In answer to those who had interest in the vintage
.35 Newton...its interesting the following quote in the new, first ever, Norma Reloading Manual:
".358 Norma Magnum...It essentially duplicated the
long obsolete .35 Newton, which had been introduced to the U.S. Market in 1915." So, if you like short, efficient belted Magnums in .35 caliber with 250 gr. bullets at about 3,000 fps...this is an easier way to go...also, if necked down to .30 caliber would approach the .30 Newton, or as a factory case, the .308 Norma Magnum would be it. Of course, Richard Simmons once called the .30 Newton "...is one of the strongest & best-designed cases that has ever been put on the American Market". Of course the true cognescenti...sniff..use the Newton cartridges...
"Illigitimi Non Corborundum"
Best Regards, Tom

Amen, brother. I am in complete agreement and qualify for the cognescenti club.

when you say X newton, swap that with X dakota (not rum) and you have danm near the exact samething. newton brass wasn't EXACTLY 404 jeffe, but, like the dakota and rum cases, it's aweful close!!

btw, there's NFW that you can get 250gr at 3000 fps with a "normal" length barrel and a 2.5 or 2.65" (then) shortmag case... and have it at reasonable pressure

jefe

Jeff,

Those were back in the days that nobody had their personal chronos to dispute optomistic velocities

The 358 Norma is at best 2800 with 250's, which isn't a bad thing

Disagree with the statement that you can't get 3,000 fps with the .35 Newton & 250 gr. bullets...
I get that with my .358 Norma Magnum over the chrony...so the .35 Newton can do the same.
Writers, gun guys...have always disputed Newton's
claimed velocities...yet every cartridge of his I've tried has exceeded Newton's factory claims...
so those of you who wish to dipute without ever trying so, go right ahead. I & Newton users know better. Tom

If you're pushing 250's @ 3000 fps with a 358 Norma, then you are running really high pressures, 2800 fps is a realistic velocity. A 35 Newton loaded to that level will only be running high pressures, realistic speed is 2900 fps. You'll need a full length 404 necked to 35 to get 250's @ 3000 fps with reasonable pressures.

I get 2800fps with 250 in my whelen AI with 26" barrel (If I remember right, maybe it is 2700 but I can doubl check tonight if I remember) but that was high pressure and primers were starting to flatten so I was going to back it down. that was months ago I tried that. now going to try the northfork bullets and less powder and see what i get.

so maybe the Norma can do it? Winchester should have bought the rights to the 308 and 358 Norma chamberings and marketed those. the 35 bore just doesn't seem to be as popular as so many others. I wonder why?

Red

Dago Red,
Your last sentence interests me as well, why haven't the big .35s really captured the imagination? Here's a possible explanation based on my experience. I've always wanted a .35 something, and have short/medium/magnum actions to build one on. When push came to shove a few weeks back, the magnum .35s were just too close to my .375H&H, in both performance and recoil. So my decision was to build a 358Win, in my opinion the "best" of the .35s.
Cheers...
Con

Well, really it's just that the Americans don't really dig big bores. Even the 338 Win isn't all that high in sales, and those that do need one, don't feel the need for anything more.
Take the 375 H&H and 45/70 out (they are classic die-hards and will never go away) and how many rounds are left over .308"?
The 348 is gone, all the 35's, all the 375 or "38" cals are gone. 40 cal, gone. (How many 416 Rems sell each year?) 45 cal, gone. 50 cal, gone.
It's nothing at all agin' the 35. We as a whole just don't buy over-.308" bores. And when we do, the 338 Win Mag, 375 H&H and 45/70 do such a great job and are really the only Wal-Mart ammo options, that there's just no market. And there's certainly little reason for the ammo and gun makers to tool up for a new round in those calibers.
35 cal is great. From the 35 Rem to the 350 Mag to the Whelen to the Norma to the STA or even bigger wildcats, you can have whatever you want. And in bullets from - what? - 150g? to 310g, the selection is bountiful.
In fact, a little-known piece of trivia for you, the 348 Winchester was supposed to be 358 Winchester, but the guy made a typo and couldn't bear to tell his boss. That was supposed to be a 225g .358" bullet going 2500 fps. Oh, what might've been....

I think one reason .35's never caught on in US is when the 358 Norma was introduced there were no good bullets for it. I have had a 35-404imp. for nearly 30 yr. The first 'good' bullets for it were made by A-Square IMHO. Now there are lots of good ones. I like the North Forks myself. My Dad's 358 Norma will get close to 3000 but not over with the some 250's. My 35-404 will go 3150 with alot more powder.I have not relly pushed the 35-404 as until now brass was far to expensive to be chucked because of loose primer pockets.(Most of my brass has been fired 10+ times)It has enough power to pass the Norh Forks thru both shoulders of a moose so what more could one ask from a cartridge? The added 200fps or so of vel. gives slightly better trajectory.Mark

I shoot a couple of .358 STA's that are awesome. With one I can get 2950 fps with a 270 grain North Fork and pin point accuracy, and over 3000 fps with inch groups. With all the good .358 bullets now on the market more people will shoot this fine caliber in the future. The Shooting Times Alaskan is still a wildcat, however many powder companies list it in their loading manuals. Winchester's shop put out 58 custom rifles some years ago and I was lucky enough to find one. Good shooting.

Or did the .35s not catch on because as consumers we're a little velocity happy, and a 225 through 275gr at 2600fps plus kicks a little too much? Seems most shooters dislike anything that recoils much beyond the 300WinMag.
Cheers...
Con

Hi: As reply to Paul H., You are almost correct
re. the .358 Norma Magnum...regarding the 2800 fps
velocity...in fact my factory Norma .358 Norma Magnum says: the factory cartridges will be 2799 fps...say 2800. That's what should be. However I do not reload these yet, I'm still shooting Norma Factory Ammo (rated at 2800fps..) and in my original Husqvarna .358 Norwa Magnum rifle using the factory .358 Norma Magnum, my chonograph reads consistenly 3,000 fps. Whas up brah? Is my choronograph wrong? I've tested it with a lot of other cartridges & calibers...I have experienced chonys either being right on or waay off. So, its boils down to this: I'm shooting my .358 Norma Magnum at the Cody, Wyoming Shooting Complex, one of the finest ranges in the country...with my .358 Norma Magnum Husqvarna using Norma Factory ammo over a good chronograph & get 3,000+ fpas. I know it does. You are predicating your argument on supposition...you are assuming its not so..but you are not shooting this particular rifle with this ammo at 5016 feet elevation in Cody, Wyoming at our range over a chronograph. Rifles can vary somewhat in velocity performance...some say as much as 200-300 fps. Maybe mine does, I do know what it chronographs...so this is where I come from. I will agree with you on this point..I also did not expect this velocity from factory ammo...but I don't know why I get this velocity either...but I do. Amen. If you ever get this way, I'll invite you to the range as my guest & let you shoot this rifle over any chronograph you choose...but before you do, lets place a gentleman's bet...not enough to be hurting but...for lunch or somesuch...my stomach is already growling in anticipation!
Also...I'm older than you so probably have more experience...but seriously...I've seen disputes from such luminaries...who like to write...such as Ken Waters, Ross Seyfried...who dispute Newton velocities, etc...saying they were pumped up...but I and a writer for "Precision Shooting", Mr. Bob Jourdan found the Newton data easy to attain...the claimed velocities...although Bob only experimented with the .256 Newton. My aim was to experiment with the other hotshot modern cartridge designs like the .30 Newton (3300 fps with 180 gr. bullets).
Yes, this I admit was high pressures...but the point is the Newton published data was real. He only claimed much less...todays slower powders bring his superb cartridge designs to real power. Aloha, Tom

Hi again...After more closely reading the posts...
the .338 Mag came out..which was close enough to the .358 Norma mag...but what was weird & maybe not known...the .358 Norma came out..Norma expected gunsmakers to chamber it...but no one bothered...then the .338 put the kiss of death on it. Later Husqvarna made rifles chambered for it.
So, you had a developed cartridge & no rifles?
At least thats what I understand of its history.
Also, don't forget...there weren't a lot of bullet choices in .35 caliber either. However, its been acknowledged that the big .358 Norma will exceed the .338 WinMag in power & has a very good long range trajectory to boot. Its just a little shy of the .375 H&H...but better longer range ballistics...I know if I went after the Alaskan Brown Bear, I'd choose the .358 Norma Magnum over the .375 H&H and be assured its the right choice...250 gr bullets of good make. The only thing the big .35's lacked was recognition & wider selection of quality bullets...but now they're available, so where's the excuse? When Charles Cottar in Africa shot a Rhino with a .35 Newton, he said it went from stem to stern, all the way through & made a good Rhino of it...likewise a .358 Norma Magnum...
I would think it would 'sort out' a Brown Bear
with thinner skin than a Rhino very handily!
Best Regards, Tom

bisonland,
I believe that Brno also chambered rifles for the 358 Norma Magnum based on the ZKK602. The 358Norma's history seems to be paralleled by the 308Norma as well. Not sure if the 338WinMag "knocked" the Norma on the head or whether gun manufacturers refusing to chamber it did. It seems odd that a time when no quality .338 projectiles existed, that Winchester would design/choose the 338WM rather than the Norma, but then weren't a few experimenters playing with short magnum cases and .333Jeffery projectiles?
Cheers...
Con

I never said a 358 Norma couldn't push 250 gr to 3000 fps, I did say it would require high pressures to do so. I don't have to visit your range or see your crhony readings, I'm more then happy to take you at your word.

I had a 35 whelen ackley that would push 250's to 2700, I think I even pushed a few to 2750. I know it was operating at high pressures to do so. I was concerned enough that I rechambered the gun to a 350 Rigby, so I could get the same performance at reasonable pressures, as the gun refused to group of the loads were backed down.

Guns certainly do vary by a few fps here or there, and a gun being 50-100 fps faster isn't out of the question. Now if I had a 358 Norma that was pushing 250's @ 3000 fps, I would be very concerned that I was operating at very high pressures. Just because it was factory ammo would not allay my concerns. I wouldn't chalk the extra speed up to a fast gun, I'd chalk it up hot loads from the factory. There ain't not magic, it takes a given peak pressure for a given chambering to achieve a given velocity for a given bullet weight.

To each their own. As I said, I'm not calling you a liar, just saying you might want to be concerned about how your gun is achieving that performance.

Guys, it's heartwarming to see this continued interest and discourse on the neglected .35 caliber. Tom, I found an article by Jack Lott in the 1984 Guns & Ammo Annual on Magnum Mauser actions recently that may be the one for which you were searching. His gun's caliber was a .350 Rigby Magnum, but he discussed it's history, it's predecessor, the .400/.350 Rigby, and mentioned the .35 Newton and the .358 Norma Mag in passing. I found his assertion that the 400/350 and the .350 Rigby Mag. were the medium calibers of choice for Africa and India prior to Holland's introduction of the .375. As side note, it appears that my .35 Newton may equal or exceed .375 H&H power levels with the 300 grain Barnes.

Hey Tom, I'm with Paul on this one. There's only one way to get a bullet to go faster, and that's to put more pressure behind it. If I had a gun shooting factory loads 7-8% faster (doens't that mean around 15% greater pressure?), I'd figure it was a function of shorter throat or some other aspect of my particular chamber (all the more so if chambered in a fairly obscure round such as this) that was rasing pressures to that required of a Norma to go 3k.
Not my idea of fun.
In fact, if you haven't done it (if you reload you may have done this pretty early upon getting the rifle; I don't know) you might want to smoke one of your factory rounds and chamber it, jsut to make sure you're not getting into the leads. And if you are, it would be interesting to see what happens when you seat the bullet so as to not, assuming it was within say 2 thou or so. At any rate, these guns are built to handle pressures higher than they should see regularly, so as long as you wear glasses and don't shoot it much, you might have a long and happy life.
Or, maybe you DO have a magic barrel. Who knows?

Regarding the 35Newton, could 8x68S brass be used to make cases? Just wondering...my vote is still for the Norma
Cheers...
Con

Definitely. And if we're keeping track, I guess I vote for the Newton, just 'cause it's cool, and insanely obscure. And with a hundredth of an inch diameter over the H&H case, I'm certain it will beat the Norma.
But, then, why not just use the 404 case?

Bwana-be, I'm with you on the Newton being way too cool, after all, anybody can wildcat a .35 on the .404 case. Some guys already have necked the .375 RUM down to .35, but I imagine recoil is very stout, and it's probably not as efficient as the Newton case. I wonder when someone will decide to bring out a factory round? Also guys, I haven't plugged the numbers into my ballistics program, but surely that 5000 foot altitude has something to do with Tom's Norma delivering the velocities he's getting.

Hi All: Sorry, I'd been off the internet for awhile...re. whether .35 Newton can be made from
8X68S Brass, Yes indeed...except its a lot of fuss.
Nonte's recommedation to do so for .30 Newton &
it follows, .35 Newton too...the problem is its a
lot of work! Inside neck reaming, outside neck turning. shortening the 8X68 so much, I had to mark cases, then just grind off necks near that slight
oversize...then trim. I've done a Lot of case
conversion, & this was the most work! I have a friend who uses .300 WinMag cases...he lets the belts center the cases...sometimes the belts flatten out...sometimes not, but in any instance, its an easier way to go. He sent me
.35 Newton cases formed from .300 WinMag cases and they're just fine...with the oddity being a belted case fired in an "unbelted"chamber...but
it works well. I would suppose the belts can
be lathe turned off, but why bother?
Best Wishes, Tom

Hello again: Re. Paul H's replies: I realize
you are thinking my rifle shooting 250 gr. .35 caliber bullets have to have high pressures...its
a good point. In fact, the most valid point one could make...I simply agree. However, my point is that my Husqvarna original rifle with factory Norma .358 Ammo registers 3,000+ fps. (24 inch bbl.)
The rifle is factory, the ammo is factory. And I have experts who have stated that any rifle can vary 200-300 fps from expected velocities....also, let me question you...get off the general assumptions...if you have a modern stong action (like the Husqvarna) Modern
Mauser Type...what is high pressure? "Blue pill" or "Blue load" tests have gone waaay over the usual factory intended loads...some as much as twice...tell me what is a high pressure load for such a rifle? I'll tell you in advance, you simply don't know, do you? That's the answer.
Because most high quality factory rifles have a
"safety factor" built in of being able to take excessive loads. What pressure do you consider excessive? I would say, the brass is the limiting factor, more than the rifle...and I'll also bet that this rifle is way safe up to at least 65,000psi probably more than 70,000..
If my rifle ejects without bolt stick, primers
don't look flattened, no obvious high pressure signs...and ballistic programs don't show high pressures over what the rifle can take...well,
you're all wet (again) and don't stand too long under the Northern Lights any more, but look at
facts...if you desire to quote in general high pressure..its not a general topic...its physics.
Best Regards, Tom

Tom makes an interesting point. What measured pressure is considered to be too high for a mechanically sound modern bolt action? If one has no access to strain gauges or copper crusher pressure test rigs, and if we accept that the average yeild strength of cartridge brass is around 85,000 psi, then what constitutes unacceptably high pressures? Many published loads run about 65,000 psi peak pressure, so is 20,000 psi an adequate margin of safety for our mechanically sound, modern bolt action? Maybe some of you engineers or metallurgists can share some industry standards and practices with us? Does the shape of the pressure curve make any difference? For the sake of this discussion, let's ignore other factors like case life, throat erosion, etc., but assume our loads will allow indefinite action life.

I have a .358 Norma Mag in an FN Mauser. The rifle and scope weigh near eight pounds. This is all I want from a .358! I only shoot the Norma ammo because I don't reload. This is a fine cartridge for a .358. I have only shot paper and a 5 gallon bucket with water. If the bucket is any indication of what it will do on game then, one shot is all that is needed. The bucket did not have a chance; never did find the top.

I always admired the cartridges of Charles Newton. If he had prevailed we would have been much better off today.

A friend has an orginal 35 Newton rifle. I don't think he shoots it much anymore but back in the 70's he was blasting away with it. Those are very light rifles with a narrow steel covered rifle butt. The recoil from it was beyond any tolarance.

He used to stick the toe of the steel butt plate into the plank of the bench rest. Somehow the rifle survived all of this. He made brass from a belted magnum. They bulged out at the expansion web but it was full steam ahead.

The velocities that he got over the chrono with the 250 gr Hornady were the same as what a 375 H&H would do with 270's.

I'd been off the internet for awhile. I agree with 'Savage 99'...the original stocks of the Newton Rifle were much too light for the .35 Newton, whew!
Actually, too light for the .30 Newton too. They were designed by Fred Adolf, the same displaced German gunsmith that built the Teddy Roosevelt Double Rifle that qas 1 of 2 museum displayed rifles at the Safari Club Convention in Reno...I don't know exactly why the same stock was used in all Newton Rifles from .256 Newton to .35..the heavy ones definately need a heavier stock to take up recoil. Newton did offer a recoil pad as an option to the steel buttplate, factory installed. What would be best is to have a .35 Newton Rifle barreled action put in a heavier stock...or another action chambered for .35 Newton in a suitable stock. But an original Newton in .35 Newton is
pretty unpleasant to shoot! Best Regards, Tom

My .35 Newton built with a Rem. 700 action uses the Remington Classic stock with the barrel channel opened up for a #5 barrel. I've found it extremely pleasant to shoot, at least until my loads with the 250 gr. bullets exceeded 2800 fps. My rifle weighs somewhere around nine pounds, but I don't have an accurate, sensitive scale to be sure. So far, my load development achieved almost 2700 fps with North Fork 270 grs., and surpassed 2550 fps with Barnes Original 300 gr. bullets. All this is instrumental measurements at 15 feet from the muzzle of my 26" barrel. I've still got a ways to go to reach maximum or achieve Newton's velocities, but it already is crowding the .375 H&H for performance. Neat, huh?

Hi: Your .35 Newton with heavier stock is just what is needed for that "bruiser of a cartridge" as its been called.
Now my .358 Norma Magnum has a replacement stock, one of the Bell& Carlson "Medalist" stocks with an aluminum bedding block insert...I find it
too, pleasant to shoot...considering its power.
The weight surely helps, the other factor is the straight comb stock for scope...
If I had an original .35 Newton, I'd just do what you did...get a replacememt stock made,
heavier & for a scope line up with high comb.
Good to hear from you again!

Best Regards, Tom

Yes, the .308 and .358 Normas are essentially the .30 and .35 Newton cartridges, with one exception - the Newton design was superior because it was BELTLESS!!

quote:

Originally posted by Paul H:
If you're pushing 250's @ 3000 fps with a 358 Norma, then you are running really high pressures, 2800 fps is a realistic velocity. A 35 Newton loaded to that level will only be running high pressures, realistic speed is 2900 fps. You'll need a full length 404 necked to 35 to get 250's @ 3000 fps with reasonable pressures.

I really get a kick out of people who claim to know what a particular rifle will do without having tested that specific one, since " every rifle is an individual, and what proves to be a maximum load in one may be quite mild in another, and vice versa." Bob Hagel, GAME LOADS AND PRACTICAL BALLISTICS FOR THE AMERICAN HUNTER, 1977. This is still true today!!

Just a note on the Husqvarna rifles in 358 Norma. Factory 358 Norma Husky rifles had 650mm barrels (25 1/2") and they were freebored. This could help explain 3000+fps w/250's. My 23" Sako 358 Norma shoots 250's at 2860 with 80 gr. of R-19 and that is ALL I want out of a 8 1/2lb rifle.
Cheers.

Somebody correct me here, but wouldn't freeboring slow the thing down? My understanding is it allows you to get more powder in without increasing the peak pressure, but with a given charge the bullet would lose steam on the way out the gate.

