Author Topic: 358 x 57mm (Read 1803 times)

358Win · « **on:** November 10, 2006, 09:22:18 AM »

I was reading an article about the actions used by Ultra Light arms the other day. It said that their short action would handle an overall cartridge length of 3.00 inches. That got me thinking that a 358 caliber rifle based on the 8x57 mm case would be a super sweet rig. Should be about 1/2 between the 358 Winchester and the 358 Whelen in performance. Based on 2325 fps for a 250 grain Nosler in the 358 Winchester and 2475 fps for the same bullet in the 35 Whelen and some fairly close volume calculations one should be able to get 2,400 fps on the money with the 250 grain Nosler Partition in a left handed Ultra Light with a barrel in the 19 to 21 inch range. Scoped with a 1.5 to 6 power Nikon Monarch Gold scope with a 42 mm Objective in Warne Medium Rings on Weaver bases the 20 inch barreled version should weigh just about 6 pounds loaded and ready to go.

This should be just about the sweetest one rifle setup one could possibly come across. The performance should be almost identical to the old 9x57mm Mauser. The following is a quote from the famous African hunter John Taylor:

The 9mm Mauser is one of a number of cartridges based upon the old German infantry round, the 8x57mm Mauser adopted in 1888. A popular sporting cartridge in itself, the 8mm Mauser spawned a number of others as cartridge designers busily necked it up and down to accept different calibre bullets. Most of these fell by the wayside, or at best achieved a moderate popularity. One version, which did achieve popularity, was the 9x57mm sporting round. For those of you who may be confused, 9mm refers to the calibre and the 57mm designation is indicative of the length of the cartridge case. This turned out to be an exceptionally well balanced and effective sporting round, and became one of the more widely used medium bores in Africa during the pre-World War II era.

It is one of those splendid calibres which just plain worked, without being possessed of spectacular velocities, or bone-jarring recoil for that matter. None of the old time hunter/writers of that era waxed particularly lyrical in its praise, but simply took it for granted that it would do its job effectively and with the minimum of fuss and bother. For any game animals up to but not including the thick-skinned, heavy animals the 9mm Mauser was wonderfully effective, proving yet again the effectiveness of larger calibre bullets of good sectional density at moderate speed.

I think I have just about talked myself into getting one.

jred · « **Reply #1 on:** November 10, 2006, 10:01:22 AM »

The round you are describing sounds to me like the old 9.3X57 Mauser, a round that can be easily loaded by using the appropriate dies and common 8X57 Mauser cases. Some of the major surplus arms importers are currently selling civilian Swedish mausers chambered in this caliber. Believe me, it has a growing and enthusiastic following in the US as these great old Husquvarnas (many prewar) are coming into the country at very reasonable prices. I have had a 9.3X57 Huskie for some time now and I love it. It is accurate, reliable and pleasant to shoot...with enough power to anchor moose size animals at woods hunting ranges. I also have a .358 Win and a .35 Whelen. I would say the 9.3X57 would be somewhere in between those two rounds.

358Win · « **Reply #2 on:** November 10, 2006, 11:52:03 AM »

Hi JRed:

There are several cartridges in the 9.3mm family. The 57mm version would be my favorite, especially with a 3.0 inch action available. There is also the the 9.3x62 which CZ is bringing in 550 rifle and carbine version. For single shots and doubles there is the 9.3x74R. The 0.366 bullets for the 9.3 are available is great hunting weights. But lack the pistol bullets that make the 358's so usefull for small game and target shooting.

But I am jealous of you having a 358, a 9.3x57 and a 35 Whelen.

There is a guy who lives about 40 miles north of me that posts here, that has both the rifle and carbine versions of the CZ 550. Another one that makes me jealous.

Rummer · « **Reply #3 on:** November 11, 2006, 08:42:01 AM »

I think this cartridge is an interesting idea.

.358 bullets are more available than 9.3mm and are designed to work at those velocities. It won't do anything that a whelen won't do, but it is fun to have something different.

Where will you get the dies?

Rummer

358Win · « **Reply #4 on:** November 11, 2006, 09:35:28 AM »

Hi Rummer:

Dies would be a minor problem. One could actually use the 9x57mm dies since the only real difference could be held down to 0.002 difference in neck diameter. Or if you went the semi-custom route you could have the sizing die cut with the same reamer used to chamber the barrel.

Actually the 35 Whelen would be a bit more powerful. I have a BLR in 358 Winchester and love it. The only advantage this would have over the Whelen would be: being able to use a short action at least the 3.0 inch actions.

captdp · « **Reply #5 on:** November 11, 2006, 01:21:37 PM »

I have considered just this same thing, only using a yugo. Dies are avaliable, except they are considerably more expensive. I don't believe trhat you would gain that much, in the field, over the 358 0r the new 338fed. Also there is some advantage in having a 'factory' round. capt david

358Win · « **Reply #6 on:** November 11, 2006, 02:50:51 PM »

Hi Capt David:

Yes, this is one of those things where the 358 Winchester is almost as powerful in an even smaller 2.80 inch action. In the standard 3.40 action the 35 Whelen will be even more powerful. Clearly the 358 Winchester and the 35 Whelen are much more practical, with dies and guns available over the counter. This is one of those pet project ideas that hold appeal partly due to the fact that you would be the only person in your state or county that had one.

Part of the appeal is also being able to hit the "magic" velocity of 2,400 fps that made the 416 Rigby famous; with a 250 grain bullet, a weight that made the 338 Win. Mag famous. Another part is squeezing that extra little bit out of the Ultra Light Arms 3.0 inch short action.

A last little motivator would be the "magic" 50.0 grain charge weight of Accurate Arms 2520 that it would take to get the "magic" 250 grain bullet up to the magic "2,400 fps". Who knows maybe I'll build one and maybe it will just never get to the top of the "TO DO" list. But that doesn't stop the "what if" fantasy of dreaming about the things one would love to have, "Just Because".

Have a Great Weekend, "358Win".

P.S. Read the articles below for a great case for the 358 Winchester as the do it all caliber of the world.
http://www.kifaru.net/rambrifl.htm
http://www.kifaru.net/rifl2.htm
http://www.kifaru.net/rifl3.htm

Slamfire · « **Reply #7 on:** November 11, 2006, 05:11:23 PM »

Better yet a 9.3 on a .350 Rem Magnum case. It'll cycle thorough any of the magazines made for short fats, and equal the ballistics of the 9.3x62. There are plenty of hunting weight bullets available. 286 grain being probably the best choice.

358Win · « **Reply #8 on:** November 12, 2006, 02:32:01 PM »

Hi Slamfire:

That is also a great idea. The 9.3 mm being 0.366 is almost a twin with the 375, and the 350 Rem Mag case allows for a short action and case capacity of the 35 Whelen. The 286 grain Woodleigh should be absolutely awesome. As you noted performance should be identical to the 9.3x62mm.

If you really wanted to get the maximum out of the short action you could neck up the 325 WSM to 358 and add another 150 fps to the 250 grain bullet over what the 350 Rem Mag or the 35 Whelen will do. But there is a hidden weight cost in going up to the larger diameter bolt face required by either the 350 Rem Mag or 358/325 WSM. The large bolt face actions weight about 8 ounces or 1/2 pound more than the small bolt face actions.

So if I want to stay withing the weight limit of the Ultra Light Arms Model 20 action then I'm limited to length at around 57 mm and bolt face diameter of 0.473. Also I really don't see the point in going any faster than 2,400 with the 250 grain slugs. The 310 grain Woodleighs can be driven at 2,100 fps. The 280 grain Swift should go about 2,250. The various 250's should go right in the 2,400 fps range. The 225's at 2,550 fps, the 200 grain at 2,700 fps, and the 180 grain at 2,800 fps.

The big advantage of the 358 bore is being able to make plinking and small game loads using pistol bullets. You can really make these sing for pest control i.e. a 140 grain at 3,100 fps. Or if living off the land load these down to about 1,800 fps for food.

A while back I posted a fairly long piece which shows that over practical shooting ranges i.e. 250 to 300 yards max., that trajectory didn't really fall off dramatically until muzzle velocities get down under 2,400 fps. For example a 150 grain 7mm started at 3,200 fps dropped 6 inches at 300 with a 200 yard zero. A 250 grain 358 started at 2,400 fps dropped 10.5 inches at 300 yards with a 200 yard zero. Given field groups of 3 MOA which is better than most can shoot these groups have about 40% overlap. To me that means the drops are very similar out to 300 yards. Most people shouldn't shoot any farther than that.

