one of us
| I am sure that it has been done but can't find any reference to it. Basically, you would wind up with the .358 Norma Magnum. |
| | | Posts: 262 | Location: PA & VA, USA | Registered: 26 June 2003 | 
IP
|
|
Moderator
| Yep, that's exactly it... a 338 necked to 358 is the 358 norm
jeffe |
| | |
one of us
| If I were going for a magnum grade .35 wildcat, one based on the unbelted magnum cases would be my choice. Winchester seems to be heavy into promoting WSSM rounds and a .35 would be a natural extention to the short action line. The big cases have lots of potential too. Thirty-fives are not very popular with most hunters but I like them. |
| | | Posts: 338 | Location: Johnsburg, Illinois | Registered: 15 December 2002 |
IP
|
|
One of Us
| Quote:
If I were going for a magnum grade .35 wildcat, one based on the unbelted magnum cases would be my choice. Winchester seems to be heavy into promoting WSSM rounds and a .35 would be a natural extention to the short action line. The big cases have lots of potential too. Thirty-fives are not very popular with most hunters but I like them.
Too be honest if I was considering a 35 magnum for something different I would get a 9.3X64 Brenneke. This cartridge will fit a standard action and is every bit the equal to the 375 H&H. It's a cannon and and with the more sloping shoulders feeds much smoother than the Norma. It has a certain amount of exclusivity if that's your thing but it's a great cartridge and most often overlooked by North Americans. |
| | |
one of us
| Quote:
Couple of stray thoughts on the idea.
Before I am skewered on a spit let me say I am quite fond of the .35 bore, and especially the .358 Win. If I may paraphrase some asshole politician from the past however, "it ain't no .338". The .338 has better SD/BC, and about everything else a guy could want, including a better array of bullets and essentially the same weight range. The .35 has it's place, but the .358 Norma and similar designs are at a disadvantage when compared to the .338 and it's cousins. JMO, but the .35 Whelan is the end of the road for that caliber, at least until somebody wants to tackle the bullet issue. At present the .338 will do anything the .35's will do, and a fair bit more.
Except of course for mild to moderate noise/recoil for about 250 yards or less, and only a little dead instead of real dead. 
I'm just wondering how much of that SD/BC gun rag talk actually matters when it comes to killing critters. In one recent gun rag a fellow wrote in asking if a 30-06 is adequate for W. Va Black Bear. The person that answered said that with a 180 gr premium bullet like a partition the '06 would do ok, as long as the range wasn't too great. Give me a flippin' break. My uncle kills 300+ pound black bear every year with a 357 Pistol, of course this is after they are treed. But still I would have to bet that given proper shot placement, if a 357 will do the job at 20-30 feet, and a 30-30 will do the job out past 100 yds (and it will) than an '06 is certainly more than adequate for Black Bear.
I guess I got sidetracked a little but the SD/BC and bullet selection debates are actually worthless when comparing the 338 bores with the 358 bores. They will both work the same on the same game with the same shot placement, and so will the 9.3's and a whole host of other similar rounds. Sean |
| | | Posts: 537 | Location: Vermont | Registered: 04 March 2001 |
IP
|
|
one of us
| Well, I disagree with that assessment. I did not address killing power directly except in the last sentence of my post. Perhaps my tongue-in-cheek was a bit subtle??  I do not suggest that folks pursue the concept of "ultra-light" hunting in the context of fishing tackle, but am of the opinion that most hunters are overgunned and underskilled regarding their ability to put a bullet where it needs to be put. There are countless big game animals killed each year with rather benign chamberings used by those who are skilled. That said, and saying again I'm fond of the .35 bore and use it time to time, it ain't no .338. My statement has nothing to do with emotion, just simple ballistic fact. If there were adequate bullets to allow the .35's equal footing we would not be having this discussion. There are not. The .35 is a hunter's caliber, the .338 is that and more, due to available bullets if nothing else. You may not see the point but fact is nobody uses the .35 bore for long range competition or hunting, and I do not care to debate the latter. The reason is bullet quality(design and construction), nothing more. Ballistic fact, not conjecture. Even in the best of scenarios the .35's start to fade around 300 yards, nothing will change that at the present. |
| | | Posts: 9647 | Location: Yankeetown, FL | Registered: 31 August 2002 |
IP
|
|
one of us
| How many bullets does a caliber have to have in order for it to be a good one?
I don't really care if they use 35 calibers for long range shooting or not. That has nothing to do with what I said. I questioned whether all the gun rag "facts" you were repeating really made a difference to a game animal.
Saying that the 338 Win is a better hunting round than a 358 Norma because of values like BC that change depending on the muzzle velocity is not giving an accurate representation of the realities of HUNTING, target shooting is another matter. Sean |
| | | Posts: 537 | Location: Vermont | Registered: 04 March 2001 |
IP
|
|
Moderator
| I don't recall the exact date, but the 358 Norma mag came out 2 or 4 years before the 338 win mag. The 338 win mag eclipsed the 358 Norma in sales, and it is henche now a relatively obscure round.
As to the claim that the 358 Norma is no 338 win mag, or that there aren't as many bullet choices in .358", that is per and simple bunk. Either round will be within an inch or two of eachother for the same bullet weight out to 400 yds.
There are 180, 200, 220, 225, 250, 270, 280 and 310 gr bullets in traditional cup/core, bonded, partition and mono-metal hollowpoint (X-bullets) in round nose, flat point and spitzer, also some solids. The 358 Norma with proper bullet choice is fully up to taking any animal that can be hunted, and out to reasonable ranges as well.
One interesting thing about the 35 caliber is that it seems to be a caliber that has never had complaints regarding bullet failures. Aim it where it needs to go, and it puts a nice hole clear through.
I'm a glutton for punishment and built a 350 Rigby Magnum, and even older and more obscure round that is essentially a beltless 375 H&H case, with a 45 degree shoulder, slightly shorter, and 35 bore. It achieves the same 250 gr @ 2700 fps performance. |
| | |
one of us
| And my .35 WSM shoots the 250's at 2700 fps too. I'm comfortable with hunting any game up here with it...at any practical range. "Practical range" is limited more by in-the-field accuracy than killing power, and for me its about 350 yards. Though I don't hunt brown bear, if I had to shoot one it would be close enough that neither power nor accuracy would be a limitation with this cartridge.
Jerry/AK |
| | | Posts: 575 | Location: Anchorage, Alaska | Registered: 12 July 2002 |
IP
|
|
one of us
| Hey buddy, I don't get my facts from gun rags for starters. Secondly, I thought I made it clear that I like the .35 and use one for that matter. If you'd like to unknot your shorts and read what I said you might realize that. Whether or not you care about long range work is not germain, nor does it obviate the truth of the matter. Tell you what Sean, I'll spot you identical form(your choice) on three calibers, and identical weight. .338/.358/.375. Now you tell me what the SD and BC are for each with let's say 300 grains. I trust you won't be turning to gun rags for your answer, and I think the truth is as accurate as a representation gets BTW. Paul, perhaps I touched a nerve about your pet caliber? Look, I'm not down on the .35 at all, and your .350 Rigby sounds like a hoot. Now if I were so disposed I could argue the merits of that cartridge until Hell froze based on the numbers you provided, in comparison with the .375 H&H and the .338 Whatever. It's all subjective bullshit for the most part and you probably know that as well as I. My point was about the caliber, not the cartridge. When I said "design/construction" I was referring to the broad sweep of things, not only core/jacket material but dimensions and QUALITY. By quality I do not mean just performance but quality of manufacturing techniques and quality control. Are good .35 cal bullets available? Certainly. Are they all "hunting bullets"? Yeah, I think they are, and that's no slam. Quote:
and out to reasonable ranges as well.
Well, that's a subjective evaluation on your part and I have no problem with how you arrive at that point or what it is. If you choose to impose that limit across the board regardless of equipment, fine. That does not change the fact of the matter. I did not say by the way, that there was not an ample array of weights and suppliers for the .35 bore. I said:
Quote:
The .338 has better SD/BC, and about everything else a guy could want, including a better array of bullets and essentially the same weight range.
And: Quote:
The .35 is a hunter's caliber, the .338 is that and more, due to available bullets if nothing else.
Y'all have a nice day now. |
| | | Posts: 9647 | Location: Yankeetown, FL | Registered: 31 August 2002 |
IP
|
|
