Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles MAGNUM ETYMOLOGY

I do believe the noun magnum, almost assuredly with roots in Latin, was originally used to mark bottles of champagne. But why was this noun given to rifle cartridges? Who was the first to do so? Why wasn't the 7MM Rem Mag merely called the 7MM Rem Super to distinguish it from the 7MM Mauser? Would the .300 Win Mag suddenly become useless were to be known as the Super .300? I guess my point is too many judge value based upon name thereby starting a craze, in this case, the magnum craze. Does anyone really believe the .280 Rem is really inferior to the 7MM Rem Mag, or the .30-'06 to the .300 Win Mag? Do hunters really believe an elk would refuse to give up the ghost were its vitals destroyed by a .30-'06 but will readily succumb to the identical shot were the rifle chambered in .300 Win Mag???

Marketing is a science, but in hunting I believe performance is crucial for sales.

I own a 7MM Rem Mag & a .338 Win Mag. If I were as sharp when I was a teenager when I knew everything about everything as I am decades later, I would have bought a .280 Rem, or maybe an '06 and probably never bought another. Fact is, I can do all of North America's ungulates with a .308 Win.

As I grown wiser, besides placing bullets in vitals, bullet design is the single most crucial factor in anchoring game. Since bullet design has kept pace with technology in other sciences, I believe the need for magnums will wane, but need and desire are two totally different concepts.



Merry Christmas,

Mando

They are two entirely differant concepts. Just like what automobile do you "need" and what do you drive.

Marketing??

Freedom is a wonderful thing!!

8mmwapiti

It was logical to market the cartridges based on the H&H 'Magnum' cases as 'Magnum' cartridges. I have no beef at all with that.

Like you, every animal I've taken to date could have been taken as easily with a .308 Win. That is not to say that will be the case in the future, or that the .308 Win is the equivalent of the .30-06 or the .30-06 is the equivalent of the .300 Win Mag - they are not. The advantages of the latter are incremental but they exist nonetheless. Close but no cigar.

Good post Mando...I wholeheartedly agree...feel the same way.
Merry Christmas to you and yours

Paul

Coyote_Hunter,

I have no beef with names given to cartridges either. My only thesis here is that all too many assume a cartridge is inferior because it lacks magnum nomenclature. How can a cartridge be deemed inferior if it routinely performs its intended task of reliably taking game? I have no qualms with a hunter who wants to hunt with a .300 Win Mag; however, I am disillusioned when said hunter professes his choice based upon its superiority vis-a-vis the .30-'06.

I did fall for the magnum craze as a kid. I truly believed that the 7MM Rem Mag was superior to almost all other cartridges then available. I have owned two 7MM Rem Mag rifles. I am heavily invested in that cartridge (reloading). My favorite rifle is my Sako 7MM Rem Mag. But if I could start anew, I would assuredly go with the .280 Rem and never look back. I now know that what a 7MM Rem Mag can do so can a .280 Rem! What a .300 Win Mag can do so can a .30-'06! My medium bore is a .338 Win Mag, but I have yet to hunt with it because my 7MM Rem Mag is more than sufficient for all North American game. But if I were in the market for a new medium bore, I would sure as heck look into the .338 Federal or the venerable .35 Whelan(sp?).

So if magnum implicates stellar ability to anchor game, wouldn't nearly all cartridges deserve the term???

BTW, when I first started hunting, my dad told me that there was a time that when a hunter referred to the .300 s/he was referring to the .300 Savage.

Rooney,

Thanks.


Merry Christmas,

Mando

I for one think there is lots a 300 win maq can do better than a 30-06, the first is buck wind.

I am not the least offended by them calling it a magnum. FWIW, I generally hunt whitetails with a 308, but prefer my 300 winny on larger animals where longer shots may be required.