Have a Great Eveninig,
358Win

Slamfire · « **Reply #9 on:** November 13, 2006, 06:07:49 PM »

Usin' a 4" maximum deviation from line of sight, 200 fps will get you 25 yards greater or lesser range. Makes one wonder why anyone shoots a magnum.

Brithunter · « **Reply #10 on:** November 14, 2006, 07:15:53 AM »

Hmmmm it's strange how some cartridges perform far better than the paper ballistics suggest that they should

I have been playing with a 9.3x57 Husqvarna Model 46 for about 7 years or so now and have tried bullets weighing from 180 Grns up to 186 grns. What surprised me was just how flat the rifle shoots

the 286 grn of course drops off first but with 235-270 grn bullets it does really well and the rather expensive RWS 246 Grn Cone Points are quite amazing followed by the 235 Grn Norma semi spitzers. Some time I need to get a chrongraph

358Win · « **Reply #11 on:** November 14, 2006, 10:09:13 AM »

Hi BritHunter:

A while back I was working on a 411 so that 41 Mag Revolver bullets could be used for general plinking and small game procurement. There are some nice hunting bullets designed for the 405 Winchester in the 300 to 400 grain weight range. Needless to say recoil became a real concern on that project. One of the easiest ways to reduce recoil, and muzzle blast/flash is to reduce speed. So the question of how slow can we go before trajectory begins to really suffer. One of the most surprising findings was that with a 200 yard zero the drop at 300 yards didn't start to radically change until we got down to around 2,300 fps. The drop for a BC ~ 0.400 at 3,200 fps was 6 inches, at 2,300 fps it was 12 inches.

This lead me to do a lot of research about cartridges in the 2,300 to about 2,600 fps range. The conclusions were that bullets of fairly high sectional density i.e. 0.250 and greater driven at these modest velocities are a lot more effective than the "high velocity" folks would like us to believe. Particularly outstanding are the high middle bores from 0.338 to 0.416.

The first time I shot my 358 Winchester I just about couldn't believe what my senses were telling me. Especially when combined with what my Oehler P35 chronograph was telling me. Perceived recoil was less than my Ruger #1 in 270 Winchester that weighs 2 pounds more. I was wondering if there was some kind of miracle stock design on my BLR or if the recoil pad has some special properties. Since then I've shot a couple of bolt guns in 358 Winchester, and auto in 35 Whelen and shot a 9.3 x 62mm and a 376 Steyr. All of them have more paper energy than a 30-06 while being possesed of less recoil, less muzzle blast, and less muzzle flash.

To say that I became an instant advocate of moderate velocities, moderate bore diameters, and moderately heavy bullets is quite the understatement.

Hi Slamfire:

Why any one would pay to get pounded by a gun that throws its bullets any faster than about 2,700 fps is beyond me. Trajectory improvement is not detectable in the field. If you need more power a larger bore with a heavier bullet will get it with less recoil and muzzle blast than jacking up the speed. All of my favorite calibers follow a recipe of 2,400 to 2,600 fps muzzle velocity with a bullet having a Sectional Density between 0.25 and 0.35. I like light rifles and bores in the 0.358, 0.366, 0.375, 0.411 and 0.416 range.

RaySendero · « **Reply #12 on:** November 14, 2006, 12:27:30 PM »

Quote from: 358Win on November 10, 2006, 09:22:18 AM

I was reading an article about the actions used by Ultra Light arms the other day. It said that their short action would handle an overall cartridge length of 3.00 inches. That got me thinking that a 358 caliber rifle based on the 8x57 mm case would be a super sweet rig. .....
.....
I think I have just about talked myself into getting one.

358,

Think about a 358/284 Winchester.

It will have about the max case volume you can get in a round that will fit a .473 bolt face and stay under a 3" overall length!

358Win · « **Reply #13 on:** November 14, 2006, 03:52:38 PM »

Good idea Ray. Performance twin with the 35 Whelen. Only very minor downside would be one less round in the magazine. Call me stubborn but if and when I get around to having an Ultra Light made up I think I'll stick to standard brass trimmed back to 57mm in length with minimum body taper like the 358 Winchester and a 25 degree shoulder like the 350 Rem Mag.

