The .358 WInchester - An Interesting Cartridge

Started by gitano, November 05, 2007, 11:21:06 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

gitano

As some of you know, I think a great deal of the .308 Winchester case. There aren't any cartridges made from it from the .22 Cheetah to .375-08 that I think aren't at least "reasonable" hunting cartridges. Since I am building a .358 Steyr (a .376 Steyr necked down to .358"), I thought I'd have a look at the .358 Win and see how it performs (on paper) relative to the .358 Steyr. As usual, it was an interesting journey. (All of the following calculations are from QuickLoad unless I note otherwise.)
 
I should define my personal design criteria first:
 
1) Muzzle energy of less than 4,000 ft-lbs, and less than 3,500 ft-lbs is much better,
2) Carry 2000 ft-lbs (and not a lot more if ME goes up over 3,300 ft-lbs) out to 300 yds, and
3) Not be more than 9" low at 300 yds when sighted in for a 6" target - (not exceed 12" of total vertical deflection).
 
When it comes to bullet seating depth, I prefer to seat one caliber deep. I'll settle for 2/3rds of a caliber (67%) if it will help to keep the max chamber pressure below the max spec'd and still keep the other numbers up where I want them.
 
According to SAAMI, the max AVERAGE chamber pressure one should have in a .358 Winchester is 58,740 PSI. Since I like Mauser 98-type actions, I set the limit at 56,565 PSI.
 
Using a 26 inch barrel I get the following numbers with a 1-caliber seating depth for a 225-grain Nosler Partition:
 
Loaded Cartridge Data:
 
................Powder: I3031
................Charge: 45.2 grains
Chamber Pressure: 51,343 PSI
.....Muzzle Velocity: 2515 f/s
......Muzzle Energy: 3160 ft-lbs
 
Trajectory and Retained/Delivered Energy Data:
 
Range in Yards . Elevation . . Energy
100 . . . . . . . . . . . 2.8" . . . . 2727 ft-lbs
120 . . . . . . . . . . . 3.0" . . . . 2646 " "
200 . . . . . . . . . . . 2.9" . . . . 2342 " "
213 . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0" . . . . 2295 " "
250 . . . . . . . . . . .-3.0" . . . . 2166 " "
300 . . . . . . . . . . .-8.6" . . . . 2000 " "
 
Now by my way o' thinkin' folks, that ain't too shabby. I get a nice short cartridge that:
 
1) Generates a very tolerable muzzle energy at a "nice" chamber pressure more than 7,000 PSI below SAAMI max,
 
2) Carries 2000 ft-lbs out to 300 yds, and
 
3) Is less than 9" low all the way out there at 300. (Total vertical deflection less than 12" in 300 yds.)
 
I'd hunt with a rifle/cartridge combination like that any day for anything on the North American continent, and most of what's in Africa.
 
And such an "old-fashioned, wimpy", cartridge it is too. Not nearly as "ehtical" or "cool" as those new "super" cartridges.
 
:sleeping:
 
Paul
Be nicer than necessary.

Mauserfan in TX

Intresting as usual Paul. How would the .358 Win stack up to the new .338 Fed. or the 8mm mauser?
8\'s is Great
Col Charles Askins

sakorick

Good stuff, Paul. It seems the gunmakers keep trying to re- engineer things that are already there. What comes to mind.....7mmWSM=7MM rem mag.....OBTW, you can't find shells for the 7mm WSM anywhere in NC Missouri.  Next is the 22-250.....the Swift is faster and has been around for over? 60 years??? All the ultra mags and Lazaronis, most of the Weatherby mags if not all, the 6mm Rem vs the .243, the 7mm-08 rather than the 7mm Mauser, the 338 Federal, anything that tries to replace the 375 H&H and finally, why the 204 Ruger????????.....sorry if I steped on anyones toes here......
 
