Every hunter gets curious about new cartridges. You hear big claims—flatter trajectory, less recoil, better energy—and before long, you’re hauling home a rifle chambered in something “different.” Then you realize why that caliber never caught on. Some rounds are either too expensive to reload, too picky about components, or flat-out unpleasant to shoot. They might look good on paper but quickly turn into dust collectors once reality sets in. If you’ve ever bought dies, brass, and bullets for one of these, you know the feeling. Here are the calibers hunters try once, load once, and never touch again.
.264 Winchester Magnum
The .264 Winchester Magnum was supposed to be a flat-shooting deer and antelope slayer, but it earned a reputation as a barrel burner. With its overbore design and high powder charge, throat erosion happens fast. You can get impressive velocity, but accuracy fades after just a few hundred rounds.
Reloading isn’t much better—powder charges are large and finicky, and consistent accuracy requires precise case trimming. Brass isn’t cheap or common, and the cartridge’s appetite for slow-burning powders makes it inefficient compared to modern 6.5mm options like the 6.5 Creedmoor or PRC. It looks sleek in theory, but it’s one of those rounds that spends more time at the back of the safe than in a reloading press.
.300 Remington Ultra Magnum
The .300 RUM promised to outclass the .300 Win Mag in range and power, and technically, it does—but at a steep cost. It’s punishing to shoot, burns a mountain of powder, and eats barrels like candy. For reloaders, it’s expensive and tedious, requiring careful charge control to avoid pressure spikes.
You’ll also deal with inconsistent brass and heavy recoil that makes precise load development a chore. It’s loud, hard on gear, and rough on shoulders. Most hunters find the extra velocity doesn’t translate to real-world results, especially when modern bullets make the .300 Win Mag or .30 Nosler more practical choices. Once you’ve loaded a few boxes, you start to question why you ever bothered.
.325 WSM
The .325 Winchester Short Magnum was introduced to bring .338-class power to a short action, but it never found its footing. Recoil is sharp, brass availability is spotty, and bullet selection is limited. Reloading components are often special-order only, which kills the appeal for most handloaders.
While it can perform well on paper, it’s tough to find rifles that shoot it accurately across loads. The efficiency isn’t terrible, but the payoff doesn’t justify the pain. Most who’ve loaded for it realize it duplicates what other, more common rounds do—just with fewer bullet choices and less support. It’s one of those cartridges that made sense in marketing meetings, not in loading benches.
.358 Winchester
The .358 Winchester has a loyal niche following, but most who try it don’t stay long. It’s a reloader’s cartridge—factory ammo is rare—but even then, bullet selection limits it. Most .35-caliber bullets are made for magnums or lever guns, not short-action rifles.
Brass is hard to come by, and finding loads that group well beyond 150 yards takes time and patience. It hits hard up close but drops fast past 200. For handloaders who want versatility, it’s disappointing. It’s one of those calibers you admire for nostalgia but rarely reach for once you’ve worked through a batch of reloads.
.260 Remington
The .260 Remington should’ve been a success—it’s accurate, efficient, and pleasant to shoot—but it arrived too late and was overshadowed by the 6.5 Creedmoor. Reloaders who give it a shot quickly realize brass and factory support are dwindling. Finding consistent loads can be tricky since pressure data varies between manuals.
It’s also fussy about bullet seating depth in some rifles, and the case doesn’t feed smoothly in every magazine. The performance is great, but unless you’ve already got the dies and brass, it’s not worth the hassle. Most who try it move on to Creedmoor, which gives identical results with half the effort.
.338 RUM
The .338 Remington Ultra Magnum delivers massive energy and punishing recoil. On paper, it’s a powerhouse for elk and moose. On the bench, it’s a nightmare to load for. Powder charges approach absurd levels, and consistency is tough to achieve. You’ll spend more time trickling than shooting.
The recoil is harsh enough to make load development miserable, and the barrel life is shockingly short. Few rifles handle it well without custom tuning. Most reloaders find they can’t shoot enough of it to make their investment worthwhile. The .338 Win Mag remains the far more practical option—easier to load, easier to find, and far easier on the shoulder.
.280 Remington
The .280 Remington has always been the “almost great” round. It does nearly everything the .270 and .30-06 can do, but it never gained traction. For reloaders, that’s part of the problem—brass is scarce, and published load data can vary wildly depending on source and rifle.
It can shoot beautifully in tuned setups, but the cartridge is fussy. Seating depth and powder choice matter more than they should, and velocity consistency can suffer. Most reloaders find themselves working harder for results they could get from a .270 or 7mm-08 with half the hassle. Once the novelty wears off, the dies start collecting dust.
.45 GAP
The .45 GAP (Glock Automatic Pistol) was designed to give .45 ACP performance in a smaller frame, but it never caught on. Brass is rare, bullets are limited, and factory ammo costs too much to justify practice. Reloading helps, but even then, it’s frustrating.
Case capacity is smaller than the .45 ACP, so pressures spike fast if you’re not careful. Powder selection is narrow, and reliable data is limited. Most reloaders decide it’s not worth the effort, especially when .45 ACP offers better performance with easier-to-find components. The .45 GAP is one of those calibers that seemed smart in theory but became obsolete almost immediately.
.300 Savage
The .300 Savage is a classic that’s hard to let go of—but most modern reloaders don’t stay with it long. Brass is limited, and the short neck makes it sensitive to bullet seating and pressure changes. It’s also slower than newer cartridges, with less case capacity and lower efficiency.
While it was groundbreaking in its day, it’s now more of a curiosity for collectors than a practical hunting round. Loading it feels like babysitting—you’re constantly checking case length, pressure signs, and overall length. It performs fine inside 200 yards but struggles to compete with anything newer.
.22 Hornet
The .22 Hornet is quirky and nostalgic, but it’s a headache for reloaders. It’s a tiny, thin-walled case that crushes easily during resizing. The powder charges are so small that even minor variances in load can cause wild velocity swings.
Accuracy varies wildly between rifles, and brass doesn’t last long. It’s fine for light varmint work, but most shooters move to the .223 Remington or .22-250 after a few frustrating sessions. The Hornet has charm, but it demands patience few reloaders want to give.
.17 Remington
The .17 Remington is fast, flashy, and frustrating. It pushes lightweight bullets at blistering speed—but that speed comes with fouling, barrel wear, and sensitivity to even minor powder variations. It’s a challenge to load accurately, especially in wind.
The brass is delicate, the cleaning intervals are short, and the payoff rarely feels worth it. It’s devastating on small varmints when conditions are perfect, but the maintenance and precision required wear most reloaders down. It’s one of those cartridges that impresses the first day and irritates you every day after.
*This article was developed with AI-powered tools and has been carefully reviewed by our editors.
