I just got finished reading an article by Greg Rodriguez in the newest issue of Rifle magazine. In the article he spends several lines stating his position that the development of new wildcat cartridges is unnecessary in his opinion because of the already flooded pool of cartridges available (which may or may not be true.)
He then goes on to sing the praises of a "new" wildcat he calls the .35 HCR (Hill Country Rifles). Greg acknowledges that it is virtually identical to wildcats that have been previously .35-338 WM or some variation of the sort.
Now I typically like Greg's writing, but my gripe is this. He writes line after line applauding this "new" cartridge and even goes so far as to say how it is BETTER than the .358 Norma. Essentially it IS the .358 Norma. Yes it is a .358 Norma made with a cheaper case but it is NOT new.
I know they have to have something to write about but do they think we are stupid, or at least forgetful. Changing the neck angle by 1 or 2 degrees or moving the shoulder forward or back a few thousandths, in my opinion, is not creating a new cartridge. And just because you formed it from some other parent case doesn't make it inherently new either.
The sad thing is that Greg must be forgetful or didn't do much research because I have an article from several years back where Chuck Taylor did the EXACT same thing and named the cartridge the .358 Taylor. Taylor also lauded his cartridge as the superior to the hard to obtain Norma.
I have a .358 Norma. I have formed rounds from .338 WM cases as well as .300's but never did I proceed to call it something else. It is a great round (maybe one of the greatest) and I agree with every statement Mr. Rodriguez and Mr. Taylor made about "their" cartridges. But come on guys, give credit where credit is due.