ruby76
Well-Known Member
NICE!! So glad you have some good brass. Keep us informed.
Will do, and once the 338 headstamped is available I'm down for 100.
NICE!! So glad you have some good brass. Keep us informed.
1. He is not trying to "win" anything....Well you almost got me. I have a Savage mdl 16 in 270 WSM that I've been trying to sell. Then I saw this, and thought "all I have to do is rebarrel and I'm in". So I started reserching bullets, barrels, etc until I found the link for determining recoil. Well it seems the recoil on the 338 starts at a couple of ft lbs more than my 35 Whelen AI, and goes up considerably from there. So there's no real advantage for me-you lose.
However, I do have a couple words of advice. First, drop the "mag" from the name of the cartridge. Your case capacity is about the same as a 338-06 AI, and nobody calls that magnum. This will change your attitude towards appropriate loading components
1. He is not trying to "win" anything....
2. The performance is that of the relative magnum (.264 win mag, 7mm rem mag, 300 win mag, 338 win mag, etc.) either on a short action or with a standard bolt face, hence the name.
3. The name of a cartridge does not determine the components one uses, rather case capacity and bore size, or published reloading data.
4. The 330-06 ai doesn't really compare to the 338 Sherman or Sherman short performance wise.
My post was not addressed to anyone in particular, but to the 338 Sherman Shortmag community as a whole. It was written in second person plural. If you look at the timeline of the loading data presented, you will see that the initial loads were with slow powders, with less-than-expected results, which I felt was due to the "magnum" label put on the name. More recent data goes as far as Varget with better results, showing that the case/bore relationship is better suited to medium burning powders. Thus my suggestion for using AA2520 and Lever, as I have found them to be better than other powders I have used.1. He is not trying to "win" anything....
2. The performance is that of the relative magnum (.264 win mag, 7mm rem mag, 300 win mag, 338 win mag, etc.) either on a short action or with a standard bolt face, hence the name.
3. The name of a cartridge does not determine the components one uses, rather case capacity and bore size, or published reloading data.
4. The 330-06 ai doesn't really compare to the 338 Sherman or Sherman short performance wise.
My post was not addressed to anyone in particular, but to the 338 Sherman Shortmag community as a whole. It was written in second person plural. If you look at the timeline of the loading data presented, you will see that the initial loads were with slow powders, with less-than-expected results, which I felt was due to the "magnum" label put on the name. More recent data goes as far as Varget with better results, showing that the case/bore relationship is better suited to medium burning powders. Thus my suggestion for using AA2520 and Lever, as I have found them to be better than other powders I have used.
The loss was to the 338 SS community because a very interested, potential member will not be joining it.
My post was not addressed to anyone in particular, but to the 338 Sherman Shortmag community as a whole. It was written in second person plural. If you look at the timeline of the loading data presented, you will see that the initial loads were with slow powders, with less-than-expected results, which I felt was due to the "magnum" label put on the name. More recent data goes as far as Varget with better results, showing that the case/bore relationship is better suited to medium burning powders. Thus my suggestion for using AA2520 and Lever, as I have found them to be better than other powders I have used.
The loss was to the 338 SS community because a very interested, potential member will not be joining it.
You're correct that the magnum label does not change performance. But what I'm saying is that it can change an individual's perception of expected performance. Thus, initial loading attempts were with powders too slow for the cartridge.There is more to it than capacity!
My 338 Sherman has only a little more capacity than the SS and will be GROSSLY overloaded with 60 grains of Varget and is right at home with the slowest powders that will fill the case where the ss is not. The Sherman is NOT referred to as a magnum by me or anyone else.
The shape of the case has far more to do with the SS acting completely different than capacity alone, quite obviously, based on these results. Putting a MAGNUM label on something, or not, has very little to do with anything. Originally, it pretty much ment a belted case which happened to have greater capacity than most cases, although there were cartridges with greater capacity with no belt that we're not called magnums.
The SS has near the exact same capacity as a saum which everyone recognizes as a magnum! A label doesn't change performance!
You're correct that the magnum label does not change performance. But what I'm saying is that it can change an individual's perception of expected performance. Thus, initial loading attempts were with powders too slow for the cartridge.
SWEET at last!Been waiting to see this combo for a while, ADG SS brass fully formed with a 250 Berger at 2.945 OAL. I loaded up some test rounds with Varget at 1/2 grain increments.
View attachment 128225