300 vs 338
- Thread starter Bk2201
- Start date
RaySendero
New member
Great answer and One to remember!
USMC 77-81
New member
As for (felt) recoil, keep in mind that total weight and stock configuration contribute to same. For instance, I have two 30-30's, a Winchester 94 and a Marlin 336. The straight stock of the 94 sends the recoil directly back into my shoulder while the drop comb Marlin has more muzzle rise, the Winchester is harsher.
I bought my R700 SPS 300WM used. I got the rifle for $350 owner claimed "only 20 rounds fired" it did look like brand new I admit. I took it home cleaned it and got a box of Remington Core Lokt just to try it. SPS's use a cheap POS composite stock so the rifle is very light. Long story short I shot 4 rounds and I was in agony ! Now i understsnd "only 20 rounds fired" ! Dam that SPS packed a brutal wallop. After investing About $1800 in a heavy barrel, a Bell & Carelson Tac A5 stock , and a muzzle brake the mighty 300 is now very manageable (weight about 14.5 lbs) . I have the highest respect for you big bore hunters that can pull off a disciplined300 yd magnum shot without the slightest flinch!
San Souci's second piece on bullet placement is spot on as well. For myself, I impose a 400 yard limit as well, but I practice at 500, 600, even 700 from time to time. Why? Because 1) I like to shoot, and 2) I have seen a hit deer run a third of a mile and lay down with it's head up (My BIL shot it, not me.). This clearly gutshot critter couldn't be approached in an open stubble field, but an '06 in the lungs put her down hard, fast, and permanently.
I've sorted out several of those for less experienced hunters who flubbed up a reasonable opportunity, but like San Souci I think that past 400 yards on an un-hit animal, you are target practicing on a live target.
...okay, on a nice bull on a calm day..I would try it...LOL
I've sorted out several of those for less experienced hunters who flubbed up a reasonable opportunity, but like San Souci I think that past 400 yards on an un-hit animal, you are target practicing on a live target.
...okay, on a nice bull on a calm day..I would try it...LOL
Stillhunter
New member
Welcome Bk2201
One post and the yardage police have thrown you under the bus.
Don,t let it discourage you though. Over the past few years I have come to respect hunters that can make a long distance shot on game. If your distance is 500 yrds,then so be it.
My distance is 300yrds,my neighbors is 500,another friend of my is 600.
With today's bullets, ballistic info,and optics,hunters on the average are taking shots a lot farther than they have 10 years ago.
With that said I think the 300 would be just fine.
Almost forgot,and practice.
One post and the yardage police have thrown you under the bus.
Don,t let it discourage you though. Over the past few years I have come to respect hunters that can make a long distance shot on game. If your distance is 500 yrds,then so be it.
My distance is 300yrds,my neighbors is 500,another friend of my is 600.
With today's bullets, ballistic info,and optics,hunters on the average are taking shots a lot farther than they have 10 years ago.
With that said I think the 300 would be just fine.
Almost forgot,and practice.
Your skill not your ego should set the boundaries for how far you should shoot an animal. You should exercise common sense which in my opinion the cartridge should match the distance that will provide a hit in which the animal will not suffer a painful death but a quick one as it should be.
All my life I've heard that a 22 is not accurate beyond 50 yds but I consistently hit clay targets at 200, 300, and 400 yds. It is about skill and common sense and most important of all is the knowledge of ballistics.
All my life I've heard that a 22 is not accurate beyond 50 yds but I consistently hit clay targets at 200, 300, and 400 yds. It is about skill and common sense and most important of all is the knowledge of ballistics.
I got nothing, but wanted to share my confusion about why there was any confusion about the .300savage round vs the .338Lapua or .338winchester round.
They are QUITE different, to the point it is like asking about a .300 savage vs a 5.56Nato round.
Then I started to realize that not all 300's are savages.
Nothing to see here. Carry on.
They are QUITE different, to the point it is like asking about a .300 savage vs a 5.56Nato round.
Then I started to realize that not all 300's are savages.
Nothing to see here. Carry on.
I prefer the .338 over the 300 for the heavier bullet. I have a .338 WM. I shoot 250 grain Nosler Partition. I'm not sure what or where the OP is hunting, but an opportunity to take a 500 yard shot at an Elk here in Colorado would be an extremely rare opportunity, most places where I find Elk, you can't even see half that distance due to terrain.
