The full-length Remington Mags are shown to their respective new siblings: at left are the two 7mm's, at right the .30s.

Remington's answer to Winchester's .300 Short Magnum is a .30 of their own--plus a 7mm. Officially designated as the Remington SA (for short action) Ultra Mag, it heralds the beginning of cartridges based on a shortened version of the Ultra Mag case.

The rationale is of course the same as that which spawned Lazzeroni's Short Action Magnums and the .300 WSM; namely, cartridges that can ballistically match the now old-fashioned longer-bodied belted magnums, and do it with less powder and in short-action rifles.

What do we have here in these SA Ultra Mags? Obviously, they are but shortened versions of the full-length Ultra Mag hull. As such, it is a beltless case having a nominal head diameter of .550". For those of you interested in such things, that's officially .006" larger than the old .404 Jeffery case, and .005" smaller than the .300 WSM. I suppose that enables both companies to claim that their offspring is unique and not based on any pre-existing case. Like the parent Ultra Mag hull and Winchester's Short Magnum, the rim of these Remington shorties is rebated to .532" to match that of the conventional belted magnum so that a new bolt face configuration isn't needed.

In a side-by-side with the .300 WSM we find the Remington case to be 1⁄8-inch shorter in body and in overall length, and to have a 30- rather than a 35-degree shoulder. The result is a vessel of 7.5 percent less volume than the WSM. Nonetheless, Remington is claiming virtually the same nominal velocities for their short .30 as Winchester does for theirs, i.e., 2,960 fps for a 180 gr. bullet versus 2,970 for the WSM.

How 'dey do 'dat? Well, it's the kind of smoke and mirrors thing that advertising and marketing guys are paid to come up with. We all know that, all other things equal, a case having 7.5 percent less volume shouldn't be able to match the larger one performance-wise. That's not an absolute, mind you, because funny things can happen when you increase case capacity to ludicrous proportions relative to bore diameter, but in this instance we're talking well-balanced cartridges of moderate (by today's standards), powder capacity.

Essentially, how Remington is able to match the larger-cased WSM is by using a bullet that takes up roughly 7.5 percent less space than the Winchester Fail Safe bullet they've chosen to compare it against. In conjunction with the introduction of these two short magnums, Remington also introduced a new premium-grade bullet. Called "Core Lokt Ultra," this new projectile is shorter and thus infringes on the combustion chamber to a lesser extent than does your typical premium bullet.

You see, other premium-type bullets designed for high weight retention like the Nosler Partition, Swift Scirocco or Winchester's Fail Safe--have less lead than bullets of conventional construction (a Hornady Spire Point or Sierra Game King are good examples). As a result, they are physically longer than similar-weight slugs of conventional design.

The 180-gr. Fail Safe bullet used in Winchester's Supreme .300 WSM load is about 1⁄8-inch longer than Remington's Core Lokt Ultra, so when loaded to the same overall length and an optimum load is developed for each, the volumetric edge of the WSM case is essentially negated. With a Barnes' X bullet, which has no lead in it whatsoever, this situation is further exacerbated in short-action calibers.

The same holds true for bullets like the Nosler Ballistic Tip and Hornady's SST. Because these bullets have polycarbonate tips up in the nose section instead of lead, they are longer than conventional design bullets of equal weight. Remington again takes advantage of this fact by using their .30 cal. Core Lokt Ultra 150-gr. bullet in a comparison with the same weight Ballistic Silvertip load for the WSM. The latter has to be seated about 1⁄8" deeper into the case which, in effect, reduces case capacity.

This new Core Lokt Ultra bullet is of conventional design in that it has a cup-type copper jacket and a solid lead core. However, the thickness in the jacket's mid-section has been increased by 50 percent, and 20 percent overall. Moreover, once the solid lead core has been inserted into the jacket, an electrode is applied that melts the core and metallurgically fuses it to the jacket.

Shown here is the new generation of .30 cal. and 7mm short action magnums (l to r): Lazzeroni's 7.82 Patriot and 7.21 Tomahawk, Winchester's .300 WSM, the author's 7mm wildcat based on the same case (and which will probably be introduced as a commercial round in 2002), and the new Remington Short Action Ultra Mags in .30 and 7mm.

Remington is claiming over 80 percent weight retention for its Core Lokt Ultra bullets. And because the melting of the core eliminates voids, a high degree of accuracy is being claimed as well.

By using other selective comparisons, Remington is also claiming flatter trajectories for their new short 7mm and .30 cal. offsprings. By comparing, for example, the 180-gr. Core Lokt Ultra load in the SA magnum with their own .300 Win. Mag loading using the standard Core Lokt bullet, they can claim a one inch flatter trajectory at 500 yards.

How? The Core Lokt Ultra bullet has a higher ballistic coefficient than the regular Core Lokt (.402 compared to .382).

Though I fully expect Winchester to announce a 7mm version of their short magnum by year's end, they don't have one as of this writing, so we can't make any comparisons. However, in comparing the 7mm SA Magnum with their own 7mm Rem. Mag, again using the Ultra bullet in the former, and a regular Core Lokt in the latter, the stubby round has the same 2,960 fps velocity in the 160-gr. loading, and a two inch flatter path at 500. And it's all done using 12 percent less powder.

And so it goes. In selective comparisons, the smaller-cased SA Ultra Mags can be shown to equal or surpass the performance of Winchester's Short Magnum, the .300 Winchester Magnum, and its own 7mm Rem. Mag. But again, all other things equal, loading the identical bullet in both short cases, the larger WSM has the potential to surpass the performance of the SA Ultra every time. Do keep in mind, however, that we're splitting hairs here. And that goes for factory ammo and handloads alike. The differences aren't enough to stick in your eye, but they're important from the advertising standpoint.