I would think the short mag's would not use the same length box or there would be an awful lot of excess room in there, but the man himself would be the best source for the right answer!
Posts: 1148 | Location: The Hunting Fields | Registered: 22 May 2002
If by short magnums you mean the WSMs or the remington equivalents, I'm fairly confident that D'arcy doesn't chamber any rifles for these cartridges, at all.
I am talking short magnums, not squat magnums. My dad is short and I have an uncle that is squat and believe me there is a difference .
By short I mean 7mm rem mag, 338 win mag, 300 win mag etc vs. 375 H&H, 458 lott, 300wby etc. I guess a guy needs to be a little more specific these days about such things.
Chuck
Posts: 2659 | Location: Southwestern Alberta | Registered: 08 March 2003
Chuck it really depends on the action in use. I fabricate and fit what ever box is required for what ever caliber and action that is to be used. In my legends I use 2 boxes. One covers 7mm Remingtons to 458 Lotts and the other is for 300 and 375 H&H magnums. These legend boxes are all the same length. This would apply for the Pre-64, 98 or Rem 700. I have not made any boxes or followers for the newer WSM or Rem short magnums as we don't have any plans to build any rifles chambered for those calibers.
D'Arcy, we must be posting at the same time. Thanks for your reply. I'm specifically interested in knowing if a 300 win mag can be made to reliably feed out of a 375 H&H magnum length magazine box. It just seems to me that this 300 could benefit from a little more breathing room.
I'm waiting for a couple of Montana 1999 actions to defect to this cold country, and I am trying to decide the magazine box length I should order for the action I want to build a 300 win mag around.
Thanks again, Chuck
Posts: 2659 | Location: Southwestern Alberta | Registered: 08 March 2003
Chuck, That sneakey D'Arcy just knew I'd be reviewing the subjects and waiting for him to reply. He also knew that if he waited long enough I would dig out my hand held number cruncher and do the calculating. A mag box intended for the 300 Weatherbugger would be about 3.6 inches as opposed to the 3.4(+)"- '06, .338, .300 win mag length box. By formula the width should ideally be .914 wide at shoulder for the Win Mag and for the Weatherby at IT'S shoulder- .146 " further out- .921". That means that at the Win Mag shoiulder the width would be. 011 wider than called for. Floating shoulder. Smokestack rounds in feeding when not desired. Factories simply reshape the "W" spring to put more tension on the front of follower and this often works. Better medicine is to Tweak the box in some fashion that will hold form when box is fully loaded at the narrower width. I do have a concern. Let us say that you indeed order the MRC action with Wby. box and follow the advice. Loading a 200 gr base end to inside end of neck ,which is probably what you forsee doing, there is a lot of projectile hanging out the end of a very short neck. You might need a thin spacer at the rear end to prevent ctgs sliding ahead in recoil and bending the round. Probably not enough to prevent some heavy duty reforming on the run to chamber, but maybe enough not to anchor one of those damned Grizzle bears which if he makes it to this side of the fence will get immediate citizenship and rights well beyond what Saddam has in Iraq, a situation us red-neck residents don't like just a little bit!
Thanks Tom. I may be calling you, or better yet, I might just have to come pay you a visit. It will give me a good excuse to look at those lefty MRC actions in your neck of the woods. I've ordered two and haven't even seen them yet. Thats sad considering the fact that if I climbed on my roof with a good spotting scope I could almost see them being assembled and packaged ready for shipment.
Speaking of bears, I've got a friend that is about to pull all of his hair out expecting to draw a grizzly tag as this is being typed. The draw results are three weeks late! So any grizzly within cyber shot better start visiting relatives in Montana while the gettin is good.
Chuck
Posts: 2659 | Location: Southwestern Alberta | Registered: 08 March 2003
quote:Originally posted by D`Arcy Echols: I have not made any boxes or followers for the newer WSM or Rem short magnums as we don't have any plans to build any rifles chambered for those calibers.
I doubt any high class rifles will be built in those fad calibers. The WSM's are kind of like bell bottom pants and big bushy afros - destined for extinction.
The only folks who would spend any real money on those calibers would have to be either a woman who didn't know any better, some man not sure of his gender or a kid who believes gunwriters.
After all, those who are the source of all wisdom know that a 180gr Nosler doing 3,000 fps from a 300 WinMag or a 300 H&H or a 30-338 will kill animals but the same bullet at the same velocity from either a 300 WSM or 300 SAUM would no doubt simply bounce off a similar animal or worse yet just wound them horribly to die a lingering death.
Right!
Posts: 4360 | Location: Sunny Southern California | Registered: 22 May 2002
quote:Originally posted by D`Arcy Echols: I have not made any boxes or followers for the newer WSM or Rem short magnums as we don't have any plans to build any rifles chambered for those calibers.
Mr. Echols, I'm curious about the reasons for not doing so. Could you elaborate?
Thanks.
