has anyone shot or built a 358 norma mag? i've been toying with the idea of a 358/375 mag. dave

I have a 358 Norma. What would you like to know?

i like the pwr it has over the 35 whelen. to pump it up, i was thinking of pushing the 35 out of a 375 h&hmag case. whatta ya think? dave

I have the 35 Whelen and 358 Norma. There is an everage of a 200 - 250fps increase between the two with any given bullet weight. The step up is the 358 STA (8mm Rem Mag necked up to 358 or 375 HH necked to 358 and fireformed.) I should give you another 150-200fps over the Norma. I have extensive data for both the Whelen and the Norma is you need some direction.

I agree with Jabs. Due to the taper of the H&H case you won't gain much capacity. Check the 375Taylor vs the 375H&H. There is basically no difference between them. The H&H case is only 8% larger. At best that would give you 2% velocity gain or about 50FPS.

My 358Norma is plenty for anything I need to kill. If you must give it steriods then go the STA stopping at the H&H would be a waste.

,,,,,Waterrat has put the 358 Norma to the best use of anyone I,ve ever known........I would say his is world famous ......The 358 Norma is much easier to get big bullets going faster than the 338 win without burning any more powder...It is an awesome round....

well gumboot458 i do believe you have sold me on building a 358 norma. i already built a 8-06 k.kale with a 29" barrel. it'll throw a 220 hdy at 2550fps, but i want more power dave ps thanks to all of ya for your input.

Back in the early 90s I designed and built a .358 X .404 IMP.It has safely pushed a 250gr. bullet close to 3200 FPS. This was long before the Ultra Mags.Bwana-b also has or had one similar. roger

Thank you for the kind words Gumboot.. The Norma's virtue's include regular action,cheap brass ai 338 formed 1 step,flat shooting w 225's, and 375 power level with 275's or 300grainers. It's just one of those cartridges that will do anything that needs to be done in Alaska.

I think the 358 Norma is great, as well as the 338 Win Mag.

I thought long and hard about this 358 cartridge. The difficult part for me was just being objective, and staying with the facts, when trying to justify whether to have a rifle made to use this great cartridge.

It's pretty easy to rationalize into thinking it is somehow better than, or offers something different than whats available with the 338.

I will be bold here, and state in my opinion the 358 Norma offers so close to nothing the 338 doesn't have, that if you say it offers nothing, you would be correct. To go further, I'll say it actually offers less, when you include available factory ammo.

Both cartridges are at their best with 225 - 250 gr bullets, and they use about the same type and charge of powder, and drive the bullets at about the same speed. Both can be loaded using heavy bullets, and the 358 offers a slight advantage there, but not enough to really justify the cartridge.

I could go on with a long winded discussion about twist rates, sectional density, etc., but I have summed my conclusions above.

Another consideration is that the 358 Norma is practically in the same class as a wildcat for me. I think there are two sources of factory ammo, and both are very good, but expensive. A-Square, and Norma. So, its best use is with handloads. The dies cost close to the same as wildcat dies. So, when I was considering this cartridge, I compared it to a wildcat, rather than the 338 Win Mag.

I had a rifle made in 9.3x338, which is the 338 Win Mag necked up to .366, and no other changes. Interestingly, it's .358 bore, and .366 grove, if I understood the barrel maker correctly. The loading dies are available from Redding, and the reamer is available too.

Anyway, this cartridge would seem to be a real, rather than imagined, step up into another class of cartridge, compared to the 338 or the 358. It really is comparable to the 9.3x64 or the 375 H&H. In other words, this wildcat will exceed the 338 or the 358, and match the 9.3x64, and maybe the 375, and feeds/fits a Ruger action with a magnum bolt face perfectly, with no modifications.

I measured the water capacity of the sized & necked up winchester brass, and it's within .5 gr of the 9.3x64. I didn't expect that. When I decided to go with this wildcat, it was partially because I wanted to use the Ruger action I had, but I really didn't know that it was duplication the 9.3x64, with a belted case. I figured it to be close, but not that close.

So, if you want to stay with a cartridge that has CIP specs, the 358 Norma is good, and the 9.3x64 is too, but if a wildcat is OK, consider the 9.3x338.

I have several boxes of the Nosler ballistic tip 250 grs, and bought a box of the Barnes 250 gr TSX, and a box of the Nosler Accubonds 250 gr. I'm planning on using gumboot's chronograph testing these. I'm betting that I can easily get about the same top speed with any of these 250 grs, that can be obtained using 225 gr bullets in either the 338 or the 358 mags. Think what can be done with 286 gr 9.3 bullets.

I named mine the 366 Alaskan.

KB

,,,,Not to argue ,,,,,well mayby to .....But the Norma does better with heavy bullets than the 338 .....I,ve loaded and shot around 1500 , 275 and 300 gr bullets in the 338 and it will do 2600 fps plus a scoosh with a 275 gr.. but the 358 will do that with the 300 gr.....The 338 is a great round but the 358 is better.......Now perhaps the 366 Ak. will be like wise but even tho Winchester named the 338 model 70 the Alaskan ,, the 358 Norma to me says Alaska better.....Some people may consider it a , hammer scissors rock , kind of thing but haveing had and got rid of 11 or 12, 338,s ,I will probably make up a 358 Norma soon.....My delima is the Norma or the STA.

I'd say it has something to do with the action you want it to go in. You're already not talking 358 or Whelen, so if you can fit the H&H-length case, why not use it? (Talking improved here, a la STA; no reason for that H&H taper if it isn't a 375 H&H!)
250/270/280g bullets will appreciate it, and if you're using lighter bullets you'll just offend the Norma!
(Like Roger said, I have one on an improved 404, and it gives me close to 2950 with 280g A-Frames, but I load them around 2850. The goal was 2800, which you can do with the H&H case I hear.)

So, Kabluewy, the 338WM and the 358 NM are twins, but you go up .008" and BOOOOOOM it a SUPER MAGNUM which far surpasses either of the others mentioned. All three use similar bullet weights and velocities will be close between the three mentioned. I do not see the difference other than to be (really) different.

jabs,me thinks i need to research this a tad bit longer before shelling out lotta bucks for the project. the action to use is a m98 mauser blown out to handle 3.60" c.o.l. rounds. i already have 2 of them blown out to do this. dave

Fireball, I see you also live in Cal. If you'd be interested in the .358 X .404 IMP. I still have the reamer and RCBS has made dies once before so you might get a reduced rate. PM me if you do have an interest. roger

There are getting to be sevral 9.3,s around here so the 366 isn,t out of hand.......The 358 will beat the 338 by about 75 fps all else being equal.. I think laziness is the only reason I don,t have one.......

quote:

Anyway, this cartridge would seem to be a real, rather than imagined, step up into another class of cartridge, compared to the 338 or the 358. It really is comparable to the 9.3x64 or the 375 H&H. In other words, this wildcat will exceed the 338 or the 358, and match the 9.3x64, and maybe the 375, and feeds/fits a Ruger action with a magnum bolt face perfectly, with no modifications.

Well the detail person in my has a real problem seeing how this is a major step up from the 358N. The person in me that answers just because I wanted to be different when asked why I designed and shoot a Wildcat says "go for it welcome to the club".

There ya go Paul, putting works in my mouth.

I used the word "real" rather than "major". The message I meant to convey was that the "step-up" is significant enough to be worthy of messing with rather than merely getting a 358N, or its clone the 338 W. However, I agree the step-up with the 9.3 is not major. Just like the difference in performance comparing the 375 H&H and the 9.3x64 to the 358 Norma is significant enough so that the following statement is true: The 358 Norma is almost in the same class as the 375 H&H - almost.

I'm saying the 9.3x338 is also almost in the same class as the 375 H&H, closer than the 358, and maybe the 9.3 is the equal of the 375. I'll have to test some loads, chronograph, and do the math. Really though, since the case capacity is so close comparing the 9.3x338 and the 9.3x64, I don't think I have to wait to do the math - it's already been done - just compare the load data for the 9.3x64 compared to the 358 Norma.

