Am I crazy? .338 Win Mag
05-09-2017, 06:57 AM
#21
Typical Buck
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Martin, TN
Posts: 854
Save your money and get a real caliber, like a 375 H&H. Leave them wimpy 338s at home. 
In all seriousness, I'd go with the Winchester since I've already got a Ruger. Nothing against the 77 - I'd just want to add the legendary Model 70 to my arsenal.
In all seriousness, I'd go with the Winchester since I've already got a Ruger. Nothing against the 77 - I'd just want to add the legendary Model 70 to my arsenal.
05-09-2017, 07:43 AM
#22
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: ****ifornia
Posts: 5,052
I have a .330 Dakota...in between the 338 Winny and the 340 Weatherby...it's fun to shoot. Will I ever actually use it on game? Probably not when a 7mm can do the job just as well and there's a 375 Wby in the works for the "big" stuff.
Now a .338 RUM, 338/378 Wby on the other hand, those are a big step up in performance and are hard to beat.
Me personally, I'll be selling the Dakota soon and jumping into a 338/378 Improved, the smaller .338's just don't have enough over the 7mm/300 mags in my opinion.
Unless of course, it's just a smokin hot deal and you need to scratch your .338 itch!
Now a .338 RUM, 338/378 Wby on the other hand, those are a big step up in performance and are hard to beat.
Me personally, I'll be selling the Dakota soon and jumping into a 338/378 Improved, the smaller .338's just don't have enough over the 7mm/300 mags in my opinion.
Unless of course, it's just a smokin hot deal and you need to scratch your .338 itch!
05-09-2017, 10:21 AM
#23
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 4,264
Jeepkid, how heavy is your Dakota? I assume you handload? This article below practically banished the thought of ever buying any .338 that is not the Win Mag, for me. But, unlike you, I have no experience shooting either cartridge, so I'm curious what your thoughts are about what Gary Zinn writes, here.
The TL;DR version is that performance comes at too great a cost in recoil, monetary cost of rifle, monetary cost of ammunition, and overall efficiency given the increased components necessary to get the difference in downrange performance.
http://www.chuckhawks.com/338win_vs_super_mags.html
The TL;DR version is that performance comes at too great a cost in recoil, monetary cost of rifle, monetary cost of ammunition, and overall efficiency given the increased components necessary to get the difference in downrange performance.
http://www.chuckhawks.com/338win_vs_super_mags.html
05-09-2017, 11:14 AM
#24
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: ****ifornia
Posts: 5,052
It's about 8.5 lbs. It's the Dakota 97 Long Range Hunter. I have dies for it but I haven't had to load any ammo, yet.
There's some truth in his article, for all practical purposes for average hunting under 300-400 yards an animal won't know the difference between any of them.
The big mags need big long barrels to take advantage of their capacity and then shoot big long heavy bullets. The energy retained past 500 yards with the big bullets just can't be beat. There's no replacement for displacement.
There's some truth in his article, for all practical purposes for average hunting under 300-400 yards an animal won't know the difference between any of them.
The big mags need big long barrels to take advantage of their capacity and then shoot big long heavy bullets. The energy retained past 500 yards with the big bullets just can't be beat. There's no replacement for displacement.
05-09-2017, 01:43 PM
#25
Super Moderator
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Trumbull County, Ohio
Posts: 9,520
Well I ended up with the Model 70. I'll get some pictures up here in a couple days. Really sharp looking gun. Now to find some glass to put on it... I still have a 9.3 itch that may need scratched... I have a savage I could rebarrel or rebore....
-Jake
-Jake
05-09-2017, 02:15 PM
#26
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: ****ifornia
Posts: 5,052
05-09-2017, 04:30 PM
#28
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: IL
Posts: 6,575
You probably know better than I, but sounds like a 338 Edge (338-300 RUM) might be similar to the 338-378 you mention.
Keep us posted...
Keep us posted...
I have a .330 Dakota...in between the 338 Winny and the 340 Weatherby...it's fun to shoot. Will I ever actually use it on game? Probably not when a 7mm can do the job just as well and there's a 375 Wby in the works for the "big" stuff.
Now a .338 RUM, 338/378 Wby on the other hand, those are a big step up in performance and are hard to beat.
Me personally, I'll be selling the Dakota soon and jumping into a 338/378 Improved, the smaller .338's just don't have enough over the 7mm/300 mags in my opinion.
Unless of course, it's just a smokin hot deal and you need to scratch your .338 itch!
Now a .338 RUM, 338/378 Wby on the other hand, those are a big step up in performance and are hard to beat.
Me personally, I'll be selling the Dakota soon and jumping into a 338/378 Improved, the smaller .338's just don't have enough over the 7mm/300 mags in my opinion.
Unless of course, it's just a smokin hot deal and you need to scratch your .338 itch!
05-09-2017, 04:36 PM
#29
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: IL
Posts: 6,575
I love my 340 wby,
If the 338 win mag were a 338-300win mag, I think would've made it close to perfect or much closer to the 340wby.
I think the 340 is pretty close to perfect, or maybe a full H&H length 338-375 Ruger would be perfect, but someone got there first...
I think the win mag is kind of a 210gr 338 round, sure you can load it higher, but the 340 is more of everything I like about the 338, and if not a handloader ammo is reasonably available, vs most of the others.
Personally something about the 338 win mag being shorter than the 300 win mag, just bothers me.
But we must all pick and choose what's best for what we want.
Also I don't think the 338 win mag offers one that much more than what a 300 win mag can do, where the 340 I think does, but also at that point a 375 H&H might be a better idea.
I say get both! ha.
If the 338 win mag were a 338-300win mag, I think would've made it close to perfect or much closer to the 340wby.
I think the 340 is pretty close to perfect, or maybe a full H&H length 338-375 Ruger would be perfect, but someone got there first...
I think the win mag is kind of a 210gr 338 round, sure you can load it higher, but the 340 is more of everything I like about the 338, and if not a handloader ammo is reasonably available, vs most of the others.
Personally something about the 338 win mag being shorter than the 300 win mag, just bothers me.
But we must all pick and choose what's best for what we want.
Also I don't think the 338 win mag offers one that much more than what a 300 win mag can do, where the 340 I think does, but also at that point a 375 H&H might be a better idea.
I say get both! ha.
Jeepkid, how heavy is your Dakota? I assume you handload? This article below practically banished the thought of ever buying any .338 that is not the Win Mag, for me. But, unlike you, I have no experience shooting either cartridge, so I'm curious what your thoughts are about what Gary Zinn writes, here.
The TL;DR version is that performance comes at too great a cost in recoil, monetary cost of rifle, monetary cost of ammunition, and overall efficiency given the increased components necessary to get the difference in downrange performance.
http://www.chuckhawks.com/338win_vs_super_mags.html
The TL;DR version is that performance comes at too great a cost in recoil, monetary cost of rifle, monetary cost of ammunition, and overall efficiency given the increased components necessary to get the difference in downrange performance.
http://www.chuckhawks.com/338win_vs_super_mags.html