Lazzeroni 7.82 Battlestar

Does anyone have pictures or dimensions of Lazzeroni’s 7.82 Battlestar cartridge?

Fede, unfortunately I don’t have any dimensional data, just some ballistics.
It should push a 150 grains bullet at about 4000 fps.That’s a very small advantage over the classic 7.82 Warbird.

I should have read somewhere that it could be a necked down 408 CT, but I can’t prove that

Can we have some more information on the 7.82 Battlestar. I was under the impression I had all of the Lazzeroni rounds but I guess not. Vic

Pivi, thanks, I also found this information on the web and it seems that the original source is a very brief commentary made by the company in American Rifleman September 2003. I thought that this was a prototype made from another case type of the Lazzeroni series until I saw a picture of a correctly headstamped case. According to the manufacturer it was commercially offered early on 2005, but I guess that this was probably a special order only.

It took me awhile, but here is a scan showing the case profile and correct headstamp.

The mind boggles…

What baffles me about the approach to performance typified by this round is that it’s all about muzzle velocity.

If they really wanted (for whatever reason) to make an maximum-performance .30 cal round, they should start with the bullet, which should be a VLD design of 200-220 grains with the best ballistic coefficient they can achieve. Then they should design the cartridge case around it, to deliver however much energy they want (but the bigger the case, the longer the barrel should be to make effective use of the propellant). The muzzle velocity would be lower, but the heavy VLD bullet would soon catch up with and then surpass the standard 150 grain bullet shown in the pic.

From the look of it, this round would be unable to use such a VLD bullet, since there doesn’t seem to be enough space between the case length and the overall length to fit such a long-ogive design. Which also applies to the great majority of cartridges on the market, including military ones like the 5.56mm, 7.62mm, .300 WM, .338 Lapua…where you’d think that maximising the effective range would be a key advantage.

Oh well, grumble over, back on topic…

[quote=“TonyWilliams”]The mind boggles…

What baffles me about the approach to performance typified by this round is that it’s all about muzzle velocity.


High velocity is the Lazzeroni primary sales point for all his cartridges.

Tony, Like most things in this world, it isn’t about performance or effectiveness, it is about sales. Apparently there are enough customers who believe in Velocity and will pay a premium for it that Lazzeroni does well.

I have talked to some of the people who make fancy “Home Defense” pistol ammunition that sells at a premium. At $2 or $3 or more a round it is a good business, but a shallow market because their customers don’t buy it and shoot it up, they load up their magazines and hold on to it. As a result the market it thin. When the potential market has their “go to war” stock in place, they quit buying, and few will shoot these rounds on a continual basis. So, the companies have to bring out something else new that is even better for “Home Defense” or better yet, something that people will shoot regularly.

This isn’t only something that happens in ammo. Customer perceptions drive sales, not facts. That is why there are some many ads in all the media, particularly this electronic media.

You already knew this, but it felt good to write it down!


Indeed Lew, and this has been going on for a long time.

I was startled to hear in a TV documentary on this subject that this started in an organised way with the light bulb industry, the main international players of which got together in the 1920s and signed a formal agreement to reduce the life of light bulbs to about a third of what they had been, in order to boost sales.

Then there are the drugs companies who invent sciencey-sounding ailments to scare people, while offering their products which of course cure the “problem”.

It seems that the entire business world is out to persuade us to buy things that we don’t need or even particularly want, and many of them are not too particular about how they achieve that.

Oh well, back to cartridges ;-)

The first problem would be building a 150 gr cal. .30 bullet that survives being launched at 4000 fps. M80 definitely suffers deformation during launch when velocity exceeds 3000 fps.

I scaled the round in your picture and, according my calculations, it should have a .634" head, exactly the same as the 408 CheyTac case.

The case appears shorter than a typical CheyTac wildcat, but I don’t think they changed the original shoulder angle

So, according to me, the 7.82 Battlestar is a shortened .30 version of the 408 cheyTac