.png)
Many years ago I have purchased a set on new old stock RCBS dies for the 256 Newton. Aimed for years to have a rifle made up in this caliber. Working on other projects and living events caused this project to be postponed. Postponed no more.
The action is a byf43 Mauser action that was converted many years ago by a now deceased local gunsmith noted for his fine work. The bolt handle has been lowered and low safety installed. A push button release had been made for the floor plate similar to that found on vintage FN actions.
Some years back a friend had given me a Canjar trigger. The trigger was the non-set variety marked M2 with trademark etc. One look at that trigger tells why Canjar's were so expensive in the day. That trigger is already installed in the action.
The action has not been drilled and tapped. I hate to have the receiver flattened for scope mounts. Back in the day it was possible to buy a Redfield that was made to fit on the unmodified Mauser receiver. That's then this is now. This is not been discussed with gunsmith. The decision on the scope is pending.
I had communicated with Norman Meyer of Heritage Custom Arms concerning barrel and stock. He had suggested a #3 weight barrel. Now my plans are for the barrel to be a Pac-Nor stainless twenty-six inches long. The twist is to be 1:8. Norman will build the rifle.
The discussion on the stock included two that were on hand here. Doing some quick figuring it was more economical to go with a synthetic stock rather than salvage these others. There's no way, frankly, that a custom wood stock would not fit into this budget (read-beyond my means). A Bell&Carson was suggested. We'll go with the synthetic stock.
As to the cartridge it was an early high velocity cartridge predating the 270. It was hard to pin down specs for the cartridge now over a hundred years old. When forming the case the shoulder is pushed back leaving a longer neck than the parent case-270 or 30-06. Making the cartridge cases is to be an undertaking while Norman Meyer's actually builds the rifle. Several dummy cartridges have been made up. The RCBS sizing die and a Rockchucher press make forming cases easy, Plans are to send the sizing die to RCBS to be polished out. Actual trim to length and allowable neck thickness will have to be decided based on the chamber. Plans are to go as far as possible while the rifle is being built.
So goes my 256 Newton undertaking. We'll see how it works out. More later.
Forever I shall be impressed by the focused dedication someone has to recreate a cartridge that for some or other reason was not marketed sufficiently at the time to become a popular seller, but the logic of its design still makes sense. It was the silly marketing of the .280 Remington which had sunk it initially and made it an underdog to the .270W that made me scout the internet to find one when I first came to Colorado in 2012. Now I have two of them.
Bill, you made me read more on your cartridge and I am impressed and intrigued - It should have been an immediate winner. Had O'Conner known of this one and spent his accolades on it and not the .270W, who knows what would have happened? What a pity - the first World War and the government taking over Newton's factory was the hurdle for this clever design. Charles Newton had done everything right with this cartridge. Later it seems because the .256 Newton was not presented with a belted base and the magnum suffix demanded at the time it did not find favour. In those days a new case sold on light-weight out the-muzzle-speed performance and not on solid on-game performance. But I have another theory why it went south and shall present it in closing.
The on-game performance of the 6.5mm bullet that the Europeans have known about 120 years ago is only now being appreciated in the USA. A 140 gr bullet of top level cup and core design in .264" leaving the barrel at 3,000 ft/sec or even a little slower makes a lot of sense. The long neck of that Newton designed case and your rifling twist rate of 1 turn in 8 inches immediately sets my mind going to either the 160 gr. Hornady Interlock or the 140gr Barnes X bullets that member Dom posted a photo of here.
My plans for a 6.5 mm based on the 7x64 Brenneke may just be diverted to this 6.5x62 Newton - which is what I think this cartridge should be named at least here in South Africa. Maybe, just maybe part of the initial misunderstanding of what it was came from it being called a Two five six and not a Two six five.
Although the 6.5mm Creedmoor is NOT better than the .260 Remington the modern style of metricated calibre indication coupled to the that name which infers some old English creed and character will be the second burying of the .260. The 6.5mm Newton - inferring it follows the physics of the good Sir Isaac - and a slightly shorter case adopting a 23 degrees shoulder angle is a little more than a simplistic necked down '06 or 7x64. (In South Africa it should be called the 6.5x62 Newton). You have a unique action and calibre there, Bill. When I was a young man looking at rifles a Canjar trigger was what dreams were made of.
With your permission I am moving this to the Wildcat section. I know I asked you to post it here but this is a dedicated project of more importance than a random report - thank you for sharing it with us in this forum.
Thanks for the kind words. Please move as you see fit. There was, if I recall, some special Newton bullets made up during the time of active production. I'll search this out and pass along any information,
The 256 Newton: The Mauser action has been delivered to the gunsmith. A 26" #3 barrel with 1:8 twist is to be used. Mainly, I am interested in 129gr. bullets but want to be able to reload with a range of .264 bullets beyond the 129gr. We have discussed several makes of barrel. The decision on make is pending availability.
We are using a Leupold base for the scope that does not require the charger guide to be ground off. This grinding off is an act of desecration.
The stock will be a synthetic Bell&Carson. A wooden stock would have been a budget buster.
I am sending my 1973 vintage RCBS dies back to be inspected and polished out. There were some non-serious scratches on the formed cases. To date. I have made up dummy rounds for the gunsmith using both 270 and 30-06 Winchester brass. Given my choice I'd rather neck down than neck up. Some prefer the 25-06 brass to make Newton cases. More on this later.
Should not this cartridge be in the class with 6.5x54 MS as far as a game rifle is concerned?
I'm still hunting information on the Newton bullet. It was an experiment seeking an improved cup and core bullet.
Thanks for your interest. I'm behind in my communications and will catch up.
Bill Reed
What I see here is very similar in performance to the 6.5x64 Brenneke and the 6.5-06. The 6.5x55 Swede is just a tad ahead of the .260 Rem with the heavier bullets, which is equal to the 6.5x54 Mannlicher if the latter is loaded to European pressures. Your Newton is up there with the Brenneke and the '06 derivative.
On game all the 6.5 mm bullets of equal construction and weight are virtually the same. The 6.5x68S is an old high pressure performer only being equalled now by the Nosler. All these do is to extend the effective range by about 35 yards or so.
I found a description of the 256 Newton bullet in Dunlap's "Gunsmithing" 2nd. ed. pp. 124 and 125. This bullet was a cup on core design. Inside the jacket there was a paper band that "insulated" the core in the bore riding area. There was a "nail" where the head was in the bottom of the jacket. This piece ended in the nose of the bullet. This "nail" was to strengthen the bullet and prevent nose battering. Remember, this was over a hundred years ago.
How about that. Imagine you could locate that bullet for posterity! Newton clearly already had the in-flesh-and-bone performance of a bullet in mind at the time and not the in-air, flat-shooting requirement.
Look at the brass plunger ("nail") in the Peregrine VRG-3/4 series. (click on the link).
With the Newton it's more things change the more they are the same. Some of the new 6.5's are no more than a latter day Newton.
Quite true that. The 30-03 / 30-06 was a geometric upscale of the 7x57. The .280 Rem duplicates the 7x64 Brenneke. The .260 Rem approaches the 6.5x55. The 7mm-08 approaches the 7x57. The hyped-up 6.5 Creedmoor duplicates the old 6.5x54 Mannlicher Schönauer. Had the US Army in 1903 adopted the 7x57 they would never have needed to again downscale the 30-06 to the 7.62x51.
That .256 Newton was a true pioneer in US hunting cartridges. It impresses me because it is standing on its own legs. I would dearly love to see a section diagram of that bullet.
I'll have to see about a picture being technologically challenged. The bullet in Dunlap's book weighed 129 grs. This bullet was what at one time called semi-pointed with a fair amount of lead exposed. The "nail" extended to the end of the bullet. The large or head end rested on the bottom of the jacket. The paper insulation backed the bore bearing portion of the bullet. This description in full is in Dunlap's "Gunsmithing." 2nd. Edition. pp. 124-125. Dunlap's comment about no fixed standard for cartridge dimensions is a concern building the rifle.
The rifle is together. Norman Meyers (Heritage Custom Rifles) did a wonderful job finishing out the action. As a controlled feed the action works wonderfully-as expected. The extractor has been beveled to allow cartridges to be feed in directly into the chamber. The rifle balances well and the Bell&Carson stock feels well. A nice wood stock would have been preferred. There was a money consideration. Making brass is the focus right now. All is going well at this point. More later.