btw, I never understood why the .338 win mag shouler was shorter than compared to the .300 win mag, don't both these rounds use the same case essentially? the .338 win mag is noticeably shorter in overall ht than the .300 win mag. I wonder if the shoulder was at or closer to the same point of the .300 win mag how much more velocity we would get out of it. I love the .338 as a big all around, but personally the only ones I considered were the .338 RUM and the .340wby, I already had a .300 win mag,though, so I wanted to put a bit more spacing between my .300 and my .338. Also when looking at a .338 the RUM's were still kinda being questioned and a gun nut I know said don't get a RUM and recently I saw an article talking about which rounds were successes and which were failers, the .375 RUM is dead or dying, I think the 7mm is as well, the .300 RUM is quite popular and should be around, I think they listed the .338 RUM as likely to survive and I kinda agree with this assesment, also the .340wby pushes the bullets a tad faster and with less kick, the .340 uses less powder than the .338 RUM. I do like that the case is beltless though.The .340 has been around for much longer. I've heard it dubbed the ultimate long range elk cartridge, course the .338 RUM would be in that category now as well. Surprising to me that the .340 wby isnt more popular than it is, compared to any round that comes out iwth the name, remington, winchester, ruger....I know cost of wby rifles is a step up, they now have the vanguards, but also you can get a mark V fibermark, for $1200 and a synthetic will be even cheaper than that. Doesn't seem like much of a stretch from a $800 remington to a $1000 weatherby.