The subject of a "true" magnum came up on the thread about the 7mm Remington Magnum. Didn't want to break that one up so am starting a new thread. Since it's obviously between major hunting seasons both in North America and Africa, and a lot of people are bored (the reason they're posting so much), I thought I'd troll a little and see what trouble we can get into.

A 'true' magnum has the initials H&H behind it...



Accept no substitutes....

Magnum , anything that kicks harder than the 30-06 and shoots a Big Game bullet over 2800 FPS

Years ago Wootters had an article that discussed "trajectory" magnums and "power" magnums. I haven't seen anyone define it better.

Anything that's louder, kicks more and doesn't kill anything more deader..

What is a 222Remington Magnum? All of it is marketing I think.

I can't define it, but I know what one is when I shoot it.

If you'd of asked me this 15 years ago I would of said anything with a belt except the 240 Roy.Today who knows?

What a can of worms. Used to be the presence of a belt. Now it is what ever a manufacturer decides to name it. There isn't a single good answer to your question.

1.5 liters instead of 750 ml. +1 on the H&H .

The only "magnum" is a bottle of bubbly...after that they are all cartridges!

+10 grs of propellant + 100fps + wishful thinking.

The word magnum refers to something that is larger than normal or average objects of it's type.

If we count the whitetail or muley as being our average game, then larger stuff like elk could be considered as magnum game.

Now, I'd never say that larger, or magnum game can't or shouldn't be taken with normal or average rifles. But clearly, and by their designers claims, some cartridges were meant for larger stuff. I would count rifle cartridges that were designed for larger species as magnums.

The 30-06 Springfield was designed to kill horses, thus it qualifies as a magnum by my reasoning.

Lots of people believe if the case is Bigger and kicks more then it has to kill a animal deader than the Smaller case that kicks less ,like the 06 or 308. My opinion the only real world advantage of a Magnum is that it will push a Heavier and Bigger Cal Bullet the same speed or maybe a little faster than the Standard Case's will push a lighter bullet.

I'd say a "true magnum" is one to which the manufacturer added "Magnum" in the name.

Let's not forget the .22 Winchester Magnum Rimfire!

I think the more easily defined "true magnum" involves large bottles of champagne...

More seriously, I would have said centerfire magnums generally involve being a certain amount overbore in powder capacity, but it turns out that's not a very good way to look at it:

http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2011/04/overbore-cartridges-a-working-definition/

Note the "mighty" 458 Win Mag is second from the bottom of the list...and the 243 Win is near the top! (Probably explaining the 243's reputation as a barrel burner...) Surprisingly (to me) the 338 Win Mag isn't very overbore either, it's pretty close to a scaled-up 30-06.

So, I'll just go back to my original statement. I think there's something to the "velocity" versus "power" magnums distinction though...

I don't think it's a "true troll" when one can actually learn something from it! Thanks!

Yes, and/or a magnum will push a similar bullet wt noticeably faster, therefore it will FLATTEN the trajectory at extended ranges.

The advantages of that 'should' be obvious.

OTOH - sometimes round 'here', that is either ignored or belittled.

225 Win Mag & up ?

Let's throw a few more worms into the can:

A bunch of people will bring up a "magnum" of wine. This comes from the Latin word magnus, meaning "great" or "large." And even then magnum didn't always refer to a bottle of wine, as in "magnum opus," or major work.

We're discussing cartridges. Here are some firearms--applicable definitions from quick web search of various on-line dictionaries:

1) A thing of a type that is larger than normal.
2) Of or relating to a cartridge containing a larger explosive charge than other cartridges of the same size
3)A large powerful gun

So far the dictionaries are all over the place, just like us, but the most common definitions relate to relative size, as in "a thing of a type that is larger than normal."

Of course, all dictionary definitions are based on what's called "common usage," meaning a general agreement among speakers of the same language. Does "a type that is larger than normal" refer to a specific caliber, such as .270, or to all rifle cartridges?

If the former, then the .270 Winchester can't be considered a magnum, as somebody suggested in the other thread. It was the first .27-caliber cartridge, so wasn't larger than normal. But the .270 Weatherby would be considered a "true magnum," since it's larger than normal--normal being the .270 Winchester.

According to the same definition the .17 Hornady Rimfire Magnum also isn't a true magnum, since it was the first rimfire .17 cartridge, so defined "normal." But the new .17 Winchester would be a true magnum, since it's larger than the .17 HMR. The same would be true of the .22 Magnum.

Or is a magnum cartridge simply larger than "normal" rifle cartridges? If so, what is a normal rifle cartridge? The .22 Long Rifle? The .30-06?

Evidently one of the problems here is "common usage." The Campfire has gotten into this before in the Big Bore forum. Some insist on the circa-1900 British definition of "big bore," .45 caliber or more. But we're not British and this is 2013. A Pennsylvania deer hunter might consider a .35 Whelen a big bore. Certainly my hunting companions in Montana when I was growing up considered any big game round much over .30 caliber a "big bore"--and in that context their opinion would certainly be "common usage."

Or is a magnum cartridge like one of the old definitions of pornography: "I know it when I see it."?

The 30/06 sort of sets the "baseline" for bullet weight,speed, trajectory,powder capacity, etc.,or some combinations of these factors.

Anything that goes faster with the same bullets, or starts substantially heavier bullets at the same velocity,is a "magnum"...therefore, we have the 300 magnums,and the 338 WM and 375 H&H are both "magnums"because they start 250 and 270 gr bullets at about the same speed the 30/06 does a 180 gr....ditto if you compare a 200-210 in the 338 with a 150 in the 30/06; or a 235 or 250 gr in the 375.

(I don't know what to do with the likes of the 458 and 460 Weatherby.Both are magnums for sure....as is the 416 Rigby and that ilk) .

