358 norma

Longwalker said:
Putting a very short barrel on a rifle that uses a cartridge designed to burn a lot of powder in a relatively small bore seems quite counterproductive. Pretty sure the .358 Norma was designed for barrel lengths of 24-26". A .350 Rem Mag would have a better ratio of case capacity to bore size for use in short barrel rifles. If you don't mind a LOT of muzzle blast, and velocities not much more than can be achieved with the .35 Whelen or .350 Mag, a .358 Norma would certainly kill big critters effectively when fired from a 20" barrel. But it seems like a mismatch to me.
Click to expand...

I agree :) good call.
 
m1978 said:
Was curious how the recoil of the 358 Norma was? Anyone here use one?
Click to expand...

Fired my buddies 3 times in a row. Will not forget and I'm a big guy. First was "ok - that's more than I expected"; second, "wow - some punch there"; third, "well I'm feeling like that's enough". Oh, and it shook me enough that my dominant eye (right) felt loose after the experience. I know, "loose eye"?, not the best descriptor but it felt jellied and no it wasn't a scope kiss.
 
I hunted probably about 15 to 20 years with a Schultz & Larsen in 358 Norma as my main rifle. Killed a semi trailer load of game with it - both species of deer, moose, and bear. Absolutely loved the gun because every animal I shot with it was a one shot bang-flop. Helps that the gun was very accurate (most Schultzs are) and would hold 5 shot groups at 100 yds. at right around 1/2" with Norma factory ammo. The recoil did not bother me at all, even off the bench. Mind you I play with calibers like 460 Wthby, 416 Rigby, and 378 Wthby at the range. I also had a factory produced Sako Fiberclass in 458 Win that weighed under 8 lbs scoped. That one gave me a few good bruises on my shoulder.

I never could understand why so many guys are afraid of recoil. It is not that hard to train yourself to ignore it. I cannot ever remember having felt recoil when shooting at game. Find yourself a few copies of the old Weatherby Guide they used to publish annually. In the back of the catalogue they feature hunting photos. Lots of pictures of ladies who wouldn't weigh a buck twenty soaking wet, standing on the dead elephant they just killed with a 460 Weatherby. My take was that if those smaller women could handle a big gun, then I damn sure could learn to also. Now I am a big guy - 6'6" and weigh about 290, but consider this - recoil punishes a big guy more than a small one because of inertia. I have absorbed more of the recoil before my shoulder starts moving back than a smaller man will before his shoulder starts moving.
 
It's all about stock design. My favourite Norma is a Varberger with a very straight stock and a lovely palm swell. Recoils straight back and not bad to shoot at all even from prone. Also MOA capable and feeds empties from the cool little rotary magazine. Some of the Huskies have a fair drop at comb and the upwards movement of the stock into your cheek accentuates recoil.
 
Longwalker said:
Putting a very short barrel on a rifle that uses a cartridge designed to burn a lot of powder in a relatively small bore seems quite counterproductive. Pretty sure the .358 Norma was designed for barrel lengths of 24-26". A .350 Rem Mag would have a better ratio of case capacity to bore size for use in short barrel rifles. If you don't mind a LOT of muzzle blast, and velocities not much more than can be achieved with the .35 Whelen or .350 Mag, a .358 Norma would certainly kill big critters effectively when fired from a 20" barrel. But it seems like a mismatch to me.
Click to expand...

Johnn Peterson said:
I agree :) good call.
Click to expand...

i disagree on that one. if you look the 375 ruger with the same kind of cartridge is really efficient with short barrel. the 9.3x62 on the non magnum cartridge is also a very good example.

i d like to see if someone tried the rl15 or varget in the 356 norma ...
 
daddylonglegs said:
I hunted probably about 15 to 20 years with a Schultz & Larsen in 358 Norma as my main rifle. Killed a semi trailer load of game with it - both species of deer, moose, and bear. Absolutely loved the gun because every animal I shot with it was a one shot bang-flop. Helps that the gun was very accurate (most Schultzs are) and would hold 5 shot groups at 100 yds. at right around 1/2" with Norma factory ammo. The recoil did not bother me at all, even off the bench. Mind you I play with calibers like 460 Wthby, 416 Rigby, and 378 Wthby at the range. I also had a factory produced Sako Fiberclass in 458 Win that weighed under 8 lbs scoped. That one gave me a few good bruises on my shoulder.

I never could understand why so many guys are afraid of recoil. It is not that hard to train yourself to ignore it. I cannot ever remember having felt recoil when shooting at game. Find yourself a few copies of the old Weatherby Guide they used to publish annually. In the back of the catalogue they feature hunting photos. Lots of pictures of ladies who wouldn't weigh a buck twenty soaking wet, standing on the dead elephant they just killed with a 460 Weatherby. My take was that if those smaller women could handle a big gun, then I damn sure could learn to also. Now I am a big guy - 6'6" and weigh about 290, but consider this - recoil punishes a big guy more than a small one because of inertia. I have absorbed more of the recoil before my shoulder starts moving back than a smaller man will before his shoulder starts moving.
Click to expand...

