I have a Ruger M77 in .300 win mag. My question has to do with the use of 200gr bullets in the short magazine of the M77. Seems like half the bullet is down in the case to get the correct oal. I don't know if this is the case or not but it seems like the pressure could go up prematurely because of the bullet being seated so deeply.

Would the Norma shoot the long 200gr bullets better than the win with the same oal to fit in the magazine? I have not actually talked to a gun smith to see if it is even possible. I wouldn't want to spend a bunch of money, I'm hoping you can mill the end of the barrel 1/8 - 3/16, rethread and then rechamber. But I maybe way off.

I have a light weight Parker-Hale in 7mm mag that shoots 175's just fine so I see no realistic advantage of the 300 win on big game if you only use 180's. Maybe 200fps more velocity but less sectional density and less ballistic coefficient.

What do yall think, waste of money?
James

I think you're wasting your time even though I have a preference for the 308 Norma.

If you're going to rechamber the barrel anyway you may as well not limit your caliber choice and find something that will launch the 200 gr. bullet even better.

Personally I wouldn't do a thing. If the accuracy as it is currently configured is adequate for your use then simply seat the bullets accordingly. You're not in a perfect situation so maybe the accuracy is not what you want. If that's the case I'd look for a trade such that you get something capable of what you desire.

Where you need to worry about pressure would not be by seating too deeply into the case, it would be if you were jamming the lands, and even that is nothing really to worry about as it's done all the time by many shooters.

Having some "jump" is how I believe Weatherby got the stats they got by having an exceedingly long throat. With a standard throat a Weatherby chambering requires that the charge be reduced from standard Weatherby recommendations.

Those are my thoughts at the moment anyway.

Good luck.

Reed

If you're talking about rechambering the same barrel, I don't think it will work as the "body" of the 300WM is longer than the Norma. Not to give you too short an answer, I think you are creating a problem that isn't there.

I thought it would probably be a waste of time.

I don't shoot it very often and I got to thinking about what loads I would want for it. I got to looking in a couple of loading books at the 200gr loads and velocities. I can't remember the details but my Hornady manual has velocities that are pretty close to a standard 30-06 with 200gr bullets. My older speer book gives over 100fps to the Norma with 200gr bullets. So I thought I would shoot the question to you guys.

I got the idea when I tried to put loaded cartridges from another 300 win (remington 700) into my Ruger. Man even 165gr BT have to be seated pretty deep. Actually looks kind of weard.

I guess I'll buy some 200gr partitions and see what it will do before I jump to any conclusions. Anyone have a good starting load?

Thanks for the input.
James

My M77 mk2 .22-250 kinda suffers from the same problem you can only seat the bullets out so far until they interfer with the box magazine. I just seat em out as far as i can and have them still cycle through. seems to shootem well enough I am happy most groups are under 1" when i am trying. Rugers must have a thing for small mag boxes

My Ruger M77 MKII in the all weather configuration lets me seat bullets out to 3.395, I get 3020fps with 200gr Nosler Partitions and IMR7828 powder. It will shoot these into .9" at 100 yards.

3020fps would be more than I would ask of it. Thanks for the recommendation on the powder. I'll have to see what oal I am at, I can't remember it off hand. The Mk II maybe a little bigger gun.

Has anyone had any luck with H1000 in the 300wm? It would be nice to use the same powder I use in my 25-06 and 7 rm.

Thanks again!
James

everything I shoot with my 300WM is shot with a 200gr speer grand slam. It works well and Ihave the idea that if I want to shoot a 180, I'll use a 30-06.
Don't know how old your load book is but some of them, back before every kid on the block had a Chrony, were a little optimistic about yield.
I don't have my log with me but I seem to think I got between 2800-2900fps with a 200gr bullet being pushed smartly but not anywhere near max.

Having to seat your bullets a little deeper is not going to give you too-high pressures with a big rifle cartridge that uses slow powders. Pressure with this kind of setup doesn't peak until the bullet is a least 1/4 of the way from the cartridge mouth to the muzzle. However, deeper seating can cause pressure problems with fast powders in pistol cases!!

To rechamber this barrel to .308 Norma, you would have to cut a couple threads off of the breech end in order to have some metal to ream out in the neck/shoulder area, because the .300 Win. Mag. case is longer in the head-to-shoulder dimension than the .308 Norma case!!

[ 02-25-2003, 21:59: Message edited by: eldeguello ]

Even if you rebarreled your 300 Win. you would still have the same problem unless you opened the magazine up a good deal...

The 300 Win and the 308 Norma would need a 375 lenth magazine to properly get the job you want done. Then you would have something.

That is why I shoot the 300 H&H so that I can utilize the longer 200 and 220 gr. bullets without getting into my powder space...A Weatherby will do the same thing...

I also have a Ruger 77 MK II in .300 WM. The mag box is 3.410", so yes, COAL is limited to about 3.390" or so. It's no big deal, I seat 200 grain Partitions 0.120" off the lands, and still get sub moa groups at 2,970 fps.

The .300 WM case with the bullet seated that deep still has more powder space than a .308 Norma with a bullet seated to the base of the neck. Besides, using a powder like RE22 or H4831, the case is nowhere near being full anyway, so it is really a nonfactor in affecting performance.

The crap written criticizing the .300 Win Mag on it's short neck causing the bullet to intrude into the case body is just that, crap. It came about 40-odd years ago when some gun rag writer was looking at this fancy new cartrdige Winchester sent him, and couldn't think of anything more interesting to say about it.

[ 03-03-2003, 08:01: Message edited by: Norm ]

Looking in an old Handloader digest,Ken Waters measured to the bottom of the case neck a 2gr water difference.