In both cases, it takes larger cases than the 30/06 to accomplish this in anything 30 caliber and up.

If we want to substantially improve 30/06 trajectory ,we start the same bullets faster from larger cases; or smaller caliber,lighter bullets,at higher velocity,also from cases of large capacity.Then we end up with things like the 264,7RM,257 Weatherby,STW, etc.

So, whether the objective is moving heavier bullets at 30/06 velocities; or the same or lighter bullets at higher velocities,both these objectives require cases of generally larger capacities than the 30/06.

Of course we can find exceptions and ask, is a 6mm/06 or 25/06,or 270 a "magnum"? Sure! Under this criteria , they are,even though all are from the 30/06 case...but all three do shoot "flatter" than the 30/06,with smaller diameter and lighter bullets.

If we think harder, we might find exceptions to any of this...with so much cartridge overlap it's hard to draw hard and fast rules.

But if you use the 06 as the baseline,it isn't hard to categorize a magnum,at least when you're bored and have nothing better to do on a Saturday morning.


Edited to Add: We can also toss in whatever cartridge the marketing agency of arms and ammunition manufacturers decides to call "magnum".

Here's another little item: If definitions are based on common usage, why does "magnum of wine" always come up in these discussions? I can't ever remember ever hearing anybody in a store asking for a magnum of Pinot Noir or Chardonnay.

Actually, I'd guess that most rifle loonies wouldn't even know about "magnum" bottles of wine if they hadn't read an article by some gun writer mentioning them while writing about magnum cartridges. We're probably the only people who keep the wine term alive.

Nothing like a set of Magnum Tittie's

Can't help but think that "Magnum" is primarily a marketing term. As such it has come to be synonymous with "more powerful. I would guess that H&H started it. I don't know if anyone else used the term prior.
If size or performance were the defining factor, then such cartridges as the 505 Gibbs, the 416 Rigby, 404 Jeffery etc. would certainly make the cut. In North America, the 30 and 35 Newton and the 280 Ross were big enough and powerful enough to deserve the classification if not the name.
Ultimately, if a company names the cartridge a magnum, it is one and will always be so designated.
It is fairly certain that no cartridge with a .473 head diameter can ever be a magnum; unless it has a belt swaged on to it and is designated as such like the 240 Weatherby Magnum. GD

What if that .473 case is necked to .22 caliber?

To answer MD's original question, a Magnum is an Americanized version of the British catch phrase, "Nitro Express", i.e., hype

Did someone say " Magnum Porn"..?


.375 H&H

No one has mentioned the Dodge 440 Magnum. I always figured that the cylinders were "bored over size" and it came equipped with an "over-sized bottle of wine" from which one could take a "belt" when he so desired.

The answer was much less complicated in the days of "Dirty Harry."

Or, for that matter, of Harry Rheems.

Sorry, I don't see the parallel there. It's not like there are a bunch of new "short magnums" of that ilk on the market these days.....

I think that sums it up the best.

When the"magnum" craze hit, I think it was in the 70's, everyone who bought one claimed they could push a 200 + grain bullet in thier magnums the same velocities as those who shot an .06 that pushed a 150 gr bullet. Once they figured it out that with the velocity came a large increase in felt recoil, they tried the lighter bullets. Then they found out if they used the 150 gr or les weight bullet the bullet would not stay together at the higher velocities.

Then they started to clamor for lighter tougher bullets to calm that recoil and not have so much shrap metal.The bullet manufacturers were only too happy to fill the void and found they could charge twice as much for the bullets.

So now you have all the magnum shooters rationalizing thier high cost of bullets saying they are the cheapest part of the hunt. Whereas all of us who never succumbed to that siren are laughing all the way to the bank.

Flame on.

"Magnum" (def.) - a larger than normal bottle of champagne.

Or, in the firearms world, a marketing term used to make it sound bigger, badder, faster, etc. than the usual cartridges.

I think Bob in NH is right. Magnum performance needs to somehow improve on 30-06 levels in some way, so that means more powder. The first cartridge I remember with the term Magnum attached to it was the 300 H&H. It seems like it was an attempt to achieve 30-06 performance with cordite powder, and needed a larger capacity that could be loaded to lower pressures to get that done. The rifle business took a look at the new, larger case size and we've been off and running since. The lower pressure aspect got run over a long time ago.

So, anyway, I have always thought of a Magnum as anything with more velocity potential then that offered by 30-06 case. capacity.

If you look at various posts around the web it would appear the two camps of magnum.

1) To move standard weight bullets of a certain caliber faster or heavier than normal weight bullets to similar velocities to cleanly take big game animals

2) To move lighter than average bullets to hyper speeds to tell others how fast you can make 'em fly

There is possibly a third camp from manufactureres; to give to a razzle/dazzle name to sell firearms.

Not saying that any of this is wrong or bad, just appears to be the use of the word magnum.

KC

in the USA you often hear comments about weak kneed Brits drinking tea and such , the truth is actually in reverse, them old chaps packed some awesome firepower hunting in Africa, Australia and elswhere in the world and never called anything Magnum,
the Americans are the weak kneed sissies with their 243's and 270's because "the 'aught-6 kicks so damn much" anything bigger gotta be a brutal Magnum.
aside from all the hype and BS most Magnums aren't that bad nor are difficult to shoot... just ask the Brits, they been doing it a lot longer than we have.....

I have always considered it to be somewhat parallel to what a species is in Biology. A species and a magnum chambering are whatever the person naming them says they are. There is no hard and fast definition that will apply to all situations.