Just for the record; My .358X.404 IMP will push a 250gr. bullet at 3100fps with a 24" barrel, but after that you start to see some pressure signs. The Norma has a good bit less powder capacity so I guess I'd have to question a 3000 fps from it , at least at reasonable working pressures.

The two cartriges ( Norma & Newton) are so close that the field performance differential would be meaningless. roger

Nothing new under the sun! Nearly one hundred years ago, shooters questioned Charles Newton's claimed velocities also. Perhaps the old ballistic pendulums were not as sensitive nor as accurate as our current chronograph instruments, but I don't doubt that the .35 Newton is capable of delivering a 250 grain bullet at 2975 fps as Newton advertised. I have reached over 2900 fps with this weight bullet in my .35 Newton and have not experienced excessive pressure signs. I admit, it is a punisher at these performance levels to shoot from the bench, but I very seriously doubt it to be impossible for me to attain 2975-3000 fps with this gun.

quote:

Originally posted by El Deguello:

quote:

Originally posted by Paul H:
If you're pushing 250's @ 3000 fps with a 358 Norma, then you are running really high pressures, 2800 fps is a realistic velocity. A 35 Newton loaded to that level will only be running high pressures, realistic speed is 2900 fps. You'll need a full length 404 necked to 35 to get 250's @ 3000 fps with reasonable pressures.

I really get a kick out of people who claim to know what a particular rifle will do without having tested that specific one, since " every rifle is an individual, and what proves to be a maximum load in one may be quite mild in another, and vice versa." Bob Hagel, GAME LOADS AND PRACTICAL BALLISTICS FOR THE AMERICAN HUNTER, 1977. This is still true today!!

That is true within reason, ie an extra 50 or 100 fps, but getting 200 fps over what is nominally considered a maximum load just doesn't happen w/o high pressures.

Would you believe someone with a 30-06 that says they get the same velocities as a 300 win mag, but without high pressure???

Paul, I certainly respect your experience with the .35 calibers, however, I'm experiencing none of the usual pressure signs and my calculations for pressure indicate that I'm within the range of factory high pressure loads. There is little to no case head expansion, no loose primer pockets and no cratered primers or ejector impressions on the case head. I agree, there can be no high velocity without higher pressures, but it's just not the case here. What do you consider too high a pressure? Is 62,000 PSI too high in a modern rifle?

Don,

I consider 62k psi a safe maximum pressure in rifles designed to opperate at that pressure.

What the folks that use pizeo transducers have found is that traditional pressure signs of loose primer pockets, ejector marks and cratered primers start showing up around 75-78 kpsi.

Thus one can be easily operating at 70-72 kpsi without seing any of the traditional pressure sighns, a pressure level that is ~15% over what the maximum design pressure is.

I can't say for sure that at those pressures you're going to damage your rifle. Odds are the factor of safety in the design will handle those pressures, though no gurantees. I personally would be leary of running that hot on belted mag case, and was simply sharing my concern with others.

Everyone needs to decide what they consider safe and acceptible. I simply consider it slightly irresponsible to catagorically state a certain level of performance is totally safe, when there are no measurements and calculations to back that up, and muzzle velocities are much higher than the norm for a given chambering. Because you choose a certain level of personal risk doesn't make it right to state to others to do so with impunity.

No, I'm not a lawyer nor concerned with some sort of liablility from this post. I do deal with safety and risk management in my job.

Hi, new to this forum and find this very interesting. I own a 358 norma built on a p-17 enfield with a 26 in hart barrel. I push 250 at 2900 to 2950 out of it all the time. It would not surprise me to be able to go faster but this is a sub MOA load in my rifle. So I leave it alone no pressure problems in my rifle and if you drop the loads 2 grs. 310 woodleighs shoot only an in lower with no other changes. Also the 9.3x64 Brenneke will beat the 375H&H at 300 yards in ME with the same weight bullet.

jim johnson ----- Welcome to AR jim, particularly another .358 guy, no matter what the flavor. Good shooting.