338 win mag or 300 win mag

What about a 8mm Remington Magnum. At 500 yards, this round will have as much energy as a.308 does at the muzzle. It also is a very good round for long range. With using a parent case of a .375H&H, the potential for reloaded is endless. Just a thought. Especially since you guys are talking about .30 cal and. 338,with a diameter of. 323,it splits the difference.
 
Once you have your 338 Win Mag try Barnes TTSX 225 gr, BC .514 so it is VLD (Very Low Drag) bullet.
And Hornady 225 SST for practice.

My shoots well with RL 19 .
 
I think you made the right choice in the .338.

I own both, and I like them both, but I find the .338 smacks game much harder than the 300 for sure.

My experience is that at 338 with 250's is actually pretty similar to a .375 with 300's (except you typically get MORE penetration with the .338).

The 300 is a flatter long range shooter for sure, but it's a still 30-06 with a bit longer legs, and nothing I've ever seen has suggested to me otherwise.

With good bullets though, either is a great slayer of anything in North America.
 
I'd go the 338WM. The books might not say that it has any more energy past 300 yards, but common sense says that your shooting a fatter, heavier bullet. That's bound to impress the animal more, even if not by a lot.
mike
 
Ardent said:
Out of the two I'm a .338 fan as well, never could warm up to the very short neck of the .300 Win even though it causes absolutely no issues.
Click to expand...

Funny, I feel the same way about the .300 Win. Mag. It's well proven in regards to accuracy and on game performance...I just hold a grudge against it 'cause I don't like how it looks :).
 
I've owned several of each but only have a single 338 now...with the incredible range of bullet weights available in .338 today, it's a very versatile offering.
 
Given the premium bullets available these days I'm not sure that there's any good reason to go with a 338 anymore. A 180 TSX or A Frame will do everything in a 300 that a 338 will do. Of course, you could also argue that 225 or 250gr bullets in a 338 are more impressive at close range, but I don't think it's significant. If there is a need to go bigger than the 300WM (and don't argue WSM, they're just a reinvented 300 H&H with none of the panache) then you're likely after something bigger and tougher than moose and you'd likely be better off with a 375.
 
I've used 225gr in the past, but currently am loading the 210gr TTSX, offering a good mix of speed and penetration. The same results could be offered by a .300wm and a 180gr TTSX, I won't deny. Either one will kill anything I'll be pointing it at, but I got a great deal on the .338...
 
I've killed a lot of animals with a 338 with 250 Partitions. Works exceptionally well on Pronghorns.

I have a 300 WM which will never be hunted and shot a bunch of critters with a 300 H & H with 180 partitions.

Never drank the Barnes Koolaid so I've always used heavier bullets.

IMO the 338 and 250 Partitions were made for each other.
 
BigUglyMan said:
Given the premium bullets available these days I'm not sure that there's any good reason to go with a 338 anymore. A 180 TSX or A Frame will do everything in a 300 that a 338 will do. Of course, you could also argue that 225 or 250gr bullets in a 338 are more impressive at close range, but I don't think it's significant. If there is a need to go bigger than the 300WM (and don't argue WSM, they're just a reinvented 300 H&H with none of the panache) then you're likely after something bigger and tougher than moose and you'd likely be better off with a 375.
Click to expand...

And a 185 grain in a 338 will do anything a 300 will do and the 225 grain will do a whole lot more!
 
sheephunter said:
And a 185 grain in a 338 will do anything a 300 will do and the 225 grain will do a whole lot more!
Click to expand...

I'd beg to differ. A 225 grain in a .338 is roughly equivilant to the 200 grain in a .300 in SD and BC of equivilant bullets (Nosler AB for example the 200 grain .30 cal is slightly superior in BC). Both bullets are leaving the barrel at ~2800-2900 fps. Will any game animal in North America really tell the difference? Will any shooting situation, even at extended ranges, really lend one or the other a big advantage?

Both cartridges have hunting bullets with extremely high BCs (into the .7's) and both cartridges are capable of sending those flying at similar speeds. I'd say neither cartridge gives anything to one another in really any situation except maybe the .300 has more options for light bullets at high speeds, like 120 grain bullets, but really who uses that much powder to send light bullets fast?

Both are very suitable choices for NA big game and neither really has any advantage over the other in any situation. My theory is sub .375 cal magnum development should have stopped with the .300 H&H, because no one can reallly bring a convincing argument as to how perfection can be improved upon :p
 
My tongue was a bit in my cheek, well actually firmly but for what it's worth, I prefer the bullet weight range with the 338 over the 300. I'd pick a 30-06 if I wanted a 30 cal with lighter weight bullet options but you are right, both will kill North American game.
 
sheephunter said:
My tongue was a bit in my cheek, well actually firmly but for what it's worth, I prefer the bullet weight range with the 338 over the 300. I'd pick a 30-06 if I wanted a 30 cal with lighter weight bullet options but you are right, both will kill North American game.
Click to expand...

I also would never take a magnum to shoot light bullets. If you're burning a lot of powder you should be sending something heavy for caliber downrange. Just my opinion.
 
I'm in the .338 camp. Most guys have a mid-range deer rifle - if you want to go bigger, than go bigger and get the .338. I believe that the medium bores (.338, .358, .366, etc.) hit with an authority that cannot be matched with a .308.
That's not to say that a .300 won't kill game, just on the big stuff I would rather throw more bullet weight. A .338 can do that without any appreciable decrease in trajectory over most hunting distances, and also without a lot more recoil.
 
I would choose the 338 Win Mag. . The 300 H&H is equal to the 300 WM and here's how it compared with my 338 WM.

I can't imagine being limited to only two rifles, but if a hunter wished to limit themselves to only two rifles, for hunting in North America, I believe the 308 Winchester and the 338 Winchester Magnum would be the two to choose.

My situation for an early fall elk is different. . Can't take'm all. . At first I was going use my 300 H&H and loaded up a few boxes of ammo to sight in a new scope and get all practiced up . . I took two rifles out to the range, my 300 H&H and my 338 Win Mag with the idea I would shoot the 338 while I waited for the barrel to cool on the 300 H&H. . The 338, with a 200 gr. bullet with 74 gr. of IMR 4831, was equal to shooting the 300 H&H with 180 gr and 68 gr. of IMR 4831. . The recoil on both rifles was pretty much equal, but I realized for an Elk hunt the 338 WM is the better choice. . Both rifles grouped nice at both 100 yd and 200 yd,and the velocities are not much different between the two, but the 338 WM\ I believe is the better choice .

I went again and increased the 300 H&H to 69 gr of IMR 4831, with 180 gr bullet, and I noticed the pressure was up as the bolt was just a tad hard to lift. . The 338 WM I increased to 75 gr. of IMR 4831 with a 200 gr bullet, and the bolt opened easy and the grouping remained tight. . The 300 H&H, at 69 gr, showed a variance in grouping. At 68 gr it held tight.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom