The Accurate Reloading Forums
Re: .350 Rigby NE (a/k/a .350 Rigby Magnum)
21 January 2004, 13:40
<400 Nitro Express>Re: .350 Rigby NE (a/k/a .350 Rigby Magnum)
buchsenschmeid:
There were two flanged Rigby .350s, the .400/.350 Nitro Express which used the 310 grain bullet at 2000 fps and the .350 No. 2 Nitro Express which used the 225 grain bullet at the same velocity as the .350 Rimless Magnum. The cases are identical. Both were introduced in 1899. I think you meant to say "before 1908" instead of "before 1898".
What makes rifles chambered for the two flanged .350s (and the .400/.360 Purdey NE, as well) so attractive is that brass is so easy and cheap to obtain. I've always used 9.3X74R cases. Just run it through the standard .350 or .360 sizing die, trim from 2.94" to 2.745", and load it.
-----------------------------
"Serious rifles have two barrels, everything else just burns gunpowder."
21 January 2004, 14:02
mbogo375Quote:
Is anyone still shooting this? At the Las Vegas show this past weekend I came across a newly made Mauser in that calibre, 26" barrel, very attractive and well made classically styled rifle with no maker's name on it. Looked the ammo up, Kynoch is making it again, 225 grains at 2625fs, Woodleigh bullet. Taylor thought this was a very good general African calibre. In power rather stronger than a .35 Whelen. I am tempted by the nice rifle, I like the long barrel, and would appreciate any opinions.
I just started working with an original 350 Rigby Magnum. So far I really like it. It should be no problem to improve on the original ballistics with the modern powders now available if that interests you. I have been using 225 to 250 grain bullets with RL 15, IMR 4320, and IMR 4350, but will try heavier bullets as time allows. Case capacity with Bertram brass is almost identical to the 358 Norma mag.
Jim
21 January 2004, 16:23
buchsenschmeidHello 400 N.E.,
We'll get each other straightened out here.
I looked up my info to make sure of the facts,and check my memory. (the memory is the 2nd thing to go.................I forgot what the first was...) and you are correct in the fact that there were 2 flanged 350 Rigbys. The oldest one is the 350 Rigby, also known as the 350/400 Rigby, which used a 310 grain bullet. The case was 2.750" long
The 350 No.2 Rigby is the same as the 350 Rigby magnum, except the No.2 has a flange (rim) Both of the later 350s were only available with 225 grain bullets. They are also 2.750" long cases.
The 350/400 was invented in 1897-98, and was first marketed in 1899. The next 2 were both first marketed in 1908.
My complaments on your knowlage. Ya got me on a few points.
There..........that wasen't so bad.
21 January 2004, 16:56
vigillinusI started this thread, appreciate all the info, however, I can supply some on the rimmed cartridge. I owned a Rigby .350 No. 2 Best sidelock ejector, made 1923, for 35 years and wrote it up in Double Gun Journal a few years ago. A superlative rifle, 26", 8 3/4 lbs. Not terribly accurate with Rigby ammo, the 225 grain at 2650, 3-4" at 100. The .400-.350 on which it was based, same case, used a very long 310 grain at around 2200, super penetration according to Taylor, not surprisingly. Finally sold the rifle when I could not see the open sights any more. For many years I watched out for one of the slant box Mausers or a Farquaharson for the rimmed cartridge, as a match for the double. Saw a couple, bores very worn. The double was nearly mint. So I am rather intrigued with the idea of a bolt gun for the rimless cartridge, which will take a low power scope. It would also be suitable for anything in North America.
22 January 2004, 05:07
Paul HI have a Leupold M8 2.5x w/ 4a reticle on my 350, and find it to be a fine match.
I'd love to get 350 double rifle!
22 January 2004, 13:26
<400 Nitro Express>buchsenschmeid:
The case length of 2.745" that I mentioned is the trim length I use as opposed to the 2.750" max length.
Yes, I've seen the 1908 date for the .350 No. 2 in some references. This date may be based on an assumption that the flanged appeared at the same time as the rimless - and I have a hunch that this is wrong. Fleming's "British Sporting Rifle Cartridges" says the .400/.350 and the .350 No. 2 were introduced in 1899 and the .350 rimless in 1908. He cites Hoyem's "The History and Development of Small Arms Ammunition" as reference for those dates.
Vigillinus:
Good photos with that article. Beautiful Rigby. Had it been mine I would have hated to part with it.
------------------------------
"Serious rifles have two barrels, everything else just burns gunpowder."
22 January 2004, 14:15
buchsenschmeidHummmm
That is interesting. I wonder if it's possible to find out for sure? I like the old cartrige, but it is so hard to find brass for it now. That's why I use the 9.3 brass. I would like to know the details just to satisfy my own curiosity.
22 January 2004, 14:21
Paul HJust a note on my cast bullet load I listed, ie 44 gr of RL 15 over a Lyman 358009. I finally got out to the range this year, as it was relatively warm 30F/-1C, much better than the -10F/-25C it's been the last week.
Anyhow, I was trying various primers, Fed 210, Fed 215, CCI 200 and CCI 250. The CCI 200's had hang fires for all 5 shots, but interestingly the group was still 1/2 the size of the other primers. Cases were WW 375 H&H.
22 January 2004, 17:38
vigillinus.400 Nitro, I thought of scoping it but it would have been criminal. Currently my only "double" is an AFW Timner (Coblenz)drilling, double 9.3x74R over 20 guage, very high quality, stays under 3" for 8 shots at 100 from rest with the open sights smoked and a merit iris disc on my shooting glasses. Superior to the Rigby in every practical sense but alas, lacking in comparable elegance.
24 January 2004, 14:23
JoeRAnother Rigby in 350. Built the same year as MBOGO375's.