John, I read an article of yours a few years ago that dealt with the "ideal" standard cartridge velocity (2600-2900) for cup n core bullets to perform...and how most that fell in that range were also very similar in trajectory. (around here we reffer to that as the 209 rule) Maybe we should use that as a baseline and define magnums as a cartridge that moves standard weight bullets at higher than standard velocities of comparable bore sizes. Sorta like what was said in the above post....lol

209 rule defined as 2" high at 100 = 0 at 200 = -9 at 300. Most of the hunting I've done in my lifetime was with a 7X57, 30-06, 8X57 and .350 Remington. Kept it easy to remember regardless of the rifle at hand and they all fell in that curve, at least withing the width of the crosshairs.

Maybe with "Magnums" it would be more of a "215 rule" +2" at 100 = +1" at 200 = -5" at 300. Either way a common primer number to remember.

All this thought is making me fuzzy. I think I'll retire to the cellar and find a "magnum" of Chateau Benson 2004 white to pop this evening.....

Why was the .38 super not called a magnum

Only if the charge is black powder. Smokeless powder just burns.

That's what the on-line dictionary said--another example of how the Internet is dumbing down the world.

Pardon my liberty with you post.

A. You are correct about them packing BIG firepower....

B. EXPRESS in britineese is used for magnum. i.e. After Rem reintroduced the 280 Rem AS 7mm Rem Express, they ran into that possible problem. Therefore they retired the term 'Express' from the 7mm (280 R).

So seems to me, the Brits used our term magnum AS express.

Whatsyathink? huh?

....any chambering Tom Selleck owns

BINGO We have a winner. Cheers NC

Need I say more??

Magnum = larger than normal is my loose definition.

Let say:
rimfire = 22RF
22cal (0.376 size)= 223Rem ... small bolt face and above 30gr powder capacity qualifies as a magnum.
22cal (0.473 size)= 22/250 ... so 220Swift is a magnum by my definition but was never named as such.
6mm = the 243Win and 6mmRem "twins"

From 6.5mm through to 375cal, its a powder capacity greater than that given by the 30/06 case.

In 40cal and above, its the ability to throw a 400gr/500gr projectile at speeds above 2150fps.

Cheers...
Con

Actually, the Brits apparently originated the term "magnum" for larger cartridges, with the .375 H&H in 1912. And originally they used "express" for black powder cartridges using light-for-caliber bullets at what were then considered very fast muzzle velocities, not the big Nitro-Expresses.

In reality both magnum and express were used on both sides of the ocean. One of the earliest American "magnums" was the .30 Adolph Express, which appeared about a year after what Holland and Holland called their ".375-Bore Magnum High Velocity" cartridge. (The Adolph round was designed by Charles Newton, who later made some tiny changes and called it the .30 Newton, but not the .30 Newton Express.)

If the .375 H&H was the original "magnum," then perhaps anything smaller doesn't qualify. Oh, and by the way H&H did not call their .300 a magnum. Instead they called it "The Super-Thirty." It didn't become a magnum until Winchester started making ammo.

Okay MD, no problem. However my post per 7mm Rem Express is what Rem said was the reason they dropped the term.

Well, yeah, some idiots thought they could shoot 7mm Express ammo in their 7mm Remington Magnums. But those idiots weren't British shooters, and didn't have any idea what "express" means in British rifles.

As I pointed out, both the British and Americans used "magnum" and "express" to denote more powerful than usual cartridges.

Not so sure ... express loads often denoted lighter weight projectiles at elevated speeds. Velopex was another word for such as was 'Accelerated Express'. As a marketing tool it denoted something that hit like 'an Express train'

Sidetrack, which country/cartridge first incorporated the term 'magnum' in its name? Earliest I can find is probably the Brits with the 350Rigby Magnum and 425Wesley Richards magnum 2-3 years prior to the 375H&H ... and beltless to boot. Took the Americans a long time to re-discover beltless magnums.
Cheers...
Con

I forgot about the .350 and .425 magnums preceding the .375. It seems the term magnum was not just invented in Britain but common before Americans ever started using it.

Maybe not as long as you think?

In the 70's or so---

Jack O'Connor titled the 270W as "Every Mans Beltless Magnum". I have the magazine & title round here sommers.

Gaday Mate:

Oops ... just pulled out COTW ... 500/450 3 1/4" Magnum Express takes us back to the 1890s. I wonder if barrels were actually marked with 500/450 Magnum Express or Nitro Express?
Cheers...
Con

Whatever a magnum is, its obviously not as good as an ultra magnum.

I prefer RUM, personally.

But probably better than a 'short' magnum.....

Guys --

I'm really not bored today.

This am, my motorcycle would not start.

My 4 wheeler barely did and I checked fences.

But it was so cold my HORSE WOULD NOT START.

It's all about the 30-06, and comparisons to it. Like it or not, it is the standard.

Sorry MD I missed that post whilst typing.

Well, you challenged us to see what trouble we could get into and it looks like the misconception that it was first coined with the 375H&H is now dead and it's maybe harking back into the 1890s with a flanged (sorry rimmed for you Americans ) cartridge. I really think a modern US manufacturer needs to add a new flanged cartridge ... nice word flanged.
Cheers...
Con

The term magnum apparently had some useful meaning originally but in today's world it has little or no definable meaning as it relates to cartridge nomenclature. But as far as I can tell there is no rationale to cartridge nomenclature any way.

Con,

Yeah, I looked at my oldest copy of COTW and there were also the .450/.400 Magnum Nitro-Express 3-1/4" from 1884 and the .500/.450 Magnum Black Powder Nitro Express from around 1880. So apparently the Brits not only came up with both magnum and express, but combined 'em!

I wonder if there was a .75-caliber Magnum Express flintlock in the past as well? Or maybe that's what the Masai called their extra-long spear blades, the Magnum Express Lion Stabbers.

DakotaDeer,

If the .30-06 is the standard, why did magnums appear before 1906?

Actually, I'm starting to feel an article coming on....

Barney Miller and the detectives were sitting around contemplating just one of those that had been used in a murder. The question arose as to whether or not it could be hurled through the solid-core wooden door to the office, the twin points of interest being if it was strong enough to hold together and it it could be thrown hard enough. Abe Vigoda volunteered to give it a try. He drew back and threw it as hard as he could. The blade held up its end of the bargain, but only stuck in the door, not penetrating completely. Someone was heard to remark, "The spear is willing, but the Fish is weak."

aww hell, as fast as ya open your mouth ya gotta stuff your foot in faster,

those damn Brits anyway, we have no originality it seems like !

if larger makes a magnum then one could argue how come the Chey Tacs and Snipe Tacs ain't Magnums ? BUUT the parent case is an Express and a Magnum so no argument... I'm starting to like the 500 Jefferey more and more, the Brits didn't invent it,
and it ain't a magnum !!!!! so it will be real pleaseant to shoot off the bench or anywhere else... HAHAHaowwwwww

Swamplord - NEVER say never,<G>

jwall...

10-4

And then, there are the two classes of magnums the "classic" magnums and the "new" magnums...
Classic magnums being more suited to short range shooting and newere magnums being suited for long range shooting.
Classic, new, short range and long range all being equally definitive.

I like this. However, i wouldn't just include the .30-06 itself but all cartridges based on its case. How about this: If a cartridge shoots a given bullet weight at least 200 fps faster than the .30-06 case, it's a magnum? I think this is a decent definition, at least with calibers from .25-.35.

A magnum is any gun that turns you green when you shoot it.

not true !!! ya can screw on that thingy with holes on it on the end of your barrel then any anti-magnum posse can shoot it !

I agree with Greydog... it's a marketing term.

My own arbitrary view is a magnum is anything that holds somewhere around 20% more powder than a 30-06-based round of the same caliber.

That's why I think of the 300 WSM as barely a "semi magnum" and don't consider the SAUM's or RCM's magnums at all...

There is less than 100 FPS difference between MOST WSM and SAUM loads, so 100 FPS makes the difference between a mag and a standard round?

I called the WSM's "semi-magnums"... I don't consider them actual magnums. And they barely qualify as "semi"...

"Magnum" applied to the name of a cartridge has about as much meaning as "GT" applied to the moniker of a hunk of Detroit iron.

Magnum is simply a term used to market another product. If became important as hunters and rifle shooters where exposed to magazines that tried to convice them they needed something "bigger" than their 30-06's and .270's. As the post WWII economy improved, much in the way of equipment, from "glass" to "rifles" and other support stuff blossomed to meet the demand of the sportsmen. No doubt Weatherby, SCI and others fueled the fire that bigger was better. Taken to the extreme now, most of us know better and have gone back the other way.

bigwhoop, you and others have assigned 'magnum' with the 30-06 as a starting place. As Mule Deer & Con have printed in this thread......

The Brits WERE USING the terms 'magnum' & 'express' BEFORE 1906 and even much earlier than 1925.

It wasn't much of a marketing term THEN and YES I agree it HAS BECOME a marketing WORD (only) today. eg. 'short magnum' 'compact magnum' etc. At lease I am UNIMPRESSED with many of those.

I guess 'marketing' played an important role at the end of the 19th Century. (sarc) It ain't NEW.

Nope! At least not since some caveman decided he could persuade other cavemen that he knapped the best spear points, because of a proprietary technique that made his kill mammoths like, well, a magnum.

MD -

My quote of yours was in response to OTHERS stating that 'magnum' was just another marketing tool and aimed at besting the 06 and/or 270.

When AS YOU had pointed out that the Brits were the FIRST to use the monikers of express and/or magnum much earlier than the 06 appeared AND it does mean larger, stronger, faster etc.

Apparently my "nope" was too short. What I was gfreeing with your last sentence, saying, "Nope, marketing ain't new!"

YEP - I missed that. Right over my head. Sorry.

I'm "fixin to" make a couple of edits that'll clarify.

THNX
Jerry

The word "magnum" was first used by (IIRC) Romans and their containers of wine.....large containers were referred to as "magnums"

Take it from there

Some REAL magnums IMO that are LESS than .333 cal.

The 22RFM certainly is a mag over the 22 LR, @1200 fps VS 2000 or so.

The 240 Wby IS a mag over 243/6mm.

The 257 Wby is a mag over smaller 25s but ???

The 270 Wby IS a mag over the 270 Win.

The 7 RM IS a mag over several lesser 7mm carts.

The 308 NM / 300 WM / 300 WBY ARE mags over 300 Sav/308W & 30-06. krap how could I forget the 303 B, OH, it's .311 that's how.

These FEW come to mind rather quickly.

We have some SO CALLED "magnums" today that I personally don't believe DESERVE the title. JMHO

YMMV, but I don't drive your truck. <G>

MD,
And what if that is exactly where the term came from and was meant to mean?!

Consider that if the Brits were the first to use it, the people targetted for their firearms and cartridges would have been military officers and aristocracy, ie those with time/circumstances and the money to hunt. These people presumably would of had some idea of what a magnum bottle of bubbly etc was ... ie an oversized and twice larger than normal bottle.

Say we date the term magnum to about the 1860s, and to cartridges in the 1880s/90s ... a time when cartridges were starting to develop long necks and gentle sloping shoulders relatively far down the body, rather than being straight walled, and long and large physically as BP was still ruling the roost. Certainly the 350Rigby Magnum, 425WR and 375H&H fit that bill, likewise the two flanged earlier cartridges.

