Go with the 300 Warbird, it trumps all the other 30 calibers. And it is smoking fast.

TC,

Not sure if you’ve already decided on a cartridge or if still pondering the situation.

If still pondering then I recommend you just go with the standard SAAMI spec 338 RUM cartridge. I know… Ho Hum…

I just ran a couple of “what ifs” in QL for the 338 RUM. You can get your 3000fps with either the 200gr Nosler Accubond (.414 BC) (3077fps) or the 210gr Barnes TTSX (.482 BC) (3008fps) at the same pressure level (loading under the cartridge’s PMap) using a 24” barrel. Move to a 26” barrel and add about 50fps for each bullet.

And the 338 RUM neck length is very close to a one caliber length so easy on handloading…

Just a thought…

I would neck the 9.3x62 or even the 9.3x64 down to 30 caliber and either would get you 3000 FPS with a 200 gr. Nosler or Woodleigh...no belt and 30-06 size bolt face...

That is what your looking for according to your post..

That said, I don't understand anyone that has a problem with a belted case, it simply isn't a problem if you handload or rather know how to handload.

Just because it hasn't been mentioned how about 8mm rem mag. Brass is say too obtain and It will meet you're energy requirements you're wanting

I think he said a non belted case, the 8mm Rem has a belt.

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:
I have some Western 35 Newton Cases that measure .2985 at the case head.
I think the Newton was screwed up by people and manufacturers using 8x68 cases but that is just my theory.
I know Wikipedia and countless references to being smaller but how does that explain the cases that are larger? I know there are a few old pissing matches about this but I can send you a case if you like.

When you say you have cases which measure .2985 at the case head, what do you really mean? My Qual-cart brass in 30 Newton measures .5275 while the Jameison brass measures .526. The jameison brass is a better fit for the PTG reamer I have.
If you want to drive 200's at 3000 without excessive pressures, you need at least 300 Weatherby capacity. You can hit 3000 with a 300 winchester but that is loading it HOT! The RUM will do it comfortably. Regards, Bill.

I mean antique original cases by Western.

quote:

Originally posted by Ben Walker:
How about necking down the shorter 300 ultra mag case to 30 cal?

Yeah and we could call it the .300 Dakota! Oh wait already been done......

Bill,

Boomie’s reference to the cartridge ‘case head’ is the same as the cartridge ‘base’; basically the base of the cartridge body.

Here’s some historical Newton cartridge data that you may find interesting – I’m sure it’ll bore others to death. I apologize beforehand for its length…
Chas. Newton collaborated with German trained gunmaker/gunsmith Fred Adolph to produce the 30 and 35 Adolph cartridges for use in rifles manufactured by or re-barreled by Adolph. The 30/35 Adolph cartridges were produced in rimmed, semi-rimmed and rebated rim configurations starting around 1910/1911. About 1912 the 40 Adolph was added to the mix, also in the three rim configurations.

It is known that the original Newton/Adolph brass was foreign manufacture using Berdan primers and that they swaged the cartridge body base down to the approximate base dimension of the factory .280 Ross cartridge. It is supposition that the .333 Jeffery Flanged, the .333 Jeffery, and the .425 Westley Richards cartridge cases were used to wildcat the original 30/35/40 Adolph cartridges – But, these three cartridges are the only ones available in that timeframe having almost identical case body dimensions in the three rim sizes that Adolph required for this business. Once Newton and Adolph settled upon the final cartridge case specifications Chas. Newton procured a UMC (Union Metallic Cartridge Company) contract (about 1913) to produce of the 30/35/40 Adolph cartridges using boxer primers with the three rim sizes.

By 1914 Chas. Newton had revised the 30/35 Adolph cartridge specifications into rimless designs named them respectively the 30 Newton and 35 Newton. The 40 Newton was added in the 1917/1918 timeframe using the 35 Newton cartridge as the parent case.

