338 Norma Magnum

Re: 338 Norma Magnum

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 1SMALLJOHNSON</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As for the ups and downs, some folks would conjecture harmonic movement.</div></div>

Or you forgot how to breath properly.... LOL!!! I think Momma should should a string or two. She was a shooter wasn't she???
 
Re: 338 Norma Magnum

b-stard. Don't bring the old lady up unless you intend to challenge HER. Wouldn't be fair, the last thing she shot was the 50, and that was about 3 years ago. Gotta get her out to the range sometime. Darn kids keep getting in the way. By the way, Momma's looking over my shoulder. Better watch what you say! She say's she's gonna school you on the 24 at 500...in wind...and Florida mirage....oooooohhhhh!!!!
 
Re: 338 Norma Magnum

Pauley,
Negative, negative. 4 shots in 3/4 inch @ 400. The rest of the shots were in the neighbourhood, but nowhere near 3/4 inch. The neat part was the variation in charge weight to shoot ~ 3 inches vertical @ 400, and the variation in charge weight to shoot 3/4 inch at 400. Granted, I was not shooting at 1k, but for those folks who weigh their charge weights to the 0.1 grain every time, seems this cartridge might not be for them. This one seems more like a "dump it and forget it" kind of guy's gun. Hell with weighing and all the time that goes with it. Just dump the charge, stick a bullet on top and head to the range!
 
Re: 338 Norma Magnum

LOL little Johnson.

Another question for you please. Why US 869?

I was wondering about slower powders such as Retumbo (vs RL22 and RSM), but it has been suggested that might not be optimal, but I believe US 869 is even slower than Retumbo.

Thanks!
 
Re: 338 Norma Magnum

Seems everybody is asking about "why" on the 869. My answer is "I just wanted to try it". I had it lying around for other calibers, and know it to work well in the 7mm Rem Mag. I also wanted to pump up the loading density, and knew 869 "should" be able to get me there.

I've got theories about accuracy and powder, just like everybody else. My theory goes that IF the powder is too slow, yet ignites consistently, likely it will produce similar muzzle exit times and velocities. If muzzle exit time and consistent velocity are a factor in accuracy, then the powder should group well. Now, we're not talking about wind-bucking ability and high velocities, we're merely talking about consistent velocity.

I'll have velocity numbers shortly. That average and the velocity range should tell me if there "might" be a correlation between consistent velocity and accuracy at nominal distances. I ain't talking about 1k at this point, merely short range. In this cartridge, I'd venture a guess of "short range" being less than 500 yards.
 
Re: 338 Norma Magnum

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 1SMALLJOHNSON</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> In this cartridge, I'd venture a guess of "short range" being less than 500 yards. </div></div>

Consecutive head shots on a Salute target at 1500 last summer.
F'N outstanding.
 
Re: 338 Norma Magnum

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 1SMALLJOHNSON</div><div class="ubbcode-body">All,
Got new dies in, they're pretty as a picture. Now got to get in the darn bushing I forgot to order earlier. As for powder, things are looking good. I'm keeping you in mind.

</div></div>

what brand of dies are available? Who is stocking them?
 
Re: 338 Norma Magnum

My brass arrived today!
grin.gif


Now if I can get my poop together, I will go see CoryT in April and see what this sucker will do.
 
Re: 338 Norma Magnum

US 869, tested in my .338 Norma.

100 grains even.

300 grain SMK

Velocity: 2710 fps, measured about 15 feet from the muzzle.

Velocity SD for 20 rounds: 9

Extreme variation for 20 rounds: 24 fps

Absolutely no signs of pressure, the necks were even still a little smoked.
 
Re: 338 Norma Magnum

V-Ref,

Yes, you can expect to see loaded ammo from Corbon.
May even see some more load houses offering this when the Norma becomes the standard. IMHO
P2080027.jpg

I absolutely love every shot this one makes. (my version of a good black and tan)
 
Re: 338 Norma Magnum

Scott,

Could you provide the basic build specs on your rifle? And smith?

Did the action fit in the standard AICS 2.0 without any mods?

