Home » Forums » Sixguns.com forums » If it don't fit anywhere else

Jim Harvey's Malaska cartridges.

4 replies [Last post]
Mon, 08/24/2020 - 21:22
John Dunlap
John Dunlap's picture
Offline
Joined: 08/24/2020

Hi all. I'm brand new here, just got my welcome letter. I actually have a question for Mr. Taffin, or anyone else who may have known Jim Harvey.

I had the idea recently for the .43 Dunlap. Still at the scribbles on a napkin stage, it's the .450 Marlin necked down to take .429 bullets, given a .400" neck and a tiny, shallow 13 degree shoulder similar to the .375 H&H, with no other changes. That should give me a butter smooth feeding cartridge that can be loaded up and down from light .44 Mag ballistics to nipping the heels of the .404 Jeffrey, while fitting neatly in a lever action or bolt gun. I'd like to put it in a Ruger Scout (being left handed drastically reduces choices in affordable bolt guns, especially if you want CRF). My idea of an everything gun.

Doing a little research, I proved once again that there isn't anything new under the sun. I ran across the Malaska series of cartridges (http://www.cartridgecollector.net/429-malaska-jnr). They were designed by Jim Harvey in the late 50's and appear to be based on the Holland & Holland case, which would make the smallest pretty much what I was thinking about. However, the only info I've been able to find is from the link above. I was wondering if anyone here can tell me more about the cartridges and their creator.

Top
Tue, 08/25/2020 - 07:14
#1
admin
admin's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/07/2010
Hello and welcome...

... to sixguns forum
Interesting round. If you don't get any results here or other forums, PM me and I'll get you in touch with Mr. Taffin. 
AL

Top
Tue, 08/25/2020 - 18:11
#2
John Dunlap
John Dunlap's picture
Offline
Joined: 08/24/2020
Thanks for the welcome.

Thanks Al. I haven't posted this anywhere else. I understand that  Mr. Taffin did know him, so I thought this was the place to start. Just for chuckles, I browsed a few of the big tool makers for a reamer. Nothing. The .450 Marlin has the same standard head diameter, .532, as the H&H based magnums, the only difference being the belt width. Since the Malaska looks to be based on the H&H case, well, there's no sense in straining my brain to reinvent the wheel. I've also thought about using the RCM case, but that wouldn't work for leverguns. I appreciate the help.

Top
Wed, 09/09/2020 - 05:52
#3
admin
admin's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/07/2010
Forwarded your message...

... to Mr Taffin. See what he says. 
Al

Top
Wed, 09/09/2020 - 20:15
#4
John Dunlap
John Dunlap's picture
Offline
Joined: 08/24/2020
Thanks...

very much for the help. This has become an intriguing mystery for me. Have you ever noticed, that there is useful crossover in most "standard" calibers with the exception of two? If you handload, it's fairly easy to produce light hunting and plinking loads for the .35's and .41's using handgun bullets. The rest, from .22 to .45, are available in cartridges that run the gamut of the velocity spectrum, so bullet choice is broad enough to give the same benefits. One rifle can often go from plinker to big game just by changing the load. That isn't true of the .338 and .429 bores. Most .338 bullets are made for magnum velocities, probably because until the .338 Federal came along, all the 'modern' .33's were magnums. With the exception of the .444 Marlin, there is no .429 rifle cartridge, and the .444 isn't in the same class as the .416's. The available bullets reflect this. I find myself wondering why this is the case. Mr. harvey had the idea over fifty years ago. A short rifle cartridge that can use .44 Mag bullets, and be loaded for whitetails all the way up to elephant, seems like a no brainer. So why didn't it stick?

Top