The "just to be different club" also applies to those wanting or shooting the 358 Norma, IMO to the same degree as shooting the 9.3x338.

I have made my claim of the 358N & the 338W being essentially clones before, and got the same arguments primarily ignoring my basic premis - which is that the two cartridges are at their best using 225 - 250 gr bullets. This heavy bullet argument is of limited value to me. 75 FPS difference is nothing - you can get that much varaition in different rifles - same caliber.

The heavy bullets in 358 require a twist rate of 12", or 10" would be better above 280 gr. This is faster than common in the 358. The normal twist rate for the 338 is 10", which is designed to stabalize the 300 grs, but practically the 12" twist would be better for the common and more useful 338 bullets 225-250 gr.

The common twist rate for 9.3, in the USA, Pac-Nor, Shilen, Lilja, etc, is 12" twist. This twist rate works for anything in 9.3mm from 232 grs, the 320 grs. Its not a problem, however I'm saying the heavy bullet argument in the 358 ignores the problem of twist rate.

If a guy wants a 358 Norma, he should decide what bullets he wants to use before ordering the barrel. If that decision is practical - and the choice is 225 - 250 grs, then the Shilen 14" twist rate is perfect. If he wants the option to use heavy bullets, then Douglas and Lilja makes a faster twist.

To put twist rate into perspective:
12" twist .338 WILL NOT stabalize the Swift 275 gr.
12" twist .358 MAY stabalize the 280 gr Swift.
12" twist .366 WILL stabalize the Swift 300 gr

Not many people use bullets heavier than 250 gr in the 338 or the 358 because there just aren't many available, and they aren't really needed for anything either of these two calibers are used for. The heavy Swift A-frame for 338 is 275 gr (SD .344), for 358 it's 280 gr (SD .312), and for 9.3 it's 300 gr. (SD .320)

What I'm saying regarding a "real step-up" in performance is let's stay with some practical comparison using the above bullets. I think it's probable that similar velocity can be obtained with each of the bullets from their respecitve cases, which are practically equal in capacity. I suspect the 338 275 gr will be the slowest, but it has the highest SD. We know that a 9.3mm 300 gr bullet will have greater energy than the 275 gr 338, at about the same speed. (about 400 ft lbs.) Although, I have some doubts that the 275 gr 338 bullet can be pushed as fast as the 300 gr 366 bullet from the same case. I suspect that the 280 gr 358 bullet, and the 300 gr 9.3 bullet can be pushed safely to very close to the same speed, using Norma 358 brass and 338 winchester brass necked up to 9.3.

However I'm biased, because I just like the 9.3mm

KB

Another option if you have a magnum length action is the 358RUM. Easy to find parent brass and Redding makes the dies. I'd guess many 'smiths in the States would have a 300RUM reamer and 35cal neck/throat reamers to allow you to build it fairly easily.
Cheers...
Con

hello mate, that was the way that i made my 8mm/300win mag. i cut off the neck portion and ground down the 308 pilot to install a different pilot for the 8mm. reamed out the chamber, set head space then reamed throat and neck with a 8/06 reamer. works really good.

fireball,
I know of at least one 'smith in Australia that has set himself up that way. Nearly all his reamers are removable pilot and he has a range of neck/throat reamers as well for the "wildcats". Need to be carefull though as at least one local had a "416Taylor" built that ended up being a 416/338WM. Bit disturbing when Taylor brass wouldn't chamber
Anyway ... the 35/300RUM I think would be awesome if your action is long enough ... a 35/338RUM being a better option if you have say a Rem700. Both would match the 358Norma at much lower pressures but would obviously need more powder to equal the Norma's velocity. Loaded up though ... they'd smoke!
Cheers...
Con

i want to thank everyone for their input but i think i'll just stick with what i've got. my rotator cuff in my left arm keeps hurting me. i could barely lift the 300mag this afternoon to put in the case. my daughter worries that i'll build one too hot to handle and destroy the rest of my shoulder, so with a heavy heart i wont be haveing anymore big guns. this is a fine web to be on.later folks. Dave

;;;;;;I,m hopeing someone with 358 Norma exp. will jump in here concerning the heavy bullet ,velocity and twist rate info...........I have choronographed alot of different ammo and rifles and as long as the barrel length is commencerate with the caliber....75 feet per second is a major step up......when all loads are chronographed it is found very fast how much stuff doesn,t make the speed hoped for.........Some times things don,t live up to but others surpass expectations.....

fireball 2,

Are you a leftie?

