New Remington 360 Buckhammer - missed opportunity

keithhagan

Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2018
Messages
221
Reaction score
129
Extremely disappointed in the leaked announcement of 360 Buckhammer. This is jointly developed by Remington and Henry, who will produce lever guns in the *new* chambering.

It should have been straight-wall, not tapered. Should have been in 10mm/.40 caliber, not 35. In a world where 350 legend, 450 bushmaster, and 454 Casull already exist, this was their opportunity.
 
Well, it’s Remington. Did any of their proprietary cartridges take off?

7mm Remington Magnum, 222 Remington, 223 Remington. I'm sure that if I thought about it I could come up with others.

I just finished Boddington's article in Guns & Ammo so I'm not sure how it could have been "leaked". Of course this is a niche round aimed at the places where you have to use a straight walled case for hunting that is not over 1.8". It has ballistics comparable to the 35 Remington (There's another proprietary cartridge still in use.). This is a 200 yard and under deer, black bear and hog cartridge. In the Henry rifle, it will be a very good hunting cartridge. Not everyone wants to deer hunt with an AR. Of course it is not going to appeal to the tacticool or 1000 yard shooters but, believe it or not, those aren't the only shooting games being played these days. I wouldn't be surprised if you see a Marlin in this caliber as I think this round will be a little more adaptable to a lever gun than the 350 Legend.
 
Not everyone wants to deer hunt with an AR. Of course it is not going to appeal to the tacticool or 1000 yard shooters but, believe it or not, those aren't the only shooting games being played these days.

Did you even read? Did I say anything about ARs being the end all be all?

I did mention the 350 legend, and, its existence does mean that the 360 will fail. I also mentioned the 454 Casull, which is already chambered in at least 2 more lever guns than the 360.

The 360 does nothing a 357 Max doesn't already do, and just as well, in a lever gun and has an uphill battle taking market share from the first-mover 350 legend. Just being a rimmed 350 legend ain't enough.

It is for these reasons and many more that I said the new cartridge should have been in 40 caliber. It should still be rimmed. It should still be designed around a lever gun.
 
Did you even read? Did I say anything about ARs being the end all be all?

I mentioned the AR, not you. That's because it is the platform that the 350 Legend and the 450 Bushmaster are designed around. Both of those cartridges are based off of existing cartridges, the 223 Remington and the 284 Winchester. The Buckhammer is based off of the 30-30. I'm sure that's because they were trying to get it to work in that Henry. The reason they base one cartridge off of another existing one is simple manufacturing economics. I'm not sure what existing cartridge you could use to make a rimmed, straight walled 10mm. Especially a rimmed cartridge that wouldn't end up with a taper. I suppose you could elongate a 10mm pistol cartridge to 1.8" and end up with what you are talking about but you still have a rimless cartridge, which is problematic with a lever gun. It doesn't really matter because it's more about trying to comply with a regulation than create the next big hunting cartridge. There isn't much they can come up with that isn't already being done by some other round. It's just about getting it to fit in that regulatory envelope and work in a lever gun. I also don't know what it's place in the market will be. It could die on the vine or it might take off. I do know that Henry is a good gun company so it will depend on how many hunters want to hunt with their gun.
 
I'm not sure what existing cartridge you could use to make a rimmed, straight walled 10mm.

The 30-30.

That's why I said that the 360 should have been a 40 caliber.

The 10mm is based off of the 30 Remington (one of Remington's few failures amongst many many successful cartridges). The 30 Remington was an attempt at a rimmless 30-30. It uses the same load data and everything. They have the same body size. That is why the 30-30, 30 Remington, 6.8 SPC, 224 Valkyrie, and 10mm all have the same base diameter.
 
The 30-30.

That's why I said that the 360 should have been a 40 caliber.

The 10mm is based off of the 30 Remington (one of Remington's few failures amongst many many successful cartridges). The 30 Remington was an attempt at a rimmless 30-30. It uses the same load data and everything. They have the same body size. That is why the 30-30, 30 Remington, 6.8 SPC, 224 Valkyrie, and 10mm all have the same base diameter.

The 30-30 is about .020 thicker at the web than the 30 Rem. so in order to get to 10mm at the mouth, you are going to have a tapered case. Plus the 30 Rem is rimless so it would be more difficult to adapt anything made from it to a lever gun, as it is difficult to get the headspace right. Ballistically, there is very little difference between the 30 Rem and the 30 WCF. Of course the 30-30 was made for a lever gun and the 30 Rem was for an auto loader. Remington made about 80000 Model 8's but the hunting market wasn't ready for semi-autos. They did find some popularity with the police.
 
Just to add some fun to the conversation. When asked what Remington named cartridge "took off". The 7 mm magnum, 25/06, and 22-250 are not Remington's inventions. These cartridges had been around for decades. Remington did make them legit by making factory ammo for them, now they did, from the ground up, design the great 222 Remington.
 
The 30-30 is about .020 thicker at the web than the 30 Rem. so in order to get to 10mm at the mouth, you are going to have a tapered case. Plus the 30 Rem is rimless so it would be more difficult to adapt anything made from it to a lever gun, as it is difficult to get the headspace right. Ballistically, there is very little difference between the 30 Rem and the 30 WCF. Of course the 30-30 was made for a lever gun and the 30 Rem was for an auto loader. Remington made about 80000 Model 8's but the hunting market wasn't ready for semi-autos. They did find some popularity with the police.

Nah, the 30-30 and 30 Remington are .422" and .421" nominal diameter at the base.

The entire family of 30-30 brass (38-55, 375 win, 225 win, etc) have nominal base diameters of 0.420-0.422". 10mm nominal base diameter is 0.425". Empirically, my stock of 30-30 have base diameters of 0.418"-0.422" and my stock of 10mm have base diameters of 0.419"-0.423" as measured using my micrometer.

A straight-wall non-tapered 30-30 would be 10mm/.40 caliber.
 
Nah, the 30-30 and 30 Remington are .422" and .421" nominal diameter at the base.

The entire family of 30-30 brass (38-55, 375 win, 225 win, etc) have nominal base diameters of 0.420-0.422". 10mm nominal base diameter is 0.425". Empirically, my stock of 30-30 have base diameters of 0.418"-0.422" and my stock of 10mm have base diameters of 0.419"-0.423" as measured using my micrometer.

A straight-wall non-tapered 30-30 would be 10mm/.40 caliber.

So how do we get a straight walled, rimless cartridge to headspace in a rear locking lever gun?
 
Don't feel bad.

There are a lots of times the "BIG" companies puts their heads together for a brand new "Got to have it" load
and they fall on their face.
It's part of the game, to increase their sales and ammo income.

Better dieing a quick death than bleeding for years to end in missery.
 
This is the first I’ve heard of it, but I’m glad. Choices are good, and the market will decide its fate.

Smart of them to use .357/.358 bullets. Makes more sense than the .350 and its .355 bullets.
 
Did you even read? Did I say anything about ARs being the end all be all?

I did mention the 350 legend, and, its existence does mean that the 360 will fail. I also mentioned the 454 Casull, which is already chambered in at least 2 more lever guns than the 360.

The 360 does nothing a 357 Max doesn't already do, and just as well, in a lever gun and has an uphill battle taking market share from the first-mover 350 legend. Just being a rimmed 350 legend ain't enough.

It is for these reasons and many more that I said the new cartridge should have been in 40 caliber. It should still be rimmed. It should still be designed around a lever gun.

I had a Marlin 30-30 with an octagon barrel recut to 405 JESS, which is a 444 trimmed to 2.050" and tapered for .412" bullets. It will push 300 grain JSP Hornadys (they're .411") to 1900 to 1950 fps without straining anything, lead GC to over 2000 fps. This cartridge, except cut for .410" bullets, would be the cat's meow. Trimmed to 1.8" it would still be a dandy.
 
Last edited:
So how do we get a straight walled, rimless cartridge to headspace in a rear locking lever gun?

We don't.

We use the shortened 30-30 case and, instead of necking up to 35 caliber, we neck up to 10mm/.40 caliber. Thus, we have a rimmed, straight-wall cartridge in 10mm/.40 caliber.
 
Don't feel bad.

There are a lots of times the "BIG" companies puts their heads together for a brand new "Got to have it" load
and they fall on their face.
It's part of the game, to increase their sales and ammo income.

Better dieing a quick death than bleeding for years to end in missery.

Too true..
 
This is the first I’ve heard of it, but I’m glad. Choices are good, and the market will decide its fate.

Smart of them to use .357/.358 bullets. Makes more sense than the .350 and its .355 bullets.


Totally agree on the .357/.358 being better for bullet selection. If they wanted to go that direction, wish they would have gone 357 maximum instead.
 
We use the shortened 30-30 case and, instead of necking up to 35 caliber, we neck up to 10mm/.40 caliber. Thus, we have a rimmed, straight-wall cartridge in 10mm/.40 caliber.

What bullets would go in that cartridge?

According to the limited data I saw on the internet the new 360 will drive a 200 grain bullet to about 2100. At that speed most expanding bullets meant for 10mm handguns would come apart. Every state I have lived in requires expanding bullets for hunting and the only heavier bullets I have seen in 10mm are cast. Bullets meant for 404 and 416 rifles are designed for water buffalo, not deer, and would probably not expand well at lower velocities.

Being a bullet maker Remington can make any type of bullet they want. But this is a cartridge meant to fill a very particular and narrow niche market, hunting in states that require a straight case. Even if they wanted a 10mm version they probably decided designing a 10mm bullet that performed well at rifle velocities wouldn't be worth the trouble.

If changing hunting regulations eliminate the niche this cartridge is designed for demand for the ammo would dry up. At least with the 358 bullets reloaders could find something that works in any 360 Buckhammer rifles they have. With 10mm they could use handgun bullets for plinking but 10mm rifle bullets would be scarce.
 
What bullets would go in that cartridge?

According to the limited data I saw on the internet the new 360 will drive a 200 grain bullet to about 2100. At that speed most expanding bullets meant for 10mm handguns would come apart.


I've successfully used the 200gr XTP 10mm bullets from Hornady at velocities in excess of 2100 fps.

Hornady uses these same bullets in its .45 caliber sabots for muzzleloaders (see here)

Moreover, various other muzzleloader sabot use .400 caliber projectiles in a variety of weights (see here another from Hornady using their SST bullets)

Every state I have lived in requires expanding bullets for hunting and the only heavier bullets I have seen in 10mm are cast.


Every state in which I've lived that has had a similar restriction has defined "non-expanding bullets" as FMJ. Thus, hard cast has been treated no differently than bullets which only partially expose their lead, like JSP.


There are plenty of JSP, JHP, hard-cast and generally non-FMJ 10mm bullets available.


Bullets meant for 404 and 416 rifles are designed for water buffalo, not deer, and would probably not expand well at lower velocities.


Noted, but we are talking about necking up to 10mm/.40 caliber, which 404 and 416 are not.

Being a bullet maker Remington can make any type of bullet they want...Even if they wanted a 10mm version they probably decided designing a 10mm bullet that performed well at rifle velocities wouldn't be worth the trouble.


Your first point here is an important one: Remington is not your average hand-loader. Even if there were not already appropriate or readily adaptable 10mm bullets on the market, like Winchester had to with the 350 legend, manufacturing rifle-ready 10mm bullets would be trivial.

Your second point is speculative.

But this is a cartridge meant to fill a very particular and narrow niche market, hunting in states that require a straight case.

This is not a reason to effectively make it even more narrow and niche by putting it in a segment already occupied by two cartridges (350 legend and 357 maximum). Indeed, it is all the more reason to use a 10mm/40 caliber projectile and place it in a segment where there is no competition.

If changing hunting regulations eliminate the niche this cartridge is designed for demand for the ammo would dry up. At least with the 358 bullets reloaders could find something that works in any 360 Buckhammer rifles they have. With 10mm they could use handgun bullets for plinking but 10mm rifle bullets would be scarce.

See above re: viable 10mm bullets at the moderate velocities advertised for the 360. Also, if you'll allow me to speculate a bit, I don't believe Remington takes into consideration the handloading opportunities to early adopters in the event the 360 proves a failure.
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

Back
Top