Maybe the connection was that visually they superficially appeared similar to the magnum bottles, and that was something the intended target audience probably knew as being 'twice as good'. A sign of excess and of wealth and privilege.

The original Coca-Cola bottle I believe was also to be designed/selected to be "a bottle which a person could recognize even if they felt it in the dark, and so shaped that, even if broken, a person could tell at a glance what it was." Eventually the coca bean may have been its inspiration, but instant recognition of the product through its shape was obviously an important factor.

Now if that's all too deep and meaningful, bear with me ... its the middle of summer down here and with 46 days to go before New Years eve (Duck season eve) ... minds tend to go a bit screwy.
Cheers...
Con

I dunno how I'm gonna write this so maybe some of you guys can straighten me out...

But to suggest the 30-06 is the baseline against which magnum status is awarded, is to say that North America is the only place where magnums live.

The 30-06 is not the standard the world over. Con, AGW and others of my countrymen might help me with this, but I would have pegged either the 243 or the 308 as the "standard" in our country. Does that make the 270 or the 30-06 a "magnum" for Aussies. Nup.

I reckon the term magnum is firstly just a marketing naming gimmick - which is to say it means nothing - and secondly and perhaps of greater utility, is just another descriptor by which to differentiate all of the cartridges. Eg 44 Special vs 44 Magnum.

Hmm, just read back my post. Not very helpful. I apologise; I am presently at the back end of an Australia Day bbq which has been going for 24 hours or more and am probably not at my best!

Regards.

- Bob

But..... THIS one goes to 11! That's one more, idn't it?



"Magnum" means a little more than normal. Or a lot.


Now define "normal" and you'll have it pegged.

Bob,
I reckon in Australia the 303British was our standard for a long time, and if you look at range templates the 8mm (presumably 8mm Mauser ie 8x57) and its capabilities is basically what seems to have set our bigbore range standards in terms of fall-out distances etc...

Out of interest, which US derived cartridge first used 'magnum' as part of its name?
Cheers...
Con

Or is a magnum cartridge like one of the old definitions of pornography: "I know it when I see it."? - MD

That's as close as anything so far...and a bit more of the bubbly from a really big bottle with a small neck might shed new light on this.

As a U S citizen and lifelong hunter and loooong time gun nut, that is an interesting ? to me. I feel like I should know the answer to that and IF I do, it's not coming to me.

This is going to be a very long day for me and it will be this evening before I can follow up.

I think you've got THE starting point for us ... Yanks

Gaday Mates

If case capacity determines the use of the word Magnum why is that a 454 Casull,475 &500 Linebaugh are not magnums.I mean a 125MM Howitzer is a rifle(Look down the barrel) and its not a magnum.So to me it is a Term used by The Manufacturer that has nothing to do with size and every thing to do with sales.Just my humble opinion,Huntz

The 475L and the 500L, 500 JRH and the 454 were named after the people that developed. To compare small arms artillery is ridiculous

It is a word dreamt up by salesmen that means absolutely nothing when applied to cartridges.

Bottles of plonk are another matter all together.

since magnum was first used to describe large bottles of wine , then it must be used in ammo to just describe a larger case

It's a gimmick to sell more guns

For me in my OLD AGE and BAD HEALTH now I cut most things down
to the simple terms for my feeble mind!
To me Magnum means WEATHERBY!!!!!!!!!!
The rest are just pretenders.
ARMA

So why is it not a 475 Linebaugh Magnum????It is after all larger than a Ruger 480.which also brings up this question why is the 480 smaller than a 475???And yes an Artillery piece can be called a Rifle.If ridiculous is not allowed in the thread,I don`t think JB would have started it.Thats the point,right JB???

The question may need to be sharpened to arrive at an unambiguous answer. The problem is deciding the meaning of "US derived".

In the US during the 1930s, dozens of wildcat cartridges were developed with the 300 H&H as the parent case, and most of them were labelled as "Magnum". Some made it to popular proprietary status (e.g. Mashburn and Weatherby), and some were eventually blessed by SAAMI. Do these count as "US derived", even though they were based on the British 300 H&H?

Would an answer naming a wildcat cartridge be acceptable, assuming the parent case obviously originated in the US?

If you exclude wildcat cartridges, and also factory cartridges based on non-US parent cases, then the earliest cartridge designated as a magnum may be the 357 Magnum revolver cartridge, which was introduced in 1934.

--Bob

The classic Magnum cartridge is the 45 ACP:

Here's a cartridge deserving mention in a SADD-based thread: The 350 JAWS Micro Mag. You can buy brass from Midway.



In the late 1990s, the Jordan Arms and Weapons System was set up in the Kingdom of Jordan. They designed a series of pistol cartridges necked down from the 45 Win Mag ctg, including the 225, 250, 300, 350 and 400 Jaws Micro Mags. They were intended for a pistol, the VIPER, designed by Wildey to be manufactured in Jordan.

The name may be the ultimate firearms oxymoron: "Micro Magnum".

--Bob

Bullshooter,
You got it, I meant US designed and commercialised cartridge to first use the 'magnum' label, though the wildcats are also of interest. Just wondering how that word came into the gun language for the US hunters/shooters?
Cheers...
Con

Frist that I rember is the 357 S&w mag.

Isn't Magnum that PI in Hawaii that lives with Higgins and flies around with TC in a little helicopter?

Con,

My guess about the first American-designed cartridge to have "magnum" attached to it would be the .270 Weatherny Magnum. According to most lore this was the first of Roy's belted cartridges, and was designed around 1943, though the .257 Weatherby may have been designed around the same time. Both were wildcats at the time, but became factory cartridges a few years later.