Just hand me an '06 or an 8mm Mauser and I'm a happy camper.:biggthumpup: :biggthumpup: :biggthumpup: Regards, Rick
Talk to yourself. There are times you need expert advice.

gitano

#3
Funny you should ask that MFIT, I looked at the .338-08 which is what the .338 Federal is. I can get the above criteria met, but the trade-off is that it comes with a higher chamber pressure and muzzle energy. Here are the numbers with a Nosler 210 Partition:

Loaded Cartridge Data:
 
................Powder: I3031
................Charge: 45.62 grains
Chamber Pressure: 55,595 PSI
.....Muzzle Velocity: 2637 f/s
......Muzzle Energy: 3242 ft-lbs
 
Trajectory and Retained/Delivered Energy Data:
 
Range in Yards . Elevation . . Energy
100 . . . . . . . . . . . 2.8" . . . . 2776 ft-lbs
127 . . . . . . . . . . . 3.0" . . . . 2659 " "
200 . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3" . . . . 2364 " "
223 . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0" . . . . 2276 " "
261 . . . . . . . . . . .-3.0" . . . . 2137 " "
300 . . . . . . . . . . .-7.2" . . . . 2001 " "

As you can see, the .338 is ever-so-slightly less than the .358 energy-wise at every range, but ever-so-slightly better elevation-wise at every range. Things being as "equal" as they are - with the exception of the chamber pressures - I'd opt for the 0.020" larger diameter bullet. But... the 1.7" better trajectory at 300 might be more inportant to others.

At first, I thought you were wanting to know about the 8mm-08, but I see you were interested in the 8x57. So here it is with the same criteria, including the 26" barrel, but using the 195 grain Hornady International at a 67%-of-caliber seating depth:

Loaded Cartridge Data:
 
................Powder: I4895
................Charge: 49.51 grains
Chamber Pressure: 53,007 PSI
.....Muzzle Velocity: 2711 f/s
......Muzzle Energy: 3183 ft-lbs
 
Trajectory and Retained/Delivered Energy Data:
 
Range in Yards . Elevation . . Energy
100 . . . . . . . . . . . 2.8" . . . . 2740 ft-lbs
131 . . . . . . . . . . . 3.0" . . . . 2613 " "
200 . . . . . . . . . . . 1.6" . . . . 2347 " "
230 . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0" . . . . 2238 " "
269 . . . . . . . . . . .-3.0" . . . . 2103 " "
300 . . . . . . . . . . .-6.1" . . . . 2000 " "

So here again, just as the .338 was a little "lighter" in energy and a little flattter in trajectory than the .358, the .323 is a little lighter in energy and a little flatter in trajectory than the .338. And again, for me, all else equal, I'd choose the larger diameter bullet. The pressure is a little lower in the 8mm because I moved the seating depth out to .216" (67% of .323). Had I done that with the .338, it's pressure would have been just a skosh lower too. The 2.8" higher at 300 yds starts to be significant in my book, but still not enough to make me pick the 8mm over the .358 for elk or larger.

Paul
Be nicer than necessary.

gitano

#4
Rick,
 
I do NOT begrudge firearms and ammunition makers making up new cartridges. I do however, deeply resent them telling me that the "old" cartridges aren't as "good" as hunting cartridges as their new ones are.
 
My personal design criteria defined by muzzle energy (recoil), delivered energy, and trajectory, are newly settled on by me. I got to thinking about how I hunt, what I hunt, and the animals I hunt, and it dawned on me that "more, more, more" was just getting ridiculous. Dead is dead, and longer and longer ranges are not "good" for hunting. I'm not trying to foist my ideas on anyone else, rather I have simply come to a new plateau in my long firearms journey. As I prepare to start the new era of firearms fabrication, I expect my views will change yet some more. I try to keep an open mind (except with regard to '06s ;) ). We'll see what this new adventure brings in frustration and enlightenment. 'Til then, it's low 3000's for recoil, 12 inches of vertical deflection over 300 yds, and at least 2000 ft-lbs delivered at 300. Everything after that is just 'detail... :D
 
Paul
Be nicer than necessary.

recoil junky

I have killed elk with this cartridge, only usinr 250 grain Hornady round nose bullets  and IMR3031.  My  sister is in posseton of the M99f Savage now. I went a step further and got a 35 Whelen. How's that for a glorified 358 Win. :greentongue: And you thought I didn't like big slow bullets.:nana:

RJ
When you go afield, take the kids and please......................................wear your seatbelts.
Northwest Colorado.............Where the wapiti roam and deer and antelope run amuck. :undecided:  
Proud father of a soldier medic in The 82nd Airborne 325th AIR White Falcons :army:

gitano

I thought I rembered you having a "big" cartridge gun of some sort. But a Whelen, geez, I'd kiss a frog first.
 
Paul
Be nicer than necessary.

Nelsdou

Interesting numbers Paul.

