300wm and 338wm

FWIW, they both work well, but I've used both and never saw any real difference with their performance on game.

I suppose if grizzly or bison were on the menu often I would choose the .338 for piece of mind, but then again I would probably skip right over them both for the .375 Ruger.

Last time I went on a sheep/grizz/moose hunt I reached for the .300WSM, as it is a pound lighter than my .375, there included lots of climbing, possibly longer shots and I was of course confident it would work just fine on all species with the 180gr TSX. I didn't wish for a .338 WM.

I like the .338 caliber much more in the smaller cases (338-06) or the bigger cases for long range shooting (.338LM etc) than in the .338WM, which just didn't impress me much over a .300.

That said, a .270 and a .338 would be a good combo for most big game hunting in Alberta, especially if you are a handloader. And then again, you coudl be just as well served by just choosing a .300 and using it for everything.:)

Kinda reminds me of the "3 guns for everything in Canada" threads. My answer is always the same - .223, anything 7-08 to any 300 and the .375 Ruger. :)
 
Slamfire said:
For comparison purposes, assume 8.5 lb rifles with mounts and scopes.

Recoil speed from conservation of momentum -

30-06: k x [190 gr x 2600 fps] / (8.5 lb x 7000 gr/lb) = 8.3 fps x k

338 WM: k x [250 gr x 2700 fps] / (8.5 lb x 7000 gr/lb) = 11.3 fps x k


Recoil energy = 1/2 mv^2

30-06: 0.5 x 8.5 lb / 32.2 x (8.3 fps x k)^2 = 9.1 ft lb x k^2

338: 0.5 x 8.5 lb / 32.2 x (11.3 fps x k)^2 = 16.9 ft lb x k^2

Yup, the 338 has 16.9 x k^2/ (9.1 x k^2) = 1.9x, or ~2x the recoil (energy) of the 30-06. :)
Click to expand...

Bartledan said:
You forgot the charge weights. They're accelerated too. Their velocity at the muzzle is harder to nail down than the bullet.
Click to expand...

Let k = expanding gas momentum coefficient, assumed to be about equal for both rounds, then in the recoil energy ratio k cancels out.
 
Slamfire said:
Interesting statistics on the 10 best selling rounds in Alaska, which likely wouldn't differ much in northern Canada. The 300 WM and 338 WM have pretty near equal ranking, and seems to be reflected in this thread -

ALASKA TOP TEN CARTRIDGES (Alaska Dept. of Fish and Game survey, 2000)
http://www.chuckhawks.com/best_selling_rifle_cartridges.htm

1. .30-06 (20.9%)
2. .300 Win. Mag. (18.5%)
3. .338 Win. Mag. (18.4%)
4. 7mm Rem. Mag. (8.5%)
5. .375 H&H Mag. (6.3%)
6. .270 Win. (5.8%)
7. .308 Win. (3.5%)
8. .300 Wby. Mag. (3.5%)
9. .45-70 Gov. (1.4%)
10. .280 Rem. (1.1%)
Click to expand...

that list only coming from a survey shooting range in southern alaska published for many years on the alaska fish and game dept.
it was after people coming to sight their rifles ... there is a lot of brown bear hunters ...
as usual we can let the numbers talk what we want to hear ... in central alaska you will find a lot of 243 win ...
 
an old guy i know here told me long before we moved to the Yukon about the choice for calibers: 270 win and 338 win mag.

he found out not that much differences on game for those calibers and he used only the 338 win mag for bison (caliber legal obligation) and the rest including grizzly with his 270 winnie.

if i may need only one caliber it will be 30-06 or 300 win mag but luckily i do not have to head for that now ...
 
old guy probably used bargain bin CorLokt round nosed bullets too. 270 rocks, it's basically a 375 H&H - effective, especially on the internet........ ..favored by old guys ... :dancingbanana:
 
Slamfire said:
~70 grs of powder for the 338 WM and ~60 grs for the 30-06, or about a 15% difference. Include a correction factor to reflect this for estimation purposes and Bob's your uncle.
Click to expand...

Correction factor? OK, I disagree that it's that simple, but let's go with that.

(A+C)/(B+C) > A/B, where A<B so you still have a profound difference in your original calculation. You really need to know C (energy contribution by propellant gas thrust).
 
Slamfire said:
For comparison purposes, assume 8.5 lb rifles with mounts and scopes.

Recoil speed from conservation of momentum -

30-06: 190 gr x 2600 fps / (8.5 lb x 7000 gr/lb) = 8.3 fps

338 WM: 250 gr x 2700 fps / (8.5 lb x 7000 gr/lb) = 11.3 fps


Recoil energy = 1/2 mv^2

30-06: 0.5 x 8.5 lb / 32.2 x (8.3 fps)^2 = 9.1 ft lb

338: 0.5 x 8.5 lb / 32.2 x (11.3fps)^2 = 16.9 ft lb

Yup, the 338 has 16.9/9.1 = 1.9x, or ~2x the recoil (energy) of the 30-06. :)
Click to expand...

