol in 15 bore sold for 5,000AUD ,,,,,that would have caused the divorce.

Never mind, with guns as with offspring, her showing resentment of them would probably have resulted in your getting custody. I've always been amazed at how a name, possibly not contemporary with the pistol at all, increases its cash value. Howdah pistols always outnumbered howdahs, and in their day were just pistols for people who thought some extra oomph and improved reliability were worth sacrificing a few chambers of a revolver. Nowadays we see people trying to sell "howdah" pistols which are plainly Belgian, made primarily for the South American trade.

Bill Torzok's rifles sound like extremely attractive ones. It always struck me as a pity that so many of the early American imports were made into heavy varmint rifles, for the Cadet begs for one-handed carry. But I'd always prefer a rim on a Cadet cartridge, and it is now possible to have one for just about every wildlife or target niche the rifle can cover.

[Hooker53]

IV even wondered how the 32-40 round would be in these actions. Could you even get it in and out??

Roy
Hooker53

[Black Beard]

Maybe not. The might be too big to extract easily past the block. The barrel would still be almost 8mm so you'd still need oversize/heeled bullets or a rebarrel. Recoil would be horrible.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

The .30-30 and .32 Winchester Special appear to feed and extract with at least some Cadet actions, and the .32-40 with the same head size should be a little easier, but that doesn't make its use a good idea. It will be difficult to get in and out, especially under a scope, and while opinion varies on which rounds may cause swollen barrel threads and difficult or impossible extraction, this is not a possibility I want to test. You couldn't load it to greater performance than you could get with smaller cartridges. The brass isn't even that easy to get, and while .30-30 can be reformed, it takes the cylindrical .38-55 to get the full case length.