I have a Surgeon XL action and a couple of .338 Rock blanks that I was going to use for a build, but I guess the AICS stock is out for that action.

Scott Nye
 
Re: 338 Norma Magnum

Hey Scott, good to hear from you.

The rifle in the picture has a Remington long action, easily strong enough for the 67,000 psi load. It either shoots a Brux or Rock barrel in 9.3-9.4" twist. Bolt is one of Dave Kiff's PTG beauties.
The original configuration was a .338Lapua Magnum (never to return).
I sent it off to Mike's Gun Sales in Aransas Pass Texas for the retrofit.
Mike Brown regardless of all the drama about his suppressors did one hell of a job with a seriously quick turnaround.
It shoots way sub MOA out to 1500 so far.
The .338 NM was designed to fit straight into a .338 LM rifle with a small barrel set back and re-chamber job. It did just that.
As for the AICS stock system it was a perfect fit considering that the .338NM is loaded to 3.602 for mag length and optimum performance while the v-block of the AI is well suited for holding this in place.
So to answer your question:
The .338 Norma Magnum will fit the AICS actions and stocks with no mods. It was designed that way by Mr. Sloan several years ago.
The mods required are a good 9.3 to 9.4 twist barrel and a chamber job.
Add the SAS .338 "Phoenix" suppressor and you can shoot with no hearing protection with a 37db. measured sound reduction.

Thanks,
 
Re: 338 Norma Magnum

Given that Accuracy International, Remington, and a few others are making 3.8' and 3.9" OAL Magazines for their new rifles. And Seekins Making one for customs. It seems the problem with the Lapua is going away. While Ill agree that the 338 Norma definatly meets the current 338 Lapua. A Lapua loaded to 3.8 with a 300 grainer in place will dominate this cartridge. With VV N560 and the 300gr at 3.800 you can get 3000 fps without problems in a 28" barrel.

Ill admit that I have only shot a few rounds through the 338 Norma and and by no means up to speed on what it is currently doing but Phyisics rule in every comparison.
 
Re: 338 Norma Magnum

I don't have a rifle chambered in either .338 LM or .338 NM so I really don't have a dog in this fight, I'm just curious at this point.

Based on the pictures I've seen comparing the two rounds it looks as if the Norma gets the bullet up out of the powder column. And from everything I've been told that's a good thing and helps with accuracy. So, whether the 300 grain bullet is going 2700+fps or 3000 fps, with a difference of roughly 300 ft/lbs at 1500 yards, what is the difference in accuracy? If I'm shooting at a man-sized target out at 1500 yards, depending on which round I'm using, am I gonna hit him in the boiler room or am I gonna just manage to shoot his dick off?

To put it in simpler, and less crude terms, which round is going to be the most accurate out to the limits of its range. And which one am I gonna want to take home with me at the end of the dance?

jc
 
Re: 338 Norma Magnum

Did I read George's post correctly? Accuracy International's new mags will be 3.8" instead of the old 3.6"? If so when will they be available. Honestly the size limit of the mag was holding me back from a Surgeon XL. Especially when you consider the length of the .338 Bergers.
 
Re: 338 Norma Magnum

Not wanting to fight or argue but I was wondering from 10XRIFLE remember that you said physics rule. This being said there is know way possible to run a 300 grainer out of a 338 Lapua at 3000 Ftps in a 28" barrel with out going into over pressure. If you are loading things this way I would suggest a pressure trace system. According to my cal.Max allowable pressure for the 338 Lapua is 68168 psi and if you load 91.8gr of VV N560 you will be around 2999 ftps with only about 89656 psi (ouch that might hurt).
Best of luck with that load and GOD bless,
SISO, I was wondering, what 338 Bergers are you shooting and where did you find them? I talked to Eric the other day and he told me they didn't have any out yet.
Just me thinking,
 
Re: 338 Norma Magnum

macssubmoa,

You are correct the .338 Bergers are not out yet, and I don't have any of them. Eric had posted the proposed length of them over on longrangehunting.com. If I remember correctly they were about .2" longer then the 300gr SMK's.
 
Re: 338 Norma Magnum

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: macssubmoa</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> This being said there is know way possible to run a 300 grainer out of a 338 Lapua at 3000 Ftps in a 28" barrel with out going into over pressure. If you are loading things this way I would suggest a pressure trace system. According to my cal.Max allowable pressure for the 338 Lapua is 68168 psi and if you load 91.8gr of VV N560 you will be around 2999 ftps with only about 89656 psi (ouch that might hurt).
</div></div>

Is that waht Quickload says???

It depends on way more info than Quickload will figure. Bore & Groove size. Rifling type. Coatings on the bullet. Freebore and Throat length. I have shot hundreds of loads at 3000 FPS. And while I will agree , Im sure the Pressure is outside SAMMI its not dangerous as the brass is all reloadable.
 
Re: 338 Norma Magnum

Yes that is what quick load says and also what my pressure trace says or very close to. I think that if you owned the equipment than it would scare the hell out of ya, maybe I'm just inlove with my life or something strange like that.
Best of luck and GOD bless,
 
Re: 338 Norma Magnum

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: A10XRIFLE</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It depends on way more info than Quickload will figure. Bore & Groove size. Rifling type. Coatings on the bullet. Freebore and Throat length. I have shot hundreds of loads at 3000 FPS. And while I will agree , Im sure the Pressure is outside SAMMI its not dangerous as the brass is all reloadable. </div></div>

eventually, the piper is going to come knocking, and it may be a steep price...
 
Re: 338 Norma Magnum

Greetings to all:

I have been monitoring this thread for a long time, but this will be my first posting. I was monitoring because I had plans to build a long range hunting rifle and news of a new cartridge interested me. I wanted to get things as right as possible before setting them into motion because the total expense of the project places it squarely in the "once in a lifetime" category for me. I have now gathered enough information that I thought it might be of value to some who also follow the thread if I share my findings, decisions, and how I arrived at them.

After watching how frequently people reply to postings from others with questions about what equipment and components they were using for their rifles, I thought I would start with that up front and then get back to how I arrived at this point. So here is where I am:

Action: Stiller TAC338 (I am left handed, actions is on order)

Trigger: Jewell HVRTLS (I will do the install)

Bottom metal/magazine: Seekins Precision

Picatinney rail: Seekins Precision (30 moa offset)

Scope rings: Seekins Precision (4 screw, 34mm, high)

Scope: Precision Heritage 5-25x56

Scope accessories: mil-spec Angle Degree Indicator/Badger Ordnance Gen I or Gen II mount; Anti-Cant Device (34mm, black)

Stock: Manners Composite Stocks MCS-T4 (incl. 90% carbon fiber option & (2) flush cups w/swivels; black; I will do Marinetex bedding)

Stock accessories: Seekins Precision Sling Rail System; Rock Creek Bipod

Barrel: Bartlein stainless steel (28.00 finished length; 1.35 dia @ receiver face; 0.900 dia @ muzzle; 5R rifling; fluted)

Barrel accessories: I have not yet decided whether to include a muzzle brake, or which it might be. If I do, I would have it removable/replacable with a sleeve to protect the barrel threads. Essentially, I do not like brakes because of the noise issue, but recoil may change my mind.

Selection of the components of the rifle was based upon prior experience, combined with a careful review of the available information of the current marketplace for components that might be found on this type of rifle.

So, on to the .338 Norma. Early posts to the thread reflected a lot of confusion re. whether the cartridge existed, what the case looked like, why it may have been designed, etc. . . . all based upon a general lack of hard information available to most people at that time. There were also a number of posts that had erroneous information that probably mislead some who read them. For instance, the case was based upon a Dakota (probably the .330), the advantage of the .338 Norma was that it could be set up in a standard length action, etc.

Pictures gradually began to be seen on the thread, and the first one that cleared up a lot of prior mis-information was posted by JustRoy on 7/21/08 @ 8:13PM. It showed loaded rounds of a .338 Lapua and .338 Norma side-by-side, of essentially identical length. It was becoming clear that the reason for the .338 Norma was to allow the use of the long 300 grain bullets, without the necessity of seating them deep into the powder space of the case because of limitations on COAL imposed by available magazines.

There was a lot of discussion about the Norma case design possibly having as much as 20% less volume than the Lapua, so how could it hope to provide anywhere near the same performance, regardless of where the bullet was seated? By now, many of you who read this will have had these questions answered in your own minds, but others may still be wondering about the details. So here is the summary of what I found:

1. Both the Norma and the Lapua are based upon the .416 Rigby case and have essentially identical case heads.

2. The Norma is not simply a shortened and "improved" Lapua, in the sense of an Ackley version of a case. The body of the Norma case is straighter (less taper) than the Lapua. It is 0.222 shorter than the Lapua, but its neck is slightly longer (0.354 vs 0.327). Unlike indicated in some earlier posts, the Norma shoulder is steeper, but just barely (20.5 deg per side vs 20 deg per side for the Lapua).

3. The primary advantages of the Norma would seem to be a shorter powder column (claimed to have higher efficiency), and the ability to seat very long bullets farther forward where they do not encroach on the powder space of the case.

4. But what about actual effective case volume? This one takes a bit of explanation. QuickLoad lists the case volume to overflowing for the Lapua as 108.0 grains of water. I just took a never fired Lapua case, stuffed the primer pocket with modeling clay, and weighed it to the nearest 0.001 gram (21.854 grams). Then I filled it with water to the lip of the neck and re-weighed it. (29.101 grams) The difference of 7.247 grams is the water, and that converts to 111.84 grains. Note that this was a Norma brand .338 Lapua case. I don't know what brand of case was referenced by QuickLoad. I don't have an empty .338 Norma case to weigh with and without water to find true volume (possibly another reader can provide that information?).

For the sake of our comparison we can pretty much eliminate the need to weigh both cases for the time being if we make a couple of reasonable assumptions: A. Both the .338 Lapua case I weighed, and all .338 Norma cases are made Norma. B. We can assume that the structure of both cases as made by Norma are similar (thickness of the web in the case head, thickness and taper of the sides of the cases, etc.) If we make that assumption for the sake of comparison, we can simply compare the volumes calculated for the outside dimensions of the two cases, correct those values by subtracting the volume of the bullet shank seated in each case, and by correcting the volume of brass due to the shorter body of the Norma case.

Without going through the calculations here, I can say that if both the .338 Lapua and the .338 Norma have bullets seated to a 3.65 COAL (max. for a current AICS magazine), the volume difference would be 0.89 grains of water (Lapua larger). In other words, the effective volumes are the same!

There is now, however, another factor brought into the situation that provides something additional to consider: magazines that handle longer cartridges are becoming available. I have heard that AICS has mags coming that go out to 3.800. Wyatt mags have the same inside dimension. Glen Seekins told me that his magazines are 3.94 inside, so a COAL of 3.90 gives sufficient space for good feeding.

With that in mind, we can go back to the posts in the thread that ask, "if longer mags are becoming available, then the limitation of needing to stuff long bullets too deep into a .338 Lapua case is no longer an issue. So now what is the advantage of the .338 Norma?" Now I needed to look at some more details.

One of the stated advantages of the Norma is the fact that it was designed to be used to best advantage with the very long 300 grain bullets. There are currently two bullets available that fit that description (Sierra MK and Lapua Scenar), and there will very shortly be another (Berger VLD). It is the "not-quite-yet-available" Berger that has my attention. The VLD designs have several notable points: 1. They are extremely efficient performers to very long ranges. 2. The bullets are very long for their caliber, and 3. They have a reputation for a particular sensitivity to being seated at just the right distance off of the rifling to provide their best performance. That meant that if I hoped to use the 300 grain VLD Bergers in my new rifle, I would likely need to have a reamer cut with a throat specifically designed for them. And information directly from Bryan Litz at Berger confirmed that a chamber so cut could not be expected to be usable with a 250 grain VLD, which means that one needs to know what one wants before it is purchased! Now, you will hear some say that although the 300 grain bullets perform better ballistically, a 250 grain bullet is faster and has essentially identical total drop to 1,000 yards. However, in these days of laser rangefinders that can quickly tell you ranges at 1,000 yards within 1 yard (!) identical total drop is a much less important issue than wind drift. Wind remains the most difficult factor to quantify, as well as the factor subject to variability in real time. And bullets with higher ballistic efficiency are effected least by wind. Thus, 300 grain bullets, with their higher efficiencies, are the definite choice over the 250's.