Slamfire said:
Let k = expanding gas momentum coefficient, assumed to be about equal for both rounds, then in the recoil energy ratio k cancels out.
Click to expand...

Bartledan said:
Assumed based on what? The very different charge weights between the two rounds? I'm afraid that doesn't hold up.
Click to expand...

Slamfire said:
~70 grs of powder for the 338 WM and ~60 grs for the 30-06, or about a 15% difference. Include a correction factor to reflect this for estimation purposes and Bob's your uncle.
Click to expand...

Bartledan said:
Correction factor? OK, I disagree that it's that simple, but let's go with that.

(A+C)/(B+C) > A/B, where A<B so you still have a profound difference in your original calculation. You really need to know C (energy contribution by propellant gas thrust).
Click to expand...

Wow...you guys really know how to take the fun out of shooting...:)

All this, just to decide which of two rifle/cartridges kicks more? When both are so close as not to matter?
 
Gentlemen, we don't need all the mathematical formulas to know the 338 recoils more than the 30-06 in the same weight rifle, as does the 300 WM. All one really needs to look at to get a sense of comparative recoil is the muzzle energy, velocity and rifle weight. I can tell you for a fact that an 8 lb 300 WM with 180s is more pleasant with less perceived recoil than a 5 lb 30-06 with 180s. Butt plate size and quality of recoil pad are two more significant factors in perceived recoil, then throw in stock design and cheek weld (fit) and you realize there are many, many factors to perceived recoil than just the number spit out by the formula.
Although I have been informed that I'm not "the yardstick" by which recoil sensitivity can be judged, I find the 300 RUM with 200 gn bullets loaded to the max in a 7 1/2 lb 700 SPSS to be one of the most unpleasant rifle/cartridge combinations I have ever shot, and I find my Supergrade M 70 in 340 far more pleasant even with max 240-250 gn loads...........haven't shot my 378 enough yet to form an opinion.....it may become #1 least pleasant in the future.

Regardless all this is off topic and of little value to the OP........difference in recoil with either the 300 WM or 338 WM will quite likely be indiscernible in rifles of equal weight more or less. I believe it is a non issue in deciding between these two cartridges.
 
Slamfire said:
With my 300 WM using 180gr to 200gr bullets around 3000 fps MV, recoil isn't much different than my 338 WM using 250gr bullets at 2700 fps MV.
Click to expand...

c-fbmi said:
...difference in recoil with either the 300 WM or 338 WM will quite likely be indiscernible in rifles of equal weight more or less. I believe it is a non issue in deciding between these two cartridges.
Click to expand...

Agreed.
 
Pretty rifles. The 26" barrels would give a slight edge in muzzle speeds over 24" barrels typically found with these chamberings.

One time I considered a 338 WM Sako carbine which has a 20" barrel. But decided against the idea because the short barrel in a magnum would have reduced muzzle speeds by around 150 fps compared to a 24" barrel. Maybe not that significant in hindsight.

32673395880_2bd40d0611_z.jpg
 
Last edited:
bassman said:
Cartridges certainly can be considered accurate, or have design features that contribute to inherent accuracy. Why do you think competitive shooters tend to migrate to certain cartridges? For example, 22BR, 6BR, the PPC family, 6 Lapua, 6.5 Lapua, 260 Rem, 308 Win etc. Did I suggest that the .338 WM was more accurate than the 300?

As far as versatility goes, the 300 has a practical projectile weight limit of +/- 220 grains give or take. The .338 has a practical projectile weight limit of up to 300 grains. The .338 can also be loaded up with Barnes bullets as light as 160 grains. Makes it pretty versatile from 160 gr thru 300 grains. Given what the OP is asking about (large game), the .338 is most certainly more versatile than the 300.

Are you going to go hammer Ranger Dave now? He says the 300 WM is 'a very accurate round'. Better go set him straight lol. :nest:

Oh, one last thing...cartridges ARE ammo.
Click to expand...

They gravitate towards those choices for a few reasons, such as bullet selection, powder capacity, efficiency in case design, and the availability of high quality brass for that round. Not because they are more accurate. Almost any modern cartridge has basically the same potential, its all about how you match a specific load to a specific gun.

Oh and in the way I described there is a difference between cartridge and ammo. Cartridge was used to refer to ANY ammo of a specific caliber and case configuration, whereas ammo refers to one specific piece of ammunition. Ammunition can be tailored to your gun via reloading, whereas the cartridge is what type of ammo your gun uses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom