COAL standard long action length question.

350JR

Handloader
Sep 21, 2012
339
1
Is there a commonly used bolt action rifle that has a magazine with a cartridge limit of 3.34" or........am I missing something?

WHY do most the long action rifle cartridges have a 3.34" suggested maximum COAL?

I've only shot 700 Remingtons 90 percent of the time and don't understand this length limit.

I'm probably missing something REALLY obvious, so color me embarrassed right out of the chute. :oops: :?

Thanks for any help
God Bless
 
My guess is that rifle manufactures don't want any factory ammo or reloaded ammo to be jammed into the lans and cause over pressure. Just my .02
 
True. So instead of the magazine being the restricting factor.......it's the SAAMI throat?

My question would then be: "Why are the rounds throat-ed for 3.4 inch COAL?"

Possibly so the throat is set to attempt to accommodate a wide variety of bullet lengths?

Thank you for the reply.
God Bless
 
Rem 700 long action is REALLY long. :)

Not all bolt actions are so accommodating.

Guy
 
Thanks, Guy. I had to wonder. What is the magazine length of any others? Is there a "standard"? Like in the M70......Do the push feed and CRF versions have the same magazine length? And how long, please?

God Bless
 
350JR - hoping some other folks with different "long action" rifle contribute.

I was in your boat for a while, most of my hunting and shooting had been done with Remington 700's. The short action was perfect for 308 Win sized cartridges, about 2.8" or a tad more. The long action was long enough for the doggone 375 H&H, which is 3.6" long! That, and the typical Remington long-throat, left a lot of room for me to seat the bullets well out on my 30-06 Rem 700.

Guy
 
350 JR, I think I understand what you're asking? There is a common cartridge that is widely used and standardized in a long action, and that is the 06 and its offspring. Everything else using a long action is shorter in both case length and overall length, such as the 8x57 for example. I think I'm right on that??

3.340 in the 06 family is the longest saami spec of any cartridge far as I know, in a non magnum cartridge, that's housed in a standard long action.

So rifle manufacture's build magazine's accordingly. To allow clearance for the longest commercially made factory cartridge that will be housed in that action. Most magazines will be at a minimum of .040 longer, and some will be much longer as Guy stated. Nothing says they can't have a magazine significantly longer, but they can't be short and must allow ample clearance beyond 3.340 to ensure reliable loading and feeding into and from the magazine should the longest factory long action cartridge be at max length.
 
This statistic isn't limited to only the 30-06 family. The magnum bolt face rounds are too in a lot of cases. The 300 Win Mag, 338 Mag and 33 Nosler all are as well.

I understand the desire to be able to feed from the magazine reliably but I have no problem doing so in a 700 with a COAL of 3.5 plus inches. I've not yet tested the MAX length but I was curious where this limitation originated ........and why.

Thank you.
God Bless
 
As far as how they came up with that exact measurement originally for a max OAL in a 30-06, I don't know. But that's what it is and goes back to my point.

30-06 family was the standardized cartridge used in a that length action. Or maybe it was the other way around I don't know, maybe they built that action for that cartridge, but they standardized that cartridge and OAL. So distance between the receiver rings, bolt throw, magazine length, length of ejection port, everything is built to work with that max OAL on a long action. Cartridge designs can be built to use a long action instead of a magnum length action, but they gotta work within those standardized specs.

That's how it appears to me to work, but I don't own Remington or Winchester, so I could be wrong.
 
First rifle chambered for the 30-06 had to be the '03 Springfield right?

So... Let's blame the government! :grin:
 
Guy Miner":4f9bhmv6 said:
350JR":4f9bhmv6 said:
I believe you are correct ShadeTree, at least this article seems to agree with the 06 "standard" for the long action.

Seems a little antiquated to me and odd for us to adhere to it.........but here we are.
Thank you.

God Bless

https://ronspomeroutdoors.com/blog/shor ... ng-action/

Spomer's article is actually pretty good! Thanks for the link.

Guy

Wish 350 would've found that link before I reasoned it all out in my head and pecked it out on the keyboard. Lol. By golly every now and then my thinking adds up. What's that saying about the blind hog? Ha.


Guy Miner":4f9bhmv6 said:
First rifle chambered for the 30-06 had to be the '03 Springfield right?

So... Let's blame the government! :grin:

Yep. :) Not hard to find things to criticize the government about, but by golly it's hard to be mad about the 30-06! :) (y) Springfield rifle is no slouch either.
 
350JR":2d01vf0z said:
I believe you are correct ShadeTree, at least this article seems to agree with the 06 "standard" for the long action.

Seems a little antiquated to me and odd for us to adhere to it.........but here we are.
Thank you.

God Bless

https://ronspomeroutdoors.com/blog/shor ... ng-action/

350, agreed it does seem odd on the surface given all the time that's passed, but it gives a standard for all rifle and ammo manufactures to work off of, without throwing a monkey wrench in the whole system.

Allows new and popular cartridges that came along after, to be chambered in boatloads of L.A. rifles of all makes and models, and to work as planned in any and all such rifles of sound design.
 
Back
Top