new-to-me head stamp

[Potashminer]

Some time ago, I had read that original Norma loadings for 7x61 Sharpe and Hart cartridge has headstamp with "Re" on it - as per Phil Sharpe's design, alleged to have thicker head and walls than "normal" - Remington came out with the 7mm Rem Mag -advertising (which Remington was MUCH better at than Norma) claimed the 7mm Rem Mag had more velocity that did Norma's 7x61 S&H - Norma tried to catch up - by that time, Phil Sharpe had passed away and no longer had input into the design of his "baby" - so Norma is alleged to have used different alloy of metal, thinner walls and thinner head - claimed to be just as strong as "old" stuff - exact same exterior size and pressure limits, but still came up a bit short of the 7 mm Rem Mag for velocity. Their improved case was head stamped as 7x61 Super.

Today I received a batch of 7x61 S&H brass - some new, some previously fired - and there is a third head stamp in there - all were made by Norma, but I do not know what that third one is about.



Maybe you can zoom in to see the case head stamp on the left one has "+" before the word "Norma" and a "Re" after that word. Middle case is the one I have not seen before - no "+", but has "Re", but also has a line dividing head stamp in half. Right one is the head stamp that I more commonly see - the 7x61 Norma "Super". I was hoping someone might be able to clarify for me what is the difference between the first two cases - why are the head stamps different, when both made by Norma?

 

['Boo]

I was hoping someone might be able to clarify for me what is the difference between the first two cases - why are the head stamps different, when both made by Norma?

They are both the same. just produced in different years. The "Super" brass is the larger capacity you noted.

A word of caution though never work up a load in the "Super" case and then use it in the "Re" cases without starting from scratch. The two types have significant internal volume differences.

Another note. The 7mm Rem Mag was not a "better" design it was only that the 7x61 S&H was a propriety cartridge found only in the expensive S&L rifles while the 7mm Rem Mag was introduced in the much less expensive Remington firearms.

 

[Potashminer]

Was that horizontal line done only on Norma Re 7x61 S&H? I have some 308 Norma Mag - they were all sold to me as made by Norma - a very few cases have ".308 Norma Magnum Re" as the head stamp - several hundred say ".308 Norma Magnum" (no "Re") I have not seen any of those with a line across their head stamp, but until today I had never seen any like that for 7x61 S&H Re either.

 

['Boo]

The "Re" lettering on some Norma cases supposedly indicates "Reloadable" as they were Boxer primed rather than Berdan-primed.

This practise was discontinued as time went on. The stamping dies get replaced as they wear out and quite often the design gets changed. One just has to look at other commercial brass such as Winchester and Remington to see that cartridge head stamping changes quite frequently.

The "Re" 7x61 S&H brass you have could be 50-60 years old and should be neck-annealed before loading as it is very possible that it has age-hardened over the years. The 7x61 Super brass is still in production by Norma although in very limited runs. The last "new" production "Super" cases I bought about 10 years ago were 3 bucks a case ordered though a dealer.

 

[Potashminer]

'Boo - I hear you about the age hardening and annealing thing! About 15 years ago I got a 7x57 rifle - I also got several bags of 50 R-P brass for it - I was "lazy" - did not reload after first firing - just made up next batch with "new" brass. Finally ran out. I am sure I had reloaded many of those previously fired R-P cases without incident. And then sold that rifle. So, last winter (?) I got busy to clean up perhaps 150 of those cases - I am building another 7x57 rifle and thought to use that brass. I popped out the primers and used stainless pins to wet tumble them - made them all shiny - then started to resize them - I must have had 20 or more of those brass "crack the neck" out of 70 or so cases. So, then I did the salt bath annealing to the rest - I cracked six more when resizing them - an improvement from 20, but way more than I had experienced previously - is my present assumption that they have got old - like me - and can not be handled like they used to be - so is my intent is to use flame annealing for any of those, going forward - not a big deal to do the same with the Norma brass - or any of it here, for that matter.

 

[South Pender]

That's interesting, Potashminer. As a 7x61 S&H reloader (S&L M68DL rifle), I've only loaded the "Super" cases. Your explanation of their difference from the 7x61 Re cases is exactly as I've understood it. You could weigh the two cases with the "Re" to see whether they are, in fact, identical (and heavier than the "super" cases). I suspect that they are, as 'Boo has noted.

As you've mentioned, Remington was much better at publicizing their development than was Norma with the 7x61, and the Remington M700 rifles chambered in their new cartridge were vastly less-expensive than the Schultz & Larsen rifles available at that time with the 7x61. According to my 1968 Gun Digest, you could buy a Rem. 700 for $134 (US), whereas a S&L M65 went for $265, and it just got worse by 1970 when the M700 was listed at $149 and the S&L M68DL at $485.

