340 Weatherby ?
- Thread starter hesher66
- Start date
Oh possibly.
He does seem to be interested in everything from small and fast to giant caliber rifles. 
Are you so dense that you can't figure out that I was discussing what ROss Seyfried said in an article? I mean- It should be clear when I say "I recall Seyfried used to be a big proponent of the 340, but eventually soured on it as he felt it should be capable of more, eventually calling it "sluggish"
Go back and read my post again, maybe you will be able to intelligently comment on Seyfrieds comments. I won't hold my breath though.
eaglesnester
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
I have a 338/378 and I can tell you it shoots bullet holes in bullet holes at 100 meters with hand loads. It will continue to do this with 3 different shooters locked in a sandbag at a sitting position. The 340 weatherby will do the same thing with carefully prepared handloads The Weatherby 338/378 will launch a 250 grain bullet at 3000fps the 340 Weatherby launches a 250grainer at between 2800 -2900 depending on bullet brand powder and load. Recoil is not too bad without a MB. on the 340 if U are not recoil shy, if U are get a MB and that will tame it down considerable. The 340 Weatherby is all the gun U need in North America to hunt anything that walks, including Kodiak Grizz and Polar Bear. Weatherby makes a great rifle, I dont care what caliber U shoot. Lots of folks po po the Weatherby products, just like lots of folks po po the Rolex watch. If U want a rifle off the shelf that has a flawless fit and finish and shoots like a house a fire with good handloads and the proper powder and load get a Weatherby, I own 3 and I love every one.
Last edited:
I'm afraid what Ross Seyfried says is not relevant to this post as are your comments, the OP very specifically asked for comments from people who had EXPERIENCE with the 340 Wby. Possibly YOU should go back and read, before insulting other people. So I pose the question again...............DO YOU NOW OR HAVE YOU EVER OWNED AND LOADED FOR A 340 WBY?..........Because you see this is really the point, or are YOU too dense to comprehend this?
You still don't seem to understand that you aren't the one who dictates who and what gets posted on CGN. The OP asked this:
Anybody have experience with Weatherby's 340 magnum. Just looking for opinions good or bad. Thanks
Ross Seyfrieds opinion might be of interest to the OP, and are relevant to the thread, which is why I posted it.
Stop trying to play internet cop with my posts. You are only a loudmouth on the internet, nothing more.
It's funny...I'm not interested in long-range hunting, or at least long-range big game hunting, and since that is really the forte of this cartridge I eventually sold mine and chose to stick with the .338Win. Reading the comments of c-fbmi and others here makes me think I should re-visit the .340, because I certainly did admire it when I had one.
The fact that Gatehouse is the leader of the opposition in this case only serves to reinforce that notion!
The fact that Gatehouse is the leader of the opposition in this case only serves to reinforce that notion!
It's funny...I'm not interested in long-range hunting, or at least long-range big game hunting, and since that is really the forte of this cartridge I eventually sold mine and chose to stick with the .338Win. Reading the comments of c-fbmi and others here makes me think I should re-visit the .340, because I certainly did admire it when I had one.
The fact that Gatehouse is the leader of the opposition in this case only serves to reinforce that notion!
I'm not opposed to the 340 WBY. I've shot one and didn't think anything was wrong with the performance. It's downside is more that it's a WBY and therefore has the associated lack of brass, rifles chambered for it and ammo. As far as I know, only WBY chambers the 340.
In contrast, the 338 LM is more available, with many gunmakers chambering it, (even WBY chambers rifles for it), and there is a supply of readily available brass.
The big .338's are all about long range, and the 338 LM dominates the long range .338's. If you are just going for regular hutnign distances, then a 338 WM or 375 probably makes more sense.
If I am opposed to anything, it's guys like cfmbi who follow me around yipping away like a chihuahua every time I post something, although I do get a chuckle when I see how worked up he gets
Last edited:
Republic of Alberta
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- ,location, location
Currently the most popular (trendy) usage for the big 338's is long range hunting and target shooting with rifles that weigh + or - 15 lbs. In that group of guys the 340WBY is not used much if at all. On standard actions like a rem 700 the 338 Edge and 338Rum are top picks, in the larger actions that can handle a larger case head the 338-378 is used and the 338 Lapua is top pick for its high quality brass. Top dog right now is the 338 Allen Mag which is a 408cheyenne tactical necked down this will drive a 300g bullet at 3350 from a 33" BBL.
Now days the 340WBY is a "Low to Mid Range" magnum, fine for a 8-9 lbs hunting rifle (nothing wrong with that) but currently not used much for Long range or Extreme long range which has become very popular.
Now days the 340WBY is a "Low to Mid Range" magnum, fine for a 8-9 lbs hunting rifle (nothing wrong with that) but currently not used much for Long range or Extreme long range which has become very popular.
340 brass can be made from 375hh which lots of companies make. I find it interesting you list brass as a negative for the 340 yet champion the 375r. Brass for the 375r is not to be made from other readily available brass and all I've been able to find is hornady.
I'm not opposed to the 340 WBY. I've shot one and didn't think anything was wrong with the performance. It's downside is more that it's a WBY and therefore has the associated lack of brass, rifles chambered for it and ammo. As far as I know, only WBY chambers the 340.
In contrast, the 338 LM is more available, with many gunmakers chambering it, (even WBY chambers rifles for it), and there is a supply of readily available brass.
The big .338's are all about long range, and the 338 LM dominates the long range .338's. If you are just going for regular hutnign distances, then a 338 WM or 375 probably makes more sense.
If I am opposed to anything, it's guys like cfmbi who follow me around yipping away like a chihuahua every time I post something, although I do get a chuckle when I see how worked up he gets
You can buy brass ready to go for the 338 LM. Ammo and rifle selection is also wider than the 340. Heck, brass and rifle availability is better for the 375 Ruger than the 340!
- Location
- Calgary, AB
The fact that Gatehouse is the leader of the opposition in this case only serves to reinforce that notion!
Oh snap ;-)
I'm sure that if you didnt mention .338 Lapua in the same sentence as .340 Wby cost of Wby brass would probably be one of your b!tches. I'd be willing to bet that in most places you'll sooner find brass for 340 than 375 Ruger.
- Location
- Calgary, AB
More like the court jester than a king
The 338 LM and the 340 Wby are pretty much ballistic twins (as is the 338 RUM/Imperial/Dakota in the real world). I own both, and they run within 40 fps of each other with like weight bullets. The LM generally gets the nod because of the lack of a belt and the tacticool factor. I used 375 H&H brass in my 340 for years before I came across a horde of 340 brass in Long Island, of all places. Worked just fine. Personally I prefer my 8mm Rem Mag as my medium bore, but I'm weird that way. I certainly wouldn't feel undergunned with the 340. - dan