I just measured the capacities of the two cases. Both are Norma and have been fired at least once.

Capacity of the empty .308 Norma case is 85.6 gr water. The .300 win case holds 92.5 gr, for difference of 6.9 gr empty.

With a 200 grain Partition loaded to a length of 3.400", the .308 Norma capacity is 77.9 gr, and the .300 Win case holds 81.9 gr. Difference of 4 grains.

With a 220 grain Sierra Round nose seated to 3.400", the .308 Norma case holds 70.4 gr, the .300 Win holds 74.2 gr. of water. Difference of 3.8 gr.

The .300 Win Mag will always have a larger capacity than the .308 Norma case, if bullets are seated to the same length to fit '06 length magazines, which are commonly about 3.4" or so. You lose velocity if you recahmber a rifle from .300 Win Mag to .308 Norma, all other things being equal.

Norm,you are right about rechambering to 308Norma from 300WinMag.But in some older(read shorter)rifles the 308Norma fits better,The cases are 1/16" shorter and have more neck to play with.That's why I rechambered to 308Norma.I use 300WinMag brass it's cheaper,you just have to cut .060 off.Velocity differences are more likely the rifle than the cartridge.

dwt2

I was referring to JamesP's specific case here, in which he is limited by the Model 77's mag length to 3.4".

Most of the .308 Norma chambered rifles I've seen are surplus Enfields which had their barrels removed, expeditiously rechambered to .308 Norma, then reinstalled. The reason they weren't rechambered to .300 WM was because that cartridge didn't exist yet. Most of them were rechambered because the throats were, ummm...gone.

I like the .308 Norma very much. If the .300 WM didn't exist, it would be my primary hunting caliber. I can't get a factory chambered rifle for it, and factory ammo is scarce and expensive (not that I ever use factory ammo, but you never know...) so the rifle I use more than any other is my .300 WM.

That said, my two Enfields are chambered for .308 and .358 Norma Magnum. I inherited them from my father, who used them to shoot dozens of big critters when he lived in Alaska back in the early-mid sixties. The rifles don't get used much nowadays, but they are definitely conversation pieces, and also sentimental favorites.

I do wish the two calibers had become more popular. Those two rifles are a tandem that can do it all in North America.

[ 03-04-2003, 18:43: Message edited by: Norm ]

Norm, I envy you, I love 1917's.

I too have a .308 Norma, as does my stepfather and his brother. I know that his brother's was originally a 300wm and he could never get it to perform, after being pissed about it for a while he took it and had them rechamber it for the Norma and has been happy ever since. We shoot 180's, nobody has taken the time to work up a 200g. load for them yet.

Winchester I hear had a chance originally to acquire Norma and make the cartridges their own, they shot themselves in the foot if they had that chance and didn't take it. They would have had a pair of great cartridges.

Norm, what bullet weight are you shooting in your 358 and what velocity are you getting? Curious as I have my .35whelen AI on a 1917 w/ 26" douglas. I get 2850 or so with a 225 grain Sierra, wondering how much extra I would get with a .358 norma.

Red

I have both a 308 and a 358 Norma, the first in a Parker Hale safari and the second on an FN Mauser. In the 358 I get 2825 fps with 250 gr bullets, a substantial gain over my 35 Whelen (even though it's not an AI version). - Dan

oh boy, got home to-nite after coming from gun shop, and it's driving me crazy. I have a pick of 2 sako's to buy, 1 st. is in the caliber i want but wrong model(75 hunter S.S.in 300 ultra 8.75 lb. 26 in. barrel) 2 nd. sakofinlite in .300 winnie 22 in. barrel 7.25 lb. I guess the finlite has 2 strike's against it (22in. barrel, and 30\06 performance.) HELP-HELPPPPPP#*^#!*$

Dago Red,

Sorry, been gone a while, didn't see your post.

I have a 24" barrel of unknown make on my Enfield. 225 Grain Sierras exit the chute at 2920 fps. This is about max.

250 grain Noslers are going about 2810 fps, which is also max.

It's a VERY nice cartridge/rifle combo. Like I said, between it and the .308 Norma, one wuld be set for about anything short of pachyderms/cape buffalo.

I guess dad knew what he was doing..

Norm,
That is not crap, it is fact...However it is not a big deal and the 300 Win. Mag. does well with 200 gr. bullets, and I agree with that part.

The 300 Win. comes up a little short with 220 and 250 gr. bullets when compared to the 300 H&H and its long neck...

Many cartridge designs are short necked and bullets do protrude into the powder space and it is defeating in many cases, depending on the bullet used...308 with 200 gr. bullets, 284 with 175 gr. bullets come to mind...

Bottom line is if the bullet interferes with powder capacity then the design is not exactly right...None of this bothers me one twit, but it does exist is all I'm saying.

Ray,

What I meant by "crap" was that neck length has NOTHING to do with how deep the bullet is seated, which is what determines how much the bullet intrudes into the powder space. The gun writer who started criticizing the short neck was blowing smoke out of his ass, and every writer who's repeated it has sucked that smoke up and blown it back out. They obviously haven't taken the time to analyze what determines seating depth of a bullet on a given cartridge.

Magazine length or throat length determines how much the bullet intrudes into the powder space, not case neck length. What one should be comparing is the relationship between shoulder position, beginning of the lands in the barrel, and magazine box length.

If the bullet sticking that far down into the case bothers someone, they should use a true (.375 H&H) long action, with a long magazine box, not an '06 length action with a 3.4" box. Most throats on a .300 WM chamber will allow bullets to be seated well past the 3.400" length. Therefore, the bullet will not be protruding as much, if at all, into the powder space, even though the neck is still "short".

[ 04-10-2003, 07:58: Message edited by: Norm ]