I would like some information. iirc, the Rifleman had an article on them some years ago by Bryce Towsley.

thanks,

Rich

No personal experience but searching 358 UMT yielded a lot of results (Ultra Mag Towsley)

Looks like 250gr @ 3100fps. That is one hellua whack on both ends!

thanks.

Rich

Yes. I designed and built one in 1995. However , at that time used .404 cases. Would be glad to E-Mail all my data to you. roger

thanks bartsche.

check your Email.

Rich

Rich, a 375 RUM is right in that ballpark. I have some 235gr Cor-Bon loads that do 3,200 fps.

But, I do not own any 35 caliber rifles...

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
But, I do not own any 35 caliber rifles...

Great time to start!

358 STA?

good option, but the RUM has no belt issues...

IS,
Belts are not an issue except in ones mind! The 375 H&H killed that old fable many years ago!

The .385 Norma is a killing machine. It does wonders on big bull elk, that's all Ive seen it used on..It seems to me it hits harder than my .338 win. How I hate to say that, but never the less, I'm happy with my .338 Win, belt and all.

How do you keep your pants up btw?

Suspenders...

The only reason the Brits put belts on cartridges more than a hundred years ago was to cling to the notion of a rim for headspacing. By time we started cartridge design, it was a mandatory mark of the magnums. Tolerances were loose, because:
1. The Brits disliked the very concept of handloading.

2. Their machinery could apparently not hold close tolerances.

For my tastes, the two benchmark cartridges of the 20th century were the 404 Jefferys, and the long forgotten 425 Westley Richards.

The Jefferys dispensed with the need for a belt, and the WR pioneered the concept of the efficient short(er) magnum. The flaw in the WR was the rebated rim which doomed it from the start. The cure for the WR feeding issues is using a magnum bolt head and 404J or RUM brass. It is a true magnum in performance, a round that would fit in a standard M98 magazine, and fired a 400gr bullet at 2350fps. Same as the 416 Rigby and the 404 Jefferys.

The 404 came out a full seven years ahead of the H&H belt. Why they put one on, other than to be different is beyond me. If Jefferys or WR had come out with a .375" version, it would have buried the belted design.

quote:

Their machinery could apparently not hold close tolerances.

Be careful what you say about these "vintage" firearms. A touchy subject on these forums.

Is the fascination with 358 caliber 'magnum' wildcats to fill a missing bore diameter?

I guess it splits the difference in a 338WM and 375 H&H but, 350 Remingtons and the 358 Norma's seem to be a good "belted" gap filler with a proven track record. Both are production rounds, though limited production, so it seems like they are a candidate for strong consideration. Sure, they are belted but, it is hard to argue with proven results gained over a long period of time.

IDAHO SHOOTER,
Hell I know all that, and your fundamentally correct at best, but the belt has no real downside except in the mind of those who live in tech la la land !! , The belt has been working fine for more than a 100 years, and its still in production on some of our finest calibers, C'mon give the old girl her due!! I have the same conversations with Jack Belk, but he is plumb et up with tech!

Lets see, all the Wbys, 338 Win. 375 H&H, 264, 300 H&H, 7 mag, 416 Rem, 358 Norma to name a few and a cornucopia of famous wildcats..

Get over it!

With all due respect, and kidding aside, I will defend with my life your right to your opinion!

Rich,
I also built an 8 mm on the 425 WR case. Getting that rebated case to feed properly was a pain in the ass. The .404 and Ultra mags. are the way to go.
For those who like belts*** ENJOY roger

Ray,

when you have a couple hours to kill, sit down with your dial calipers and one hundred brand new belted cases. Then start measuring them from the base to the front of the belt.

There is a reason Redding used to sell a set of five shellholders in .002" increments.

Also, is there some reason H&H was pretty much the only firm of the era to use the belt?

Rigby? Nope
Jeffery? Nope
Westley Richards? Nope
Birmingham Small Arms? Nope
Germany as a whole? Nope
Austria/Hungary as a whole? Nope
Not even the French ventured there very often.

Do we see a trend here?

"Belted" and "Magnum" are, or should I say were, great marketing gimmicks.

Would a 338 Winchester or 300 Winchester sell as good without the "Magnum"?

How about the Remington Ultra? Or, the Remington Short Action Ultra?

Does the "belt" on Winchester Magnums help it outsell the RUM and RSAUM alternatives?

With modern technology and modern manufacturing, we don't really need "belted" ammunition today but, who wants to give up their 338WM or 375H&H? Would I rather start over with a 375H&H or 375RUger? Maybe but, what do I do with all my existing ammunition, cases, reloading gear, etc.?

While I can get 338WM and 300WM at Walmart (at least occasionally), I don't recall ever seeing the same for my RUM's? I rarely even see 7RSAUM online.

Wildcats legitimately fill some small niches but, the vast majority of people and hunted animals will never know the difference. While I have some interest in simple wildcats like the 338/06AI and some of the other Whelen/AI options, I really don't give up much with a 9.3x62 and I don't need the marketing HYPE behind cartridges like the Ruger options and 370 Sako which really don't bring that much extra to the table if you load everything to the same levels (i.e. ignore pre-WW1 pressure concerns with modern rifles). Sure, I can probably hotrod the 370 Sako a little more than the 9.3x62 but, why? If I can't kill it with a good 9.3x62, would I kill it with a 370 Sako?

So, coming full circle, the 358NM still seems viable if you don't mind the belted case. For a wildcat, I might consider the 9.3 B&M or 375 B&M but, today I don't see it offering any capability I cannot get with my 9.3x62 and then you have the Rugers and Steyr to consider again.

I prefer the belted case. The reason is I have always likes to play with reduced loads and often very reduced....squib loads. A 358 RUM being 35 calibre would be a candidate because of the 35 pistol bullets.

With rimless cases you get a few thou head space after each shot with very reduced loads. What happens is the primer blast drives the case forward but the pressure is very low and the case does not fully fireform. No problem with belted or rimmed cases.

Of course with rimless cases you can run an expander plus through them and then though the FLS die and that will put a small shoulder on the bottom of the neck. But a belted case eliminates that fucking about.

Not a big 35 fan but I did own a 35 Whln. Nearly shot myself owning it. It was so damn predictably boring but not in a good way like the 30-06 . I got rid of it after rationalizing my way upto the 9.3x62. About that same time I was hand loading Kile's 358 Norma Mag, what a fantastic cartridge for a 22" barreled gun, low expansion ration and awesome velocity. I liked that big Swede. A 358 RUM would make a great hammer but there isn't a lot of bullets right now that I see would take advantage of the case. At any rate if you get one or a Norma get a tighter than 1-16" shit twist.

BTW having a belt should be a non issue if your a handloader and if you are not, it should even be less of an issue. Sheesh

I shoot two .358 STA's and have for several years. I load everything I shoot and always have. There are no belt issues what so ever, this is a myth only those who don't shoot them talks about. There is no better round for larger animals anywhere. My son, grandsons and I have used them for Elk extensively. I used one for plains game in Africa and will in the future. There are many good bullets to choose from, my go to bullets be North Fork 225, 240 and 270 grainers. Nosler Partitions are great as well as Swift A-Frame and Barnes. A 270 grain North Fork at 2950 fps is formidable indeed. In my opinion it is more versital than the .375 and shoots much flatter. I have muzzle brakes on both of my rifles but if you are recoil or noise sensitive stay on the porch. I cannot speak for the .358 Rum or any other .358, but the STA is assume. Good Shooting.

If belts are a good thing, you would see them on BR cartridges, where only things that give the best accuracy work.
Nobody in the industry will tell you belts are anything but a sales gimmick.

They exist today because of inertia.

By the way, anybody do the measuring thing yet?

Personally always thought a "belted" rifle case only made sense for a straight case cartridge such as the .470 Capstick, it's superfluous for a bottlenecked cartridge.

Much the same as a guy NOT carrying 20 pounds of "stuff" in his pockets who uses suspenders AND a belt to hold his pants up. One or the other (the suspenders or the belt) is for show only...

Belts or no belts, whatever floats your boat. I really enjoy listening to how a cartridge with a belt is suddenly a bad idea after 100 years or so.

I've always wanted a 358 Norma but after reading about the 358 RUM that sounds interesting too. Either way I'm sure both work just fine as intended.

Hmmm, .35 caliber: Let's see, I own a .35 Remington, a couple of .358 Winchesters, a couple of .35 Whelens, a .35 Brown Improved Whelen, a .350 Rigby Magnum, a .358 Norma Magnum, and a .350 G&H Magnum. A 400/350 Rigby is on my wish list. Is there a pattern here?

As far as belts are concerned, take the case of my .358 Norma, which started life as a left handed Ruger 77 in 7mm Remington Magnum. I had it rebored and rechambered to its present caliber and formed cases for it out of once fired and annealed 7mm Remington Magnum brass. I have been trying to teach myself to shoot left handed, so I load up 100 rouonds at a time, using .357" jacketed pistol bullets and a mild load of AA5744. I can't shoot my .350 Rigby that way, because Rigby cases are expensive and hard to come by. The only problem I have experienced with the Ruger is that the barrel heats up with repeated rapid fire strings to the point that I had to devise a special system for running water down the bore to cool it every few dozen shots.

Whatever the theoretical advantages of the beltless case may be, the fact is that belted cases are relatively cheap, especially once fired cases, available in abundance and the unbelted Magnum cases are not.

Concerns about headspace issues can be resolved by simply ignoring the belts and headspacing on the shoulder, which is what long range competitive shooters have been doing for decades with their .300 Winchester Magnums and other belted cartridges.

My .458 WM, .450 Watts Magnum and my wildcat .505 SRE all headspace on the belt. There is no other option for them.

Years ago, Winchester brought out what was essentially a beltless short Magnum and called it the .284 Winchester. Its purpose was to duplicate the performance of the .270 Winchester in the Winchester Models 88 and 100, both of which accepted only .308 Winchester length cartridges. We know how successful that was.

I like belts! Think they look cool! My favorite cartridges, 375 H&H and 264 wm, would look funny without it. I've shot plenty of rifle/cartridge combinations, with and without belts and never had an issue with either.

This ain't a thread on who likes belts. Belts are as necessary as tits on a boar hog. belts roger

Apart from the advantages I posted above with regards to very reduced loads, belted cases allow very sloppy chamber dimensions to be used and especially in the shoulder area. That will always be a plus for chambering dirty ammo or ammo made to poor specifications....surely an attraction for dangerous game shooting.

Michael,

are you saying belted cases are for slob reloaders? Or for (God forbid) with crappy ammunition in general?
I have made three trips to Africa, which does not qualify me as any sort of expert. BUT, that said, every round of ammunition I took along had been cycled two or three times thru the magazine, with each round fed from each position available in said rifle magazine to make sure it will feed and fire.

I see no reason to shoot such reduced loads in a large case. Ever hear the term SEE?

Of course, I never saw the logic of a reduced load, at least not a major reduction in power. If my ____________ (fill in the blank) kicks hard enough to get me thinking about seriously reduced loads, I would just grab another rifle with less recoil off the rack or from my safe and shoot it.

Another thing, do you see any military standard issue cases with belts? Not a few special warfare units, but ground pounder infantry by the Division.

Belts reduce magazine capacity by a round in many cases.

Inertia and tradition are the only reasons I see to own a rifle shooting belted cases...

Back to the RUM. I have a couple 30 caliber rifles. The next stop is my 375 H&H Improved. Within a year or thereabouts, I expect to own two .35 caliber bolt rifles. A 358 RUM in the nine-pound range, and a little carbine size 358 Winchester. Personally, I would not load the RUM down to 358W power levels. I would just get the 358W out with close to factory level ammunition.

But, to each his own, and roll on...

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:

I have made three trips to Africa, which does not qualify me as any sort of expert. BUT, that said, every round of ammunition I took along had been cycled two or three times thru the magazine, with each round fed from each position available in said rifle magazine to make sure it will feed and fire.

I see no reason to shoot such reduced loads in a large case. Ever hear the term SEE?

Of course, I never saw the logic of a reduced load, at least not a major reduction in power. If my ____________ (fill in the blank) kicks hard enough to get me thinking about seriously reduced loads, I would just grab another rifle with less recoil off the rack or from my safe and shoot it.But, to each his own, and roll on

You might have perfect ammo in your lounge room but it can still be dropped on your shooting trip.

As to reduced loads, I am not here to convince you of their value and fun but the facts are the belted or rimmed case is better for very reduced loads.

The obvious disadvantage of the belted case is I assume there would be more steps or more difficult to manufacture so that alone would be a reason for lack of use by military.

quote:

Originally posted by Michael McGuire:

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:

I have made three trips to Africa, which does not qualify me as any sort of expert. BUT, that said, every round of ammunition I took along had been cycled two or three times thru the magazine, with each round fed from each position available in said rifle magazine to make sure it will feed and fire.

I see no reason to shoot such reduced loads in a large case. Ever hear the term SEE?

Of course, I never saw the logic of a reduced load, at least not a major reduction in power. If my ____________ (fill in the blank) kicks hard enough to get me thinking about seriously reduced loads, I would just grab another rifle with less recoil off the rack or from my safe and shoot it.But, to each his own, and roll on

You might have perfect ammo in your lounge room but it can still be dropped on your shooting trip.

As to reduced loads, I am not here to convince you of their value and fun but the facts are the belted or rimmed case is better for very reduced loads.

The obvious disadvantage of the belted case is I assume there would be more steps or more difficult to manufacture so that alone would be a reason for lack of use by military.

The real reason for no belts on general use military ammo is because they don't shoot magnum cartridges plain and simple. Some special forces types have been known to use the .300 Winchester magnum and in the beltless category the .338 Lapua. I'm sure there are others I'm not aware of.

Actually, nobody touches my ammunition once I have cycled it.

We will just have to agree to disagree on the value of a belt. The rim makes headspacing child's play.

Gentlemen,

The belts are there too keep your trousers up... most of you can't do without them.

Never had an issue with belted cases. Shoot many of them and provided you set your dies up correctly I think they are a non-issue. I've also never needed a Larry Willis fix the belt issue die, but it is out there if you need one for peace of mind.

You need to set the dies to headspace on the shoulder of bottleneck cases wiht a little set back of the shoulder. The Accuracy of the .300 Win Mag is well known. The belt is not a problem (neither is the short neck, but let's not start that!).

As cougarz had pointed out:

quote:

The real reason for no belts on general use military ammo is because they don't shoot magnum cartridges plain and simple. Some special forces types have been known to use the .300 Winchester magnum and in the beltless category the .338 Lapua. I'm sure there are others I'm not aware of.

True, there are others now - the Army has recently begun fielding the M2010 sniper rifle (reworked on the original M24 receivers), which is chambered in 300 Win Mag. It is among all of the maneuver battalions and squadrons, but admittedly only a small part of those units (snipers).