.303 versus 7.7×56mmR

[JS569]

Whilst walking the dog, I had a random thought. I have a number of .303s on my license, obviously Enfields in 303 as that's my interest. It occurred to me that .303 isn't the actual calibre. Correct me if I'm wrong but it's a bit of a misnomer.

Often here we see the question, if I have a .308 on my license can I buy 7.62 ammunition and so forth. So out of interest, if I were to ask for another slot but as 7.7×56mmR do we think A. the licensing body would click that it's .303 and additionally if I had that on my license I could buy .303 ammunition or a firearm.

This is purely hypothetical, I'm not trying to pull the wool over anyone's eyes it just occurred to me that technically 7.7×56mmR is the actual dimensional size of the ammunition/chamber.

Thoughts?

[snayperskaya]

The bullet diameter is actually 7.92 mm/0.312 in diameter so 7.7mm could also be a misnomer........

7.7×58mm Arisaka and 7.62x54r both use 7.89 mm/0.311" bullets but I doubt you'd get far with 7.89x58 or 7.89x54r on your certificate if you tried to buy either.....and I bet most shops would be scratching their heads if you asked for 200 rounds of 7.7x56r!.

[Sim G]

7.7x56R is already the metric name for .303 British. 7.7/.303 is the bore diameter, not bullet diameter.

[Laurie]

7.7/.303 is the bore diameter, not bullet diameter.

Quite so, as per the usual British convention until at least WW2 of using the bore (lands) diameter in rifle cartridge designation. Hence .256 Mannlicher, Britspeak for what Europeans call 6.5mm and lots of confusion among Americans who assumed anything of that size must be like their 25-calibre as in .257 Roberts.

..... but as noted by snayperskaya bullet diameter is something else again, 7.62/30-cal with nominally 0.3080" bullets being 7.82mm actual diameter. AFAIK, only Lazerroni used actual metric bullet diameters in its cartridge descriptions, as in:

http://gundata.org/cartridge/59/7.82

I wouldn't like trying to explain such to an FEO or gunshop assistant except in the highly unlikely event of my ever acquiring a rifle chambered for such a Lazerroni number .... and goodness only knows just what the FLO would print on the FAC on getting a variation.

[JS569]

Interesting topic though, only this week on Forgotten weapons, Ian was talking about two firearms with the same calibre that the testing body gave different names to even though the bullets were the same (this is incorrect but for example .250 and .260) just to help we demarkation.

[Laurie]

Well yes. Just look at 22 centrefires. There are names with at least the following numbers in them without going into metric designations:

218 ...... [218 Bee]
22 ........ [22-250 Rem; 22 Nosler; 22 Hornet]
220 .......[Swift]
222 .......[Rem]
223 .......[Rem]
224 .......[224 Valkyrie; 224 Weatherby Magnum]
225 .......[Winchester]

all using 0.224" dia bullets (0.223" in pre-WW2 Hornets and similar).

[Laurie]

......... oh, and 219 Zipper and Donaldson Wasp, plus the 221 Remington Fireball and you have a complete set of 'calibre' designations from 218 to 225 for a single diameter bullet.

[redcat]

I have a few of these I was considering turning into cuff links.

Redcat

[Andy632]

I have a few of these I was considering turning into cuff links.

Redcat

Aaah, good ol' South African 303.

They definitely wouldn't call it 303 British, would they!!

[ovenpaa]

Well yes. Just look at 22 centrefires. There are names with at least the following numbers in them without going into metric designations:

218 ...... [218 Bee]
22 ........ [22-250 Rem; 22 Nosler; 22 Hornet]
220 .......[Swift]
222 .......[Rem]
223 .......[Rem]
224 .......[224 Valkyrie; 224 Weatherby Magnum]
225 .......[Winchester]

all using 0.224" dia bullets (0.223" in pre-WW2 Hornets and similar).

Then you have the confusion of the 22 Hi-Power (5,6x52R) which actually takes a .227" projectile, although some describe it as a .228" which I am not convinced is correct.