Posts: 2206 | Location: USA | Registered: 31 August 2002
KS I just see no need for any of the new "short magnums" with the vast variety of great "old magnums". All my clients to date have had arms that are long enough to allow them to cycle the bolt and are not concerned with having a rifle weigh 8 lbs or more. I have no feeding problems with belts, no problems with velosity or with accuracy that a new barrel could not solve, no problems with magazine box spec's. In short the only problems I have are being able to competently build our rifles in a reasonable amount of time for the consumer. Its was broke, I fixed it, next problem please.
DB, the short mags attempt to solve a problem that does not exist, and often have less powder capacity than the regular mags which they are supposed to be superior to. Further, personally I find short actions to be visually unattractive and I find that they do not balance as well as longer actions.
But if a guy wants to spend $20K on a stubby M700, at least it's good for the economy!
Posts: 18352 | Location: Salt Lake City, Utah USA | Registered: 20 April 2002
quote:Originally posted by D`Arcy Echols: KS I just see no need for any of the new "short magnums" with the vast variety of great "old magnums". All my clients to date have had arms that are long enough to allow them to cycle the bolt and are not concerned with having a rifle weigh 8 lbs or more. I have no feeding problems with belts, no problems with velosity or with accuracy that a new barrel could not solve, no problems with magazine box spec's. In short the only problems I have are being able to competently build our rifles in a reasonable amount of time for the consumer. Its was broke, I fixed it, next problem please.
What was the question???????????
Would you build one if requested to do so by a customer?
Posts: 2206 | Location: USA | Registered: 31 August 2002
This is a bit off the topic of Mr. Echols magazine box. However, I have to ask a retorical question.
As my handle implies, I like .30 cal. magnums. I have a good number of them including .300 Ultra, .300 Weatherby and .300 H&H. I like them each for different niches that they each fill.
Doesn't the .300 WSM intrigue some of you for the reason of cartrige resembles the .22/6 mm PPC and the inherent accuracy of same?
Just a thought.
Posts: 1323 | Location: San Antonio, Texas | Registered: 04 March 2003
30cal mag.fan- No, the WSMs and other super short designs offer no intrigue, interest or utility to me. As Darcy said, my arms are long enough to cycle a standard or magnum length action and those cartridges offer nothing in the way of velocity or accuracy gains over the magnums I have now. If I want less velocity or a shorter/lighter rifle then I pick up my 30/06 or 270. YMMV.
Posts: 1148 | Location: The Hunting Fields | Registered: 22 May 2002
I'm getting 285 fps more with my .270 WSM than with my .270 Win. You could say the 2" extra barrel helps the WSM, but I'm not shooting a max load I'm shooting an accurate load!
I read of people all the time ackley improving, wildcatting, and using 27-30" barrels to achieve less than a 200 fps gain...
I think as much as some people like to bad mouth them they are here to stay..
Mike
Posts: 324 | Location: GA, USA | Registered: 20 April 2002
I'm sometimes amazed that the short magnums (by short magnums I mean the old style short magnums about 2.5 inches long not the short fats)work as well as they do in some of the long magazines. There is a lot of room ahead of a 7mag in a Rem700 for instance. Strangely enough, in the push feed M70s, the cartridge that was frequently a bit of a problem was the 375H&H which fit the mag box pretty well. To me the short fats are the answer to a question nobody asked. Even if it was asked it was anwered back in the sixties by a number of wildcatters. I have built some 300WSM single shot target rifles. They shoot every bit as good as a 308 Norma or a 30/06! Regards, Bill.
quote:Originally posted by D`Arcy Echols: KS I just see no need for any of the new "short magnums" with the vast variety of great "old magnums". All my clients to date have had arms that are long enough to allow them to cycle the bolt and are not concerned with having a rifle weigh 8 lbs or more. I have no feeding problems with belts, no problems with velosity or with accuracy that a new barrel could not solve, no problems with magazine box spec's. In short the only problems I have are being able to competently build our rifles in a reasonable amount of time for the consumer. Its was broke, I fixed it, next problem please.
Since I am a customer and not a supplier my voice sounds louder and carries more weight. Of course if some individual builder is busy making something then fine.
This thread expresses where rifle size and utility matter to me.
quote:Originally posted by D`Arcy Echols: KS I just see no need for any of the new "short magnums" with the vast variety of great "old magnums". All my clients to date have had arms that are long enough to allow them to cycle the bolt and are not concerned with having a rifle weigh 8 lbs or more. I have no feeding problems with belts, no problems with velosity or with accuracy that a new barrel could not solve, no problems with magazine box spec's. In short the only problems I have are being able to competently build our rifles in a reasonable amount of time for the consumer. Its was broke, I fixed it, next problem please.
Since I am a customer and not a supplier my voice sounds louder and carries more weight. Of course if some individual builder is busy making something then fine.
This thread expresses where rifle size and utility matter to me.
When you put down a deposit then you become a customer.
Until then, you are a potential customer.
Keep in mind that custom gunmakers do not mass market to the guys who buy Remington 700's. They offer a very specialized product/service to a limited audience who both appreciates the product/service and has the ability to pay for it. It makes no sense to spend time and effort trying to satisfy potential customers who have neither the financial resources or the interest to become actual customers. That effort is much better spent making actual customers happy, and by all reports the actual customers of Mr. Echols shop are delighted with everything he produces.