I would also guess that the Weatherby magnums were what put the word "magnum" in the minds of American shooters. They certainly put it into the minds of Remington and Winchester, both of which were forced to bring out their own belted magnums in the 1950's and 60's to compete with the Weatherbys.

The Weatherby rounds became practical when IMR4350 was introduced in 1940. At the time it was by far the slowest-burning powder available to handloaders, and changed the whole game. Of course, after WWII H4831 became available as a surplus powder, and was a little slower, but IMR4350 started it all.

Interestingly, when doing some research a couple of years ago I ran across one sources that claimed IMR4350 was developed at least partly for the .300 H&H, which became relatively popular in the U.S. after Winchester chambered it in the Model 70 and started making factory ammo in the late 1930's. Ben Comfort didn't hurt the .300 H&H's popularity either when he won the Wimblecon Cup with Model 70. (Another bit of trivia: Comfort's score actually tied for first place, but he was awarded the trophy on the tie-breaker system.)

Thanks MD,
The 270Weatherby was the first that came to my mind as I thought it was about a mid 1940s cartridge, by the early to mid 1950s the main US manufacturers had certainly jumped on the bandwagon.

Just had a quick look through the CIP spec sheets ... the term is certainly most heavily represented amongst US cartridges both belted and rimless, then the Holland & Holland offerings, and less than a handful of European cartridges.

So the term whilst perhaps British in origin, it has certainly been adopted and embraced by the US manufacturers.
Cheers...
Con

THNX, MD & Con.

I'm between events & just had to check in.

So, the 270W was the FIRST victim of the American magitis <G>

At least Wby had a GOOD objective.

It's interesting to me that of the two British gun terms, Magnum and Express, only magnum was successful over here

Did a search and figured out exactly what a magnum cartridge is:

Example 1.

Example 2.

Example 3.


Glad I could clear that up for everybody.

True. I suppose originally both may have stood for something that offered prestige, like a Magnum bottle and an Express train ... perhaps Express is the new name wildcatters should adopt just to bring it back??
Cheers...
Con

Because "Super" is better than "Magnum". Ever hear of Magnum-man? Nope, cause Superman got to him

Quote: "Why was the .38 super not called a magnum?"

Just to add, Express seems to have been applied to accelerated BP loads. May have been a progression from regular BP military cartridges like the 577Snider, to Express, to Black powder Express (BPE), to Nitro Express as powders transitioned to smokeless? Maybe Magnum is the epitome of superior smokeless cartridges.
Cheers...
Con

I would like to ask the original question a different way:

If we were to scrap all cartridge nomenclature right now and rename them all, which ones would be called magnums?

I will come up with a simple suggestion; any cartridge that requires an extra large and very strong bolt action receiver to operate them.

In other words, no short action 308 length rounds and I suppose the 30-06 length rounds would be out too.

I must admit to never having shot more gun than the 308 Norma on a regular basis, so from there up I will defer to the true experts.

Wrong, I assigned "magnum" in contect of post WWII when the US economy got back to a peace time footing. Hunters were being wooed by "marketing". The likes of Weatherby, writers, SCI and others tried to convince them that they needed something more powerful than their 30-06's and 270's. This has nothing to do with the birthdate of the 30-06.

The 475L come way before the 480 Ruger

John-

As a rifle loony, are you considering only rifle cartridges in your reply, or can pistol and shotgun cartridges qualify?

As noted above, the 357 Magnum was introduced about 1934. It was exclusively an American design, based on the 38 S&W Special. Elmer Keith wrote a long review of the cartridge and revolver in The American Rifleman of November 1935.

The term was also used to describe shotgun cartridges. Western Cartridge Co. attached it to their cartridges that were longer than standard in 10 and 12 gauges. Elmer Keith wrote a descriptive article, "The Ithaca Magnum Ten-Bore", that was printed in T. A. R. of September 1935. Because the long shell was an American design, it may qualify as part of an answer to the original question.

A rifle loony would enjoy an article in T.A.R., Nov 1934, in which Elmer Keith described the 280 Dubiel Magnum cartridge. Keith noted in passing that a few years previously, Askins Sr and John Dubiel worked with the 275 H&H Mag case to make the 276 Dubiel Magnum, changing the shape of the shoulder and necking it to 7mm. Western Cartridge Co. marketed cartridges for the 276 Magnum, putting it at least 14 years ahead of Weatherby's efforts.

In T.A.R. of April 1937, Keith described work with the 250 O'Neil Magnum, based on a heavily reformed 300 H&H case. I don't believe this cartridge was ever commercialized.

--Bob

Bullshooter,

I was mostly considering rifle cartridges--which at least four people chose to ignore when they HAD to mention wine bottles. (And no, "magnum" wine bottles didn't just refer to champagne.)

But the question was cartridges, which would obviously include handgun and even shotgun rounds.

Thanks for reminding me of the O'Neil and DuBiel wildcat magnums. They were certainly the forerunners of the Weatherby rounds.

Probably Askins, Jr.

Askins, Sr. was a shotgun guru. Jr. was the rifleman.

DF

A magnum cartridge is one that is so named, by either by the originator or his/her/its marketing team. Has nothing to do with any of those other features. The 9.3 BS could just as well have been named the 9.3 BS Magnum. It might have even become a commercial offering if its originators had been thinking ahead and had consulted a good patent attorney. (Hee, hee.)

That was`nt the question.

Whatever says "Magnum" on the cartridge box, like, you know, 22 Magnum (rimfire).

"Magnum" is a cartridge that burns large amounts of powder for small gain in velocity over a standard cartridge.

Magnums are not well balanced in terms of case capacity to bore size.


Where did I put my flame suit ?


Mike

well yea it was. Have you read the entire thread? Did you read what JB posted?

I would say generally, that would be one that shoots faster than the accepted "standard" for bore size, or shoots equal size projectiles at increased velocity.

I'm tempted to say that a "true" magnum performance starts with the .300 Win Mag level with 180gr bullets and up. However, the .338 Win is probably a better start point because outside a trajectory advantage, the .300's don't have a big advantage over the .30-06 IMO, and the '06 seems to be a pretty well accepted standard.

Edited to add
*Given that, if I could pick just one "Magnum" short of the African big five, the .300 Win would be it. Include the big 5 and it's the .375 H&H for me*

What's in a name?

Dirtfarmer-
I'm pretty hesitant about replying, given your possession of Askins Sr's Browning shotgun. And certainly the two men have the reputation of areas of expertise that you describe.

The sentence as written by Keith: "A few years ago Capt. (now Maj.) Chas. Askins and John Dubiel spent much time developing the .276 Magnum."

My reasons for assigning the job to Askins Sr was as follows:

(1) The article was written in 1934. At that time Jr was still in the Border Patrol. On page 2 of the next issue (Dec 1934), there's Winchester ammo ad with a photo of Jr dressed in his Border Patrol uniform as the winner of all individual matches in a major Southwest Pistol Meet.

(2) In his autobiography (p.102), Jr describes being commissioned as a 1st Lieutenant just after Pearl Harbor. Before then he was a Sgt in the Texas National Guard. Also in the autobiography, he indicates he became a major only toward the end of WWII.

(3) Askins Sr did some rifle shooting and wrote about it. His book Rifles and Rifle Shooting was published in 1923.

(4) Some further description of the work of Askins Sr with the Dubiel rifle is provided in an Askins article in T.A.R. of Nov 1930, p.22. The entire article on about five different rifle topics shows Askins Sr to be pretty knowledgeable about rifles.

(5) In his autobiography (p.18), Askins Jr. tells of visiting his father, probably in the late 20s or early 30s, and finding that his father had "put together a loading that was a mite too hot. The rifle had blown up. He was in a state of shock, had bits of metal in his face and hands, and it was plain that he had lost considerable blood. The rifle ... was a variation of the .270. ... It was an old Mauser action and the case was the .275 H&H which has now disappeared." It's probably a safe assumption this was a 276 Dubiel, or something close to it.

I may have misinterpreted some of this, but I think I'll stick with the Askins that Keith mentioned as being Askins Sr. Feel free to correct me.

--Bob

Here is what MD posted on page one about definitions pay attention to the red

Thanks a bunch for that info and the correction.

I was assuming and you know how to spell that word, ASS U&me...

DF

Bob,

As an addendum, Sr. Askins and Elmer were pretty tight. The story has it that Sr. actually encouraged Elmer in his early career and was helpful getting him started as a gun writer. During that era, Sr. was the highest paid gun writer of his time, so I'm sure Elmer looked up to him. And, I'm sure Sr. was in a position to be of real assistance to an upcoming, otherwise unknown gun writer. It's never been easy, breaking into that kinda profession, then or now. And Elmer wasn't a college journalism professor like J.O'C. He was a cowboy, guide and gun nut. He, undoubtedly, needed some coaching, grooming and the right introductions.

That's an interesting tidbit of info that I didn't know about Sr.

DF

Right on.

It's what the marketing dept. decides to call a new round...

DF

I have a copy of "Rifles & Rifle Shooting" by Charles Askins

Outing Publishing Company , Copyright 1912

Outing Handbooks #15


Mike

6-250,

Wonder if there are any reprints of that book available?

DF

Bob,

Another tidbit about Sr. He was a writer of childrens books at one time, was a teacher and attorney who didn't follow either profession. He, instead, chose to train bird dogs. That didn't work out, because he like to shoot more than train dogs and it's hard to do both. He moved about, hunting and writing until he settled down in OK where he lived for a number of years.

So, as a highly educated man, he had more in common with J.O'C than a rather crude, uneducated cowboy/guide/gun nut from Idaho. But, those two hit it off, and as they say, the rest is history...

DF

I don't know about reprints. Occasionally the originals show up for sale on the interweb. Interesting that when they do the book is often mistakenly credited to Askins Jr , he would have been what , 6 years old in 1912 ?


Mike

Yeah, sorting those two out has been an ongoing point of confusion.

DF

Mike

Cool.

And those birds on a rifle book. Now, that does sound like the Major...

DF

I found this:

http://archive.org/stream/riflesandrifles00askigoog#page/n28/mode/2up

Book doesn't seem to be available, but at least one can read it on line.

DF

I seem to remember Elmer writing about some shotgun that he got from Sr. that he used for slinging #3s at waterfowl.

IIRC, it was an Ithaca double.

DF

It was also a 10-gauge magnum Ithaca double.

One of my favorite stories about Askins Sr. comes from his book GAME BIRD SHOOTING, published in 1931. He talks about a setter he trained named Doc Hick, who was a national field-trial winner. Askins sold Dic Hick after winning a lot of trials, and very soon thereafter Doc Hick died.

"I never since have had any heart for dog training. My dogs are now just about the least trained bird dogs ever went afield, because I never punish them. I let them do what pleases them best, they do the best they know how, and we have a grand time together; but it scandalous handling in the eyes of a stranger."

I believe that I would have liked him.

I have several original Askins Sr. books and love to read his stuff. I may have that one, too. Will check when I get home from the office. The old man was amazingly technical and on the cutting edge of ballistic and weapons technology of his day. The way he paid attention to details, backing up everything he said with data and fact, sorta reminds me of a certain contemporary gun writer...

The Major had a tender heart and was a much easier going sort than Jr. His wife, Jr.'s mother, was a "contentious Irish woman" words from Jr.'s own writings. So, I guess opposites do attract and Jr., although he adored his Dad and didn't have much use for his mother or sister, was evidently "wired" more like his Mom.

I just learned some stuff on the Fire about Sr.'s rifle stuff. This is an electronic copy of his book "Rifles and Rifle shooting" from 1912. I'm looking for a copy to add to my collection.

http://archive.org/stream/riflesandrifles00askigoog#page/n98/mode/2up

DF


Edited to add, I do have "Game Bird Shooting" by Askins, Sr., a 1931 first edition, Macmillan Company, N.Y. that was owned by a West Point Cadet, Roy Wheaton Cole, Jr.

Col. Cole eventually became military Attache' to Sweden, Col. Askins served as military Attache' to Spain, so there was some parallel to their military careers.

Col. Cole evidently was a fan of Sr. Askins.

Here's the link from 1933 Superposed on the SGW forum, showing the book. http://www.shotgunworld.com/bbs/viewtopic.php?f=53&t=124719&start=220

We can only hope...

Maybe we could break with the tradition of placing the word at the end, place it in the front, and used "Big-Assed", as in "Big-Assed 7MM". This would probably hold a certain appeal to many.

That name would appeal to a niche market of men

Has it been pointed out that Ken Waters liked to use "Express" for his wildcats?

Excellent observation!

I tend to prefer a B-prefix for my wildcats, whether real or imaginary.

Well I couldn't help wonderIF ....

the B S had dual application??

Magnum starts on and in conjunction with the curve of diminished return.

Just a little DIFFERENT take on that.

I agree that with 'some' you don't get much more.

However, IMO, I feel there are some mags that give an appreciable INCREASE for a reasonable amount of 'more' powder.

IMO - IMO - IMO - IMO.

The 7 Rm gives an appreciable increase 'over' the 280 R - both using handloads NOT factory ammo.
Only 1 ex. - 66-68 grs (depending on gun) in 7 M - 139 HBTSP = 3300 fps @. That from a 'bunch' of 7 Mags.
COMPARE - 62-64 grs in 270/280 - 130/139 = 3100 fps.

******That is @ 4 grs FOR 200 fps increase***** 24" mag--22" std.
I have DONE THAT on many occasions.

_________________________________________________________________


Also the 300 WM give a very noticeable increase over the 06 with the ***180 OR 200 grainers****

In several 300 WMs I have/had --73 grs w/180 = 3100fps OR MORE.


***All this info uses OLD reliable powders NOT some of the newer ones. I do NOT comment on powders/bullets I have NOT used.***

IMO, it just depends on WHAT anyone feels is a justified gain -- for whatever 'more' powder is used.

Maybe it's a whole lot simpler than all this. Seems to me that when you shoot them side by side a standard cartridge goes CRACK!!!! and a magnum is more of a BOOM!!! Of course I could be wrong...

jwall,

How much flatter does a 7mm 139gr BTSP fly at 3300 fps over 3100?

What powders did you use in both calibers to obtain these speeds?

Big Redhead:

First w/o looking I can't tell the exact diff in trajectory >> but I know it is NOT a great diff. But the added vel increases the momentum and energy.

Second, in the 7 RM, I & others, used IMR 4350.
>>> slower powders will give a little V more WITH a little more powder.<<
.....in the 270/280 we used 'SURPLUS' 4831 (NOT H 4831); WHEN that was gone I switched to IMR 7828.

---

In the 300 WM (at least 4 or 5, Ruger 77, B B R, Rem 700, Win 70)
I STILL use IMR 4350.

IMR 4350 gives pretty good vel PER amount used. I knew what I wanted when I started loading the mags. That was/is ECONOMY, the least powder for the most speed.

Slower burning powders WILL give a little more vel at a little more powder used.

I have to go now. I'll get back a little later. Maybe something else I need to add.

I used to have a .350 Remington magnum. It kicked like a magnum but the numbers just weren't there.

RichardAustin,

Your "Magnum starts on and in conjunction with the curve of diminished return" is interesting--except that in powder-burning rifle cartridges diminished return in bullet energy for the powder burned starts immediately above the .22 Short.

MM -

What was the bll length of the 350 RM? Some had rather short blls for a mag.

I've never had/loaded a 350 RM and would have to look at the loading manuals for powder charges.

I/We have been told the 35 Whelen gave very similar performance to the 350 RM.

The AMOUNT of powder directly affects the recoil. It's NOT the only thing but it's part of the equation.

Big Redhead -

The reasons I'm still using IMR 4350 & IMR 7828 are:

1. In the 90s WHEN the price of powders reached 15-16 $ /pound.... I < STOCKED > up. I still have several lbs of each.

2. THEY WORK also in the South we don't have the EXTREME cold of the Northern States, Canada,or Ak. so there is no excessive drop in vel.

Both are still excellent powders, too!

I've had a couple of .350 Remington Magnums, both with 22" barrels, a Remington 700 Classic and a Ruger 77 Mark II. The .35 Whelens I've owned also had 22" barrels. Velocities were very similar from both rounds, and I never could tell any difference in recoil--but neither of the .350's were super-light carbines. Instesd they were full-sized rifles, weighing at least 8 pounds with scope.

The .350 (and the .35 Whelen) do come back some, especially with 250-grain bullets loaded up around 2600, but they can't be called really hard kickers. Though I do tend to shoot some larger rounds than most people do!

22"

Hard to put into words, you just know one when you see it.

If snot flies when you pull the trigger it's a magnum. No, more appropriately, if the snot stays stationary while your head flies backward it's a magnum.

I recall reading many, many years ago (perhaps by JOC) that the British named Magnum cartridges after a larger-than-normal bottle of champagne, and that they named Express cartridges after a faster-than-normal train. That's still how I think of them today.