In some ways, the 7x61 is a better-designed cartridge than the 7 RM. Although its case is shorter than that of the 7 RM, it has a longer neck, and from an “efficiency” standpoint, the 7x61 is superior. However, even with the “super” cases, it couldn’t quite match the 7 RM’s velocity, falling something like 100 fps short at similar pressures with most bullet weights and equal barrel lengths—about what you’d expect with its 76-gr. case capacity as opposed to the 7 RM’s 81.5-gr. capacity. That capacity difference is close to the 5-gr. capacity difference between the 7x61 Super and the earlier 7x61 S&H “Re” case. But MV is not really a criterion for excellence; it’s hard to characterize the 7 RUM cartridge, with its 108-gr capacity, as “better” than the 7 RM, although it certainly yields far higher velocities.

 

[Potashminer]

It was my understanding that those various cartridges were developed and marketed circa late 1950's and early 1960's, when very few "private" persons had access to a chronograph - so most people believed what the factories advertised and never checked or verified for themselves. I think similar might still occur. Most of the S&L rifles in Europe had 26" (66 cm) barrels - most "magnums" made by Remington in USA had 24" barrels - so was probable there was not even 50 fps difference between them, using same bullet weight. Was a thing I ran into though - often from guns from Alberta - likely the owner at the time could not get or afford 7x61 S&H ammo - so can find S&L rifles that the chamber has had 7 mm Rem Mag reamer ran in there - so far as I know, S&L never made rifles in 7mm Rem Mag, but is a lot of them around. My own 7x61 S&L rifle (an M60) also has a circa 23.5" (60 cm) barrel - not sure that S&L ever did that.

 

[daddylonglegs]

It was my understanding that those various cartridges were developed and marketed circa late 1950's and early 1960's, when very few "private" persons had access to a chronograph - so most people believed what the factories advertised and never checked or verified for themselves. I think similar might still occur. Most of the S&L rifles in Europe had 26" (66 cm) barrels - most "magnums" made by Remington in USA had 24" barrels - so was probable there was not even 50 fps difference between them, using same bullet weight. Was a thing I ran into though - often from guns from Alberta - likely the owner at the time could not get or afford 7x61 S&H ammo - so can find S&L rifles that the chamber has had 7 mm Rem Mag reamer ran in there - so far as I know, S&L never made rifles in 7mm Rem Mag, but is a lot of them around. My own 7x61 S&L rifle (an M60) also has a circa 23.5" (60 cm) barrel - not sure that S&L ever did that.

Schultz & Larsen did indeed factory chamber 7mm Rem Mag. I was an avid S&L collector for many years and have owned 2 of them. I also own a M65DL factory chambered in 338 Win Mag. I have never seen or heard of another.
-Len

 

[Potashminer]

I was likely in error - I found on Internet a couple references that S&L did so chamber and sell rifles in 7mm Rem Mag in late 1960's. I never found a reference, yet, about one in 338 Win Mag, though. The 7 mm Rem Mag cartridge was introduced by Remington circa 1962 - I think the S&L M60 was made about 1960 - likely 7x61 only, then. Again, I am not sure but M65 and M68 might be from 1965 and 1968 respectively - I think I just read that some M68 were chambered in 7mm Rem Mag. Not sure that any M65 were, and not likely that any M60 were.

 

[South Pender]

In that series of rear-locking Schultz & Larsen hunting rifles, the first, the M54J, was made between 1954 and 1957 and was available in 7x61 S&H, 30-06, .270 Win., .244 Rem., and 6.5x55. It was followed by the M60 which ran from 1957 to 1960, and, curiously, was available only in 7x61 S&H. Both the M54J and M60 were ####-on-closing actions. The next model, the M65, was made between 1960 and 1967, and the last in the series, the M68 (made only in the deluxe version, the M68DL) appeared in 1967. The M65 and M68DL were available in a large number of chamberings, including 7 Rem. Mag., and were ####-on-opening actions. However, they did share most of the action design features with the earlier models. Of the rifles in that series, the M65 (and M65DL, the deluxe version) were by far the most numerous, with over 4700 made, still, however, a tiny number when compared with the Remington 700, for example, that would probably have numbered that many in a week or two's production. In the entire period of production of that series, 1954 until the late 1960s--the M54J up to the M68DL--fewer than 10,000 Schultz & Larsen rifles in total were made.