The 30 and 35 Newton cartridge brass produced by UMC (Union Metallic Cartridge Company – the original Chas. Newton’ contract manufacture), cartridge brass produced by Chas. Newton Rifle Co., and the original Western Chas. Newton contact run cartridge brass had rim dimensions in the 0.528” to 0.531” range and base dimensions in the 0.528” to 0.530” range (rim’s generally being equal to or 0.001” larger diameter than the base diameter). The Speer Bullet Company produced 35 Newton loaded ammunition in the early ‘50s but the brass was soft so not very popular amongst users; rim and base diameters of the Speer brass ran within the above noted dimensions.

It should be noted that the 30/35 Newton rim and base dimensions in the preceding paragraph are within the Hornady production tolerances for the .375 Ruger cartridge case; the preferred range is -0.002” to -0.004” with -0.006” being borderline and -0.008” being the absolute maximum-minimum acceptable).

The later Western’ 30 and 35 Newton cartridge brass production runs – typically those closer to the WWII era and until Western ceased 30/35 Newton cartridge production – became progressively smaller in rim and base dimensions until they reached rim diameters in the 0.524”-0.5255” range with base diameters in the 0.523”-0.524” range.

In that era, gunsmiths desiring to chamber rifles for the 30 Newton or 35 Newton cartridges typically did not have access to the Chas. Newton chamber specifications so they relied upon Western production cartridge cases to generate the relating data for the production of finish chamber reamers. This unfortunately was during the production era of the undersized Western mfg/headstamp 30/35 Newton brass. “Sages of the day” deemed the RWS mfg/headstamp 8x68 S brass to be the optimum (or perfect) brass to use in 30/35 Newton chambered rifles once Western production brass completely dried up – their stated reason was due to the RWS 8x68 S brass having the same 0.524” base dimension of Chas. Newton’s 30/35 Newton cartridge cases.

A few of the older AR Forums participants may perhaps recollect articles written by many of these same ‘expert sages of the day’ alleging that Chas. Newton’s rifles were manufactured with horrible quality control because of the extremely sloppy chambers of these rifles caused bulging in the case body base area when firing either very late production Western 30/35 Newton ammunition or their handloaded Newton ammunition using the RWS 8x68 S cartridge cases. Unfortunately it never dawned on these many ‘Einstein’s’ that the issue lay with using undersize brass rather than sloppy chambers in the Chas. Newton factory’ 30/35 Newton chambered rifles.

During this same timeframe many of these same ‘expert sages’ deemed using 30-06 brass in 9.3x62 Mauser chambered rifles as perfectly correct because the 9.3x62 Mauser cartridge was based upon the 30-06 case… Again the resulting bulging of the case body base area is due to an oversize chamber in the 9.3x62 Mauser chambered rifle; again the brunt of their wrath is misplaced…

Ok back to the Newtons…
During the era when Western was producing undersized brass and then zero brass actual Newton rifle collectors who also shot and reloaded for their factory rifles determined that .375 H&H Magnum brass run into a Chas. Newton production FLR die, then trimmed to length, and subjected to 2-3 full pressure loadings resulted perfectly formed 30/35 Newton brass with only a very thin circular line on the case body indicating the original junction of the belt and case body. I’ve been informed by a few of these collector-reloader-shooters that belted brass after fully formed into Newton brass was usable for an additional 12-20 full pressure re-loadings depending upon the quality of the manufacturer’s brass.

Today’s primary 30/35 Newton issue is to assure that your reloading dies perfectly match your rifle’s chamber…
If you rifles chamber matches the original Chas. Newton chamber specification – use Hornady’s .375 Ruger formed brass. Once run fully into your properly adjusted FLR die and then trimmed to length, you should be ready to load and go shoot.
If your rifles chamber is cut undersize – use the QC or Jamison 30/35 Newton brass. Again run it fully into your properly adjusted FLR die and trim to length. You should be ready to load and go shoot.

Again, I apologize for the length of this post…

My query about Boomstick's post had to do with the measuement he gave of .2985" which makes no sense whatsoever with regards to Newton dimensions. I have copies of the original Western cartridge company prints and also copies of Newton Rifles chamber prints.
I have always been a bit fascinated by the Newton cartidges and often wonder how the American cartridge landscape might have looked if one of the major manufacturers had chambered those cartridges. If Winchester had chambered the 30 Newton, we would probably have never seen an American built 300 H&H. We would certainly have never seen the 300 Win Mag and probably not seen the 264, 7mm Rem, or 338. Also the 308 and 358 Norma would have been unlikely to be introduced. I have trouble believing the last two were not influenced bu the Newton designed cartridges since the dimensions are so similar.
I would really like to see Remington offer the classic 700 in 30 and 35 Newton because I would then be able get brass at a reasonable price. I have not yet tried forming brass from 375 Ruger but will do so ay some point. If necessary, I can always make a die to reduce the head diameter. Regards, Bill

quote:

My query about Boomstick's post had to do with the measurement he gave of .2985" which makes no sense whatsoever with regards to Newton dimensions. I have copies of the original Western cartridge company prints and also copies of Newton Rifles chamber prints.

Good. You’re starting well ahead of most individuals in these discussions.

Today we have SAAMI certification of cartridges which includes both chamber dimensions and cartridges dimensions. If one took solely the SAAMI cartridge dimensions they’d never fit within the SAAMI chamber dimensions because the cartridge dimensions almost always larger than the chamber dimensions! Until, one first understood that the chamber dimensions were the maximum-minimum with plus dimensional specifications and that the cartridges specifications were the maximum-maximum with negative dimensional specifications.
Let’s take the .375 Ruger as an example –
The SAAMI chamber dimensions note an allowable +0.002” for all diameters and +0.015” for length.
The SAAMI cartridge dimensions note an allowable -0.008” for all diameters.
And it should be noted that these allowable dimensional deviations are virtually a requirement for the manufacturing process for both finish chamber reamers and for the cartridge case punch process which requires the copper button, the punch tooling and the equipment to produce the cartridge cases.
Once these plus and minus dimensional specifications are factored into the actual chamber and cartridge specifications one can see that cartridge brass manufactured -0.002” to -0.004” under specification will easily fit within a chamber that is cut anywhere from exact specification to the allowable plus specifications.

So back to Chas. Newton and the Western cartridge company prints. SAAMI came into existence in 1926 which was after commencement of the original Western contract with Chas. Newton and the SAAMI current dimensional practice regarding chamber and cartridge had not yet been adopted.

Anyway, during that era it was understood that manufacturing tolerances required both plus and minus allowances for manufactured items. The underlying rational for the plus allowance for the finish chambering reamer is to allow for multiple cutting edge sharpening, which reduces dimensions, before the reamer’s dimension fall under specification requiring replacement – and also for a little slop when reaming the chamber even if the finish reamer is exact in its dimensions. And for the cartridge specifications it related to the “quality of tolerance’s held during the punch die manufacturing” and for the cumulative wear of the parts before replacement. So when considering the combination of plus and minus tolerances between the chamber and the cartridge case it was standard practice to draw the cartridge print at what would be considered the “optimum dimensions” to fit within the chamber drawing regardless of the tolerance combination encountered.

So what all that means is that – yes it was normal for UMC, NACO (one of Newton’s headstamps), and early Western manufactured brass to run both plus and minus from the draftsman’s cartridge drawing – my samples indicate something a range from 0.5305” to 0.5270” was the norm. It seems only later production Western manufactured brass from print dimensions with zero plus deviation, only minus deviation.

I tried sizing a 375 Ruger case and while it appears to be do-able, there is a certain amount of difficulty. The main problen is a tendency for the shoulder to dent (severely). This may well be mostly due to the lack of a vent hole on the C-H FL sizer I have. I see the same problem when forming 256 Newton from 270 or 30/06 brass. Air is trapped as the neck diameter is reduced and the shouklder diameter also reduced. I have found, if I first relocate the shoulder and reduce the shoulder diameter with a 7x57 die, there is no problem. Also no problem when using 25-06 brass since no air is trapped. BTW, I would rather not hear how the dents are caused by excess lube; that is not the case in this instance.
Anyway, if I make a die to re-locate the shoulder first, it appears the 375 brass may work OK. The head diameter of the piece I have is .528" which should work OK.
The Qual-cart brass is variable in size and also seems a bit soft; not great for brass which is over three bucks apiece. The Hornady brass can't be worse and costs a lot less. Regards, Bill.