In my discussions with Bryan Litz, he also indicated that the best location for bullet seating would be expected to be found in the range from 0.000 (touching) to 0.100 off of the rifling. He also indicated that if I designed the throat of the reamer such that the ogive of a 300 grain VLD bullet just touched the rifling when the heel of the bullet was 0.100 ahead of the base of the neck, I would then have the ability to move it back as much as 0.100 in testing for the most accurate seating location and still not have anything but the boat tail encroaching into the powder space. If that is done, the COAL for that bullet seated to touch rifling in a .338 Norma case would be 3.894. However, in the Lapua, even if I seat the bullet to use the full available 3.900 COAL of the Seekins magazine, the full boat tail and 0.097 of the bearing surface will protrude into the case. In this scenario, the volume advantage of the Lapua (calculated in the same manner as previously) actually increases to 2.06 grains . . . still not very much.

So what did I learn from this? If I accept that the shorter powder column of the Norma is more efficient as claimed, the small difference in effective volume between the two cartridges may be a wash, giving equivalent performance between the Norma and Lapua. Powder charges for either should vary by amounts no larger than the differences in their case volumes. Recoil? I'm sure I couldn't feel any difference (both hit hard). Accuracy? I can't say with certainty, but I seem to have read somewhere that the Lapua is also pretty freakin' accurate, eh?

The single confounding factor in this is the statement that the great performance of the Norma was due in part to factory loads being stuffed with a powder that is not available to the general public. This would seem to be a situation similar to that of the 6.5 Creedmoor. My assignment of value of this revelation is "LESS THAN ZERO". Any cartridge that needs to use proprietary powder in order to achieve its highly claimed performance is suddenly of decreased interest to me. Would I use factory loaded .338 Norma? Well, let's see, is it available with the 300 grain Berger VLD bullet? Would the bullets be seated at the most accurate depth for my particular rifle? Does it cost the same as handloaded ammunition? The answer to those, and other similar questions is of course, NO! Those are some of the significant advantages prized by handloaders. In rifles of this category and performance level, I would venture to say that, outside of military and LE users, few others rely on factory ammunition.

And, here's my final tie breaker: Always, in all of my reading, research, and personal experience, I have found nearly unanimous preference for Lapua brass over Norma. Beyond numerous quality issues, this is particularly significant to me when I factor in the predicted number of times it can be reloaded before needing to be replaced. So, with the availability of long magazines, the minimal expected differences between the .338's Lapua and Norma from a performance perspective, and the significantly better reputation of Lapua brass, my rifle is "currently" scheduled to be a .338 Lapua. Of course, since I do still have a little time before I need to order a reamer, I could still "potentially" change my mind. I just wish that someone could provide accurate measured information on the true full to overflowing case volume for the .338 Norma, as well as confirmation that the Norma brass can be loaded 15 or more times before replacement. I suppose if I go ahead with the Lapua and am later proven wrong, I can always have the next barrel on my rifle chambered in .338 Norma. But then, how far wrong could I be . . . at 1,000 yards or more?

Just my take on things.
 
Re: 338 Norma Magnum

You can get the answers to your questions from a gentleman named Mr. Jimmy Sloan.Mr. Sloan is a cartridge designer that came up with the 338 Norma. The 338 Lapua was awsome in its day as was the 300 H@H but times change and so does info and tech. Choose wisely my friend. Get ahold of Mr. Sloan,known as Have None
GOD bless,
Macs
 
Re: 338 Norma Magnum

Muffcook,
Your information seems adequate, though incomplete. I'll leave it up to Jimmy to add comment. Regarding the "special powder": The two calibers are on par for "special powder", thus "off the shelf" powders are likewise on par with each other. Basically, the statement is: If you want to hand load for another 150-200 fps over "off the shelf" powders, you won't be able to do it with either caliber. So, that argument is null and void. If the canister guys want to start carrying der vonderpowder, that's their call, not mine. They'll sell what the market will bear.
What you're missing has got to do with the way the two cartridges fit in the chamber. I'll leave it at that, as I'm not the expert in that field. Further, if you do a powder to velocity comparison, you'll find that you can do the same in the Norma, with less powder. What does that mean? It means you're spitting extra powder out the end of your tube. If you want to fertilize the lawn at the range, then the extra powder may be of advantage. I"m not bashing the Lapua. It does a job, but some have found improvements to the round.
Seems to me, you can put a Norma together on any old long action. If you (as I did) put a Lapua together off the same long action, better bring your lunch. You've got some homework to do... The darn Norma just seems to shoot, no questions asked.
 
Re: 338 Norma Magnum

Since my last post I have considerably received more input that details the differences between the Lapua and the Norma .338's, including the way in which those differences influence the performance of the newer round. I will not go any further into those details at this point, but the option I previously left open returning to the Norma . . . has been taken. All of my concerns have been answered.

muffcook
 
Re: 338 Norma Magnum

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: macssubmoa</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Not wanting to fight or argue but I was wondering from 10XRIFLE remember that you said physics rule. This being said there is know way possible to run a 300 grainer out of a 338 Lapua at 3000 Ftps in a 28" barrel with out going into over pressure. If you are loading things this way I would suggest a pressure trace system. According to my cal.Max allowable pressure for the 338 Lapua is 68168 psi and if you load 91.8gr of VV N560 you will be around 2999 ftps with only about 89656 psi (ouch that might hurt).
Best of luck with that load and GOD bless,
SISO, I was wondering, what 338 Bergers are you shooting and where did you find them? I talked to Eric the other day and he told me they didn't have any out yet.
Just me thinking, </div></div>

Just checked it........the international standart (CIP) gives a max allowed pressure of 4200 bar= 60916psi for the .338LM
The 4700bar=68168psi was long long ago when the 338 was in it´s first steps of design at Lapua. There are only 2 Rounds out there with a max allowed pressure of 68168 psi. The 7mm KM and the 7,62UKM.

Best
2RECON

Edit: And a 9,5TORNADO (375"-.338LM ) also 68168psi.....sorry
 
Re: 338 Norma Magnum

I have now e-mailed Have None as my build is on a suregon and scheduled to be a .338 LM however I am assuming my suregoen action will be for the old style mags and not the CIP rated ones. If this is the case and I can get some correctly head stamped brass in to our "anti gun welfare republic of Australia :D" then I might swing to the .338 Norma.................338 LM is reletavily easy in Australia as we can get brass etc. But Have none is sayiong that it can be made from .338 LM at any rate.

I suppose I can ask that my bottom metal be swapped over and get a CIP mag for my suregeon action ? Is thats all that required or do you need action work as well ?
 
Re: 338 Norma Magnum

I've read with interest all the information on the 338 in this thread, and found very little about its big and small brother anywhere. But now:
http://www.blaser.de/Blaser-Magnum.1294.0.html?&L=1&tx_jppageteaser_pi1

It seems in a few months we'll know more. Or perhaps someone here will inform us earlier :)

The 7mm was not in Norma's catalog teaser picture. Must be rather speedy if it's the same case and length?

 
Re: 338 Norma Magnum

I have a .30-338 Norma dummy round Jimmy Sloan gave me at the Shot Show, measured right now it looks to be about .120 shorter than the .338 Norma, shoulder angle looks to be the same. Over all cartridge length not sure what bullet is in the case is 3.365 case length is 2.370 and the .338 case is 2.490

Paul
 
Re: 338 Norma Magnum

The rifle was built by Mike's Gun Sales (Jett Suppressors)and has a brake and 20 minute base made by Mike's. I have some rounds loaded and ready to go when the scope comes in.