Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles 358 Norma or 375 Ruger

Check out Ammoguide.com

.358 Norma Mag

.375 Ruger

7mm Rem Mag

I am currently have a Brno Mauser action being barreled in .358 Norma. I also, have a Browning FN .375H&H so I don't have a need at this time, for the .375Ruger. I will add, that either way you go, you are going to like it!

Ray,

As near as my research can confirm, the reloading data for the .35 Newton and the .358 Norma are comparable. As we know, each individual rifle is a law unto itself! Thus I just figured that I'd start with .358 Norma starting loads and work up using a chronograph. The rifle in question came with most of a box of original factory loads. Thus, I thought I'd sacrifice three of them to formulate a "Control" base.

The newest data that I can find printed is from Speer #4 handbook, dated 1959. It shows loads for the 250 gr. at nearing or barely surpassing 2900 f.p.s. I believe that's a bit optimistic, As I don't intend to go appreciably beyond 2700 f.p.s. I believe that to be adequate of all intents and purposes. Especially considering my rifle is about 90+ years old. Comparing loading data to the Norma indicates about three grains more for maximum loads in the Newton.

Having an extensive handloading library at my fingertips is a given adavantage. John J. Donnelly lists in his Handloaders Manual of Cartridge Conversions the water capacity of the .358 Norma to be about 87.5 grs of H2O while the Newton is listed @ 92.5 grs of H2O.

One of my resources is a friend who custom makes bullets. I intend to use a semi-pointed bullet of apx 220 gr. After all, I only hunt whitetailed deer. There may be just ONE more Elk hunt in the cards for me. If so, I expect this rifle to get the nod. (With one of my various 9.3's for a backup.) I will then use 250 gr. bullets. I will sight in with both spitzers and RN's. As I believe the RN's are entirely adequate out to 250 yds and beyond. 'Sides that, any game animal on the far side of 300 yds is likely quite safe from a rifleman of my qualifications unless provided with a very solid rest. As a general rule, If I can't injun up within 200 yds, I don't shoot!

PM me your mailing addy and I'd be happy to send you a "dummy" round.

Grasshopper

If you go Norma you can always re-use your 7 Mag cases by necking them up. (They're the same as 338 WM which is often suggested as reformable; they're just a bit easier to find. Work great for me anyway.)

Klik,

Good point... However; As one who has spent more than my share of time necking cases up and down, I've found that in the real world, the only reason to do so is if the final result is unavailable... Also, have found thru experience that to achieve best results in doing so, one is best advised to use new, unfired brass. Brass is relatively cheap... The casual reloader, can use only 50 pcs of brass and they will last him several years.

I've also discovered that trying to hoard brass is an exercise in futility for the most part. (Especially once fired brass...) Seems I have discarded a whole bunch of older brass because of splits as a result of age and brittleness.

Any more, I buy a bag of 50 or 100 and dedicate 50 pcs to each rifle in any given caliber When they are worn out, I get another 50. BTW: This philosphy does not include varmint rifles...

Grasshopper

What ever the Norma can do, the Ruger can do better.
Through the years I've had a .358 STA, a 375 H&H, a H&H Imp, and a 416RM. They have since all went bye bye, to be replaced by the 375 Ruger, built on a 700, and it feeds just fine, thank you.

I hunted all through Alaska and Canada with a 7 RM. It did the job. The most popular and readily availbale ammo up there is the 300 Win Mag, 338 Win Mag and the time tested 375 HH.
I've hunted Elk with the 7 RM and the 06.
No complaints here.

The 375 HH isn't going any where and can still do what all the new Whiz Bang Rounds can do.

It's a killer.

Although the 358 Norma is a cool round. It would be best to go with the 338 Win Mag.

More practical. And proven.

Thomas

I've got one of long necked Normas that Greydog speaks of, I believe the first one he did. And I speak of it on here, probably too much. "We" built this about 7 years ago. I discussed with Greydog, then was smart enough to stay out of his way!

Why did I go Norma and not 375H&H? At the time I convinced myself it was the best compromise of bullet diameter and weight and good velocity, with the subsequent flat trajectory. Put that in a 8 pound rifle without muzzle break, and it would still be nice to carry and I could shoot it from prone and live to tell about it. After a bit of tweaking from my original spec's, it's absolutely perfect.

I went with a 12 twist so I could shoot the heavies, but modern bullets like the 225TSX makes that a moot point, unless I end up shooting something big and nasty in Africa with this rifle. Living in BC with the game available here, that seems unlikely.

Does it do a thing the 375 Ruger won't do? Of course not, except perhaps the 8 pound/prone/surviving part. Will the 375 Ruger do anything that a 35 cal 225TSX at 2950 fps or a 250 at 2800 from my rifle won't? That's for each of us to decide, that's why we have different cartridges!

As mentioned, the ability to use pistol bullets is a nice touch. I don't practice with those, but I do carry a few 158 JHP's loaded to 1400 fps in my pocket so I can shoot a grouse while moose and elk hunting. Call me crazy but a TSX at 2900+ fps seems a bit "excessive" for a chicken!

If I was doing this rifle over again in 2009, what would I change given todays choices? Not a bloody thing.

RickF,

What stock did you use? Is that the discontinued G&H pattern? And what barrel (and contour) is your Norma? That looks great. I actually just put some Talley's on mine and a Leupold VX-II 3-9x40 on it.

Long story.

It started life with a heavier barrel because one of the smiths who used to post on this board was very strong in his recommendation. It also had a Brown Precision stock that weighed 32oz.

The "smith" was wrong, the result was a graceless POS that was incredibly muzzle heavy. Greydog was very understanding... I had him turn down the barrel until it balanced on the front screw, exactly as I asked him to do. I haven't got it in front of me, but if memory serves the 23" tube mikes 0.635" at the muzzle.

This is another rifle which proves that you can turn down a barrel successfully. Greydog took a bunch off the barrel, and it shoots as well now as before. When shooting 225TSX's at 100 yards, the bullet holes usually touch.

The stock? I upgraded that a while back. That's a standard fill Echols Legend, I understand one of only a couple LEGEND swirlies in existence. I ordered it through D'Arcy. Everything they say about just how good that stock is? They are absolutely right. I've had most of them...Borden, G&H, Brown, 700 classic. This is by far the best shaped stock for a full sized sporter I have ever used.

Grasshopper your pm's are full. Cool rifle rick. I am going to probably stay in the .358 game for now and take the advice of having both eventually. The ruger feels good in the african to me.

... Ooops, try it now...

When I saw the first 375 Ruger cartridge, I thought, "Hmmm, that looks just like a 35 Newton".
Well, a few quick measurements showed that to be a pretty close guess.
I have always wondered what might have happened if Charles Newton was friendly enough with Winchester that they elected to chamber the Newton cartridges in the Model 54 and Model 70. In many ways it would have made perfect sense. The Newton cartridges had been around for a long while. They fit the magazines. Western Cartridge even loaded the ammunition.
Imagine... Winchester elects to chamber the Newton lineup in the new Model 54 Winchester bolt action rifle. Because the 256 (actually a 6.5mm) makes such fine long range smallbore, they don't need to develop the .270 Winchester. The 30 Newton is the first 300 Magnum and is roughly 85 years ahead of it's time. It's beltless, with minimal body taper and a reasonably sharp shoulder; just what people would be wanting in the year 2000. With it in the line up, there is no need for Winchester to stretch out the M70 magazine to hold the overlong 300H&H. The Newton fits perfectly. The 35 provides about all the punch the north American hunter is likely to need but since some African locations required a 375 bore for dangerous game, Winchester might have decided to neck up the 35 Newton case to 375 for African use. They could even go further and make a 416 if they so desired.
If Newton and Winchester had gotten along well enough to get Newton's cartridges chambered in Winchester rifles, we would probably never have seen a 300 H&H chambered by a North American factory. We would possibly have not seen the 375. The 270 might not have been developed. Almost certainly, we would never have seen the 308 Norma,the 300 Win Mag, the 338 Win Mag or the 358 Norma. Most likely the 264 and the 7mm Rem Mag would never have seen the light of day. The 375 Ruger would not have been developed because it would already exist as the 375 Winchester developed nearly 80 years ago.
So US firearms history was determined by an American company's decision to chamber British cartridges rather than use an American's already established cartridges. Probably because the guys at Winchester just didn't like Newton (he might not have been that likeable!). The one real big benefit of my revised history is that the WSMs would never have appeared! GD

Besides the fact that I am a fan of the 358, I would chose it because the 7mm RM and 358 NM are the same other than neck diameter. Thus no work needed other than screwing on a new barrel or a re bore. Lou

Greydog,

Interesting observations... However if what I have read is correct, Chas Newton didn't actually design the .30 and .35 Newton. He plaguerized them from Fred Adolph. Probably with Mr. Adolph's blessing. I suppose at this late date, we'll likely never know. But you do have to admit that the design was a winner. I can hardly wait to get mine in the field... (Or rather the woods...) Not to mention that I would dearly love to take an Elk with the 90+ yr old rifle.

Grasshopper

Rick: Nice rifle!

Back just before the 358 STA, I ran into a horde of 250 gr 35 caliber Bitterroots,so decided to build a rifle around the bullets.I got a pre 64 375H&H action, had Butch Searcy screw on a 12 twist CM 24"Kreiger,and dropped it in a Brown Precision stock.We chambered it for the 8 Rem Mag necked up to 35 cal with no other changes.

I did load development with the 250 Speer and and 92 grains of RL19 gave me over 3000 fps.This thing was a hammer at both ends, very flat shooting and zeroed 3" up at 100 it was down only 9" at 400 yards.It kicked like a mule....

At the same time, I discovered that a 375H&H with a light contour 24" barrel,and rifle that weighed about 8 1/4,could be loaded with only 78 gr of 4064,and gave a 250 Sierra or Bitterroot 2900+ fps. It dropped only about 13" at 400,kicked a lot less,and (I learned) made big holes in brown bears.

I sorta figured that trying to improve on a 375H&H by going to a 35 was pretty tough to do,and dropped the 35 "thing" all together;not that 35's are not good,because they are great,but any advantage they give over a 375 bore is pretty much in the noodle of the shooter.

Given the choice today between the 375 Ruger and a 358 Norma, I am grabbing the Ruger any day;loaded with something like a 250 Swift A Frame to a bit below 3000,it does anything a 338,340,358 Norma or 375H&H does,although the H&H is just as good.

With a good 375 Ruger or H&H,a guy just does not need anything else over 30 caliber,unless he wants a 40 cal+ "stopper";and yes I understand this is not about "need"

Bob:

How right you are... Since I own a M-700 C-grade Safari, I really didn't need the Newton. (Altho' I believe the Newton came to me 1st, but I have had a .375 in my safe for at least 20 years...)

However, I just couldn't resist the challenge of something different. I'll likely never hunt anything but whitetails with it anyway...

Grasshopper

Grasshopper: I understand the obsession. Rifle nuts are funny people....

How very true....

Grasshopper,
It was my understanding that the 30 (originally the Adolf Express)was designed by Newton for Fred Adolf. In reality, it was probably a collaboration: I suppose it doesn't really matter. The 35, which came later, grew out of the 30. They are nice cartridges and it is interesting it has taken almost 90 years and a 3 generations for the designs to be accepted as the "latest great thing in cartridge design".
My Dad had a 308 Norma chambered when the cartridge first came out. As a kid, I saw the similarity between the Norma and a 35 Newton cartridge Dad had in his collection and wondered why Norma even bothered. GD

Didn't Phil Shoemake write an article about the .375R where he stuffed it into an Interarms? Like a 270, maybe? Or was that in one of my acid flashbacks?

Kaiser Norton