quote:

I have always been a bit fascinated by the Newton cartridges and often wonder how the American cartridge landscape might have looked if one of the major manufacturers had chambered those cartridges. If Winchester had chambered the 30 Newton, we would probably have never seen an American built 300 H&H. We would certainly have never seen the 300 Win Mag and probably not seen the 264, 7mm Rem, or 338. Also the 308 and 358 Norma would have been unlikely to be introduced.

Considering that Winchester procured Chas. Newton’s patents and intellectual rights it would have been restricted to their branding unless repurchased by another brand.

Personally I believe the 30 Newton, the 33 Newton (.338 caliber), the 35 Newton, and the 40 Newton would have eliminated virtually the entire line of Winchester’s 2.5” belted magnum cartridges. And, by the time Winchester introduced their 2.5” belted magnums the powders available to the manufactures had progressed to the point that a .264 Newton using the 30 Newton case would have been doable (not so overbore).

And the Newton case (along with the Ruger case) is usable in .458 caliber, so I agree – had Winchester adopted the Newton cartridges, or slightly tweaked the dimensions for the Winchester name, I do believe both the .300/.375 H&H Magnum cartridges likely would have fallen by the wayside. And I agree the .308/.358 Norma Magnums capacity wise closely mirror the Newton cartridges so they likely would not have been produced. Oh well, didn’t happen.

quote:

I tried sizing a 375 Ruger case and while it appears to be do-able, there is a certain amount of difficulty. The main problem is a tendency for the shoulder to dent (severely). This may well be mostly due to the lack of a vent hole on the C-H FL sizer I have. I see the same problem when forming 256 Newton from 270 or 30/06 brass. Air is trapped as the neck diameter is reduced and the shoulder diameter also reduced.

Does C-H offer FLR die with a vent hole? Or can yours perhaps be modified by a qualified machinist?

Just thought - I presume you have a two die set. If so can you pull the decapper pin from the FLR die? Would that give you the pressure vent you need for the initial case forming?

If not, can you order a case forming die from CH with a proper vent to eliminate your problem? I do notice that CH does offer a 30 Newton forming die.

Just some food for thought, what about the new 300 Norma??

BD

quote:

Originally posted by bigdog:
Just some food for thought, what about the new 300 Norma??

BD

An improved 2.49" case length with 338 Lapua Magnum rim and groove specifications (slightly different rim thickness and groove diameter than 416 Rigby specifications) and designed for high pressure loadings. Great for long aerodynamic monometals...

What's not to like? I guess unless you compare it to the 338 Norma Magnum.

Gents

I got Dave Manson to make me a reamer that uses the 338 RUM case but has a 300 WSM shoulder width, angle and neck

I actually use my 300 WSM die (set longer) to neck sick size the brass, the neck needs to be trimmed back to a length of .300 thou

After you fire the brass it blows out the RUM taper (the WSM case is wider at the shoulder than the RUM), also giving it a 35 deg shoulder and basically the capacity of the longer 300 RUM in a slightly shorter case

it should just about fit in a standard action, I did it to allow 300 RUM users to be able to use long long bullets with a simple set back and rechamber

reg S&F

S&F,

Good to know. Could you post the reamer print just in case anyone stateside wanted to duplicate your efforts? Also, what is your 'name' for the cartridge?

Thanks,

Seems to me that an 8mm Rem mag would fill the bill. Many, including Craig Boddington, consider it the, as near to perfect as you can get, elk rifle. A 30/06 though is hard to beat as an elk rifle and it won't knock you out from under your hat. I don't understand the big hang up with the belt. I've shot belted mags all my life and they have not been a problem if properly reloaded by headspacing off of the shoulder.

300 Norma (not 308 Norma) would work.

But honestly the 300 RUM is just about perfect, and it's not overbore.

quote:

and it's not overbore

I would have a hard time saying it wasn't overbore.