Been hunting a long time in a lot of cool places. Have owned a few different guns and killed stuff with most of them. Now hunt with a 257 Weatherby MAGNUM, a 300 Remington ULTRA MAGNUM, and a 416 Rigby which does not call ittself a MAgnum but sure eats powder and hits back like one! As was stated, there most certainly IS a difference. The premium bullets simply allow me to use a smaller caliber MAGNUM where a larger pill used to be needed. My .02

After many years of carrying guns that weigh too much I've started to look at the receiver and let it be the determiner of which ctg should be fired from it. Takes the same chunk of steel to hold the '06 or the 300 Win Mag, so why struggle trying to get my '06 to perform at 300 levels when the mag does it easily? Same thought with 7Rem Mag vs 280 Rem. Everyone shooting the 280 seems thrilled that they get "almost" 7 Mag velocities with the right trick (dangerous?) handloads. My thoughts today are to carry the tiniest receiver and get the most power from it. Does that make any sense?

Mando: The differences that exist between, for example, a 30/06 and a 300 win mag; or a 280 and a 7 RM, may be small, but they do exist.And the higher velocity of the larger case does have a noticeable effect on things like trajectory, bullet expansion, wound channel size due to added velocity,ability to drive heavier bullets at the same velocity level the smaller cases achieve with lighter bullets, and expand tough bullets somewhat better.

Small advantages? Yes. Incremental improvements? Yes.Some drawbacks to the bigger case? Yes.Is the 280 a great cartridge? Yes. Would I choose it over a 7 mag? No. Been there,done that.

I hunt all my large game with pretty tough expanding bullets. I am not a "long range shooter" as the term might be defined today. I find the higher velocity, flatter trajectory out to about 500 yards,long range bullet expansion, and negligible recoil levels of a 7 RM helpful.The thing I notice about many 280 owners is, the first thing they do is load it to the gills to try and prove that it is, by god, the velocity equivilent of a 7 Rem Mag. Well, it ain't...I have owned enough of both to know.The reason is simple:the 280 has less powder capacity.If you don't feel you need the extra velocity, fine. Shoot the 280...I'm sure everything will be OK.

Frankly, I never bought a cartridge because of the monicker attached to it.I looked at its' performance.Your theory is interesting,but anyone who buys a rifle cartridge because of the name attached to it does not have his priorities straight."Magnum" cartridges are popular cause they hold more powder and go faster.How much of this added performance you want is pretty much up to you.

I bought a 7Rem Mag when I was young and impressionable. It killed okay, but no better than the old '06. At least not on deer and moose and bear. I sold the dern thing and bought an '06. Killed everything I ever shot it at with good success. A lot of years later -- 25 maybe -- I got bit by the magnum bug again, and went with a 300 Winnie. Great cartridge?? You bet! Does it kill any better at sane distances? Nope. Gets there a little quicker with a little less trajectory in between. results?? Dead deer - dead moose. I love the 300 Winnie. Last rifles I bought have all been NON magnums, and I wound up carrying guess what ? ? ? ? ? ? And ole 30-06. After over 100 years, it still kills everything I point it at stone cold dead!

You want a magnum? Help yourself. I've had a couple, and I liked the one (300) but any more, I'd sooner get it done with less buck and snort. YMMV.

BobinNH,

I do agree that magnums have slightly improved performance, but even here this can be nebulous. For instance, the .280 Rem has slightly improved performance vis-a-vis the 7X57. Moreover, to my way of thinking, ballistics should be considered at anticipated distances at which game will be harvested. In essence, we shouldn't compare the .300 Win Mag and the '06 at muzzle but at 300 to 400 yards where they might be separated by a couple hundred FPS. I kinda wonder to what that translates in point blank range.

Maybe terminal performance might be a more objective method of assessing a cartridge's efficacy. And at the ranges at which most game is shot, just about all big game cartridges will destroy the vitals of all North American ungulates, especially with improvements in bullet technology.

BTW, I once saw a training film in which a 7.62 NATO round (.308 Win) shot through-and-though the front end of a car with a V-8 engine. The bullet went through the first fender, through the engine block, through the off-side fender, and through a ballistic vest behind the off-side fender. If a .308 Win can do that, it sure as hell will penetrate through-and-through the largest ungulate on this continent provided the right bullet is selected.

Therefore, is a .300 Win Mag really any better at anchoring game than an '06? Could be, but I have yet to see it.

As for me, I'd much rather carry a 22" barreled standard caliber rifle up-and-down the Rockies as opposed to my 24" barreled Sako 7MM Rem Mag. However, I can understand why others would feel more comfortable with a magnum.

I listened to the same argument for years. The 300 ultra does not do anything the 300 wea can't, the 300 wea does not do any thing the 300 win can;t the 300 win does not do anything the 30-06 can't do the 30-06 does not do anything the 308 can't the 308 does not do anything the 30-40 can't the 30-40-the 30-30 so on and so on

So if one did not know better the 30-30 and the 300 ulta are equal??????????????

Each step of the way there is an increment of differance. Those increments are often no where near as important as some think, but they are there.

The 30-06 is one of if not the best all around catridge for North American game. Do no take that to mean that I think it is the only one anyone should have. The 7mm Rem that some are demonizing is an excellent cartridge and in north America it will do the job (and you can quote me) JUST AS WELL AS THE 30-06.

Even if someone taged it with the Magnum curse.

According to Chuck Hawks:

�The "magnum" concept as applied to wine indicates an outsize bottle. As applied to rifle cartridges it implies a larger than standard case. Until recently, magnum rifle cartridge cases headspaced on a belt at the head of the case. The presence of such a belt, in the collective mind of the shooting public, indicted a magnum cartridge.�

�Holland & Holland followed the success of their .375 with .300 and .244 caliber cartridges based on the same case. H&H also introduced a .275 (7mm) Belted Magnum cartridge on a shortened version of the .375 case that measured 2.500" in length. And, in the 1920's, a smaller belted case with a rim/belt diameter of .467", base diameter of .450", and case length of 2.490" for their .240 Magnum Rimless.�

�Thus, from the originator of the modern magnum rifle cartridge, we see all of the trends to downsize that have more recently so muddied the magnum waters. But, note that the two things all of these H&H Magnums had in common when introduced was performance superior to standard (non-magnum) rifle cartridges of the same caliber and a belted case.�


Additional info from mixed sources:

�The .375 Holland & Holland Magnum was introduced in 1912 as the .375 Belted Rimless Nitro-Express. The .375 H&H was only the second cartridge ever to feature a belt (.400/375 Belted NE was the first). It initially used cordite propellant, which was made in long strands - hence the tapered shape of this cartridge, which was also to ensure smooth chambering and extraction from a rifle's breech.�

It�s not real clear when they dropped the Nitro-Express nomenclature and introduced Magnum into the cartridge�s name but probably about the time they stopped using cordite to launch bullets with. I would agree with Chuck, �The presence of such a belt, in the collective mind of the shooting public, indicted a magnum cartridge.� As far as my thoughts go, Magnum simply implies a bigger case. Hell, the 22-250 and 220 Swift are magnum rounds. You never saw a belt on the 357 or 44 magnums.

H & H listed what is called a 375 H&H flanged Magnum that didn't have a belt in 1925 that used cordite as a propellant. So the word "Magnum" goes back a long time.

Let�s stick with the .30�s for a minute, as I have a .30-30, .308 Win, .30-06 and a .300 Win Mag. All of the game I�ve taken could v been taken with the .308 Win and most could have been taken with the .30-30. From left to right the advantages of each cartridge are incremental with the least advantage being the .30-06 over the .308 Win.

The .300 Win was my first choice. Why? Not because it had �Magnum� in the name but because of a demonstrable performance advantage over the .30-06 in terms of downrange energy, velocity and trajectory. The difference is incremental but the .300 Win Mag DOES have performance advantages over the .30-06. My first .300 Win Mag handloads were .308 equivalents and worked up through .30-06 territory. But I�ve never been able to get my .30-06 to match my top .300 Win Mag loads. With top loads the .300 Win Mag burns more fuel, recoils more, and tends to come in longer, heavier rifles � all characteristics which are sometimes considered negatives. Whether or not the .300 Win Mag is �superior� or �inferior� to the .30-06 depends on the yardstick being used.



A 7mm Rem Mag was my first centerfire firearm and it has served me well for the last 25 years. Sorry, a .280 Rem is close but it is not the equivalent of the .7mm Rem Mag � the 7mm�s extra 17g of water capacity gives it an extra 200fps or so for a given pressure. You can�t beat the physics of case capacities with the .280 Rem any more than you can with the .30-06 vs. the .300 Win Mag.

Will a .280 Rem do most of what is done with a 7mm Rem Mag? Of course. That�s the essence of �incremental� differences. But the 7mm Rem Mag wins the performance race with 17g worth of increments.



Short answer, �No�.

The .30-06 was well established when H&H introduced the .375 H&H Magnum, which fired much larger bullets and provided an additional 27g or so case capacity with which to drive them. The .375 H&H was and still is considered adequate for the largest and most dangerous game. When H&H introduced what is now called the .300 H&H Magnum, it was called �Holland�s Super 30� and lacked the �Magnum� nomenclature. Using .375 H&H Magnum performance as the test, one could argue that few existing cartridges deserve the �Magnum� nomenclature.

But the fact is it doesn�t matter what manufacturers decide to call a cartridge � the name does not affect actual performance one iota.



Like the .30-30, the .300 Savage is a fine round - but it certainly does not deserve the �magnum� nomenclature .

Coyote_Hunter,

I do appreciate your:

"The .300 Win was my first choice. Why? Not because it had �Magnum� in the name but because of a demonstrable performance advantage over the .30-06 in terms of downrange energy, velocity and trajectory."

but how does this translate to actual hunting use? What are the demonstrable performance advantages of the .300 Win mag over the '06? At what distance does the '06 start to give up ground to the .300 Win Mag? And what are the actual trajectory advantages at say 350 yards?

I wish I could actually tell you the exact point at which my 7MM Rem Mag pulls away from the .280 Rem in terms of ability to anchor game. But I cannot. And 200 FPS muzzle velocity differential using 175 grain bullets would translate to nearly identical velocity at 300 yards.

I still believe that destruction of vitals is the single most crucial element in the process of anchoring anything. Thus, it matters little of what caliber does the destroying, only that destruction occurs.


Merry Christmas,

Mando

8mmwapati,

"So if one did not know better the 30-30 and the 300 ulta are equal??????????????"

They might just be, depending upon how they're measured. If you're using a .300 Ultra Mag to harvest deer at 150 yards and another hunter uses a .30-30 to do the same, and both are successful, how is one inferior to the other for the task under review? In fact, a good argument could be made that the .30-30 is more efficient for hunting deer at 150 yards or less!

How would any animal know what caliber were to destroy its vitals?



Merry Christmas,

Mando

338Federal,

your post is the first one I have seen here that mirrors my idea's exactly as respect to reciever size. No reason that I can imagine to carry a bolt rifle capable of chambering a 257WBY and chamber it in 25/06 or 257 Roberts. Well said and right on.

MARK

Mando,

Yours is a good post and thoughtful discussion. Some of us like total bangflops and can shoot well at the extended ranges that the big guys are demonstrably better at. Also, more horsepower enables us to, with good premium bullets, move up a bit in game size i.e. when I was hunting for a Zebra in Zim last year and the opportunity arose to take an exceptional Eland (these guys are bigger than an Alaskan moose, coming in at apx 2000lbs) at a fairly long distance. I was reasonably well armed with the 300 Ultra Mag using 180 gr Barnes Triple Shock bullets BUT... it took every bit of horespower I had at my disposal as the bullet JUST made it to the skin on the offside of the Eland bull and I MUCH prefer an exit wound. A .308 or 30/06 would have been less effective and if the second lung had not been pierced this could have been a case of a LONG and possibly fruitless tracking job. My 300 Ultra also allowed me to hold dead on at a large Kudu this year who was a measured 350 yards out and killed him DRT with one well placed shot. He, and the Zebra I shot a few days later died within a few paces of where they stood and the terminal damage done was impressive X 10. I have shot a fair amount of game with a 30/06 and the 'ol ought six is a great all around cartrideg but, as has been stated here by others, there IS a difference. Maybe not for deer at 150 yards but for big stuff and especially if it is a ways out there the difference is real. Fun thread!

Mando, When you talk of 7mm/175gr bullets leaving at 200fps diff and arriving at 300yds at same speed what bullets are you comparing? Round nose vs Spitzer? I guess I don't know how the slower one catches up. Got any charts?