Yes, another thread on .338.

I have enjoyed the 338 Win Mag for over thirty years. And I've been intrigued about 338/375Ruger and 338 Lapua. However, finding easy-carrying rifles for the 338 Lapua is currently a challenge, and expensive. Which brings us to the topic.

Does anyone have any experience with re-chambering a Ruger Hawkeye 338 Win Mag into a 338 Norma Magnum?

The Norma Magnum case is only 2.49" long.
It is based on the Rigby case head, so a bolt-face would need to be enlarged from .532" to .590". The Ruger Hawkeye should allow this fairly easily because the bolt-face slides under a claw extractor rather than having a plunger inside a recessed circle. Opening up a mauser-type bolt face is relatively easy.

However, the magazine of a Ruger Hawkeye is practically limited to about 3.4", so I wonder if anyone has any thoughts or experience with re-chambering a Ruger 338 Win Mag for a 338 Norma Mag?
What kind of standard cost estimates would a person be looking at?

Thank you for your thoughts.

What is the norma giving you over a 338-375R? Looks like the ruger will outrun the norma by about 100fps with 250's?

338-375R would be a simple rebarrel of a 375R production rifle.

I'd think if I wanted to do this conversion and still have a few in the mag the RSM would be the action to start with, but the prices on those are getting rather steep.

Thanks.

The Norma has about 9-10 grains powder capacity more than the 338/375R, in fact it is the equivalent of the 338RUM but in a standard length case. Standard lengths usually get placed in lighter all around rifles and a Hawkeye would probably run about 7.8 pounds in walnut.

There are all manor of hot 338 caliber magnums out there, and they kick like a mule, they make a hell of a lot of blast and noise, and the gain is about 100 to a 150 FPS max over a std. .338 Win. I have played with them on the chronograph and in ever case I was thoroughly disappointed and got an new appreciation to my mild recoiling .338 Win..

Some folks claim huge masses of incredible velocity, they load them to max with IMR-BS apparently, its a cheap powder and yes its easily obtained...

Well, if one uses the estimation of %-capacity increase divided by 4 as the %-velocity increase --
then a 338 Win Mag sending a 225 TTSX at 2831 would turn into a 338 Norma Mag sending the 225 TTSX at 3019 fps. An increase of 188 fps.

Of course, a person can do a lot of hunting with a .514 BC guaranteed-penetration projectile at either 2831fps or 3019 fps.

I suppose that upping the velocity to 3019 might increase sound and be considered an invasion into the serenity of a forest. However, if someone were to get a 338 Win Mag and found that it shot favorite bullets and loads into 1.5" to 2" groups, after bedding and tinkering, then a new barrel might be ordered. That would seem to be a good time to consider a 338 Norma on a Hawkeye action. And such an option on a controlled feed action (like the Ruger Hawkeye) would be a good reason for not getting a push-feed (like the new inexpensive Winchester, Ruger American, Mossberg, Remmie, Tikka et al.), where a bolt-face alteration seems much more complicated (not being a smithy).

Tanz,

The simple answer, yes it can be done.

I'm on my iPad right now and it takes awhile to get my PC running (still limping it along right now) so I can't check the chamber specifications of each cartridge to determine whether the barrel ought to be setback or not.

The only concern I've identified regarding the 338 Norma is that some folks are retooling the 338 Lapua case to get greater reloading case life cycle.

I know it's not your question, but it's likely that Nosler will release a 33 Nosler in 2017, they recently released the 30 Nosler, so that might be a better option.

Benefits are:
1) It'll definitely clean up a 338 WinMag chamber.
2) It'll give you a case capacity between the 338/375 Ruger and the 338 Norma.
3) It's designed for for use in a 3.4" nmagazine.
4) You'll be able to use factory hunting ammunition next year should you so desire. And finally,
5) You should also be able to keep 3-down in the magazine vs 2-down with the Norma.

Just a thought.

Thanks, Capo.

Yes, the Nosler would definitely be a candidate, and much easier than a Norma Rigby-case-head.

If I got a 338 this year, I could wait for next year before even knowing if I wanted to rebarrel. A Norma would need to be set-back a couple of tenths of an inch or else, rotated at least one thread or two threads.

quote:

Originally posted by FFemtRN5287:
What is the norma giving you over a 338-375R? Looks like the ruger will outrun the norma by about 100fps with 250's?

I'm not tracking with you on this one.

Here are my reasons:
1) The 338 Norma case is a blown out improved 338 Lapua case shortened to just a hair (or so) under 2.5" 2.4921" in length; not a standard length belted case derivative of the long released 308 Norma or 358 Norma.
2) The 338 Norma net case capacity exceeds that of the 338/375 Ruger net case capacity when a 250gr bullet is seated to the same case depth with each cartridge.
3) The 338 Norma net case capacity exceeds that of the 338/375 Ruger net case capacity when both are loaded to the same maximum COAL. And finally,
4) The CIP/SAAMI pressure specification for each cartridge it also fails in favor of the 338 Norma specification at 65000 63817 psi Piezo PMAP versus the 375 Ruger specification at <63000 62004 psi Piezo PMAP.

(Edited to correct the length of 338 Norma Mag and the psi Piezo PMAP of both cartridges.)

Tanz,

If you want a 338 based on the 0.532" rim/case head right now then go for the 338 WinMag now. You can always re-chamber to a larger case down the road should you desire to do so.

I know Mrs Tanz shoots left-wing so standardizing on right (you) and left (Mrs Tanz) bolt M77 Rugers at least gives you commonality of action lengths, scope rings, and potential future repair issues.

I personally plan to utilize the FN mfg Winester M70 Extreme Weather SS (with its B&C Medalist stock w/full length aluminum bedding block) for future purchases. That is unless I finally succumb to my growing interest in the Browning BLR SS takedown rifle.

quote:

Originally posted by capoward:
Tanz,

If you want a 338 based on the 0.532" rim/case head right now then go for the 338 WinMag now. You can always re-chamber to a larger case down the road should you desire to do so.

I know Mrs Tanz shoots left-wing so standardizing on right (you) and left (Mrs Tanz) bolt M77 Rugers at least gives you commonality of action lengths, scope rings, and potential future repair issues.

I personally plan to utilize the FN mfg Winester M70 Extreme Weather SS (with its B&C Medalist stock w/full length aluminum bedding block) for future purchases. That is unless I finally succumb to my growing interest in the Browning BLR SS takedown rifle.

Both of your future rifles sound nice, though the Winchester would make conversions easier should you need to open up the bolt face (thinking Lapua here). The open-faced claw would seem much easier to do, and to do right, than an enclosed plunger/tiny ejector.

It's always good when a friend recommends another rifle purchase. Thanks. It's hard to beat a 338 Win Mag for most North Amer hunting if the rifle is tuned up and accurate. And there is a space in our US rifle safe for a 338. Also, I've got leftover dies, boxes of bullets and quite a few cases from the 338 we've got in TZ. A 338 would work for a Sierra walkabout in the Fall. Lady Tanz has her 270 for Calif. but I don't really hanker for using the grandkids' 243.

So we could do a 338 Win Mag this year and wait see if we would need to do something different next year.

416Tanzan,
Got the .338 itches again? . I've been up and down the 338 ladder more then once. Now days, practical starts at 338 win mag and ends at a 340 wby. This because I don't want to carry a rifle in that caliber much more then 8lbs, do not. Want a brake, and do not want a barrel longer then 24". It's bad enough I also chicken out on a 22" 338. If I was going to do anything faster than a 340, I'd probably do a RUM. Really my 340 is going along at a pretty good clip in a 24" barrel and seeing how I hunt the front half of 1200 yards (more under 500) I wouldnever realize any benefits to the 338 L, RUM, or Norma.

quote:

Originally posted by 416Tanzan:

quote:

Originally posted by capoward:
Tanz,

If you want a 338 based on the 0.532" rim/case head right now then go for the 338 WinMag now. You can always re-chamber to a larger case down the road should you desire to do so.

I know Mrs Tanz shoots left-wing so standardizing on right (you) and left (Mrs Tanz) bolt M77 Rugers at least gives you commonality of action lengths, scope rings, and potential future repair issues.

I personally plan to utilize the FN mfg Winchester M70 Extreme Weather SS (with its B&C Medalist stock w/full length aluminum bedding block) for future purchases. That is unless I finally succumb to my growing interest in the Browning BLR SS takedown rifle.

Both of your future rifles sound nice, though the Winchester would make conversions easier should you need to open up the bolt face (thinking Lapua here). The open-faced claw would seem much easier to do, and to do right, than an enclosed plunger/tiny ejector.

It's always good when a friend recommends another rifle purchase. Thanks. It's hard to beat a 338 Win Mag for most North America hunting if the rifle is tuned up and accurate. And there is a space in our US rifle safe for a 338. Also, I've got leftover dies, boxes of bullets and quite a few cases from the 338 we've got in TZ. A 338 would work for a Sierra walkabout in the Fall. Lady Tanz has her 270 for Calif. but I don't really hanker for using the grandkids' 243.

So we could do a 338 Win Mag this year and wait see if we would need to do something different next year.

Sorry had to re-edit my response multiple times as I was
Yes its always nice when a buddy tells you to go right ahead and purchase another rifle.

Anyway, as you already have a 338 WinMag in TZ then you obviously just need a 338 WinMag stateside.

I have my two 338 Lapua based (derivative) commercial FN M98 Mauser rifles in .423 and .500 calibers so I'm not sure that I'll ever build another Lapua based rifle. If so it’d be a 338 Lapua and currently I don’t see a need, or a desire, for it.

At age 67 I have less time allocable to the field for hunting due to the wife, grandkids, great-grandkids, and my 93 ½ year old mother consuming greater amounts of my time every year. But all is well…
Anyway, after having owned two Ruger M77 SA SS rifles in 300 SAUM (now owned by one son and one son-in-law), carting them around, and shooting them I’m finding that I actually prefer the shorter overall length and lighter weight that the short-magnum short-action rifles afford vs my FN M98 Mauser 264 WinMag rifle length. Traditionally I’ve tried to keep all shooting under 300yds but in the states west of the Mississippi River it is very easy to encounter 400-450yd shots as being the only shots available due to the wide open spaces – and when paying out of state hunting fees not taking the only available game is not an easy answer to digest.

So looking at my current preferences two rifles chambered in 270 WSM and 338 WSM would cover just about every hunting opportunity I foresee within North America. That would give me near 270 Weatherby and 338 WinMag performances in the shorter OAL that currently interests me.

Then that brings me to the lever action BLR vs the bolt action M70 rifles. Yes the BLR action wise is a longer OAL than the bolt action M70 but it is also much faster on repeat shots. Of course utilizing either action would cause “want to have” issues because a 405 WSM chambered in the BLR would be a great modern follow up to the M95 405 Winchester. And of course if I went with the M70 WSM action I’d be almost have to build a 50 B&M just because it so darn fun to shoot!

If I did purchase/build a new standard length M70 bolt action ora BLR takedown lever action rifle it’d be chambered in one of Nosler's 3.4" COAL RUM derivative cartridges. Why? Because Ruger/Hornady screwed the pooch by not releasing full-length 375 Ruger derivative cartridges in sub-375 caliber and now with Nosler filling that gap any standard length Ruger based cartridges introduced into this arena would likely be less viable. My 2¢ anyway.

Tanz,

Its been a long afternoon creating the 26 Nosler in QuickDESIGN from the SAAMI specifications and then running the 28, 30 and 33 Nosler builds – please reference the following extracted from the Nosler website – to understand that for anything other than the 26 Nosler and 28 Nosler it’s all speculation until Nosler or SAAMI release the cartridge/chamber information beyond the SAAMI approved 26 Nosler:

http://faq.nosler.com/index.ph...=31&id=70&artlang=en

quote:

What are the differences in the Nosler Cartridge Dimensions?
________________________________________
The 28 Nosler is the only cartridge in the entire family (26, 27, 28, 30, 33, 35, and 36) that shares all of the 26 Nosler case dimensions with the exception of being necked up. The 27 Nosler was changed from the 26 as well – the case may be the same length, but the shoulder datum was brought back to a shorter dimension.
There are two main reasons these features were changed between cartridges:
• We were committed to staying within a 3.340” maximum OAL, and had to design around the longest ogive Nosler bullets in each caliber. Getting up to 30 caliber and larger sizes, necessitates shortening the brass and therefore moving the shoulder accordingly to preserve adequate neck length.
• The single most important reason the shoulder and length dimensions were changed is to prevent cross-caliber chambering. For example, bullet and neck diameter alone is not enough to guarantee someone can’t force a 28 Nosler shell into a 27 Nosler chamber. By bringing the shoulder back on the 27, it can prevent someone from possible serious injury if they inadvertently chamber and fire a larger caliber shell in the smaller chamber. This sort of safety review was done for all possible combinations of the entire 7-cartridge family.
Also, depending on when and where SAAMI-spec drawings and reamers were acquired, it might be a good idea to check them against the recently approved SAAMI-spec drawings before starting a new rifle chambering project.

I also utilized the QL v3.9 which includes the 338 Norma Magnum so the case volume is correct for Norma factory brass – which to this point is brass/cartridge manufacturer.