Having said that, my .338 is zeroed for 300 yards and although I haven't done it for a few years, I used to practice shooting it out to 500 yards regularly because of the extremely remote possibility of that trophy bull walking out in to that big meadow that's 500 yards long
Having said that, my .338 is zeroed for 300 yards and although I haven't done it for a few years, I used to practice shooting it out to 500 yards regularly because of the extremely remote possibility of that trophy bull walking out in to that big meadow that's 500 yards long
Thanks for all the input. I guess I thought I was opening a simple thread. I wasn't looking for advice on ethical shooting. That was implied. I also wasn't looking for advice on flinching. Obviously the bigger calibers are going to kick harder. Also implied is that the gun is going to be heavier to allow for more recoil which means on a 5 day hunt it's going to get heavy. I get and understand all of that. Any caliber I shoot I practice with and know my limitations. Currently I shoot a .270 for both deer and elk I feel confident in the right conditions shooting A little past 300 yards. I have taken deer at that distance again in ideal conditions. I have also shot and killed an elk at about 150 yards with my 270 that I affectionately call the meat wagon. I love that gun. I'm considering a larger caliber to be able to if the right conditions allow it shoot up to 500 yards. Don't know if I would ever do that but with practice and ballistic knowledge and ideal conditions I would like the option. This past fall I had the opportunity at a nice bull in optimal conditions at 400 yards without an option to get closer (and yes I'm in shape and would have gladly tried to get closer). Hard to watch that critter. I travel a long distance to hunt elk and would like to expand my effective range to maximize my time in the hills.
The discussion I was hoping to get was different opinions on the pros and cons of both calibers using different bullets weights in regard to ballistics and functionality.
The other side of the discussion is I plan on hunting moose and bear in Alaska in the next 5 to 10 years. I would also like to use the same gun. That is why I wanted to limit it to the 300 win mag vs the 338 win mag.
I should have probably clarified what opinions I was looking for. With that back story, please give me your thoughts.
The discussion I was hoping to get was different opinions on the pros and cons of both calibers using different bullets weights in regard to ballistics and functionality.
The other side of the discussion is I plan on hunting moose and bear in Alaska in the next 5 to 10 years. I would also like to use the same gun. That is why I wanted to limit it to the 300 win mag vs the 338 win mag.
I should have probably clarified what opinions I was looking for. With that back story, please give me your thoughts.
Bk2201,
Were it me, I would not buy a rifle for what I might do. I'd buy a rifle for what I know I will do. Hence, I'd go with a non-magnum. If in the future you decide to hunt Alaskan griz, then I'd go with a .338 Win Mag consistent with your criteria.
I own a .338 Win Mag. It's a gorgeous Belgian Browning. I've owned it for more than 3 decades. I've fired it exactly three times. It is far more powerful for everything I hunt. So it sits in the back of my gun safe. I've used my 7MM Rem Mag for elk. It will kill elk as advertised. But so will an '06. God only knows how many griz have been killed with the '06. I believe that it's the cartridge of choice of Eskimo and Inuit for griz and polar bear.
My 7MM Rem Mag is the most accurate rifle I own. I bought it when I wanted to get serious about hunting majestic elk. Hindsight is 20/20. Were I accorded a do-over, I would not buy it. I already had a more than suitable elk rifle: a .270 Win.
Were I to buy a rifle for only the largest bears, I'd probably buy a .45/70 Gov't. The .45/70 Gov't has killed everything that walks Earth. If I had to go into dense brush after a huge bear, I'd want a .45/70 Gov't.
I know how it is when a hunter gets a notion for a certain cartridge. When that itch starts, a hunter will usually scratch it.
I've given you the best advice I can. It's based upon years of hunting and killing big game. Believe me, I wish someone had told me to buy a good-quality .280 Rem when I bought my first rifle. There is no doubt in my mind that a 175 grain Partition or similar bullet will shoot through-and-through the latest bear's shoulders. On the other hand, were a mean griz to charge me, I'd want a fast handling .45/70 Gov't.
Teddy Roosevelt killed griz and elephant with a .405 Win.
Best of luck to you. I hope it works out for you, and you wind up with a rifle chambered for the cartridge that's best for you. I'd hate to see you buy a rifle that will see little or no hunting...like my .338 Win Mag.
Were it me, I would not buy a rifle for what I might do. I'd buy a rifle for what I know I will do. Hence, I'd go with a non-magnum. If in the future you decide to hunt Alaskan griz, then I'd go with a .338 Win Mag consistent with your criteria.
I own a .338 Win Mag. It's a gorgeous Belgian Browning. I've owned it for more than 3 decades. I've fired it exactly three times. It is far more powerful for everything I hunt. So it sits in the back of my gun safe. I've used my 7MM Rem Mag for elk. It will kill elk as advertised. But so will an '06. God only knows how many griz have been killed with the '06. I believe that it's the cartridge of choice of Eskimo and Inuit for griz and polar bear.
My 7MM Rem Mag is the most accurate rifle I own. I bought it when I wanted to get serious about hunting majestic elk. Hindsight is 20/20. Were I accorded a do-over, I would not buy it. I already had a more than suitable elk rifle: a .270 Win.
Were I to buy a rifle for only the largest bears, I'd probably buy a .45/70 Gov't. The .45/70 Gov't has killed everything that walks Earth. If I had to go into dense brush after a huge bear, I'd want a .45/70 Gov't.
I know how it is when a hunter gets a notion for a certain cartridge. When that itch starts, a hunter will usually scratch it.
I've given you the best advice I can. It's based upon years of hunting and killing big game. Believe me, I wish someone had told me to buy a good-quality .280 Rem when I bought my first rifle. There is no doubt in my mind that a 175 grain Partition or similar bullet will shoot through-and-through the latest bear's shoulders. On the other hand, were a mean griz to charge me, I'd want a fast handling .45/70 Gov't.
Teddy Roosevelt killed griz and elephant with a .405 Win.
Best of luck to you. I hope it works out for you, and you wind up with a rifle chambered for the cartridge that's best for you. I'd hate to see you buy a rifle that will see little or no hunting...like my .338 Win Mag.
I would skip the 300 and 338 magnums too.
If it were me, I would choose a nice rifle in .300WSM.
The reason I would do this is that if you own a 300WSM and use the starting loads listed in any reloading manual, what you wind up with are maximum 30-06 velocity for the bullet that you have chosen. And as SansSouci has pointed out, this is more than capable for the great majority of hunting situations encountered. There is good reason for 30-06 being widely recognized as the best all-around hunting cartridge available. It is versatile.
The 300WSM is even better, even more versatile than the venerable 30-06 because it will exactly emulate the 30-06 performance with easy starting loads that are easy on your firearm, and easy on your shoulder - but if and when you feel that more range, or more grunt with heavy bullets is required, then full-power loads in the 300WSM will deliver this additional power for you.
An additional benefit is that it is a short action cartridge. - With a shorter, faster bolt throw. We all hope that second shot will never be needed - but if it is, then we all hope that we can do it right away. Also, a short-action means that the action weighs less, and you can put more of that steel in the barrel, where it will do you the most good. Or you can have a lighter gun.
A 300WSM loaded to 30-06 level will act like a 30-06... The barrel will last a long time, your shoulder will thank you and yet it will be very capable. This is how I would shoot my 300WSM for 95% or more of the time.
On those rare occasions when I need something more pops up, I will not have to buy another rifle to address that, I'll just use a more powerful load.
Note that a 300 or 338WM can be loaded down too - but these cartridges do not respond as well to reduced loads as the WSM case does. The short, fat case reduces ignition and consistency (accuracy) issues that you will run across when trying to load down the longer cases.
That's just me though. - And I'm big on the added versatility that reduced loads can give us as sportsmen.
If it were me, I would choose a nice rifle in .300WSM.
The reason I would do this is that if you own a 300WSM and use the starting loads listed in any reloading manual, what you wind up with are maximum 30-06 velocity for the bullet that you have chosen. And as SansSouci has pointed out, this is more than capable for the great majority of hunting situations encountered. There is good reason for 30-06 being widely recognized as the best all-around hunting cartridge available. It is versatile.
The 300WSM is even better, even more versatile than the venerable 30-06 because it will exactly emulate the 30-06 performance with easy starting loads that are easy on your firearm, and easy on your shoulder - but if and when you feel that more range, or more grunt with heavy bullets is required, then full-power loads in the 300WSM will deliver this additional power for you.
An additional benefit is that it is a short action cartridge. - With a shorter, faster bolt throw. We all hope that second shot will never be needed - but if it is, then we all hope that we can do it right away. Also, a short-action means that the action weighs less, and you can put more of that steel in the barrel, where it will do you the most good. Or you can have a lighter gun.
A 300WSM loaded to 30-06 level will act like a 30-06... The barrel will last a long time, your shoulder will thank you and yet it will be very capable. This is how I would shoot my 300WSM for 95% or more of the time.
On those rare occasions when I need something more pops up, I will not have to buy another rifle to address that, I'll just use a more powerful load.
Note that a 300 or 338WM can be loaded down too - but these cartridges do not respond as well to reduced loads as the WSM case does. The short, fat case reduces ignition and consistency (accuracy) issues that you will run across when trying to load down the longer cases.
That's just me though. - And I'm big on the added versatility that reduced loads can give us as sportsmen.
Last edited:
ligonierbill
New member
These comparisons are hazardous, as I usually end up buying the ones I don't have just to see for myself. But not in this case. I'll admit to being a .338 WM fanboy. Mine is not in the back of the safe, and I'm on the second loading of the 500 new cases I started with. First, a little comparison from Hornady's handy ballistic calculator. I have tested loads for the 200 AB and 250 SGK. I'll compare to Nosler's book load for .300 WM 200 AB. All 200 yd zero.
For 200's, there's no comparison. Nosler's .308 BC is 0.560, their .338 BC is 0.414. They start about the same speed. Nosler gets 2,972 from the .300 WM and a little over 3,000 with the .338. I, however, get 2,964 from my 24" Savage 116. That BC kills the .338 at long range. At 500, it drops 41.9" and holds 1,663 ft-lb. The sleek .308 drops 37.1" (not a big difference) and holds 2,123 ft-lb (big difference).
Now, my favorite 250 SGK. My Re-19 loads go 2,700 out of my rifle, pretty much in line with the manuals. Recently, I tried VV N560 and got 2,800 without going off the reservation. But I'll use the former for comparison. With a BC of 0.563, the GameKing drops 45.9" at 500 and holds 2,139 ft-lb. (OK, my faster load does 42.3 and 2,325. My new go to.)
Clear as mud, right? Oh, both the .308 200 Accubond and the .338 250 GameKing have outstanding sectional density. The answer to the OP's question is "neither". Either one will kill an elk at 500, or well beyond that if you can hit boiler room. Of course, so will a 7 mm RM or a 30-06 or... The .338 does have an advantage, I my opinion, at closer range. Big bullet at a little lower velocity isn't as likely to damage as much meat.
I bought my rifle intending to hunt Alaska, and I still hope to get there. Meanwhile, I've learned to shoot her (she does kick) and that's what I'll pack out west.
I'll close with some factoids. When I lived in SE Idaho, the .300 WM seemed to be the rifle of choice, not the only one by any means, but very popular. I carried a 7 Mag at the time and did well with it. But my elk hero carried a .338 WM. Dad was coming out to hunt, and I needed a rifle (He later gave me the 7 Mag). So I asked my hero. He spent 15 minutes on the virtues of the .338 WM, then said, "Get a 30-06." I did. Still good advice. Me, I like my medium bore magnum knock 'em dead, but it ain't for everyone. And 500 yards? When you get to my age, the coyotes will have eaten it before I get over there.
For 200's, there's no comparison. Nosler's .308 BC is 0.560, their .338 BC is 0.414. They start about the same speed. Nosler gets 2,972 from the .300 WM and a little over 3,000 with the .338. I, however, get 2,964 from my 24" Savage 116. That BC kills the .338 at long range. At 500, it drops 41.9" and holds 1,663 ft-lb. The sleek .308 drops 37.1" (not a big difference) and holds 2,123 ft-lb (big difference).
Now, my favorite 250 SGK. My Re-19 loads go 2,700 out of my rifle, pretty much in line with the manuals. Recently, I tried VV N560 and got 2,800 without going off the reservation. But I'll use the former for comparison. With a BC of 0.563, the GameKing drops 45.9" at 500 and holds 2,139 ft-lb. (OK, my faster load does 42.3 and 2,325. My new go to.)
Clear as mud, right? Oh, both the .308 200 Accubond and the .338 250 GameKing have outstanding sectional density. The answer to the OP's question is "neither". Either one will kill an elk at 500, or well beyond that if you can hit boiler room. Of course, so will a 7 mm RM or a 30-06 or... The .338 does have an advantage, I my opinion, at closer range. Big bullet at a little lower velocity isn't as likely to damage as much meat.
I bought my rifle intending to hunt Alaska, and I still hope to get there. Meanwhile, I've learned to shoot her (she does kick) and that's what I'll pack out west.
I'll close with some factoids. When I lived in SE Idaho, the .300 WM seemed to be the rifle of choice, not the only one by any means, but very popular. I carried a 7 Mag at the time and did well with it. But my elk hero carried a .338 WM. Dad was coming out to hunt, and I needed a rifle (He later gave me the 7 Mag). So I asked my hero. He spent 15 minutes on the virtues of the .338 WM, then said, "Get a 30-06." I did. Still good advice. Me, I like my medium bore magnum knock 'em dead, but it ain't for everyone. And 500 yards? When you get to my age, the coyotes will have eaten it before I get over there.
Hello Bk,
You're not under-gunned with your .270 for elk. Read post #3 again, and just put .270 in there where HiBC mentioned the '06 and follow that advice given. Glad you stayed with the thread you started, and welcome to this forum. You seem as a caring, ethical hunter in fine shape to pursue the wily wapiti in the fair chase mode. You and "The Meat Wagon" will do just fine. I mostly use the '06 for elk, and killed my cow at 192 yds. (via my range finder) with it this past season, and it worked just fine, as always.
I've got a great old magazine I've had for over 30 years, and in it there's an article about a man who killed more than 1000 head of elk with the .270. He was a gov't hunter and game warden in Colorado back in the 50's. Sounds unbelievable, no? The article also includes a number of other calibers that he used to kill elk (along with some comments about elk rifles by Elmer Keith). It looks like there's a copy of that same magazine I have on ebay for a pittance price for the articles in it. I highly recommend it.
reinert
If you Google; Guns and Shooting/Lucien Cary/ True Magazine/ 1952, it will direct you to the ebay site where the magazine is offered. It it's still there, you should get it. It's a great buy for great informational articles from old time rifling machines, to buffalo hunters, to target shooters, and also a fine story on John Browning.
You're not under-gunned with your .270 for elk. Read post #3 again, and just put .270 in there where HiBC mentioned the '06 and follow that advice given. Glad you stayed with the thread you started, and welcome to this forum. You seem as a caring, ethical hunter in fine shape to pursue the wily wapiti in the fair chase mode. You and "The Meat Wagon" will do just fine. I mostly use the '06 for elk, and killed my cow at 192 yds. (via my range finder) with it this past season, and it worked just fine, as always.
I've got a great old magazine I've had for over 30 years, and in it there's an article about a man who killed more than 1000 head of elk with the .270. He was a gov't hunter and game warden in Colorado back in the 50's. Sounds unbelievable, no? The article also includes a number of other calibers that he used to kill elk (along with some comments about elk rifles by Elmer Keith). It looks like there's a copy of that same magazine I have on ebay for a pittance price for the articles in it. I highly recommend it.
reinert
If you Google; Guns and Shooting/Lucien Cary/ True Magazine/ 1952, it will direct you to the ebay site where the magazine is offered. It it's still there, you should get it. It's a great buy for great informational articles from old time rifling machines, to buffalo hunters, to target shooters, and also a fine story on John Browning.
Given your Alaska criteria..recalculating...
The .300 with it's flatter trajectory still comes out on top for me. Moose are not known to be as tough as elk, but on the Big Bears, yes, the .338 would have a slight edge.
That having been said, it isn't much of an edge and the .300WM is a perfectly adequate gun for Brown Bear, but is more well suited to the vast majority of your hunting. On the other hand, the .338 WILL cross the 500 yard mark with elk killing power, so it really is your call.