Roger QSL

yes i am but i've also got a torn rotator cuff in my right shoulder ,so i think my 8mm/300win mag is just about all i'll be able to handle if i take care of the shoulders dave

fireball 2,

You got mail...

Roger QSL

;;;;;No siree Fireball......That is one of the first and biggest mistakes people make.....A 358 Norma isn,t a Big rifle ...neither is th 338 or the 366 or even the 375.....They can and sometimes kill like they are ,, But if you can shoot the noisey bothersome 300 you can shoot the 358 just as well and easily..

In regards to twist rate, a 12 twist will stabalize a 280 Swift , no problem, I shoot them all the time. You can use a shorter barrel with the 358 and not suffer ballistically speaking. mine is 23". You can use use less powder, hence less recoil, better carry rifle, NO silly muzzle brakes. 69 gr. H4895 vs 88 gr. of R19 with the STA with the same bullet(225 gr.). ALL things considered, the 358 Norma is simply the best for Alaska IMHO.
Regards,
SB Smith

Yes, SBSMITH is right, my 358 Norma pushes 280gr. A-frames very accurately.

That's good info to know. If I made a 358 Norma, I would go with the 12" twist, and the Swift 280gr would be on the menu. Frankly, I can see no (practical) reason to have a 358 N unless you want to use the 280 Swift. That bullet is worthy of making a rifle to shoot just that one. Plus you get the benefit of using 225 gr & 250 gr too, if wanted.

I have a friend who has a 35 Whelen on a left hand Ruger action, with a Douglas 12" twist. He asked me what I thought before ordering the barrel, and fortunately my answer was the same as the gunsmith. Go with a 12" twist. He is very happy with the rifle, and I've shot it too. As far as we can tell, with limited testing, it's accurate with 200, 225 and 250 grs.

My 35 Whelen has a Shilen 14" twist, and it shoots 200 gr and 250 gr equally well. I haven't tried 225 grs, but I'm pretty sure they will be good too. Once I tried sme of the old Barns original, can't remember the weight, but heavy, and they gave very poor accuracy. I figured it was the wrong twist.

KB

quote:

Originally posted by sbsmith:
You can use a shorter barrel with the 358 and not suffer ballistically speaking. mine is 23". NO silly muzzle brakes. 69 gr. H4895 . ALL things considered, the 358 Norma is simply the best for Alaska IMHO.
Regards,
SB Smith

My 9.3x338 barrel is also 23", with no SILLY muzzel brake. The only powder I've tested so far is IMR 4895, with 250 gr Ballistic tips. Just shot into a snow bank, looking for pressure signs. Worked up to 66 grs, and quit. It's not a compressed load, but filled up to just below the base of the neck. No signs of pressure problems, but I want to wait until I can set up and shoot through a chronograph, and at targets for accuracy. I'm thinking of trying RL 15. Anyway, the 358 Norma load data is my basis for choosing and starting loads, and I cross check if possible with data on the 9.3x64, and the wildcat 375x338.

quote:

Worked up to 66 grs, and quit.

Well just a heads up. Assuming that your wildcat has the same capacity as the 9.3x64 Loadtech shows a max load of 61.8grs of 4895 at 63800psi. If I extrapolate the pressure gains to 66grs I'm at 71,300psi.

Yup, you got my attention.

Perhaps my memory is wrong, but I'll check everything again. There was no sign of a problem, judging from primer, and bolt lift.

I'm curious, please run the math through Loadtech, and extrapolate the load shown above for the 358 Norma 69grs of H4895 with 225 gr bullet.