This will be a very light gun and a 250 grain at 2,400 fps should be all that is needed. Don't want to get the kick up too high. The extra round may come in handy someday on a backpack 30 miles from the nearest dirt road.

jred · « **Reply #14 on:** November 15, 2006, 08:41:04 AM »

It is very tempting to get involved in the statistics that I think it is easy to forget that what we are looking for is a cartidge and rifle combination that gives us the best results for our particular needs. Into the equation (as I get older) the shooting "comfort level" is gaining in my prioties. This is why I have gravitated to the 35's and the 9.3mm's. They seem to shoot as hard or harder than calibers and rifles using a lot more powder (with attendant recoil and muzzle blast). It is indeed a case of rapidly diminishing returns. Tastes obviously vary, but my "confidence level" tells me a .358 will quickly kill a large bull caribou at 150 yards (done that) and a .35 Whelen will quickly kill a nice sized bull elk at 80 yards (done that, too). I am sure my 9.3X57 would do the same given the chance. But most importantly to me is that I can shoot all three off the bence trying out different loads and enjoy the range session without having to have an appointment to see my Neurologist. I guess that, for me, there is no need to pursue a new and improved load that pushes the envelope or requires a new wildcat.

Kona11 · « **Reply #15 on:** November 16, 2006, 05:14:20 PM »

I have an older BLR in .358...I absolutely love that gun, and shoot a handloaded 225-gr Speer BTSP that knocks woodland whitetails flat on their ARSE...I must admit that I lose a little respect/confidence in the Greats, such as Jack O'Connor, when she, er, HE reports the recoil as "rather grim", but, prior to that questionable statement, he states the commercial failure of the cartridge "gave him pause", apparently because he thougt it would be ideal as a woods cartridge for bear, deer, elk or moose. Hodgdon also drops the ball with this cartridge, when, in my reloading manual, they say "the .358 is a fine example of a woods cartridge, but nobody seems all that enthused about buying a cartridge that is dedicated to close-range hunting, especially if the game at hand appears on the next ridge at over 200 yards..." . Silly crap from Hodgdon (makes me not want to trust thier manual--I'd rather go online and poll a bunch of blokes like yourselves...). While I must admit, I've never shot a whitetail farther than 150-odd yards with it, every one I've shot, I've only shot once, and have recovered every one within a short distance (or nearly in its tracks) from the Hit. I've been itching for a fight with one of these dern wild hogs in our area, but I always seem to have something else in hand when one shows up (last one: .222 Remington!---Still did the job, tho).

As far as the greats go,Boddington thinks its a great cartridge...

Cheesehead · « **Reply #16 on:** November 16, 2006, 05:38:30 PM »

I am not sure but this caliber could be save some old worn 8x57 Mausers by boring the old barrel to a new larger caliber, maybe too expensive.

Cheese

358Win · « **Reply #17 on:** November 18, 2006, 03:24:15 PM »

Hi jred:

When I was 25 I thought nothing of banging away with my 338 Win. Mag. and occasionally wish I still had it. But at 53 I've become much more comfortable with calibers that do the job without all that recoil and muzzle blast.

I can't hardly say how much I love my BLR 358 Winchester. It is almost a religion with me. The muzzle energy is equal to the 30-06 and burns about 8 grains less powder to get equal energy. The muzzle blast and muzzle flash of either the 270 or the '06 are quite a bit more than the 358 and the pitch of the noise is higher and more disconcerting. Once I found that a 250 grain at 2,350 shot almost as flat as an '06 with a 180 grain less than 2 inches difference in drop at 300 yards with a 200 yard zero, then it became simple for me and my love affair with cartridges like the 338 Federal, the 358 Winchester, the 9.3x57mm, the 9.3x62m, the 35 Whelen etc was off to the races.

The wildcat I've suggested here is mostly just because I want a very light rifle that will be taken backpacking with a Kifaru Gun Bearer system. The 358x57mm just happens to be the longest standard cartridge that can be squeezed into and Ultra Light Arms Model 20 action. This cartridge should be exactly half way between the 358 Winchester and the 35 Whelen in performance. So do I really need a wildcat? No way, but since when did that have anything to do with enjoying a fine firearm.

The main thing that really keeps me pushing the 358 bore over the 9.3mm or the .375 or the .338 is the ability of a backpacker with a limited supply of ammo to make small game loads by pushing 140 to 160 grain revolver bullets at 1,800 to 2,000 fps. The spectrum of game that can be taken with this caliber ranges from rabbits to large bears in a pinch. Naturally if you're in Bear Country the defensive ammo is set to go and small game is taken by loading the chamber one at a time. The fact that this is an awesome big game hunting rifle to boot for deer, elk, moose, and caribou doesn't hurt either.

I'd spend all my time bragging up the 358 Winchester except for this one very special project. I'm hoping to the loaded and scoped rifle here right at 6 pounds. The 57mm case will fit so why not.

Hi Kona11:

For a factory gun you can buy off the shelf, there isn't one that competes with the 358 Winchester in a BLR. Although I have given some thought to picking up a Remington 750 carbine in 35 Whelen.

Hi Cheesehead:

One could surely do a lot worse by an worn out 8x57mm than rebore the barrel to 358. This would be an extremely flexible and utilitarian cartridge.

Kona11 · « **Reply #18 on:** November 18, 2006, 06:18:28 PM »

Hi, 358...well said...thanks for the .02.

Keep 'Em Thumpin', and
WAR EAGLE!
Kona

jred · « **Reply #19 on:** November 21, 2006, 06:02:32 AM »

Hi 358, I understand what you are saying...great concept. Here is a thought "outside the box". I have an old 98 Mauser FN that origininally had been a police carbine. It has an 18" stepped barrel and is chambered for 8X57mm. As it had already had its stock bubbed, I put on a Choate black composite stock and had it D&T's for a Williams peep sight. On the front I had a ramp installed with a high visability fiber optic sight. The whole rig weighs in at about 5-6 lbs. The stock really soaks up the recoil. Loaded to about 2500 fps it is very pleasant to shoot..Not a .35 or 9.3 but, as they say, "same church, different pew".

358Win · « **Reply #20 on:** November 27, 2006, 08:55:17 AM »

Hi jred:

A nice carbine, especially a M98, in 8x57mm would be an awesome choice in it's own right. I am always amazed by those that have missed the concept of medium bore diameter, coupled with medium long bullets, and medium velocities will do everything that needs to be done out to around 300 yards. The real truth is: Get six of your friends and have them shoot for groups at 300 yards from field rest positions only. If you get one that shoots less that a 10 inch group at 300 yards from field rest, you've got better friends than most. 400 yard shots are stupidity for over 90% of us, myself included, and pure luck anytime someone actually gets a one shot kill at that range. The moral being a 300 yard rifle is all anyone really needs, and the extra recoil of those flat shooting 400 yard numbers turns good shots into bad shots.

jred · « **Reply #21 on:** November 30, 2006, 11:13:30 AM »

358, We are brothers of the same faith. 300+ yard shots are too far for me. I was qualified as an expert on the M-14 and M16 by Uncle Sam (many) years ago and have since done a bit of shooting out on the prairies as well as over the water. As my experience increased my "effective" hunting range decreased. I no longer own any magnums and the 35's and 9.3's (as well as 8mms) seem to be creeping into my gun rack. The trend, however, came to a screeching halt when I bought a Ruger #1 in 45-70 and shot my first heavy reloads from the bench....ouch! Moderation in all things, as my old Grandmother used to say.

358Win · « **Reply #22 on:** December 06, 2006, 08:56:19 AM »

Thanks jred, also good to meet one of the family.

To those who made comments about the 350 Rem. and/or the 358/284 cartridges both are great and are actually almost twins with the 35 Whelen. But a new idea just crossed my mind. The new 375 Ruger is a rimless design on a magnum boltface diameter of 0.532. Any action that will work for the 350 Rem. or the 358/284 would also work for a shortened necked down 375 Ruger case and actually would get at least 100 fps maybe 150 more than the 35 Whelen or 350 Rem. or 358/284 with a 250 grain bullet.

The 375 Ruger is a great case design and adds 100 fps to a 270 grain over the grand old 375 H&H, and does it in a standard 3.4 inch length action.

jred · « **Reply #23 on:** December 08, 2006, 08:57:09 AM »

.358, I note that there was a lengthy article in Rifle magazine about a year ago by John Barnsness where he discussed a wildcat he worked up with Sisk of Sisk rifles called the 9.3 Barnsness/Sisk. They used a .350 Rem Mag case and chambered the rifle in a short action Remington 700. The article included load data and ballistics information. What they wanted to do was develop a short action medium caliber that would equal the 9.3X62 Mauser.