This is where I part in opinion with San Souci: If you want a Magnum, get a Magnum. While a .270/150gr in an elk's heart at 500 yards will prove fatal, an awful lot of animals get hit in the lungs, or through a leg while taking a step, or are quartering more than we think. I also like the option of switching from "pure meat hunter" when I see a rack I really want, and this sometimes dictates shots from sub-optimal angles. Plus there is that HUGE difference in body size between a smallish cow, and a Royal Bull. As such I am a proponent of the conventional wisdom when it comes to Big Game rifle stopping power.
I'll take your word that you can shoot the calibers well and are willing to practice. After all, they aren't THAT bad! I can and do, so why should I assume you can't? (I even know a 96 year old who shoots a 7mm Magnum so well that if I told the stories people would think I was stretching the truth mighty thin...lol)
As far as range and ethics? Well, I guess that's reflex...but in truth my best whitetail went down to a first round hit at 536 (Lazered) yards. That was an '06 150gr, and the wind doping involved would make your hair stand on end. I was holding 42" over him, and well behind him...but I'd shot a lot of gophers that year with that gun, in all conditions. This year I worked two jobs, didn't shoot it in the off season at all...and wouldn't have attempted that shot.
I guess I'm trying to say "I'm sorry".
The .300 with it's flatter trajectory still comes out on top for me. Moose are not known to be as tough as elk, but on the Big Bears, yes, the .338 would have a slight edge.
That having been said, it isn't much of an edge and the .300WM is a perfectly adequate gun for Brown Bear, but is more well suited to the vast majority of your hunting. On the other hand, the .338 WILL cross the 500 yard mark with elk killing power, so it really is your call.
This is where I part in opinion with San Souci: If you want a Magnum, get a Magnum. While a .270/150gr in an elk's heart at 500 yards will prove fatal, an awful lot of animals get hit in the lungs, or through a leg while taking a step, or are quartering more than we think. I also like the option of switching from "pure meat hunter" when I see a rack I really want, and this sometimes dictates shots from sub-optimal angles. Plus there is that HUGE difference in body size between a smallish cow, and a Royal Bull. As such I am a proponent of the conventional wisdom when it comes to Big Game rifle stopping power.
I'll take your word that you can shoot the calibers well and are willing to practice. After all, they aren't THAT bad! I can and do, so why should I assume you can't? (I even know a 96 year old who shoots a 7mm Magnum so well that if I told the stories people would think I was stretching the truth mighty thin...lol)
As far as range and ethics? Well, I guess that's reflex...but in truth my best whitetail went down to a first round hit at 536 (Lazered) yards. That was an '06 150gr, and the wind doping involved would make your hair stand on end. I was holding 42" over him, and well behind him...but I'd shot a lot of gophers that year with that gun, in all conditions. This year I worked two jobs, didn't shoot it in the off season at all...and wouldn't have attempted that shot.
I guess I'm trying to say "I'm sorry".
Last edited:
ACTUALLY...
Since flat trajectory makes bullet placement easier, and since I am a proponent of the conventional wisdom on Big Game stopping power...
Have you considered any of the REAL heavy hitters like the .30-378wby, .338-378wby, 340wby, .300 Rem. Ultra Mag, or .338 Lapua? Recoil kings to be sure, but flat shooting and hard hitting.
Just a random thought. I don't reload, the recoil level is approaching my limits, and so I would incline towards the Win Mags myself.
Since flat trajectory makes bullet placement easier, and since I am a proponent of the conventional wisdom on Big Game stopping power...
Have you considered any of the REAL heavy hitters like the .30-378wby, .338-378wby, 340wby, .300 Rem. Ultra Mag, or .338 Lapua? Recoil kings to be sure, but flat shooting and hard hitting.
Just a random thought. I don't reload, the recoil level is approaching my limits, and so I would incline towards the Win Mags myself.
ligonierbill
New member
When your bullet drop is 3 or 4 ft, we're not talking "flat". Of course, in a day of rangefinders, it doesn't mean that much anyway. Unless you can hold right on, a claim made by the new Nosler 26 and 28, but even there we're not talking 500 yards. A shot that long gives lots of time to set up, check the wind, check the range, get a solid rest. Requires you to do so in fact.
Regards bears, long shots are unlikely, and probably strongly discouraged by guides. I've got a nice load with 275 gr Swift A-frames for those guys.
Regards bears, long shots are unlikely, and probably strongly discouraged by guides. I've got a nice load with 275 gr Swift A-frames for those guys.