Thanks, KB

quote:

I'm curious, please run the math through Loadtech, and extrapolate the load shown above for the 358 Norma 69grs of H4895 with 225 gr bullet.

Load tech would call it 66400.

What was your water capacity and AOL for the 9.3x338. I'll see if I can refine it.

New RWS cases 9.3x64 holds 84.4 gr water

Winchester 338 brass, necked up to 9.3, fired once, holds 83.9 gr water.

This is filled to capacity - can not hold another drop.

The length I didn't measure, but the batch of 50 338 brass was trimmed very slightly to clean up the mouth, and make them all the same length.

KB

quote:

New RWS cases 9.3x64 holds 84.4 gr water

Sorry I need the OAL with bullet it assumes 3.37". Longer the OAL more net capacity less pressure for each bullet. As to the capacity Loadtech has 9.3x64 as 87 so numbers will get worse.

Paul,
This is interesting. I'll make the measurment, and get back to you, hopefully later today.

The bullet was the 9.3 ballistic tip 250 gr, seated to the crimp grove, crimped slightly, so case length is not too short, since it hit the crimp ring in the die easily. As you know this is a pretty long bullet, with the plastic tip and boat tail, but eye-balling it the OAL was right there with my 338 ammo loaded with the 225 Hornady Interbonds. The magazine of the Ruger will not take anything longer, and I also checked the ensure the bullet was back off the lands properly.

It all worked out very well regarding the loaded round length / magazine length / and seatind depth re: land engagement. I planned it that way of course, but it's satisfying to find it actually worked out as planned.

KB

quote:

The bullet was the 9.3 ballistic tip 250 gr, seated to the crimp grove, crimped slightly, so case length is not too short, since it hit the crimp ring in the die easily

I bet it will be around 3.34-3.37". Just being curious I ran the 9.3x64 Data from Saeed's site. Allowing the program to set the capacity at 87grs most of the max loads Saeed showed were in the 67,000 range for the various bullets and powders. Which says the results might not be to far into left field. I've had Loadtech call it real close and some powders way off. The 4895 is normally close. The load you gave me for the 358Norma looked realistic. My Nosler book calls 67.5 as max.

For clarity - that 358 load was sbsmith's load, and the powder was H4895.

My loads were using IMR 4895 in my 9.3 wildcat.

I don't know for sure just how comparable the two powders are, but I think they are very close. I don't want to confuse anyone reading this info.

Somebody may be foolish enough to actually use this data somehow, without adequate confirmation on their own, done independently of anything we say here.

We're just talking here, and having fun, but this ain't rocket science.

Perhaps I should mention that I chose IMR 4895 because I had some on the shelf, and because I figured it was the most forgiving and most likely to succeed powder I had. H4895 falls into the same catagory. IMR 4350 fills the case too much, and I don't want to deal with compressed loads just yet. 4320, and 4064 look like possibilities, as well as RL 15 and V140, Varget, and others. Anyway, of all the choices, with this particular wildcat, I figured IMR4895 to be my best and safest bet for starting with this somewhat unknown wildcat.

Once, many years ago, I had the bright idea of trying some reduced velocity 338 loads, using the published starting loads for IMR 3031. Experiencing a hang fire with a 338 is different than merely explaining it. Short story is that I don't want to do that again.

From everything I know, and Hodgen says so about their H4895, it's safe to go as low as 60% of max with that powder. I figured IMR 4895 to be close enough. So, I figured I would take 358 Norma data for 4895 whatever, times 80%, and start there, work up one grain at a time, until pressure showed itself, then back off. I never got to where pressure appeared to be a problem, and quit - as I remember - at 66 grains. I would not take that approach with any powder other than IMR4895 or H4895, unless I learned something new and reliable, that I don't know now.

Again, as you can see, this really ain't rocket science, but it's not taking wild chances either.

KB

The data I gave you was IMR4895. Years and years ago when I made the switch from H4895 to IMR4895 the loads were within different lotts of the same powder.