So here you go:
338 RUM – QL data = 110.0 H2O overflow capacity
338 Lapua Magnum – QL = 108.0 H2O overflow capacity
338 Norma Magnum – QL data = 106.0 grs H20 overflow capacity
33/26 Nosler – QD data = 105.5 grs H20 overflow capacity
338/375 Ruger (using 338 RCM neck specs) – QD data = 98.6 grs H20 overflow capacity
338 Winchester Magnum – QL data = 86grs H2O overflow capacity

interestingly, the guy who designed this round lived in my same small town - porter, tx --

it'll feed with same mods as the 500/490/476 accrel ...

as it is a very close homage

quote:

Originally posted by capoward:

quote:

Originally posted by FFemtRN5287:
What is the norma giving you over a 338-375R? Looks like the ruger will outrun the norma by about 100fps with 250's?

I'm not tracking with you on this one.

Here are my reasons:
1) The 338 Norma case is a blown out improved 338 Lapua case shortened to just a hair (or so) under 2.5" 2.4921" in length; not a standard length belted case derivative of the long released 308 Norma or 358 Norma.
2) The 338 Norma net case capacity exceeds that of the 338/375 Ruger net case capacity when a 250gr bullet is seated to the same case depth with each cartridge.
3) The 338 Norma net case capacity exceeds that of the 338/375 Ruger net case capacity when both are loaded to the same maximum COAL. And finally,
4) The CIP/SAAMI pressure specification for each cartridge it also fails in favor of the 338 Norma specification at 65000 63817 psi Piezo PMAP versus the 375 Ruger specification at <63000 62004 psi Piezo PMAP.

(Edited to correct the length of 338 Norma Mag and the psi Piezo PMAP of both cartridges.)

Jim,
Thanks for correcting me. I was infact looking at a necked up 308 norma, a 358 norma......

So now the real qeustion.....how big has someone necked up the 338 norma case??

quote:

Originally posted by FFemtRN5287:
So now the real qeustion.....how big has someone necked up the 338 norma case??

I have finish reamer, gauges, and reloading dies for a .500 caliber based on the 338 Norma Magnum case along with a spare .500 caliber PacNor Super Match barrel.

Jeffe has a .510 caliber based on a 2.65" length 416 Rigby case - the 500 AccRel. The 338 Norma is also a 416 Rigby derivative (although it uses the 338 Lapua rim thickness and groove diameter/width - so the case could be taken to .510 caliber as well.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
interestingly, the guy who designed this round lived in my same small town - porter, tx --

it'll feed with same mods as the 500/490/476 accrel ...

as it is a very close homage

Yep

quote:

So here you go:
338 RUM – QL data = 110.0 H2O overflow capacity
338 Lapua Magnum – QL = 108.0 H2O overflow capacity
338 Norma Magnum – QL data = 106.0 grs H20 overflow capacity
33/26 Nosler – QD data = 105.5 grs H20 overflow capacity
338/375 Ruger (using 338 RCM neck specs) – QD data = 98.6 grs H20 overflow capacity
338 Winchester Magnum – QL data = 86grs H2O overflow capacity

The above makes relative sense except for the RUM and Lapua. AmmoGuide also does a calculation of capacity, but uses a formula with slightly thicker brass that results in the loss of a couple of grains of calculated capacity. Nevertheless, the relative capacities make for similar comparisons. Here is
the AmmoGuide list:

340 Weatherby - 93.5
338 RUM - 104.6
338 Lapua Magnum - 111.8
338 Norma Magnum - 104.9
338-26 Nosler - 98.5
375 Ruger 94.7 (338Rug wiil be a couple grains less)
338 Win Mag - 82.7

The AmmoGuide RUM doesn't match QuikLoad in relative placement and the AG Lapua is larger than QL Lapua rather than smaller.

quote:

Originally posted by FFemtRN5287:
So now the real qeustion.....how big has someone necked up the 338 norma case??

no sir, the real question is how small has the 500 accrel been necked down -- for, you see, my rounds were in public domain prior to the 338 being designed .. by a guy down the road from me...

.510, .500, .498, and .475, has been done.. links to most in my signature.

quote:

quote:

So here you go:
338 RUM – QL data = 110.0 H2O overflow capacity
338 Lapua Magnum – QL = 108.0 H2O overflow capacity
338 Norma Magnum – QL data = 106.0 grs H20 overflow capacity
33/26 Nosler – QD data = 105.5 grs H20 overflow capacity
338/375 Ruger (using 338 RCM neck specs) – QD data = 98.6 grs H20 overflow capacity
338 Winchester Magnum – QL data = 86grs H2O overflow capacity

The above makes relative sense except for the RUM and Lapua. AmmoGuide also does a calculation of capacity, but uses a formula with slightly thicker brass that results in the loss of a couple of grains of calculated capacity. Nevertheless, the relative capacities make for similar comparisons. Here is
the AmmoGuide list:

340 Weatherby - 93.5
338 RUM - 104.6
338 Lapua Magnum - 111.8
338 Norma Magnum - 104.9
338-26 Nosler - 98.5
375 Ruger 94.7 (338Rug wiil be a couple grains less)
338 Win Mag - 82.7

The AmmoGuide RUM doesn't match QuikLoad in relative placement and the AG Lapua is larger than QL Lapua rather than smaller.

The problem with using either AG or QL as the definitive measure is that is the real world brass weight and internal capacity will differ from lot-to-lot from same manufacturer but the greatest difference in internal case capacity comes into play between brands of manufacture.

Examples are:
1) Remington brand 300 RUM brass has greater overflow H2O capacity than Nosler brand 300 RUM brass. (At this point in time I believe 338 RUM head stamped brass is only manufactured by Remington but I may be wrong.). And,
2) Hornady brand 338 Lapua brass has greater overflow H2O capacity than Lapua brand 338 Lapua brass.

And some of the above goes by the wayside when a "brand" contracts their brass manufacture to multiple manufacturers - or perhaps worse, in a situation where a contracted manufacturer subcontracts the production of contracted brass to another manufacturer to fulfill the original contract requirements.

Anyway back to the original differences -
I can easily see where the differences in internal H2O overflow capacity of the 338 Lapua could be the difference between Hornady and Lapua brand brass.

The RUM internal H2O overflow capacity difference is very problematic indicative of comparing a one fired case to an informed case.

But these are real work scenarios.

Solely looking at this from a mathematical modeling computation all of the above goes out the door because internal case wall thickness at multiple points along the case body are not manually taken - they are only assumed by the programming.

I know from reading some of Mr. Braumel's (spelling?) comments in years past on 24hr Campfire forum that he only added cartridges to the QL database when he physically had the brass in hand to measure. I do know this is how the B&M cartridges were added to QL - Michaels sent trimmed ready to load brass to him. I am also aware that QL has the "create cartridge" feature that will use a mathematical computation to arrive at the internal H2O overflow capacity as well as the brass weight.

Personal Comment:
One nice thing about QL that I've identified is that I can take an identified cartridge, alter the case weight and measured internal H2O overflow capacity at my "new unfired, trimmed to case length, ready to load brass" and then save the cartridge to a different name. I can then do the same for my "once fired, trimmed to length, ready to load brass" and have two exacting scenarios to accomplish my reloading "what if scenarios".
This I cannot do with AG. In fact, once AG has created a cartridge it is nigh impossible to get anything changed regarding the cartridge specifics (even when you provided the originating information.). I can however add loading information to the cartridge's history, which is a very nice feature.

Both AG and QL are very useful tools - but neither are definitive....

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:

quote:

Originally posted by FFemtRN5287:
So now the real qeustion.....how big has someone necked up the 338 norma case??

no sir, the real question is how small has the 500 accrel been necked down -- for, you see, my rounds were in public domain prior to the 338 being designed .. by a guy down the road from me...

.510, .500, .498, and .475, has been done.. links to most in my signature.

True. But we must recollect "the guy down the road" used different case specifications (length, shoulder angle, shoulder diameter) for his case no different than you when altering the original 416 Rigby case specifications; that's what wildcatting is all about....

quote:

Capoward:
I personally plan to utilize the FN mfg Winester M70 Extreme Weather SS (with its B&C Medalist stock w/full length aluminum bedding block) for future purchases.

what do you think of the merits between the Ultimate Shadow Stainless and the Extreme Weather Stainless?
The Extreme Weather seems to come with an upgraded stock that includes a bedding block. That might be nice in case someone rechambers to a 338 Lapua or 338 Norma. On the other hand, if someone were to put a Boyds Walnut or Laminate on the rifle, then the extra expense of the Extreme vs. the Ultimate might be moot. Is there something else to be aware of?

quote:

Originally posted by 416Tanzan:

quote:

Capoward:
I personally plan to utilize the FN mfg Winester M70 Extreme Weather SS (with its B&C Medalist stock w/full length aluminum bedding block) for future purchases.

what do you think of the merits between the Ultimate Shadow Stainless and the Extreme Weather Stainless?
The Extreme Weather seems to come with an upgraded stock that includes a bedding block. That might be nice in case someone rechambers to a 338 Lapua or 338 Norma. On the other hand, if someone were to put a Boyds Walnut or Laminate on the rifle, then the extra expense of the Extreme vs. the Ultimate might be moot. Is there something else to be aware of?

Nothing else.

The answer will be found in the chronograph, all else is piddle!!