Talk:Wildcat cartridge

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	It is requested that a photograph or photographs be included in this article to improve its quality.
	The Free Image Search Tool (FIST) may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

	This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Firearms; If you would like to join us, please visit the project page where you can find a list of open tasks. If you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked

[edit] 6.8 SPC and .303/25

I added the 6.8 SPC entry to the "commercially accepted wildcats" article some time ago, but I now question whether or not it should be moved to the "commercially developed wildcats" segment of the entry. It was developed mainly by Remington engineers, and honestly it hasn't gotten a great deal of commercial acceptance - although it remains to be seen how much staying power the cartridge has. I may just move it myself within a few weeks, if nobody objects.

That sounds good--and it is getting wider acceptance, Ruger has come out with a Mini-6.8 rifle. scot 22:01, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Since the .303/25 cartridge is uncommon anywhere outside of Australia, and obsolete even there, I would definitely hesitate to call it 'commercially accepted.' It's nowhere near the level of the .22-250 or the .454 Casull, certainly. This segment of the entry should be moved to another part of the entry, or deleted. I will move it myself soon if nobody objects.

That doesn't change the fact that it presumably was accepted at one point. If a significant number of commercial firearms were manufactured in that caliber and/or a major ammunition maker manufactured ammunition in the caliber, the I'd say it was commercially accepted, albeit perhaps obsolete. Sounds a lot like the .25-06 Remington, which was a wildcat for many years until Remington accepted it, but it's never been a big caliber. scot 22:01, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

71.162.11.151 21:54, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Commercially developed wildcats

This section is a contradiction in terms as well as with the intro. I don't think it belongs here, it has nothing to do with wildcats, it has to do with cartridge design. Probably it belongs at Cartridge (firearms). Arthurrh 17:02, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Actually, that depends on whose definition you use. MidwayUSA's dictionary defines wildcat cartridges as Cartridges created by modifying the cartridge case of a standard commercial cartridge, while the SAAMI glossary defines them as Cartridges designed by individual inventors that have never been commercially manufactured. Under the SAAMI's definition, as soon as someone sells pre-loaded rounds, it's no longer a wildcat, while Midway's definition does allow for commercially developed "wildcats" like the .204 Ruger. I think the solution is to work on the definition and point out that commercially developed or adopted cartridges fit the more inclusive definition, but not the more restrictive. scot 17:42, 20 September 2007 (UTC)