:)No disagreement with your assessment on the quality and accuracy of the Schultz & Larsen rifles. Shortly after I acquired my first, a model 65DL in 308 NM, an old European gunsmith in the B.C. interior, informed me the accuracy was the result of top line workmanship and the quality of the barrels used. It's proven itself on a 'number' of Moose and a few Mule Deer. The only field use my 7x61 S&H, a model 68DL as is my 358 NM, has had is an Antelope hunt on draw in AB with my Daughter and Son In Law.
I see what you're saying on the question of the effects of recoil and its punishment of a large person VS a small person. ;)'Some' question there from an instance way back when I had my first 308 NM, a Super Safari model Parker Hale. I was out with a school mate doing some pre Moose season shooting from a rest and he asked if he could take a shot. Brutal!!:(:( He SCOPED himself, a vicious cut over his right eye to the point where it also broke the rear scope mount. Over the years, I've seen a few of those injuries, but none ever that bad.
 
medvedqc said:
i disagree on that one. if you look the 375 ruger with the same kind of cartridge is really efficient with short barrel. the 9.3x62 on the non magnum cartridge is also a very good example.

i d like to see if someone tried the rl15 or varget in the 356 norma ...
Click to expand...

And there's the difference maker, especially where velocity performance is the objective or 'measuring stick'. That being said, ;)and for what ever reason, while two powders are easily able to obtain the same velocity, one powder choice will 'often' provide a better level of accuracy using the same bullet choice, than the other. In many instances, IMR 4350 is a go to for me. Going with your reference to the 9.3x62 and :redface: I'm going to throw cold water on my choice of IMR 4350 as an accuracy powder. With my very limited reloading for and use of the 9.3, IMR 4320 and IMR 4064 with the 285gr PRVI, the results have been EXCEPTIONAL!! Considering the 375 Ruger, having a 375 H&H and a custom 375 Chatfield Taylor, the Ruger 'chambering' isn't on my list to acquire.
 
By this reasoning if you want a short barrelled med bore the optimal cartridge is a 357 magnum, built for a 4 inch barrel! Maybe a 38 special, just to avoid any possibility of going over bore.

In my experience with similar cartridges (9.3x62, 338 WM) a 20 inch barrel does not bleed that much velocity, certainly still kicking the 35 whelens ass in the case of the 338.

I like a 20 inch barrel, good middle ground for a handy gun. As always YMMV


I think it’s a neat gun, wouldn’t be my first choice of styling but cool to see
 
There is a significant difference in the relative bore size vs case capacity in the 9.3x62 and the .358 Norma. Check the relative burning rates of powder recommended for each of them. I agree that the 9.3x62 doesn't suffer much from a very short 20" barrel. If you choose to shoot a short barrelled .358 Norma or .338WM knock yourself out, just don't expect to enjoy all the performance that the cartridge is truly capable of. It will still kill game. Some of the muzzle blast and velocity losses of a short barrel can be mitigated buy loading slightly faster burning powders. Everyone has their preferences. I prefer my sense of hearing to remain functional and my bullets to achieve the velocity the cartridge is normally capable of producing.
 
There is a book called Big Bore Rifles & Cartridges by Wolfe Publishing, a compendium of articles from Handloader magazine. Jon Sundra wrote the article on the .358 Norma. His rifle originally had a 24" barrel, and he had it cut to 22". He reports having a 35 fps loss of velocity total for 2-inches less barrel.
 
Longwalker said:
There is a significant difference in the relative bore size vs case capacity in the 9.3x62 and the .358 Norma. Check the relative burning rates of powder recommended for each of them. I agree that the 9.3x62 doesn't suffer much from a very short 20" barrel. If you choose to shoot a short barrelled .358 Norma or .338WM knock yourself out, just don't expect to enjoy all the performance that the cartridge is truly capable of. It will still kill game. Some of the muzzle blast and velocity losses of a short barrel can be mitigated buy loading slightly faster burning powders. Everyone has their preferences. I prefer my sense of hearing to remain functional and my bullets to achieve the velocity the cartridge is normally capable of producing.
Click to expand...

;)Well called:).
 
Longwalker said:
There is a significant difference in the relative bore size vs case capacity in the 9.3x62 and the .358 Norma. Check the relative burning rates of powder recommended for each of them. I agree that the 9.3x62 doesn't suffer much from a very short 20" barrel. If you choose to shoot a short barrelled .358 Norma or .338WM knock yourself out, just don't expect to enjoy all the performance that the cartridge is truly capable of. It will still kill game. Some of the muzzle blast and velocity losses of a short barrel can be mitigated buy loading slightly faster burning powders. Everyone has their preferences. I prefer my sense of hearing to remain functional and my bullets to achieve the velocity the cartridge is normally capable of producing.
Click to expand...

Apples to apples when both are loaded to their respective max SAAMI pressures (56k psi 9.3x62, 63k psi 358NM), data from Quickload

Average speed of top six fastest powders from 26" and 20" barrels :

358NM 250gr 26" barrel = 2809 fps, 20" barrel = 2651 fps (loss of 158 fps or 26 fps per inch)

9.3x62 250gr 26" barrel = 2668 fps, 20" barrel = 2518 fps (loss of 150 fps or 25 fps per inch)

The powders that gave the highest velocities in the longer barrel, did also give highest from the shorter barrel length
 
Or a necked up 338 Win Mag (fractionally shorter than the 358). You can also use a wide variety of cast loads for the 358, plus load 38/357 handgun bullets for plinking and small game pummeling.
 
:)One of my primary quests at gun shows these days is for components. With the 358 NM, as with most other calibres I have, my stock/supply is;) adequate +. With the 358 NM, I have also lucked into 'generous' quantity of Norma factory loads:d.
 
I missed some brass that Ted had on the EE :( I know I can make it from just about anything but I have headstamp ocd.
 
Slimbo said:
I missed some brass that Ted had on the EE :( I know I can make it from just about anything but I have headstamp ocd.
Click to expand...

:)The model 1651 Husqvarna in 358 NM I acquired was from Ted. I will form brass at as a last resort but my bottom line, if at all possible, is the real thing with headstamp. One of my few exceptions to the head stamp issue, is the 219 Donaldson Wasp. And these, I fire form from 30-30 brass.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom