Home
Is Ruger killing the 300 & 338 RCM's?

I was on the Ruger website trying to check out a .338 RCM only to find the 8 lb Guide Gun is it! Are they kidding? I would think the RCM was more popular.
The RCMs were a marketing epic fail.
So what will I convert my 338RCM into when brass is impossible to find, or will Ruger replace the defective design? I feel a class action lawsuit in the making.
Originally Posted by ingwe
The RCMs were a marketing epic fail.


I think it was just blind pride and stupidity.

Cartridges in search of a reason to exist... and a day late and dollar short at that.
Originally Posted by Brad
...Cartridges in search of a reason to exist...and a day late and dollar short at that.


That's happened quite a bit the past twenty years or so. The focus has been lost. The world has changed. My Leupold rangefinder is made in China. Holding companies exist solely to make a buck, with little concern for pride of ownership. Why couldn't Remington develop a decent budget bolt rifle in thirty years of trying? Why are many new cartridges some kind of magnum? Why aren't the big companies listening to the consumer?

And what of the lady in red?
Considering the fact that you could effectively hunt any game in the world with a 12 gauge shotgun and a battery of rifles in 3 or 4 calibers that have existed since 1956 or before, the last 40 or 50 cartridges that have been introduced seem a bit superfluous to me. There will be lots of nice rifles for which ammunition does not exist that will be taking up space in closets in years to come.

Many of them will be in calibers that haven't even been introduced yet.

I'll still be able to buy ammo for all of mine, because I am old-fashioned.
Originally Posted by siskiyous6
I feel a class action lawsuit in the making.


Has something like that happened before when a cartridge was discontinued?


They are still making ammo and brass for the 8mm Rem, 6.5 Rem Mag and a host of others that have long since been dropped from factory chamberings. As long as brass/cartridges sell, they should continue to make them.

On another note, I'm stocking up brass for my .300 SAUM every chance I get just in case...that should save me the hassle of an (?) lawsuits..,
Can't imagine the RCMs perform any better, or worse, than what's already out there. I was intrigued by the 20" barrel package of the 338 RCM. Make for a great hunting rifle.
Ruger shoulda necked the 375 Ruger case down...they missed the boat...
I actually like the case design of the RCM better than the WSM. I don't own one or a WSM at the moment though. They were just too late to the party.

Ditto for the .30 TC.

I haven't figured out what it will do that the .308 Winchester won't do.
The RCM's raison d'etre was magnum performance from a 20" barreled rifle.
As this experiment shows the market for short barreled magnums is pretty small.

I know I have less than no interest in one.
Originally Posted by nyrifleman
Ruger shoulda necked the 375 Ruger case down...they missed the boat...


Yep, WTH were thinking..A 7 and 30 cal on the 375 case would have taken off..There is a pretty big long range crowd shooting the 7LRM, which is off of a 375 ruger.
Originally Posted by bellydeep
Originally Posted by siskiyous6
I feel a class action lawsuit in the making.


Has something like that happened before when a cartridge was discontinued?


They are still making ammo and brass for the 8mm Rem, 6.5 Rem Mag and a host of others that have long since been dropped from factory chamberings. As long as brass/cartridges sell, they should continue to make them.

On another note, I'm stocking up brass for my .300 SAUM every chance I get just in case...that should save me the hassle of an (?) lawsuits..,


Lawsuits? crazy
Originally Posted by ingwe
The RCMs were a marketing epic fail.


Couldn't let Remington have all the fun.
Originally Posted by nsaqam
The RCM's raison d'etre was magnum performance from a 20" barreled rifle.
As this experiment shows the market for short barreled magnums is pretty small.

I know I have less than no interest in one.


Huh?

Nice French, but the RCM's have the case capacity of a 30-06 plus 1 grain give or take... hardly a magnum.
Originally Posted by EdM
Originally Posted by bellydeep
Originally Posted by siskiyous6
I feel a class action lawsuit in the making.


Has something like that happened before when a cartridge was discontinued?


They are still making ammo and brass for the 8mm Rem, 6.5 Rem Mag and a host of others that have long since been dropped from factory chamberings. As long as brass/cartridges sell, they should continue to make them.

On another note, I'm stocking up brass for my .300 SAUM every chance I get just in case...that should save me the hassle of an (?) lawsuits..,


Lawsuits? crazy


He said it, not me
Originally Posted by Brad
Originally Posted by nsaqam
The RCM's raison d'etre was magnum performance from a 20" barreled rifle.
As this experiment shows the market for short barreled magnums is pretty small.

I know I have less than no interest in one.


Huh?

Nice French, but the RCM's have the case capacity of a 30-06 plus 1 grain give or take... hardly a magnum.


Modern powders + selective data = smoke and mirrors
They're more capacious than the .30-06.

And marketed as magnums.

According to ammoguide 67gr to 71gr.

According to QL 68gr to 75gr.

Both advantage RCM.
Originally Posted by Steve Redgwell
[quote=Brad] Why couldn't Remington develop a decent budget bolt rifle in thirty years of trying?


They had/have the ADL...apparently it wasn't "budget" enough for the guys on a budget???
I actually think the RCM's are decent cartridges. Sure, they are just a re-vamped '06 as far as capacity and performance are concerned but they do fit and function well in a short action.
I had a 338 RCM briefly and sort of liked it except for some flaws with the rifle itself. I had to add an inch and a quarter to the stock to get a reasonable length of pull and spend two evenings making the forarm less ugly (I went with a schnabel and it looked pretty good). The rifle was very accurate and not too bad to shoot with the lengthened stock. Why on earth they supplied the rifle with such super-high rings is a mystery to me. I guess for the guys who wanted to mount a 50mm scope on their lightweight carbine. Also, the bolt handle was ridiculously thin.
So the rifle was, in some respects, a turkey. The cartridge worked just fine though.
I like the 300 RCM better than the WSM just as I like the SAUM better. With the WSM, it was hate at first sight. I had reamer before I could get brass and had some of the first brass in the country then wondered why I had bought both.
Ultimately, I think the main failing with the RCM's is not with the cartridges but with the rifles. Ruger really needs to take a step back and look at some of their earlier offerings before they produce something too stupid. They have produced a few nice rifles but not too frequently lately. GD
Bill, I like the SAUM's better than the WSM's as well... hence, there was no need for the RCM's except Ruger's intransigence.

Originally Posted by nsaqam
They're more capacious than the .30-06.


Whatever... in the real world (as opposed to Nerdvana) they're the same.
Originally Posted by Brad
Originally Posted by nsaqam
They're more capacious than the .30-06.


Whatever... in the real world (as opposed to Nerdvana) they're the same.


According to QL they're more capacious than the .300 SAUM you prefer.
74 to 75gr.
And almost exactly split the difference between the -06 and the WSM.

And marketed as magnums with magnum performance from a short barrel. I read their adds too.
So in the real "real world" they're bigger and faster than the -06 despite your strenuous objections to the contrary.
Ever worked with one?

I thought not... one glance at Hogdon's website and pressure data tells your QL is nice guess work.

180 GR. HDY SP Hodgdon H4350 .308" 2.820" 56.4 2648 50,700 PSI 60.0C 2826 62,600 PSI
Ever done math?

Ever heard of the concept that case capacity wins when pressures are equal?

I thought not.

Either way, they were marketed as magnums utilizing a short barrel and the folks who didn't beat a path to their door to embrace this concept tells me that the market for short barreled magnums is pretty thin.
You need to get into the real world...
You win Brad, enjoy.


Here is the Hornady press release


-----------------------------------------------------------------------


Hornady Introduces .300 and .338 RCM (Ruger Compact Magnum)

Hornady Press Release



Illustration courtesy of Hornady Manufacturing Co., Inc.
Hornady�s New Ruger Compact Magnums are Extreme Cartridges for Extreme Hunting

Hornady knows that hunting elk, bighorn, brown bear, musk ox and African game can land you in some fairly extreme environments. And until now, hunters have used gear that hasn�t evolved much in the past 100 years.

The paradigm has shifted. Hornady�s new Ruger Compact Magnum cartridges afford hunters a rifle/cartridge combination that will allow them to take their hunting to new levels of performance.

Based on the beltless 375 Ruger case, the 300 and 338 Ruger Compact Magnums match 300 and 338 Win Mag performance. The kicker is the RCMs do it in a well-balanced quick-handling rifle.

Anyone who has spent much time in the woods with a long barreled rifle knows they can be ungainly, heavy, and not too quick inthe hand. But shorten the rifle a few inches and you immediately feel the difference. Plus, a shorter barrel is more rigid, making the gun stronger and more accurate.

To that end, Ruger� has made a number of modifications to the M77� Hawkeye� to create the perfect mate to the new RCM Cartidges. These new rifles are built around Ruger�s rock solid short action and feature 20" barrels, crisp LC6 triggers and updated stock dimensions to improve handling. All in a compact, fast-handling package that tips the scale at just over 6.5 lbs.

� Exceeds 300 & 338 Win Mag performance from a compact 20" barrel
� Optimized propellants and case geometry deliver more velocity with 10-15% less powder
� Longer barrel life
� Less recoil
� Less muzzle blast
� Superior temperature stability from -15�F to 140�F
� Extreme cartridges for extreme hunting!

Magnum performance in a package you don�t need a gun bearer to carry!

Any veteran big game hunter will tell you the 30-06 and 300 Winchester Magnum are the standards by which other cartridges in the class are judged. And the 300 Win Mag is a great cartridge. But to be efficient, it requires a 24" barrel - a 26" barrel is better.

Hornady�s new 300 Ruger Compact Magnum, available in 150, 165 and 180 grain offerings, deliver 300 Win Mag level performance, but do it in a much shorter package. The new 338 RCM, in 200 gr SST and 225 grSST, provides a compact, quick-handling alternative to the 338 Win Mag.

The new Ruger Compact Magnums deliver this performance using 10-15% less propellant than other magnums. This means longer barrel life. The new RCMs also produce less recoil and muzzle blast due to smaller propellant payload, and best of all, the efficient case geometry delivers exceptional velocities from 20" barrels. Hornady�s propellant technology allows for VERY little temperature sensitivity from -15�F to 140�F.
Brad still wins because he's used one.
Originally Posted by jwp475


Hornady Press Release:

• Exceeds 300 & 338 Win Mag performance from a compact 20" barrel
• Optimized propellants and case geometry deliver more velocity with 10-15% less powder
• Longer barrel life
• Less recoil
• Less muzzle blast
• Superior temperature stability from -15�F to 140�F
• Extreme cartridges for extreme hunting!

Magnum performance in a package you don’t need a gun bearer to carry!




How many 'experienced' handloaders believe this CROCK? !!!

IMO - If HALF of that manure was true - Ruger would NOT be dropping them..



edited to add:

I have an Oehler 33, I'll GLADLY graph ANYONE'S RCM. I'd REALLY like to see it.


True or not is not why they are dropping them. Nasqam is correct people were not interested in a 20" barrel magnum. Lack of sales is the reason they are being dropped. Handgun loaders aren't even a drop in the bucket of the gun buying public, most handloaders are 59 years old or older.
It's a magnum in name only.

No handloader can duplicate the factory ammo velocities that use a proprietary powder... just like no handloader can duplicate those same proprietary "High Energy" loads available for the 30-06, 308, et al.

If anyone thinks two grains more H4350 than a 30-06 to push a 180 at 2,825 from the 300 RCM is a Magnum, I've got a bridge in Brooklyn for them.

A 30-06 will get to 2,800+ loaded to the same pressure as the RCM with 58.0 H4350.

Two grains and less than 25 fps between them... good grief, IT'S A MAGNUM!
Originally Posted by Brad
It's a magnum in name only.




YEAH buddy. THAT IS my point!!


jwp - My offer of graphing is NOT limited to handloads!!

The wages of hype is an early death.

And they dropped an eminently useful .338 Federal to flog their .338 RCM too.

1B
And that's what appealed to me about the RCM. '06 performance on a SA. I never bought one though.
Originally Posted by jwall
Originally Posted by Brad
It's a magnum in name only.




YEAH buddy. THAT IS my point!!



jwall, I understood... I wasn't responding to you, just using the quick reply feature.
Originally Posted by shortactionsmoker
And that's what appealed to me about the RCM. '06 performance on a SA. I never bought one though.


And my point was the 300 SAUM was already available... Ruger just didn't want to pay into the Jamison collection agency.
Originally Posted by jwall
Originally Posted by Brad
It's a magnum in name only.




YEAH buddy. THAT IS my point!!


jwp - My offer of graphing is NOT limited to handloads!!




I not only have a chromo but I also have an Ohler personal ballistics lab

Do you guys realize that I am not commenting on the performance of the cartridges one way or the other, only on how they were marketed to the public.

It certainly appears that the public was not impressed with "magnum performance" in a 20" barrel and if they got the speeds claimed in a 20" or reasonably close then they were/are rather amazing. But I am like the majority of the buy public not interested in a 20" barreled rifle shooting that high of pressure as the noise would be too much because of the high exit pressure

Originally Posted by Brad
Originally Posted by shortactionsmoker
And that's what appealed to me about the RCM. '06 performance on a SA. I never bought one though.


And my point was the 300 SAUM was already available... Ruger just didn't want to pay into the Jamison collection agency.


Agreed.
Again, those "Magnum Velocities" were only available with factory proprietary powder HE-type loadings that can't be duplicated by the handloader...
They have never died, as they were stillborn from announcement.

If anything did steal their fleeting breath, it was the great sucking sound of the 300WSM train already headed down the tracks full-steam ahead.


If Ruger wants a winner, all they have to do is offer a 7-375.

Only a small percentage of american hunters reload today, not like 30 years ago times have changed
When the RCM's were announced, Kimber listed them as available chamberings in the magazine ads. The ads listing the chamberings only lasted a month or so. The next issue of said magazines dropped them from the list. I wonder why that project was pulled? To my knowledge, none were produced.

I may try to dig up one of the ads tonight.
Originally Posted by jwp475

Only a small percentage of american hunters reload today, not like 30 years ago times have changed


And HE loads are available in the 30-06, 308, etc... and the factory SAUM was already established doing a bit more than the 300 RCM.

Ruger got its back up over Jamison and launched their hair-brained RCM's.

But at least they had the sense to offer a 33...
Originally Posted by old_willys
Is Ruger killing the 300 & 338 RCM's?


To answer the original question:

No - the market is killing the 300 & 338 RCM's
Originally Posted by nyrifleman
Ruger shoulda necked the 375 Ruger case down...they missed the boat...
yup....I was amazed when they walked away from a case they already had and bought out the RCMs

I suppose the short bolt throw was more important to them......did they ask any of us?
Wasn't there some official buzz a couple years back about Ruger doing a 300 on the 375 case?

Originally Posted by Brad
Originally Posted by jwp475

Only a small percentage of american hunters reload today, not like 30 years ago times have changed


And HE loads are available in the 30-06, 308, etc... and the factory SAUM was already established doing a bit more than the 300 RCM.

Ruger got its back up over Jamison and launched their hair-brained RCM's.

But at least they had the sense to offer a 33...


I for one do not like short barrel on high intensity cartridges. On the other hand I do like a 20" barrel on a 7X57 since it is not normally loaded to 60,000PSI, factory loads are in the 40's making it a fun cartridge to shoot in a short barrel.

I have a 26" barrel on my 30-06 and I get 3020FPS with 59 grains of H-4350 and a 165 grain bullet. The M-70 holds 5 rounds in the factory magazine, try that with a short fat cartridge
Originally Posted by Brad


jwall, I understood... I wasn't responding to you, just using the quick reply feature.


Yes Brad, I too understood.

I AM agreeing w/you + qualifying the graphing offer to ANYONE.

PEACE bro.
Originally Posted by jwp475


True or not is not why they are dropping them. Nasqam is correct people were not interested in a 20" barrel magnum. Lack of sales is the reason they are being dropped. Handgun loaders aren't even a drop in the bucket of the gun buying public, most handloaders are 59 years old or older.

You have probably written the epitaph of the new Guide Gun right there. A 20" stainless rifle with open sights, yeah, I can see it. That rifle chambered for the .300 Win Mag, .338 Win. Mag., the RCM's - can't really see that.

Perception is reality - certain chamberings may or may not live up to public perception, but perception is why folks spend their money. Not to disrupt this thread, but if Ruger chambers that Guide Gun for what folks "perceive" as good thumpers then it will sell, ugly brake and weird stock or not. .350 Rem. Mag (maybe), .308, maybe even a .325 WSM, those are things folks see (at least I see) as good matches in a shorter, handier type rifle. That, or they need to do some serious marketing to change public perception to sell these.


You hit the nail on the head "public perception"
30/30 the original 30 caliber Magnum 119 years ago and still going strong!!!!
By the way, when I had the 338 RCM, I had no loading data for it so I compared capacity to some Winchester 30/06 brass I had handy. It was exactly the same. Not in the same ballpark, not similar, it was the same. So I used 338/06 data and it worked out fine. Like all of the short magnums, these were a cartridge with no real purpose. Only Winchester was able to market successfully; possibly because they were first but mostly because they were better at slinging the bull.
I still want to see somebody resurrect the 30 Newton! GD
Originally Posted by 1B
The wages of hype is an early death.

And they dropped an eminently useful .338 Federal to flog their .338 RCM too.

1B


To my mind that's the real shame of it. I'd have bought a 20 inch barreled 338 Fed in a heartbeat.
Originally Posted by greydog
By the way, when I had the 338 RCM, I had no loading data for it so I compared capacity to some Winchester 30/06 brass I had handy. It was exactly the same. Not in the same ballpark, not similar, it was the same. So I used 338/06 data and it worked out fine. Like all of the short magnums, these were a cartridge with no real purpose. Only Winchester was able to market successfully; possibly because they were first but mostly because they were better at slinging the bull.
I still want to see somebody resurrect the 30 Newton! GD


You obviously aren't an engineer with a pocket protector and undying faith in QL... grin

Nothing like actually doing a real-world comparison.
And or a blue flame special with a marketing MBA looking to keep employed via a company pushing a bunch of marketing coinage to keep some wet dream round afloat...

Course once the marketing coin stops then the sales mix of the round will drop to a point where it's no longer needed on the menu. Some of my old restaurant background coming here eh Mac... smile

Dober
We all come up with excuses for additional firearms. Often we create elaborate justifications for new guns. My excuse for a rifle to fill a perceived gap was to build another short barreled 338-06 when I came across this 338RCM to be used as a "large game rifle". I had sold my previous 338-06 and I wanted another but decided to give the RCM a try. For shooting any big game rifle outside of the top five chamberings, unless you have deep pockets, I'm of the opinion one should reload, so having odd chambered guns like a 338-06 or a 338RCM doesn't bother me much. So I picked up enough ammo and reloading supplies to keep the RCM fed for many years to come. I liked my compact 338-06 a lot, but I love the short barrel RCM. Kinda like a marriage between a 338-06 and a 350RM. Right down my alley.

[Linked Image]

[Linked Image]

All of the below links are for loads chrono�d with a 20� barrel 338RCM. There is measured data within as such:

200grainers: handloads maxed out in the 2800 to 2850 range

225grainers: handloads maxed out in the 2650 to 2700fps range

250grainers: handloads maxed out in the 2500 to 2575fps range

http://www.realguns.com/archives/170.htm

http://www.gunsandammo.com/content/338-rcm?page=1

http://www.rifleshootermag.com/ammunition/RS_0108_01/index1.html

http://www.gunsandammo.com/content/hot-couple?page=3

http://www.loaddata.com/members/search_d...eloading%20Data


I personally was unable to reach the same performance level with my beloved short barrel 338-06 as can be reached with the short barrel 338RCM. You guys are undercutting the performance potential of the RCM, especially when talking about a 20-inch barrel. The RCM is very efficient from a short barrel. But, short barrel guns are not everyone's cup of tea.

Best smile

The RCM's were turkeys from the beginning. Good riddance.
Originally Posted by ingwe
The RCMs were a marketing epic fail.


Browse "Cartridges of The World" for a plethora of failures over the years.

Our era isn't unique at all. whistle
In my eyes, the RCMs never appeared in a configuration that would have interested me much. Those 20" guns are ridiculously heavy, sorry but a wooden stocked M70 FWT in 358Win I have weighs considerably less and its a sporter with 22" barrel. I know in comparison to a friend's (he bought 2 of them), even he was stunned at how heavy his rifle was.

A 338RCM in a Ruger UltraLight configuration I'd have probably bought, better yet a 338Federal though. In a Mannlicher ... hold me back!! grin

Ruger seems to have 'killed' off a few things the last few years ... the No1 rifles have been decimated, no more Ultralight, or RSMs or my absolute favourite the Mannlicher RSIs. Seems to me this is very much the age of the 'black rifle' and if that's where the market is, so be it ...
Cheers...
Con
Think I just here my dog cover somthing.
BS boy's but that is guist me! Kawi
Out of the box, the wood stocked 338RCM weighed a measured 6 lbs 14 oz. They are not ridiculously heavy.
My 300H&H made in '55 seems to work just fine. Never could see the need for a short fat sort of magnum.
They needed to be closer to an even 6 lbs to be what they should be, a light, short, fast carbine bolt action.
That would be impossible. There are neither factory wood stocked compact Rugers nor featherweight compact Winchesters that can be built with a 20 inch barrel and fixed sights to weigh 6 lbs even. The Winchesters weigh a 1/2 pound more with a 20" barrel w/out sights and the Ruger gets close but it has a 16.5" barrel.
They were a dream come true for a left hander in a different cartridge. I bought a 338 RCM and love it, one of the easier cartridges to load for first loads were under 1". Neat 20" carbine with sights, light quick handling and pleasant to shoot.
I'm with Gary on this one. It's a small niche for sure, but in a carbine size rifle, I think the RCMs are useful. Trying to say they are equal to or better ballistically than their full size magnum counterparts is the same stupid marketing ploy used when the WSMs and SAUMs came out. But, poor and or dishonest marketing doesn't make any of the WSMs, SAUMs, or RCMs bad or useless cartridges. They just fill a small niche that may or may not support their survival. Before they're gone, I'd like to pick up a LH 77 in 300 RCM with a 20 inch barrel-just because.
Speaking of small niches, there's even people out there that ardently believe that the 7mm Rem Mag is just too small, the 7mm STW too big, the 7mm RUM way too big, and have a marvelous wildcat called, I think, the 7mm Mashburn. I believe there is even a "Super" (long throat?) version. Now, seeing that I've owned a few wildcats and currently have a 35 Brown Whelen (lot's of fun fireforming brass with no headspace), I'm not questioning the need and usefulness of said cartridge. More power to ya. grin
Seriously, there is really only a few downsides to the RCMs. If you hate Hornady brass, don't buy one. If you hate Hornady bullets and don't handload, don't buy one. If you are a person who handloads because you like to be able to beat the underloaded factory stuff for velocity, don't buy one. Otherwise, they're just another cartridge choice to take or leave.
Just my 2 cents,
Steve
Yep, and THAT is the reason these failed. wink

I have a Mdl 70 Classic FW in 325 WSM that weighs 6 1/2 pounds, and I see no reason why they couldn't weigh less in an RCM, maybe not the magic 6, but closer.

I also have a great Small ring 98 Mauser 8MM in a beautiful walnut stock that shoots clover leafs and weighs 5 lbs 14 oz. It has sights, too, and a 22" barrel.
I bought one (338 RCM) yesterday, literally. I went with a slightly different model - 22" barrel, no iron sights, so we'll see what happens.

The plan is to top it with a Zeiss Duralyt 1.2-5x36, install a 1" Pachmayr Decel. (in Red, of course), and use 210-gr Swift Scirocco II's and 231-gr. Lapua Naturalis.
I think your bullets will simply bounce off any animals you attempt to slay.
Steve
I've long thought one of those compact mag rifles in a good, lightish synthetic stock would make one heck of a hunting rig. Could be chambered in just about anything...
Wow! If Ruger had gotten as much response to their RCMs as this thread did, they'd still be making them!

Never understood why Ruger keeps introducing new cartridges as a strategy to sell more rifles. I understand the concept of catering to gun nuts for profits but an easier strategy is to make a run of some of the oldies like they did with the 9.3x62. It would be interesting to see the sales data on the 9.3x62 vs the 338 RCM. There are so many good old ones out there to release. Seems like a better strategy.

More people want new-better than old-dependable. It's the American way. wink
Originally Posted by pointer
I've long thought one of those compact mag rifles in a good, lightish synthetic stock would make one heck of a hunting rig. Could be chambered in just about anything...


Maybe .358 Win ?

I liked the little 20" Stainless Laminated .338 RCM I handled, but didn't jump at it.

Maybe a Belch Fire and Thunder Special if a .338 RCM bbl was re-chambered into a .338-375 and screwed onto an Alaskan!
Originally Posted by nyrifleman
Ruger shoulda necked the 375 Ruger case down...they missed the boat...
............Kinda agree there. They shortened the 375 Ruger casing instead.

But as far as the 338 RCM is concerned, Ruger in conjunction with Hornady, wanted to "try as best a possible" (but fell short) duplicating 24" barreled 338 Win Mag ballistics from a new 20" barreled more compact Hawkeye.

I personally feel that had they taken the 375 Ruger casing as is and then necked it down to a 338 and also to a 300 calling them the 338 Ruger and 300 Ruger respectively, they might have enjoyed more success vs the RCMs.

Using the original and non-shortened 375 Ruger casing, the case capacity would have been more and duplicating or exceeding 24" tubed 338 Win Mag ballistics from a 20" barrel would have been much more likely.

They should have maintained the same home run "out of the park" 375 Ruger vs 375 H&H theme for the 338 and 300 calibers as well.
Originally Posted by DakotaDeer
They have never died, as they were stillborn from announcement.

If Ruger wants a winner, all they have to do is offer a 7-375.


Huge +1 on both, though I'd add 338 to the bottom line.
Originally Posted by bellydeep
Originally Posted by siskiyous6
I feel a class action lawsuit in the making.


Has something like that happened before when a cartridge was discontinued?


They are still making ammo and brass for the 8mm Rem, 6.5 Rem Mag and a host of others that have long since been dropped from factory chamberings. As long as brass/cartridges sell, they should continue to make them.

On another note, I'm stocking up brass for my .300 SAUM every chance I get just in case...that should save me the hassle of an (?) lawsuits..,


I believe manufacturers warranty a safe rifle, not ammunition availability. Remember 45 years ago when Browning chambered the 22-250; no commercial ammunition was available - it was a handloading proposition
Originally Posted by stanimal
[To answer the original question:

No - the market is killing the 300 & 338 RCM's


And this is still the reason.

The powers that be at Ruger aren't stupid despite folks' displeasure with them in not catering to their own personal whim. They're willing to take a risk and when you take a risk sometimes you fail.

They're not going to stop making rifles in chamberings that sell, they are going to stop making rifles in chamberings that don't sell.

"Folks" all said, "give is a 9.3X62, it's so cool, I'd buy one." So Ruger did, and folks didn't buy one. At least not in enough numbers to justify its continued existence. Remington had the same experience with the .35 Whelen- "oh, give us a .35 Whelen, we'd buy lots". But they didn't buy lots of them.

I don't think someone at Ruger just up and thought of making the .300 and .338 RCM's. Their market research must have shown them the public wanted a handy carbine that still gave good velocity. But, sometimes market research is wrong. They're in good company, so to speak; the .284 Winchester and 6.5 Remington Magnum come to mind, not to mention all of the SAUMs.

In the case of the .300 and .338 RCM, they gambled and lost. I am reminded of Jack Nicholson's line in "One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest" - "at least I tried, dammit, at least I tried...".
Never been a fan of short barreled rifles. A true magnum has a 24" barrel. If offered in a 24" barrel I would own a 338 RCM
Hate to say, "I told you so" but you should never buy any rifle chambered for a cartridge that has not been in production for at least 10 years, unless you understand from the get-go that you may end up hand loading only, fire forming, etc.
I'd say most on the fire hand load
How embarrassing, 338rcm. All this time I just assumed that with your screen name, you were a big fan of the 338 Ruger Compact Magnum blush. Seriously, I thought they did make the 338RCM with a 23" barrel. If you consider the fact that the RCM is a half inch shorter that the 338Win, that makes the 23" barrel the same as a 23.5" barrel on a 338Win. Not much difference, really.
Steve
Steve, I was going to build a lightweight 338 RCM years ago. I never got around to doing it. I would still buy a factory gun with a 24" barrel
The word magnum in the name had nothing to do with me getting a 338RCM. I bought it because the economic failure meant the gun was being offered at a rerasonable price, and my even lower offer was accepted - that is called the market.

Now despite theory and prejudice what I have on my hands is a great elk rifle, it is light and powerful, and shoots flat.

How flat? Well some cross canyon rock busting during deer season alongside a pair of well used 7 Weatherby Mags with 26 inch barrels resulted in my friends judging the 338 to be a good shooting rifle. We were hitting out to 500 plus yards.

I know it isnt as flat shooting as my 300 Weatherby, but the rifle is easier to carry in the woods. It does have a performance edge over my 358 Winchester.

The same people who wish they could find a Remington 660 in 350 Remington Magnum for elk hunting are going to try and buy this gun from my grandson one day.

Some times the market over looks the sum of all the pieces.

The Hawkeye in 338 RCM is a hunters dream rifle.
A 300RCM with a 20" barrel would be my choice. Not really magnum performance, but surely a 308Win on steroids.
BTW, what's the pup in your avatar?
Steve
Originally Posted by Steve_in_OR
A 300RCM with a 20" barrel would be my choice. Not really magnum performance, but surely a 308Win on steroids.
BTW, what's the pup in your avatar?
Steve


Shes a Vizsula, but shes not a pup anymore. Just my best(spoiled) friend
siskiyou,
Since you made a well thought out purchase of a 338RCM and have carried and shot it in the field, I'm not sure you are qualified to be commenting in this discussion grin.
Actually, I agree with you on all points. Just curious what model you have and if you are handloading or using the Hornady factory stuff? Good post.
Steve
Nice size breed and beautiful dogs. The ones I've been around have been pretty high energy-actually really high energy dogs. Be nice to have one that was sorta de-tuned but I suppose it's the nature of the breed.
Pets and grandkids- just wouldn't be fun if you couldn't spoil 'em.
Steve
Originally Posted by Steve_in_OR
How embarrassing, 338rcm. All this time I just assumed that with your screen name, you were a big fan of the 338 Ruger Compact Magnum blush. Seriously, I thought they did make the 338RCM with a 23" barrel. If you consider the fact that the RCM is a half inch shorter that the 338Win, that makes the 23" barrel the same as a 23.5" barrel on a 338Win. Not much difference, really.
Steve
Steve, Its just a user name and no matter how you measure a barrel 24"s is 24"s
If you can get the performance from a 20 inch tube why go 24?
How much better would it be in 24"s
Originally Posted by hrnhuntr
If you can get the performance from a 20 inch tube why go 24?


Simple.

Even more performance! wink
Steve I have only used factory 225 SST's so far. I do have dies, but not enough empty brassto make it worth setting up a loading session. Knowing how I am I would say check back in about 2014 on the reloading.

I have the wood stock 20 inch barreled model, I am being to lazy to look into the safe right now. Or too sore, it was a long day.

I sort of feel like my decades of experience spoke to me when this gun was chosen. I guess I could machine a nice bloop tube to get 24" - LMAO (I do install a bloop on my long barrel AR for walk around varmiting, saves the ears some.)

And thank you for the nice review of my post.
Performance isnt an absolute - each factor is a compromise. I carry a 26 inch Weatherby with a 2 inch muzzle brake on it for 28" in all, and yes it makes my 300 Weatherby really perform, but it is a nusance in the thicker woods.

Elk hunting where I go now is a medium distance game.
Originally Posted by siskiyous6
Performance isnt an absolute - each factor is a compromise. I carry a 26 inch Weatherby with a 2 inch muzzle brake on it for 28" in all, and yes it makes my 300 Weatherby really perform, but it is a nusance in the thicker woods.

Elk hunting where I go now is a medium distance game.



Sounds like a 24" barrel would be model perfecto!!!
I wouldn't argue a guys barrel length choice. It can be based on performance, handling, balance, looks, or a combination thereof. I've made 'em 20, 22, 22.5, 23, 24, and 25 inches. Sometimes it was well thought out and other times I just picked a length. One thing I have learned, start out long. It's relatively cheap to shorten a barrel and really expensive to lengthen one.
Another thought about the RCM case-what if they had come out with say a 243, 257, 264, and 284 RCM (well maybe skip the 243)? Then went with a 7mm, 30, and 338 on the 375 Ruger case. I think the 7mm and 338 may already exist as wildcats but haven't heard of any on the RCM case. Food for thought.
Steve
Originally Posted by greydog
I actually think the RCM's are decent cartridges. Sure, they are just a re-vamped '06 as far as capacity and performance are concerned but they do fit and function well in a short action.
I had a 338 RCM briefly and sort of liked it except for some flaws with the rifle itself. I had to add an inch and a quarter to the stock to get a reasonable length of pull and spend two evenings making the forarm less ugly (I went with a schnabel and it looked pretty good). The rifle was very accurate and not too bad to shoot with the lengthened stock. Why on earth they supplied the rifle with such super-high rings is a mystery to me. I guess for the guys who wanted to mount a 50mm scope on their lightweight carbine. Also, the bolt handle was ridiculously thin.
So the rifle was, in some respects, a turkey. The cartridge worked just fine though.
I like the 300 RCM better than the WSM just as I like the SAUM better. With the WSM, it was hate at first sight. I had reamer before I could get brass and had some of the first brass in the country then wondered why I had bought both.
Ultimately, I think the main failing with the RCM's is not with the cartridges but with the rifles. Ruger really needs to take a step back and look at some of their earlier offerings before they produce something too stupid. They have produced a few nice rifles but not too frequently lately. GD


I agree, I like the saum and the RCM better than the wsm, at least in theory as that is all I'm going on...
So there still is no short action .338 that is even a little popular.
I really like my stainless 338 rcm. I have a 2.5-8 vx-III on it and carry it a lot in island Park because of the number of bears there. I run a 225 interbond at 2675 ish and it carrys nice and comes up quick. It shoots several loads well and feeds well. I had one load with a 200 Speer over BL-c2 that clocked 2800 + and grouped into cloverleafs. Only downside is that mine didn't like 210 partitions but I have some 225 partitions to try soon.

Bb
Originally Posted by Brad
Originally Posted by ingwe
The RCMs were a marketing epic fail.


I think it was just blind pride and stupidity.

Cartridges in search of a reason to exist... and a day late and dollar short at that.


They thought that they'd cut in on Remington's long-standing dominance of that position.
If Ruger wanted to sell rifles, they should have necked down the 375 brass to 25,6.5, 27, 7, 30, 33, and 35. Outrun Weatherby in all under 30, equil/surpass the rest, all in a standard '06(3.34) case. Plenty of short/fats when they got off their asses and built the compacts.

Would there have been losers? Sure, but not what they already have.
I think there is a lot to like about the 338 RCM. 338-06 (which is a wildcat anyway) performance in a 308 length action.

What's not to like about that?

If they made a decent rifle chambered in it with a 22 inch barrel rather than that horrid guide gun I would be all over it. Plenty of gun for anything in Australia (even buffalo with good bullets) and most of the rest of the world.

The fact that it hasn't succeeded despite having no real competitors to me indicates the average man doesn't feel there's any need for bullets bigger than 308 cal, unless you are driving them a lot harder than the modest 338 RCM can.
RCM were created to get around the the royalty to Jamison for the WSM. Nothing more, nothing less. No matter the benefits of the RCM, sometimes people don't buy the flimflam.

Rifles may have had something to do with it also. Why reduce your market by offering a performance round in only a carbine with iron sights blued/wood. They lost me. I want no sights with 22-24 inch barel with stainless/synthetic. Just my preference. Don't offer it, I ain't buying. Plus I already had a 300WSM by 2010.
the VP at Ruger that thought this was a good idea must have been pretty high up to last that long with a goofy "hey lets do a one off" idea
I like the 338 RCM. Lots of folks howled like scalded dogs when the 325WSM came out and wasn't a 338. Go figure. Never had a WSM, never likely will.

And not only have I loaded and chronoed loads... I've actually hunted one. A 338RCM slapped into a skeleton stock and with a 2.5-8 is hard to beat, and you simply can't ruin the [bleep]. 490 wasn't quite far enough for this cow to be out of range of a 225NAB launched at a whopping 2600 from that 20" carbine.

[Linked Image]

Marketing and advertised velocity be damned, it's a handy elk package, and I'd never carry a long action 24-26" barrel into elk woods again.
I have never understood the rational behind the whole short fat thing. More efficient? Fits a short action? What do they do that others do not do that have been around for many many years? An answer to a question that was never really asked? My one venture into this area is a 338 Federal, I at least know that I can make brass until the 308 goes away.
Originally Posted by calikooknic
If Ruger wanted to sell rifles, they should have necked down the 375 brass to 25,6.5, 27, 7, 30, 33, and 35. Outrun Weatherby in all under 30, equil/surpass the rest, all in a standard '06(3.34) case. Plenty of short/fats when they got off their asses and built the compacts.

Would there have been losers? Sure, but not what they already have.


If they bring out a 25 RCM in the right model, and marketed them correctly, I suspect they could sell a bunch. That ground has not been tread upon.
Originally Posted by smithrjd
I have never understood the rational behind the whole short fat thing


My crackpot theory, which I've never heard anyone even mention, is that a shorter, fatter cartridge with the same case capacity will be ever so slightly more efficient than the longer one, simply due to a longer effective barrel length, if they both have the same finished barrel length. The expanding gasses get to push on the bullet for a very slightly longer amount of time.

In the comparison of a 338RCM and 338-06, that's the difference of 2.840 and 3.340, if both are seated to max OAL, 1/2". Literally jackschitt.
Well your crack pot theory ain't jackschitt. Among other things to consider is short action, lighter weight, more efficient burning of powder column, greater accuracy potential.
Originally Posted by MissouriEd
Well your crack pot theory ain't jackschitt. Among other things to consider is short action, lighter weight, more efficient burning of powder column, greater accuracy potential.


Lighter, shorter, handier, etc. is certainly where the true magic is.

I've done it both ways, short action medium short tube is where it's at for me. Can't for the life of me figure how a heavier 4" longer barrel, a longer action, and more recoil is "better". I've done it both ways so I'm certainly not forced to guess a comparison of a 20" carbine and it's resultant virtues as compared to a 24/26" magnum and it's "attributes". LOL

Well I'm an old school type I guess. I have always thought my pre-64 300H&H was an efficient well feeding round.
Originally Posted by AB2506
Rifles may have had something to do with it also. Why reduce your market by offering a performance round in only a carbine with iron sights blued/wood. They lost me. I want no sights with 22-24 inch barel with stainless/synthetic. Just my preference. Don't offer it, I ain't buying. Plus I already had a 300WSM by 2010.


They did...
Accuracy in the old gal ain't to bad either.
Originally Posted by MattMan
Originally Posted by smithrjd
I have never understood the rational behind the whole short fat thing
In the comparison of a 338RCM and 338-06, that's the difference of 2.840 and 3.340, if both are seated to max OAL, 1/2". Literally jackschitt.


I can't address the short fat vs long skinny, but ...

A Winchester/Mauser action and 3 position safety in a 20" SS/SYN rifle with iron sites and 338-06 ballistics for <$600 guts feathers and all is why I bought it.

Let's see cheapest I could get into a 338-06 is $200 Savage plus $300 for a rebore or new barrel or a $500 Armslist gun plus shipping...

No contest. The biggest issue is the proprietary cartridge. I've made 338RCM brass from 375Ruger and 300RCM. As long as one of the 3 are made the gun will have life before needing re-chamber.

With the 338 Federal flagging maybe it's time Ruger cleaned this cartridge up and marketed it for what it is a smart all around cartridge, instead of a short fat 338WM which it ain't.

Steve
Oregon

The 1/2" in COAL is the difference between SA and LA often much less than that. I have a 338 Federal and do like the round. Not a real long distance number, but I don't hunt where I need long distance. In the woods at 50 yards or so it works quite well. It is not that popular either, few new rifles if any are chambered for it now. I do not think it is a short magnum, not really anywhere close to the 338WM. It does not have the recoil either especially in a light weight woods rifle. Like the short fat ones it is a "niche" rifle.
Originally Posted by smithrjd
Well I'm an old school type I guess. I have always thought my pre-64 300H&H was an efficient well feeding round.


As does mine. grin
[Linked Image]

Too many magnums. Compacts, Supers, Ultras. Time to clear the shelves. Time to get back to basics. Time to hunt for real again.
Originally Posted by ol_skool
Originally Posted by AB2506
Rifles may have had something to do with it also. Why reduce your market by offering a performance round in only a carbine with iron sights blued/wood. They lost me. I want no sights with 22-24 inch barel with stainless/synthetic. Just my preference. Don't offer it, I ain't buying. Plus I already had a 300WSM by 2010.


They did...


Great. They designed another rifle 2+1 capacity. Not buying.
The .222 Mag is a .223 AI.

The 7-08 makes Christ beat off.

The .338 Federal feeds well.

WSM's don't.



Gus
Originally Posted by AB2506

Great. They designed another rifle 2+1 capacity. Not buying.


If you think it's a 2+1 deal, you've never stuffed an RCM mag...
Originally Posted by deflave


The 7-08 makes Christ beat off.



That oughta stand you in good stead on some future date. I would add GFY but it appears you're doing just fine all on your own.
Originally Posted by MattMan
Originally Posted by AB2506

Great. They designed another rifle 2+1 capacity. Not buying.


If you think it's a 2+1 deal, you've never stuffed an RCM mag...



Ruger M77 Hawkeye All-Weather Rifle HKM77RFP 37112 GA, 338 RCM, 22 in, Bolt Action, Black Syn Stock, Stainless Finish, 2 + 1 Rd
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Click to enlarge
Image may not necessarily represent the actual item.
Please read the title and description before purchasing.

Manufacturer #37112


Current Reviews: 0 (Write a review & get a $5 coupon)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Last Price: $576.84







--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Restricted Product
Guns can only be shipped to a location within the USA that holds an FFL (Federal Firearms License) - this can be your local gun shop, pawn shop, sporting goods store, etc. Your local gun dealer will then handle the transfer of the firearm to you.

Please ensure that you have familiarized yourself with the process before placing a gun order:

How to Buy Guns Online
Shipping & Returns
Product Restrictions



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Product Description
The M77 Hawkeye All-Weather is based on the M77 Hawkeye Standard model, this rifle features a weather-resistant stainless steel barrel and receiver in Hawkeye Matte Stainless finish, and a rugged black synthetic stock.

Please Note: This description may represent a general group of products. Please read the item's title and specifications for more specific information about this particular item.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Specifications
Action : Bolt
Caliber : 338 Ruger Compact Magnum
Barrel Length : 22"
Capacity : 2 + 1
Trigger : Standard
Safety : Three Position
Length : 42"
Weight : 7.75 lbs
Stock : Black Synthetic
Finish : Stainless




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Product Reviews
Reviews of Ruger M77 Hawkeye All-Weather Rifle HKM77RFP 37112 GA, 338 RCM, 22 in, Bolt Action, Black Syn Stock, Stainless Finish, 2 + 1 Rd



There are currently no product reviews of this item - click the button below and be the first to write one!
As thanks for your feedback, we will send you a $5 coupon code for writing a product review!

Don't care. Specifications read 2+1. Take it up with the writer. Don't get bent out of shape defending your Edsel.







Originally Posted by Steve Redgwell
Too many magnums. Compacts, Supers, Ultras. Time to clear the shelves. Time to get back to basics. Time to hunt for real again.


Which is exactly why I really like my 338 FED.
When trying to be stealthy in a thisel patch. Have you aswell found that one nut is a tad lower then the other? grin.
Like many, not an issue with ballistics. It offered no differenting benefit over existing rounds in their caliber.

IMHO, RCM's were DOA. Ruger/Hornady never asked me. Just like the 30TC, another DOA.

The Creedmoor is a nice round, and if in a Mannicher RSI #1 I would buy it, though would probably pick a 260 over it, being a handloader more brass options and same same performance.

Not many voids left, but if I were building factory rifles, I have a few ideas I would execute asap. It would expand sales quickly.
Originally Posted by AB2506
Originally Posted by ol_skool
Originally Posted by AB2506
Rifles may have had something to do with it also. Why reduce your market by offering a performance round in only a carbine with iron sights blued/wood. They lost me. I want no sights with 22-24 inch barel with stainless/synthetic. Just my preference. Don't offer it, I ain't buying. Plus I already had a 300WSM by 2010.


They did...


Great. They designed another rifle 2+1 capacity. Not buying.


LOL, that's funny!! Need to stuff 5 25-06 to bring bambi down, eh? I guess all those 1885 and No.1 fans are 5 times as stupid...

Steve
Oregon
Originally Posted by kawi
When trying to be stealthy in a thisel patch. Have you aswell found that one nut is a tad lower then the other? grin.


Ok, this is good! Can I use it sometime! Smart, I can feel this...
Originally Posted by AB2506

Don't care. Specifications read 2+1. Take it up with the writer. Don't get bent out of shape defending your Edsel.


Not bent out of shape at all. If you like your WSM, rock on. I honestly couldn't care less.

Ruger and Hornady dropped the ball on the marketing campaign by bringing out "the other" RCM with a .308 throat instead of .284, .264, or .257, and by not signing up more "Bubba and Bubba", or "Bubba and Bigtits" shows to espouse the virtues of the RCM package.

The 300 WSM already had the .308 market share, and they should have marketed the 338 as what the 325 could have been. Pitting the 338 RCM against the 338 WM? WTF?... Remington firmly blazed that marketing trail, circa 1997. "Finally, 270 Winchester performance in a short action - the NEW 260 Remington". Epic fail. No matter the virtues of the 260.

Top all that off with the whole "You can't get this performance with handloads, we use pixie dust and secret powder" BS.

That's like pitting your new badass IPA against Coors Light or Bud Light. Maybe a great [bleep] beer, but Coors Light and But Light drinkers likely ain't your [bleep] target audience, no matter how many cans they crack on Sunday. Then tell your target market "This new badazz beer is only available on tap. You just can't get our good flavor in cans or bottles".

The RCMs were doomed from the start by marketing, and they hopefully have fired the dipschitts they may have hired from Remington.

Luckily I'm not forced to guess about 338 RCM recoil, external ballistics, terminal performance, mag capacity, stainless/synthetic offerings, nor the field attributes of tubes 20" sighted vs. 22" naked in that package...

My "Edsels" and IPAs are BADAZZ from where I'm sittin. And I don't really give a schitt how many guys like Coors Light or Bud Light, nor do I care how they think it tastes.

[Linked Image]
Upon contact one tends to pan right or left.
Forgot to add, every RCM M77 I've met holds 4 down, but won't allow the bolt to close without feeding the top round. I've yet to attempt any "massaging" to make that happen, but the original Hornady article advertised the test rifles as 4+1.
Yes I have both the 300 and 338. and I like them thought I can.t get ammo this year. 223rem and 300sav are my hunting pards this year. Speed goat throu elk with 300 yds as a long shot.
Another satisfied user of 338RCM. A damn shame, as it would/will take a lot of time and money to build a left handed, short action, magnum bolt face that actually feeds.

Sucks you can still find 350 Rem Mag brass, which is pretty well dead, but not find any 338RCM brass, which technically still has a weak, but beating heart.

[Linked Image]

[Linked Image]

Opposite of MattMan. 37 yards. Barnes 185TSX
New brass was scheduled for August. With the updates and cuts in Amax production I doubt RCM brass made the production list
25 years from now, I wonder how many will be hoping to collect these unusual guns, and complaining that Ruger missed out on keeping a good thing going.
Another generation of Remington 600/.350 worshippers.

One thing many fans (well, "many" is too strong a word in this instance) of now-obscure cartridges that failed commercially complain about is not enough promotion by the Big Company. This isn't 1920, when there weren't that many available "modern" cartridges, so any round introduced for bolt actions had a pretty fair chance for success. Since World War II the USA has been flooded by bolt-action rounds, plus cartridges for other actions that should have been bolt-action rounds, such as the .284 Winchester and .280 Remington. Consequently there's very little opportunity to squeeze into one of the ever-smaller empty slots.

Rifle manufacturers have countered by bringing out umpteen zillion different models, from short/lights (like the Remington Model 7 and Ruger RCM's) to long/heavys with 26" barrels. Mostly, however, they're chambered for cartridges that have been around for 50 years or more.

Just about every cartridge imaginable has been tried by rifle makers, but what sales tend to indicate is that most shooters want average-sized rifles chambered for the usual suspects, especially the .223, .22-250, .243, .25-06, .270, 7mm Remington Magnum, .308, .30-06, .300 Winchester Magnum, .338 Winchester magnum and .375 H&H. And the truth is that 100% of the world's varmints and big game can be taken handily with those cartridges, and the conventional rifles that fire them.

Once in a while something comes along that succeeds in the marketplace. The Remington Model 7 succeeded because it looked pretty much like a conventional rifle (unlike the 600/660 line) and was chambered for conventional cartridges that didn't kick much, like the .223, .243 and .308 (unlike the 6.5 and .350 Remington Magnums).

The .300 WSM succeeded because a bunch of publicity (which was mostly BS) had built it the concept of a short-far .300 long before it appeared. From more recent sales it looks like it's star is fading.

The .204 Ruger, plus the most recent .17's from the rimfires to the Hornet and Fireball, succeeded because they found a slot BELOW the standard stuff. There isn't much chance of another major hit in cartridges ABOVE the .375 H&H, though. The .416 Remington Magnum pretty much took care of that 25 years ago.

And yet rifle loonies still are astounded and angry when yet another cartridge or rifle that's supposed to fill a tiny slot fails. What did the .260 Remington do that several already popular cartridges didn't? The only people who ended up with one keep yapping about it's "versatility," since it can supposedly do anything any cartridge from the .243 to the .270 can do. But the day is long past when real rifle loonies cared about versatility in their cartridges, and every .260 fan I've met has dozens of rifles, because they want to own rifles in a bunch of different chamberings and obsess about each one. The average guy couldn't care less. Instead he'll just buy a .243 or .270.

The same applies to the .338-06. Most rifle loonies agree its a great round, so balanced and wonderful it should have been a factory round long ago. Guess what? It fell flat on its face because the modern trend has been to more velocity, not less. Hunters bought .30-06's and .338 Winchester Magnums, not some compromise between the two.

American rifle history also indicates that very few people care about "compact" rifles shooting magnum cartridges. That was demonstrated with the Remington 600/660 and the .350 magnum in the 1960's, yet Ruger tried it again with the .338 RCM, with the same results. And the fact that the .338 RCM is basically a short .338-06 didn't appeal to many customers either. Why would it, if the .338-06 didn't sell as a factory round?

American rifle companies can't afford to keep a new round afloat very long, unless it shows signs of taking off, like the .204 Ruger and .300 WSM. Ruger didn't fail to promote the RCM cartridges and rifles. They tried, and 99+% of the hunting public yawned. The RCM's didn't fail. They were still-born, because there never was any real demand for either one--and that could have been foreseen with a little look at the history of American hunting cartridges and rifles since 1950.
John, you just "wasted" a good article for some.....well, maybe not. We may see it in print yet. It was a great piece and nails the 'problem' dead. Good job.
Thanks, Mickey!

Hope you're doing well--and it's cooling off down there....
30 T/C is where it's at.



Travis
We are overlooking the economy as a factor. New gun sales went through the roof, but mostly for tactical guns. We don,t have much disposable income and we are using it to prepare for civil war.
The talk about the 260 Rem is interesting.

Its funny that on the 30-06 case and 7x57 case we have commercial versions of 6mm, 257 cal, and 7mm based on both cases.

There's no 264/6.5 version of either of these cases. Ok I know there is the 6.5x57 but its pretty obscure other than being chambered in Euro rifles. I guess I should be pulled up on that one.

My point being; the 260 kinda, sorta, y'know, DID fill a niche in that there wasn't a 308 or 30-06 (or 7x57 Mauser either if you'll grant me a little license) commercial variant based around a 264 cal bullet. There wasn't even a 257 or 277 version on the 308 case.

I imagine that's where the marketers thought they might be on a winner when devising the commercial launch of the 260 Rem.

Maybe most people looked at the 260 Rem and thought "it doesn't do anything the 6.5 Swede can't do, what's the big deal?" They're probably right too I suppose.

I think I have expressed myself pretty clumsily. But what I am saying is that I think there probably existed one of the strongest cases when they debated introducing the 260 Rem. I would have thought it made more sense than coming in with a 270-08 which a lot of people still scream for.

264 comes in pretty neatly between 243 and 284.

Anyway buggered if I know why some cartridges do well and some not. There seem to be lots of target rounds that overlap too. Maybe the field is just way too crowded.

Sorry for the confusing post (now I have read it back)!
Wasn't the RCM rifle also available in 308 Win? I'm almost positive I saw that listed on the website. Think I saw one in a store too. Now that would have made a nice rifle! Anyone got one of these?
I have not read, I believe, the above but do know that as a user of the 338-06 for 20 years on elk, grizzly and others that it would be the last rifle to go. This from an avid elder of the 35 Whelen and 9.3x62, the latter taken to Africa in 2002. Mine, a simple LaBounty rebore on a M700 270 Wally World special for $300. A couple of truck loads have fallen to this dime-a-dozen rifle.
bobnob,

You overlooked a fairly popular cartridge commonly known as the 6.5x55 Swedish Mauser, though it wasn't exclusively designed for either Sweden or Mausers. It isn't based on the 7x57 case but it's close enough to work in any rifle suitable for the 7x57, and does anything the .260 will do.
Quote
Great. They designed another rifle 2+1 capacity. Not buying.



All these years I'd been laboring under the apparent misapprehension, that one needed a magnum so the first shot would neatly halve whatever the targeted game animal was?

Who realized magazine capacity was also an issue? ;O)

MD pretty much covered the silliness of the past several decades and some of the cartridge/rifle combos that've hit the market (and then faded away).

That occurs to me each time I walk into a gun shop and see a table with "last year's" innovations marked down below retail. One time it was Rem. UMs at fire sale prices. Then assorted shortmags from various manufacturers. Haven't seen any lately, which is either good or bad, depending on one's perspective.

But somewhere there lurks a marketing genius that will eventually stumble onto the next, great thing to inflict us with.

I'm pretty much a skinflint, so have been spared the agony of "keeping up". Have nothing more powerful or exotic, than some 30-06s. A few of which are older than I am. All still kill chit dead, which in my case is deer.

The little stuff ranges from rifles in 22LR, to the wee centerfires in Hornet, 222 and 223. Close enough. Still recall the day some years ago, when I entered a favorite shop and a guy waved a 204 cartidge at me, insisted this was the shape of things to come. Asked him what it was good for, that I didn't already have covered before he was out of diapers? He put it down and let me be.
The RCM's where doomed because they didnt exceed the performance of the WSM's. Intern the WSM's are ultimatly doomed because they cant match the HP of existing rounds.
The only two meaningful improvements I can see since 1960 are:

1. Better bullets.

2. Tighter manufacturing tolerances, which means better accuracy.

Quote
The RCM's where doomed because they didnt exceed the performance of the WSM's. Intern the WSM's are ultimatly doomed because they cant match the HP of existing rounds.


Pretty much how I see it? If they want to conjure up "new" things and someone else gets excited enough to buy into them, more power to 'em.

I get more het up over improvements in components and manufactured ammo, which I believe is much better than it was when I started down this road over 50 years ago. Pretty hard not to find something that suits you these days?

Do like some of the efforts such as the M7 and other handy things, but don't really need any of them at the moment. Glad they're there for anyone that wants them.
Nice dissertation John... you're mostly right.

You failed to cover the point that a fairly large portion of the public who actually hunt already have a gun they like just fine, and the hunting public is sadly but slowly shrinking every year. Loyalties to chambering have been built over generations and run deep. The majority of folks shoot whitetails from a concealed or elevated fixed position, don't walk much, and should be able to do anything that needs doing with a 30-30 or 30-06. The majority of western hunters I see in the field do a large portion of their hunting within eyesight of a road, since they rarely leave the saddle of their quad or side by side unless they've already spotted game. Packability of a rifle matters not to them, and high velocity rounds with hubble sized scopes and long heavy tubes happen to make them feel better.

I guess I fail the "Real Loonie" litmus test. Though I have owned and hunted many of the long action and magnum offerings, I've long since grown tired of getting the dogschitt knocked out of me when I pull the trigger, and really don't care to pack a long action or tube longer than 20-22" to the places I hunt. I don't own dozens of rifles, I do care about versatility, and own less than a half dozen centerfire chamberings, and really only use three of them.

I guess I'm not a real 260 fan either, since I simply bang away with mine, regularly, and can't fathom a valid argument against many other rounds that basically do the same thing. I simply like mine. With 4 hunters in the house, we do own more than one 260, and use them for the vast majority of our family's hunting and shooting, and as a whole happen to be more than satisfied with the results obtained. The only thing it does that a 6.5x55 won't, is fit in a short action.

Successfully expanding product availability and demand in an ever shrinking market would require some sheer marketing genius. Yet the market doesn't actually need to need your product, they just need to think they do. That is the job of marketing... to convince a target market of just that without anyone figuring out the BS too quickly.
Nice freakin' bear, BTW.
This has been a good thread that's gone somewhere I wouldn't have expected. Some great discussions.


Mule Deer thanks for your counterpoint, I actually didn't overlook the 6.5x55 though. I did mention it in the post as comparing favourably with the 260.

Like I said in the post, I think I made my point a little clumsily but thanks for your thoughts.

JB, I agree w Mcoleman.
Second, I could be very happy if I were forced to use a 7x57 or 6.5x55 the rest of my life for all game, if in a quality rifle, properly scoped, and with a lifetime supply of quality brass and bullets.

I suppose Lapua Brass and 140 6.5/160 7mm Nosler Partitions might scale back the SKU's wink

Wait, I like the trimmer package in a short action w/near same same ballistics...such defines me as a Loony I suppose wink

Life sure would be boring if the only thing I had were a 30/06 or 308, though one could likely do far worse. Just so you know, it pains me to say that, b/c they are great all around - rounds, just enjoy the lesser recoil of 6-7mm's that kill fine for me w/shot placement. No doubt, I think the large big game hunters are full of options in 30 and 338. I applaud the industry in investing in new products, but they should poll the public to find needs and wants. Ruger was listening to folks as directed by upper management the last time I was at a Shot Show - that was the year they were bringing out the RCMs, and when Hornady was doing the 30TC. They were likely attempting to jump on a misperceived trend, that was more a short lived fad.

Re: the 260 - it's a great round in many ways, and I won't argue JB, the Creedmoor is a better design. But that said, Big Green had an opportunity that they failed to capitalize. Over on another forum the 260 is all the rage and many 308 fans have made the switch. Instead of having a Heavy barrel option for those shooters, all Big Green offers is the 223 and 308 in many rifles. The 223 is smaller than I want for most of what I do, and the 308 larger. So there is a void - no 6mm or 6.5mm for a strong growing trend of shooters who want to punch paper, steel, varmints and deer near and far with minimal recoil, flat trajectory, and good accuracy/shootability. I never am ceased to be amazed at the blunders of such a large company. Perhaps once shooters ran the company, now it's bean counters. The 6BR and 22BR had alot of opportunity, as others, but they dropped the ball. Oh well, it keeps the gunsmiths fed.

Short and Fat was in vogue, but reliable feeding is an issue, as is ammo stocking.
Members on here are of a different breed than 95% or so of the gun buying hunting rifle public. I also think that the majority of the people who ultimately make these decisions never hunted a day in their life!
True, but the knowledge allows more informed shooters to enjoy the benefits that comes with it. They also play a factor in trends.
Well, here I am again late to the party. I've got a .338 RCM and I hunt with it and like it a lot. BUT, I've also got .22 Hornet, .223, .22-250, .250-3000, 6.5x55, .270, .280, 7mm Rem Mag, .308, .30-06, .300 Win Mag, .303 Brit, .375 H&H and .45-70 rifles that I use at least somewhat regularly and some more not so regularly. The .338 RCM doesn't kill deer any quicker than any of the others from the .250-3000 and on up, but I really like the fact that it's lighter, more compact, handier, and easier to carry in thick cover than many of the other rifles, plus it packs the punch to easily and confidently handle elk and large hogs or bear, and I can shoot it well.

It might be a dead cartridge, but I'll probably hang onto it just because I'm a loony and sometimes like to have something a little different.

Here it is and the 330 lb northern Missouri 10 pt buck I took with it last year. The buck was 7 1/2 years old - past his prime, gray faced, pot bellied, and sway backed (same as the hunter). The scope is a Burris FF II 2x7.

[Linked Image]
Us rifle loonies often benifit from these flops. When they close them out you can often get a good deal on one. I have a cdl whelen I got a deal on and also remember picking up 700 bdl ss rifles in the saum chamberings new for about $400.

I have several boxes of 338 rcm brass rat holed so I'll probably keep mine for a while but the more I hunt the more I realize that the killing power between most cartridges from 260 to 35 whelen isn't that much different. I do like my rcm stainless because its a rugged handy little setup but if they made the same rifle in 308 I would be just as happy with it.

The looney side of me would like to see a 6.5 rcm based off the shorter 338 rcm case not the 300. When it flopped I'd pick one up for $400.

I do think a line of cartridges based off the the full length 375 ruger would be a good thing. I had a 7 lrm and really like the way it fit a rem long action.

Bb

Nice picture taking of that grand old buck. What a deer!
[quote=
The looney side of me would like to see a 6.5 rcm based off the shorter 338 rcm case not the 300.
[/quote]

Burleyboy,
I like the way you think. If I can attach the image I can show you a 6.5x338 RCM compared with the 6.5 Rem mag and the 6.5-284(Sorry, no photobucket). These cartridges essentially are kissing cousins as to performance. The 6.5 RCM, unlike the 6.5-284 or the 6.5 Rem mag, can fit the 140's into a short action magazine and feeds flawlessly. Both the form and subsequent function will remain appealing. Regarding the 338 RCM itself, I found it to be a great round. Like you, I have stock piled 338 rcm brass and not really concerned regarding the commercial success. I built my RCM's on the Rem 700 and a Stiller predator not that I dislike Rugers but only because of being more familiar with the 700's. In addition, with the extended magazines, you can really seat the bullet out there. If that makes me a rifle loony, so be it, but I'm having fun.

I'm primarily a lurker on this site and enjoy the diverse points of view for enlightenment. With that said, I hope I'm not out of line when I state a preemptive GFY for deflave in the event that he may following this post.

MVC
I anybody really wants a .338 RCM a local store has one on sale for $550 right now, and Montana doesn't have a sales tax.
Originally Posted by ingwe
The RCMs were a marketing epic fail.

Apparently the 270Win did a lot better.


.
When I decided to build a 338 rcm and subsequently a 6.5x338 rcm it was solely on the features of the design and expected function and performance of the 338 rcm case. In hindsight, I too ignored all the marketing jibberish. With that said, I'm very satisfied with the 338 rcm cartridge. Now, if only more powder was readily available that I could reload a little more frequently...
Originally Posted by EdM
I have not read, I believe, the above but do know that as a user of the 338-06 for 20 years on elk, grizzly and others that it would be the last rifle to go. This from an avid elder of the 35 Whelen and 9.3x62, the latter taken to Africa in 2002. Mine, a simple LaBounty rebore on a M700 270 Wally World special for $300. A couple of truck loads have fallen to this dime-a-dozen rifle.


The only problem with the 338-06 (or the other two chamberings mentioned) is that the vast majority of hunters don't have those larger animals as an intended target regularily.
I am wanting a 338 RCM for my RH wife and boys for a Moose and Bear rifle, light and handy and Synthetic SS with sights.

Would like to find brass though.

Would have wasted a lot of money to find a LH rifle to customize it to same specs as a LH Ruger, 338 RCM.
You can't kill what that which was dead at inception.
I'm wildcatting both short and long 375 Rugers. I use the 300 RCM for the shorty's. I'm using one case taper in all of them. And this taper follows the old 8 x 68 S Schuler's.

With my taper, my 243 VampKat will feed out of a M-98 Mauser's box magazine, and is one holy terror. In a previously taken off target barrel, with 1 in 14 inch twist, at 26 inches, it does stabilize Speer 105 R.N.'s out to beyond 500 yards. My newest loads are using Hornady GMX 80 gr. Spitzers, as they are long for their weight. If this rifle barrel will stabilize 100 gr. lead cored, flat based spitzers, I will re-order a new Barrel with the 1 in 14 twist. If not, then I'll order a quicker twist.

While I'm waiting until Sept. for Neil Jones Products to return my second fitting bushing die, I bobbed off a couple of old military stepped M-98 barrels in 7 and 8 mm., and chambered them, using oversized pilots, on my PT&G wildcat reamer. When the take off Shilen barrel is done in, it will become a .277.

This 243 VampKat has 70.5 grs. of H2O to the case mouth sans meniscus. The short 8mm has about 76 grains of water. Even with my severe case taper, I can still make a 44 cal. wildcat, which is a rimless 444 Marlin on steroids, and which will feed through most bolt action's magazines. It will dish out Hornady 265 gr. Flex Tips at more velocity than they are designed to handle. And in a light rifle, more recoil than I am designed to handle.

But for the rest of you, unless you are being really anal about reliably feeding through CRF bolt magazines, once you get above the factory's 308 caliber, the stock RCM's case taper and Go gauges will work fine. These can form shoulders which will adequately head space rimless cartridges in the old 375 and 400 Whelens. But a 400 Whelen nips right at the 416 Taylors, so "short, & light", may be too much of a good thing.

I think its really dumb to cuss out this cartridge, which will, at the very least, duplicate the 9.3 x 62mm, and do it in a short action. Dave Kiff and I designed this little beast to elongate these 300 RCM's out to an honest 55mm. But with the first stage bushing and button dies, we stalled at 53.94 mm. I'm hoping my new full length chambered PT&G die blank in 270 cal. will put this in order. Obviously, above .308", the Ruger's 53mm will start to shorten up a bit.

All in all, the Rugers are better designs than either of the two rebated short magnums. Simply put, Ruger and Hornady didn't have to bullet proof their case heads using their purely rimless design. So this means that the 300 RCM case has nearly as much volume as the rebated rimmed 300 RSAUM does.

I lose two grains for my extra case taper, and about the normal amounts for necking down from a 308 neck. I'm left handed, so when I've worked up some winners, I'll have a do over with left hand bolt rifles. As I said, after re-chambering my Rem6mmBR Shilen take off barrel, the difference between the little Remington target round and my 243 VampKat, which sports 6 grains more capacity than the 240 Weatherby, is astounding.

I feel that I'm knocking on the doors of the legendary David Lloyd's 240 H & H Magnum rifles. I think that shooting the 80 gr. GMX's and mating it with my Nikon 1000 laser range finder, will let me range and smoke, Yotes and Lopes, out to about 700 meters. Without a good reflective surface, this is a good maximum range for this ambi. laser range finder.

So I will be searching for a really stiff action, with a 3 inch long magazine in a left handed bolt action rifle. It will probably be one of the newer Savages. Last but not least, the Ruger case design is made to go up to 60,000 + M.A.P. The 300 RCM's neck wall is 0.014" and going down makes them a little thicker. So Neil is setting me up to do both inside and outside neck work to keep my neck walls down to his approved 0.012". My PT&G chamber's 243 VampKat's neck diameter is .2775". F.W.I.W. The free online Powley Powder Computer which I use, goes off scale with my 243 VampKat, right in between the 85 and 87 grain bullets.
Originally Posted by wildhobbybobby
Considering the fact that you could effectively hunt any game in the world with a 12 gauge shotgun and a battery of rifles in 3 or 4 calibers that have existed since 1956 or before, the last 40 or 50 cartridges that have been introduced seem a bit superfluous to me. There will be lots of nice rifles for which ammunition does not exist that will be taking up space in closets in years to come.

Many of them will be in calibers that haven't even been introduced yet.

I'll still be able to buy ammo for all of mine, because I am old-fashioned.


"you could effectively hunt any game in the world with a 12 gauge shotgun and a battery of rifles in 3 or 4 calibers that have existed since 1956 or before, the last 40 or 50 cartridges that have been introduced seem a bit superfluous to me."

Quite true, but not as much fun. New calibers and new rifles add to the spice of life.
You could effectively hunt all the game in the world with the 8mm Lebel, but there has breally gooeen real progress since the 1800's.

I hope the 338RCM survives, it is sort of like the fate of the 350 Remington, a good hunting round is being lost to the economic fates.
Update, I just checked Graf & Sons, for the first time in a while they had the .338 RCM 225 grain SST load in stock. I paid $90.00 for two boxes shipped after adding an NRA Roundup to my order.

At this price it seems like there must be some commitment to further manufacturing of the product.

Now I have 100 brass so my rifle will never be unusable.

I think the Obama inspired expansion of the gun industry has more to do with this thread than any other factor. The manufacturers were caught by surprise when a milk cow industry became a shooting star. (Terms used in certain business models to describe growth potential, and strategies for profits.)
At some point I don't need any more power

And

A lighter rifle is not on my "must have" list

But

I did buy a 450Marlin and love it

I am bitter it did not make the cut...

So I most likely will never buy a new round that is better cause it is smaller (shorter)or fills some "Gap".

Snake

WGAFF???
With two more boxes of ammo from Graf's making 100 pieces of brass my 338 RCM Hawkeye will have along life. This winter I have got to get my reloading system set back up.

This rifle is such a nice package that it would be a shame not to hunt with it.
I bit the bullet and purchased a left hand Ruger M-77 Compact in 300 RCM caliber, from CDNN.inc, down in Abilene, TX. for about a penny less than $600. They have both calibers, and in gloss or matte finish. My piece was made in 2012. Its claw ext. had 0.022" more gap, than does its replacement which Ruger Support shipped immediately, upon our complaint. The first one dropped the fired case within the first inch of extraction. The tighter second number works just fine.

I was impressed by my wildcats using Hornady virgin brass. But now shooting the real deal, I am dumbfounded. It most certainly is a full fledged, 300 Magnum, with the factory ammo. It was accurate right out of the box. By the time the replacement claw came in, my G.S. had done a trigger job, bringing its pull down from 5.5 lbs. to 2.7 lbs.

Now I'm pushing $700 with shppg., FFL charges, and the $45 trigger job. But this is still a bargain, and the little piggie really does shoot. Note that this model is discontinued, and sports the full length Ruger M-77 gunstock. So putting in a lightweight fluted barrel of 25-26 inches for my 243 VampKat, will actually improve the aesthetics of this rifle.

This will be my first left hand donor rifle, and now I'm going to try and blood it later this month. The 243 Custom VampKat die set is still quite a ways off. And I'm not ordering a new barrel until I can load accurate ammo for my take off Shilen Target barrel, in one of my four test bed M-98s'.

All of my RCM wildcats have too short of necks. The custom forming and reloading die set is supposed to help this by letting me form cases from full length 375 Ruger or the Basic cases. Then I can put whatever length necks on them, I want.

Hornady has really eliminated most of the noxious muzzle blast of a short barreled 300 Magnum, in this 300 RCM. I suspect that cutting down this barrel to 17 or 18 inches, would raise the muzzle blast exponentially. Down to the 284 caliber, it should stay 20 inches. From 6.8mm down to the 6mm, it should grow out to 25-6 inches, in a moderately generous diameter, fluted barrel.

Ironically, this short CRF action also feeds the 6.5 Rem. Mag. and 350 Rem Mag. with aplomb. So in effect, you have four, factory cartridges, plus my 6, 7, & 8mm wildcats.
I really liked the platform they put the RCM in just wish they would have done them in 308 and 30-06. I mostly hunt with two cartridges, 30-06 and 338WM. Unless it's something big and I'm good with my 375 H&H or my 45-70. I guess I'm a little too traditional... and old.
I always thought the 338 RCM might have a chance, but the 300 was doomed at the start. I used the 338 RCM to take a book black bear and subsequently sold it to fund another purchase. That was about the time I cleaned the stable of (almost) all non-traditional chamberings.
It's a shame that the RCM's came along late in the game. The 338 is a nifty round, and at least on paper, the 300 RCM is quite possibly the best of the short fat 30 cal's - no rebated rim, and it's not so fat as to potentially cause feeding issues. And that's coming from someone whose rifle in 300 WSM is a personal favorite and also respects the design of the 300 SAUM.
I have one rifle that has a short fat cartridge. It is a 350 RM on a 600 action w/ a kevlar stock and a 1x4 scope. I built it after my first elk hunt in Colorado. I thought I needed it in the dog hair. It is accurate.

I'll keep that one, but it is probably the only short fat cartridge rifle I'll ever own. And no, I don't pick it up very often when it comes time to go hunting. RCM WSM RAUM -- no interest for me



Ruger tried to answer a problem that didn't exist. So does 90% of the schit that's on the market. The "problem" now is making $300 rifles.
Where's the 325WSM in this mess? Thought it was pretty popular for awhile, haven't heard squat for a couple of years or more. Actually, I've never even seen one.
if the folks that make these cartridge decisions had necked down the .375 Ruger to .338 and .300 there might have been a better recception....essentially achieving .300 Weatherby performance from a standard action length.....something many Mauser owners would appreciate....but then, let's face it folks.....these cartridges aren't heads and tails over the .300 and .338 Win mags either.....that said, I'm not sure that the shooting clan values the short action as much as Ruger thinks they do....either way, the gains are not truly significant....but marginal at best.....
The more I see, the more I revert to and respect standard cartridges which have the most honest of track records and, over the longest times.
John
PS: I am have an action re-barreled to 280AI which contradicts the above only until the barrel comes off. I like to think of it as open mindedness which ultimately, tends to reaffirm the first sentence.
JW
I think a lot of you guys are being overly critical of Ruger and the 300 RCM in particular.

The 300 RCM is nearly as capable and versatile as the 308 or 30-06, and will perform almost as well as those two.

Except for the minor inconvenience that there is generally no ammo and no brass available it's a GREAT round!

So stop being so critical!

Originally Posted by MissouriEd
Where's the 325WSM in this mess? Thought it was pretty popular for awhile, haven't heard squat for a couple of years or more. Actually, I've never even seen one.


They are being re-barreled to 7WSM...I can't argue with that.
Originally Posted by TopCat
I think a lot of you guys are being overly critical of Ruger and the 300 RCM in particular.

The 300 RCM is nearly as capable and versatile as the 308 or 30-06, and will perform almost as well as those two.

Except for the minor inconvenience that there is generally no ammo and no brass available for it's a GREAT round!

So stop being so critical.


Satire.....clever.
Brass has been available for some time now. Midway has it, Wholesale Hunter has it Graf has it. Plenty to go around.


.
Originally Posted by TopCat
I think a lot of you guys are being overly critical of Ruger and the 300 RCM in particular.

The 300 RCM is nearly as capable and versatile as the 308 or 30-06, and will perform almost as well as those two.

Except for the minor inconvenience that there is generally no ammo and no brass available it's a GREAT round!

So stop being so critical!



Not to critize, but thre ain't no rifles either.
Companies cut the losers loose pretty quick thse days.

Was in a LGS the other day and saw an Icon with a really striking walnut stock. Asked the counter guy what it was and he said, ".30TC".

Oh well.....
You can't kill something that's already dead...
Like the rem 600?
The RCM's are far from dead. No you are not going to find ammo for the RCM at your local Walmart, every sporting good store in my area carries it, plentiful sources are available on the Internet. So all of this BS about not being able to get ammo, is simply that, BS.
The 300 RCM is a great little round,
Extremely effective and accurate out of my full-sized 22 inch barrel Hawkeye.
..... And for those of you questioning the future availability of ammunition for the RCM's, I would invite you to call Hornady and speak to their customer service department
Turns out that the 300 and 338 RCM's are favorite pet cartridges of the president of Hornady.
Oh,, and just found Hornady brass, box of 50, on Amazon, no tax free shipping 54$. Picked up some at that price.



.
Speaking of the M77 Hawkeye .338RCM, adding a detachable mag to it has made this my favorite rifle. CDI Precision made the kit and it is awesome.

[Linked Image]


[Linked Image]


[Linked Image]
Sweet set up
I would not have a hunting rifle like that. With the magazine protruding, how do you carry it at the balance point with one hand?

As for the RCM cartridges, we now have so many cartridges that there are no meaningful gaps to fill. I personally think that almost any new cartridge from now on is guaranteed to be obsolete immediately. I would only buy an "oddball" like the RCMs if I could make brass out of something common like .308 or 30-06.

If double rifles ever became affordable, I could see a rationale for some new rimmed cartridges, but that will never happen.
zonzin,

I need to ask: Why the detachable magazine? I've tested several hunting rifles with magazines like that, and always wondered what particular advantage they have. Indy mentioned not being able to carry them at the balance point, but I also wonder about a higher-capacity, detachable magazine with the release lever stocking below the bottom of the magazine. Why is this so desirable? Seems to me like something waiting to go wrong.
I went with detachable mags on my rifles because I do not like loading rounds through the top, or unloading by racking the bolt like I had to do on my Rem 700, so much easier to load a mag and slap it in. Also, much quicker to load the rifle with the detachable mag when the need for a quick load arises.
As for the release lever, the one in the pic is a tactical lever, I have since replaced it with a much lower profile lever that eliminates any possibility of inadvertent mag release.
As for carry, in all my years of hunting with this setup, no issues. I rarely carry one handed and just use the scope as a carry handle when I do.
To each his own I guess.

.
Graf and Sons are one of the largest dist. of Hornady brass. They only received 36 boxes of 300 RCM brass, and had a two day's supply when I lightened their load, by six boxes. I think this left them with only six more boxes. I've been waiting for a year to buy a supply of these cases. Blink and you lose, forget about snoozing. My left hand Ruger Compact Magnum is on its third extractor claw, and possibly its second bolt body. Now it will extract a fired case, but the glitch with the full magazine jamming is still there.

De-tuning this CRF action to be a push feed may solve the problem. Putting in detachable bottom metal should work also, but at what price? I had to promise to push back my new 6mm Hart barrel, due to buying $300+ worth of cases two days ago.

I've calculated that this little popper has the capacity of a 30 Gibbs wildcat. I also calculated that putting the barrel into a standard length action would solve the CRF jamming problems. These cases work O.K. out of three test bed Mauser M-98's.
The contraption similar to the above is what keeps me away from the otherwise delightful CZ 527. They claim to make a semi flush model M-1, but try to find one in the spotter weight configuration.

Jack
Originally Posted by zonzin
Oh,, and just found Hornady brass, box of 50, on Amazon, no tax free shipping 54$. Picked up some at that price.
.

That is some expensive brass. For comparison, .348 Win brass is $47.49 for 50 as listed at MidwayUSA. For .338 RCM brass to be more expensive than .348 Win really says something about it.

I like the convenience of box magazines too, but mine are pretty much flush with my rifles (Winchester Model 88, Savage 99C, BLR). I also have a Remington 7600 with detachable magazine. While it isn't quite flush, it doesn't protrude much.
Originally Posted by Gringo Loco
Originally Posted by zonzin
Oh,, and just found Hornady brass, box of 50, on Amazon, no tax free shipping 54$. Picked up some at that price.
.

That is some expensive brass. For comparison, .348 Win brass is $47.49 for 50 as listed at MidwayUSA. For .338 RCM brass to be more expensive than .348 Win really says something about it.


Have you checked prices for .270WSM brass? Midway has Norma for $40.99 for 20 cases, while the Nosler stuff goes for $66.99 for 25 cases. Now THAT is some expensive brass! I still like my .270WSM's and found some primed Federal nickel plated pulled brass for $210 for 500 cases, so my son and I are set for the lives of our rifles now.
Those cartridges were stillborn. No need to kill them.

Market saturation.
Pity really!

The 338 RCM in a Stainless Laminated 20" barrelled Hawkeyes, with open sights is near the top of my List of Loony Lusts

Resistance is Futile ...
Hey to everyone, new to the forum

I do have a few questions and points to make for the Ruger .300 RCM. I am a little surprised at how many slams and dislikes and cuts there are on the caliber and it's uses. I am a little surprised due to me being an avid gun lover and the fact, I see no bad caliber for any rifle when used for its purpose. Why would any of us not like to see the calibers continue to grow.

I add, I would love to know how many people here actually own an RCM in .300 or even the .338 and also, taken any game with it. Why would it be condemned by anyone who has never used it and only knows it by reports and articles written by range shooting. Now, I totally understand the one bad deal and that is; its not being able to duplicate the powder mix allowing its great ballistics. I never call anyone liars or even mistaken but, the ballistics are true as I have owned this caliber for a while, shoot pure factory ammunition and it keeps side by side, even slightly above, my .300 WSM and is even a good 100 F. per second faster and 80 such than my .300 WinMag.

I have over the years, very much appreciated light rifle and short barrels when hunting in timber or packing any type weight. We hunters all know the rifle seems to gain weight every step when hiking far and taking out quarters. Never the less, its an awesome caliber, shoots its factory ammo SUB-MOA and is a joy to carry. The rifle caliber drops Elk, Deer and Bear in its tracks with ease.

I will say Ruger dropped the ball in its promotion but this changes nothing to the fact, its an awesome caliber and is a very nice short light weight rifle. Love the 20" barrel. I love it as much as I love watching Wildcats become new calibers and so on. Not for the reloading shooter but if your a factory ammo shooter, this caliber rocks, just like its brother the .338 RCM.

I will add it is an awesome gun for Wild Boar and its open sights as well.

Good shooting all

Originally Posted by 2ndtimer
Originally Posted by Gringo Loco
Originally Posted by zonzin
Oh,, and just found Hornady brass, box of 50, on Amazon, no tax free shipping 54$. Picked up some at that price.
.

That is some expensive brass. For comparison, .348 Win brass is $47.49 for 50 as listed at MidwayUSA. For .338 RCM brass to be more expensive than .348 Win really says something about it.


Have you checked prices for .270WSM brass? Midway has Norma for $40.99 for 20 cases, while the Nosler stuff goes for $66.99 for 25 cases. Now THAT is some expensive brass! I still like my .270WSM's and found some primed Federal nickel plated pulled brass for $210 for 500 cases, so my son and I are set for the lives of our rifles now.



If anyone is in need of 270WSM (Winchester headstamp) brass, drop me a line. There's a bunch of it available locally at a decent price.


I do like the short barrel, ease of carry, and it gets out of a saddle scabbard as quick as a lever gun. I have the 20 inch with sights. It wears a 2x7 Vortex Viper scope, and is in a McMillan. So far it has elk at 400 yards, and 15 yards in the timber. It handled both without a problem. It has become my go to gun. I intended to have a 338-06 built but picked up the RCM for $345.

But yes it is pretty much dead now. It may make an appearance once in a while. Get the components while you can.
Hornady seems to support their creations better than Win and Rem. You can still get brass and ammo for the 376 Steyr and it can't be as popular as the RCMs.
In 2007 when the RCM's came out people were saying they wouldn't be around in 10 years, and they are still here. You can find them on most gun sites, and you can find the ammunition on most gun sites too. The special powders are available now too, but from what I understand many reloaders are staying with normal powders to replicate the .300 h&h magnum instead of the special powders to replicate the .300 winmag. Also they are using the normal powders to replicate the .338-06 instead of the special powders to replicate the .338 winmag.

I have never understood the disappearing caliber fear. I have a SS .338 RCM as well with a "22 inch barrel, and I just love it! I will die owning this rifle! I bought 12 boxes of Hornady .225 SST's, and they are awesome! I am buying 3 more boxes to have an even 300 rounds. I use this rifle for hunting, and shoot it 6 or 7 times a year, and I may have to reload it in 40 years if I don't by 10 more boxes by then.

Ruger and Hornady put some thought into these calibers. They replicate some great previous calibers: .300 h&h magnum, and .338-06. They offer magnum performance in a .308 Winchester size cartridge with minimal recoil, and not to mention the performance when hunting!

I've never heard anything but positive comments about performance from RCM owners! In my opinion these are some of the most interesting, and brilliant calibers to come out in a very long time, and they were created by two highly respected company's in the sporting fields community!
The Failure of the RCM cartridges is not at all about any deficiency of the cartridges or of the guns. But solidly the blame is about business management.

As the former CEO of a bullet company, I have seen it before. You know the old saying about those that won’t learn from history?
As long ago as the 60s, Jeff Cooper (and several others) were saying that high priced guns firing low priced ammo would always be a success and the opposite will always be a failure.

That is the reason all military rounds have a good following in any nation that civilians are not subjugated into ‘livestock for the tax consumers”. We have had a number of very good all-around hunting cartridges in the USA that have had a super popular status until something replaced them, and then that status of top-seller fades because as the cheap ammo disappears, so does popularity. Some rounds have been super popular even in the face of mixed reports as to their usefulness, justified or not ( see 30 carbine, 223, and 9MM as examples)

Since Joyce Hornady died, the management of Hornady Inc. has pulled out the stops in their quest to gain profits, and in many cases they are taking it too far. Ruger got in bed with Hornady as the maker of the RCM rounds and THAT is the reason for the catastrophic failure of the rifles and sales of ammo.

Winchester made the magnums of its name and produced the ammo, higher priced then standard rounds, but in the 50s and 60s when it came out a box of 300 mag was only $1.75- $2.25 more than a box of 30-06. Remington did the same with their 7MM Mag. Super good sales with affordable ammo and “cheap to reasonable” brass.

Not Ruger!

Good price on a gun, that shot ammo that bent you over and “did the deed dry” when you needed to buy it, and ever shafted the public with pricing on empty brass------- when you could get it. (most of the time you couldn’t)

I expected the 375 RCM to really take off because of the fact that I and other gunsmiths could now give the customers 375H&H performance in a standard length action which means for any given budget more can be spent on a higher grade of wood, nice sights, better glass or just more ammo, rather than spending it on a magnum length (very expensive) action. You simply get a nicer gun with the standard action for a given price. I have done this many times in making 416 Taylors instead of 416 Rigbys. Far less to spend on brass, and far less on the action makes for a far better bargain in what you get for your dollar. And both the Rigby and the Taylor shoot the same bullet at the same speed.

But NO!

Hornady made it a problem to get the brass, charged out the nose for it, and just made the RCMs a logistical problem. So that prediction of mine didn’t happen. When I made my prediction I didn’t foresee the rip-off pricing of the ammo and brass.
Hornady killed the RCMs not Ruger.

Customers will not commit to making such a rifle because of Hornady’s pricing and policies, not Rugers. And no one else makes the brass so competition only exists in going to the WSM or Remington short mags,( which is what most everyone does.) If Ruger has any blame it is that they should have addressed this issue in their contract with Hornady in the 1st place.

As the former CEO of a bullet company and as a custom gunsmith I can tell you with no doubt at all that lots of people will buy an expensive gun they can feed, but few will buy a cheep gun that can’t feed. (or just can’t justify feeding at the cost)
It's tacticool, John.
No, they are dying on their own--
I just checked the Midway site and found ammo and brass for the .300, .338, and .375 available and at very competitive prices with other rounds in the same class. Brass for all three is about $.90 each, which is typical of all Hornady brass. Ammo for the .300 and .338 runs about $2 a pop; for the .375, about $3.

I don't have a dog in this fight one way or the other, but now at least, ammo and brass doesn't look to be a problem from either an availability or price standpoint.
© 24hourcampfire