Posts: 18352 | Location: Salt Lake City, Utah USA | Registered: 20 April 2002
The Wall Street Journal had an article last week IIRC commenting that the biz schools are teaching that in a cost-driven business environment you have to analyze your customers costs and benefits, and some customers you will want to pass on. It was an interesting read. The author also commented on how fast you should dump customers that ask for unethical practices.
jim dodd
Posts: 4166 | Location: San Diego, CA USA | Registered: 14 November 2001
I understand D'Arcy's stance on this subject. It is not wise to put ones name on something that you do not have complete confidence in. Even though there may be customers who would want a WSM, obviously his business does not need these customers to keep busy. He does not deserve any criticism for not offering a certain option. I personally think that there have been no significant improvements in rifles since the mauser 98, just refinements. Ian
Actually, the higher up one gets in the "master" division of gunmaking the less flexibility there is in what they are willing to do. They already have all the work they can handle in a reasonable amount of time, so trying to accomodate someone with ideas that don't fall in line with theirs usually doesn't get past a quick telephone visit. You must remember, they don't achieve "master" status until they have perfected something in their products that puts them apart from most others. It could be called their "signature" if you will. Alvin Biesen does ONE stock style and it is unmistakable to anyone who knows anything about his products. The part of it that sets it apart from anyone else's work is the comb nose treatment and it is like a flashing neon sign, instantly recognizable. His recessed checkering treatment is also without peer, as is the feel and pointability of their stocks. David Miller builds one style, either for open sights or scope, but not both on the same rifle. If you want detach mounts, go somewhere else. His handbuilt scope mounts could be his signature. Darcy has his style as well, and his magazine box and feeding accumen are unrivaled. They could be his "signature" work. And BTW, he doesn't do detach mounts either. What it boils down to is this. When you choose such a craftsman to build you a rifle you are chosing THEIR style and way of building a rifle. Just like buying a real H&H, Rigby or Purdey. They have spent years and years doing what they have come to be recognized as a master at doing, so they aren't going to do something radically different just to please you.
Posts: 1148 | Location: The Hunting Fields | Registered: 22 May 2002
It is pleasant to hear someone speak honestly and frankly about a subject. Mr. D'Arcy, thank you for your candor. It is my opinion as well that the short, fat, magnums are here primarily to assist the manufacturers in selling new rifles. The consensus is that these porky midgets give the owner increased velocity. So what does that mean? Certainly not accuracy, most rifles and pistols shoot more accurately at a load that is less than maximum. Why not take the same dollar amount and try and wring more accuracy out of the rifle(s) you have? Spend more time and dollars at the range becoming more proficient with your rifle(s). If haveing the latest and greatest is your bag then go for it. That's why you work so hard. As for me, I'm still trying to learn how to shoot the rifles I have.
Posts: 614 | Location: Miami, Florida USA | Registered: 02 March 2001
Well...My dream rifle would be one built by Mr. Echols, specifically a "Legend" in .338WM, but with a stainless action and barrel. Since I can't afford such a rifle for the time being, it will have to be a dream. Besides, the last time I heard, Mr. Echols doesn't work on Stainless steel rifles.
I imagine some of you have no idea on what types of rifles Mr. Echols works on, or you would not be asking such "WSM" cartridge questions.
Posts: 2448 | Location: Alaska | Registered: 25 May 2002
Through out this thread I have made an attempt to address the Short Mag question with humor but as usual my short direct answers have raised the haclkes on more than a few AR regulars.At this time there are many, many, many fine custom riflesmiths to fit everyones desires and needs. The cost for this labor is as variable as is the skill level. My talent, for what it's worth, fills a very small segment of this trade. I can only do but so much and try to stick to what I know best and interest me the most. This interest drives me to give my custumers the very best that I have to offer. When somebody calls my shop and asked me what I think about thier idea's, I tell them truely what I think. If what they desire is not within the framework of my skills or interest I give them the names of many other craftsmen that may be able to give them exactly what they desire. To do otherwise is foolish, pigheaded and a disservice to the customer and the trade. Learning to say NO to a request is just as important as learning to say Yes.
quote:Originally posted by Phantom Duck: The consensus is that these porky midgets give the owner increased velocity. So what does that mean? Certainly not accuracy, most rifles and pistols shoot more accurately at a load that is less than maximum.
Even if most may shoot most accurately at "less than maximum" (something I have not found to be true in several cartridges & powders), it's still "less than maximum" FOR THE SPECIFIC CARTRIDGE. I.e. even if a particular .300 WSM gets its most accurate load a bit below maximum, it still will be going faster than a .30-30.
So given that the .300 WSM basically gets the same velocities as a .300 H&H or .300 Win. Mag., even if you had one of each and cut the powder charge down to get a "most accurate" load, they still might well be on the same level.
Posts: 1246 | Location: Northern Virginia, USA | Registered: 02 June 2001
![[Smile]](images/icons/smile.gif){kind=icon}
. ![[Big Grin]](images/icons/grin.gif){kind=icon}
![[Wink]](images/icons/wink.gif){kind=icon}
![[Roll Eyes]](images/icons/rolleyes.gif){kind=icon}
