redhead522

Hello everyone,
I currently have a Browning A-Bolt in 300 win mag. I would like to get a rifle for not only elk and moose, but also grizzley. I've looked at a lot of old topics in the gun forum, and they all reccomend a 338 caliber or bigger for grizzley. Anyways, I've found a pretty good deal on a Weatherby in 340 wby mag, but after looking at the ballastics, I'm at a tossup what to do . The 300 win magaverage about3500 ft lbs of pressure, the 338 win mag about 3800 ft lbs of pressure, but the 340 wby mag has about 4600 ft lbs of pressure! I can handle the recoil just fine of my current rifle, but that's a significant jump in recoil.

Is the felt recoil for the 340 wby mag that much more than the 300 win mag?

And, while I'm at it, is the 300optimal for grizzley hunting, or would you prefer the larger 340?

Thanks

ShatoDavis

I personally wouldn't hunt griz with anything less than a 338. The recoil is significant when you jump from a 300 to a 338 and that much again when you go to say a 338 ultra or 340 weatherby. I can't answer whether you can handle it or not. You'll just need to shoot one and see. Something to consider is the 375 H&H. Its a great bear gun with less recoil than the 340. Loaded with 250 grainers its deadly on elk, or with 300 grainers its a cape buffalo gun.

moosehunter21

Yeah. I agree with Shato go with the .375 H&H mag. I would not hunt grizzly with my .300 win mag. The bigger the better.

DM

I would NOT be afraid to hunt and take any of the big bears with a 300 Win. Mag if it was loaded with 200 NP's. I tramped all over Alaska with one in my hands (includeing hunting brown bears) and never felt under gunned!

I've hunted with 338's and also the 340 Wby., and the 340 is expensive to shoot and does have a lot of recoil. Personally, i like the 338 Win. Mag better as it has plenty of power.

The 300 will have no problem getting the job done, if you do your part.

Drilling Man

stubblejumper

If recoil is a concern be aware that the 340 does produce a noticeable increase in recoil over the 300winmag.The 338win mag may be a better choice.

bigbulls

Not to sound like a big A-hole but.........................

If you are wanting to hunt grizzlies then forget about the recoil. You're just gonna have to live with it. With biger bullets comes biger recoil. There are a whole bunch of ways to mitigate recoil while at the bench and while afield though.

Having said that the 340 Weatherby would not be on my list of cartridges and while I would prefer something larger than the .300 I would not feel "undergunned" with one.

A good round to consider would be a 35 Whelen. It will launch a 250 grain bullet at about 2500+ fps. That's a pretty big slug making very respectable energy levels and will give great penetration with very manageable recoil.

RedAllison

The 300Win will kill a griz, but so will a 30/06 but that makes neither a "preferred bear round". Likewise, I can't understand why someone would purposefully dismiss the awesome 340Wby and yet proclaim the 35Whelen a better bear round? The 338 is a GREAT round and I have stated many times that it probably would be my recommendation for the mythical "one gun, one bullet, reasonable ammo prices, anything, anywhere on the continent" round. BUT in realistic terms, the man who can jet around and hunt anywhere he pleases can certainly afford more than one gun and doesn't have to buy his ammo at Wallyworld.

IMHO the 340 Wby is a GREAT game stopper and would be right at home on Kodiak Island or chasing 52" bulls through the Yukon! I also would encourage a man to go with that great ol dame of world renown, the 375 Hittem Hard. I certainly wouldn't discourage him from buying one if he wanted one, but likewise on the 340 as well.

The choice is redheads and ANY of the calibers he asked about upgrading too would be a good choice. For the specific question he asked I would recommend the 340 tho, not because it would be noticably better than the other two on bears, but because it is a flat shooter and that could be useful when he goes after elk and on rare occasion, for moose!

Good luck,
RA

handloader1

I own a Weatherby Mark V Sporter .340 Wby. Mag. with a Pentax Lightseeker II 4-16x44, and I will never sell it. I push a 250 gr. Barnes XFB 3062 f/s, 5204 ft/lb, and.408" three shot group at 100m. It took about 100 rounds to become accustom to its recoil which was donein a two daybreak in period. Just make sure your scope has enough eye relief. Good luck.

Superpig

The difference in recoil between a 340 & a 300 is considerable. I used to own a Browning A-Bolt in 300 Win Mag. My cousin and hunting partner owned a Ruger Model 77 Mark II in 338 Win. Mag. I fired 180 gr. reloads and he use 230 gr. Fail-Safe factory loads. I couldn't tell much difference in the recoil of each rifle. The Browning was about 1 pound lighter so this would have some to do with it. My deceased uncle once owned a Mark V 340 Mag. Firing factory ammo as he didn't reload this rifle was beyond my recoil threshold. His rifle with scope weighed about 12 lbs. with sling and ammo. This is a heavy rifle and still kicked like a mule. I would opt for the 338 Win. Mag. firing the 230 gr. Fail Safe if it gives acceptable accuracy and I think you will have plenty of gun. If the Fail-Safe load is inaccurate there are many good loads out there in weight running from 210-250 that are acceptable for use on the biggest bears.

redhead522

Thanks everyone,
I've decided not to go with the 340. The ammo would kick too much, cost to much, would have to be special ordered (none of my local dealers carry it, and I live in a city of about 40,000), and could be a pain in the future (since it's only made by Weatherby & Federal, and Federal only makes one kind of it.)I will look into a 338 win mag instead.