Looks like with the Steyr in .35 you should have "room to spare".

I've shot a lot of Hornady 195s over 48 grains of Varget (very accurate) in military mausers with the bullets seated a little deeper than your example, so I'm guessing my recoil threshold is about that wimpy 3000 ME level.

The more I play with the bigger bullets, the more I like the 35 "neighborhood".  9x57, 9.3x57, 358 win, 35 rem mag, 35 whelen, 9.3x62, they all seem to "git her done".  One thing I've noticed about this "neighborhood" is in the barrel twist varience from 12 to 16.  What twist are you considering for the 35 Steyr?

Nels
Put it into perspective; we live on a rock hurtling through space, what could be scarier than that?

Hunterbug

I've done alot of thinking about this round. I'd love to have one in a short quick handling rifle for places like where we hunted last year in the trees and I missed that elk with the 338 MAI. Of course on that shot a 12ga with slugs would have worked well too. ;)
Ask not what your government can do for you. Ask how your government can go away and get out of your life.
 
 
The unarmed man is is not only defenseless, he is also contemptible.
Niccolo Machiavelli

Rick

I love my MRC 1999 Stainless .358 Win.  I had it done with a 21-inch barrel as it balances perfectly with that length and a .650 muzzle diameter.  In a MacMillan Edge stock, it goes just over 6 pounds with a Leupold compact scope.  I get 2530-2570 FPS with W-748 powder and a 225 gr Partition.   It dropped a big waterbuck in South Africa in its tracks at about 75 yards.   (I got better accuracy with the 2530 FPS load, so that is what I used.)  It seemed to be just about as effective as the 300 gr .375 bullet at 2400 FPS I used on other animals.

gitano

#10
QuoteThe more I play with the bigger bullets, the more I like the 35 "neighborhood". 9x57, 9.3x57, 358 win, 35 rem mag, 35 whelen, 9.3x62,
[/SIZE]
Nelsdou, that's kinda where I'm getting to. As for the "wimpy" 3000 ft-lb recoil threshold, it's between 3000 and 3300 that I really prefer it.
 
Also, it's good to hear from somebody that has used the Hornady 195 International. I've got a box of em, but haven't had the chance to work 'em over yet. Your 48 grains of Varget looks like as good a place as any to start. Indeed, according to QL, 48 grains of Varget does generate about 3000 ft-lbs of energy at the muzzle with this bullet.
 
HB, I'll tell ya how much I've been thinking about it... I now have a .358 Win finishing reamer and .358 Win dies in hand. :D
 
Rick, great to hear about actual use, especially on African game. To tell the truth, I like the idea of the 21" barrel and a full-length Mannlicher stock. Or... a 24-to-26" barrel on a short, single-shot action, no longer than a Ruger No.1. The latter is what I'm thinking of building my first single-shot action for.
 
Paul
Be nicer than necessary.

Mauserfan in TX

Paul, thanx for the info. i do enjoy picking your ballistic brains. My dad liked the .358Win a lot. I was thinking for my next project making another scout rifle in something along the lines of a .35x57, since i have a TON of 8x57 brass. Maybe Ackley-ize it,I need to win the lottery.
8\'s is Great
Col Charles Askins

gitano

I am as fond of the x57 case as I am the .308 Win case. Another outstanding design. I think the .358 Mauser (9x57) would be a dandy. I assume you are aware that the 9x57 (9mm Mauser) is a factory cartridge in Europe. As such, reamers are not "custom" affairs. Might even find one on Ebay. ;) I'll post some QuickLoad ballistics for the .358x57 later this evening.
 
Paul
Be nicer than necessary.

Brithunter

Hi All,

   Ahhhh fellers don't forget that Mannlicher also had a 9x56 cartridge in the Model 1908 Schoenauer. The thing to be aware with the Mauser 9x57 is that is uses 0.356" bullets and Ken Waters found that using American 0.358" bullets caused terrible copper fouling due to being oversize.
Go Get them Floyd!

gitano

That's an interesting bit of information about the increased copper fouling with "non-matching" bullet diameters and bores. Of course if one really wants access to the widest variety of bullet weights and styles in the .356-.357-.358 range, I suppose the thing to do is get a .356" barrel and squeeze the .357 and .358 bullets down to .356". But... Ya gotta wanna.
 
Paul
Be nicer than necessary.

Tags: