the 338 federal is looking promising
11-07-2006 | 11:11 AM
#31
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,572
Likes: 0
From:
RE: the 338 federal is looking promising
ORIGINAL: ipscshooter
I'm not sure where the 700 ft lb difference comes from, but using Federal loads, the difference looks to be closer to 500 ft lbs at the muzzle.
I'm not sure where the 700 ft lb difference comes from, but using Federal loads, the difference looks to be closer to 500 ft lbs at the muzzle.
I'm not seeing anything like that in the federal catalog. I already posted the two best loads for each cartridge.
Wait I know where this is coming from. I'm using the high energy federal load for the .308 which is what I shoot.
The difference in muzzleenergyusing the weaker .308 loadsis about 600 ft/lbs, however they drop back down to just about equal (with my load) at 100 and 200 yards.
So if you use the crappy .308 loads you can get that difference at the muzzle.
I still don't see where there is a benefit. It doesn't do anything better than other calibers at longer ranges and there are other rounds that are better inside 100 yards.
My .308 load has over 3000 ft/lbs at the muzzle.
11-07-2006 | 11:22 AM
#32
Boone & Crockett
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 12,369
Likes: 5
From: The Republic of Texas
RE: the 338 federal is looking promising
ORIGINAL: BrutalAttack
No.
Something you're doing isn't adding up.
I just compared 180 gr. 30-06 and 250 gr. .338-06 and the difference was only 283 ft/lbs.
I'm still not buying it.
No.
Something you're doing isn't adding up.
I just compared 180 gr. 30-06 and 250 gr. .338-06 and the difference was only 283 ft/lbs.
I'm still not buying it.
11-07-2006 | 11:27 AM
#33
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,429
Likes: 0
From: Missouri
RE: the 338 federal is looking promising
To further explain my comparison of the 30-06 & 338-06 as support and to answer one of the points you brought up about "air" slowing down the bigger bullet.
I utilized Norma's ballistic calculator to come up with some figures. I compared Nosler Partition bullets at 2600 FPS for the 30-06 and 2700 FPS for the 338-06. Nosler publishes the BC of the 30 cal 180 gr partition at .474. I was unable to pull the bc of a 200 gr. 338 cal partion so I used the bc of a 225 gr the 200's bc should be better than the 225 so I feel confident in my numbers. So KE numbers are as follows:
Muzzle--> 30-06 = 2700... 338-06 = 3200 +500 ft. lbs.
100 yds->" = 2300... "= 2700 +400 "
200 yds-> " = 2000.... " = 2300 +300"
300 yds-> " = 1700... " = 2000 +300 "
The 30-06 is very similar to the 308 so by association I believe the 338 federalwould be very similar to the 338-06. It is fairly reasonable to assume that the numbers would have a very distinct correlation.
I utilized Norma's ballistic calculator to come up with some figures. I compared Nosler Partition bullets at 2600 FPS for the 30-06 and 2700 FPS for the 338-06. Nosler publishes the BC of the 30 cal 180 gr partition at .474. I was unable to pull the bc of a 200 gr. 338 cal partion so I used the bc of a 225 gr the 200's bc should be better than the 225 so I feel confident in my numbers. So KE numbers are as follows:
Muzzle--> 30-06 = 2700... 338-06 = 3200 +500 ft. lbs.
100 yds->" = 2300... "= 2700 +400 "
200 yds-> " = 2000.... " = 2300 +300"
300 yds-> " = 1700... " = 2000 +300 "
The 30-06 is very similar to the 308 so by association I believe the 338 federalwould be very similar to the 338-06. It is fairly reasonable to assume that the numbers would have a very distinct correlation.
11-07-2006 | 11:31 AM
#34
Boone & Crockett
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,679
Likes: 0
RE: the 338 federal is looking promising
I would really like you to post or PM me what cartridges you do own. I am very interested to know if you have one or more that don't do anything that you couldn't do with another cartridge that you already have.
And how do you figure that a standard .308 load is crappy. It is well known tht the HE and light mag loads are very seldom the most accurate loads for a givencartridge.
Here is just one example of how it is better than the .308 Winchester............... I havea .338 Remington ultra mag. It has a 26" barrel and very substantial recoil as well as just being a heavy gun. Why wouldI take this rifle in the elk woods (dark timber)whereI know for a fact that I will not be shooting over 150 - 200 yards at the most. In this situation I would want a light weight rifle with a relatively short barrel that is able to deliver a heavy bullet with substantial energyat medium ranges and with relatively light recoil for quick follow up shots. The .338 Federal will do this better than the 338RUM and the .308 Winchester. It will bequicker handling rifle than RUM and will deliver more energy and a bigger and heavierbullet than the .308 Win can.
And how do you figure that a standard .308 load is crappy. It is well known tht the HE and light mag loads are very seldom the most accurate loads for a givencartridge.
Here is just one example of how it is better than the .308 Winchester............... I havea .338 Remington ultra mag. It has a 26" barrel and very substantial recoil as well as just being a heavy gun. Why wouldI take this rifle in the elk woods (dark timber)whereI know for a fact that I will not be shooting over 150 - 200 yards at the most. In this situation I would want a light weight rifle with a relatively short barrel that is able to deliver a heavy bullet with substantial energyat medium ranges and with relatively light recoil for quick follow up shots. The .338 Federal will do this better than the 338RUM and the .308 Winchester. It will bequicker handling rifle than RUM and will deliver more energy and a bigger and heavierbullet than the .308 Win can.
11-07-2006 | 11:37 AM
#35
Boone & Crockett
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 12,369
Likes: 5
From: The Republic of Texas
RE: the 338 federal is looking promising
ORIGINAL: BrutalAttack
So if you use the crappy .308 loads you can get that difference at the muzzle.
So if you use the crappy .308 loads you can get that difference at the muzzle.
11-07-2006 | 11:49 AM
#36
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,429
Likes: 0
From: Missouri
RE: the 338 federal is looking promising
I noticed that I failed to mention what BC I used for the 338 bullet. I used a BC of .454 which corresponds to the BC of a 338cal 225 gr partition.
I'm not try to claim that the 308 is an inferior cartridge. Quite the opposite. The 308 is an excellent round. I'm simply showing that what you claimed was "not possible" actually was. Remember there are no absolutes, we must assume everything is possible until we prove that it isn't.
I'm not try to claim that the 308 is an inferior cartridge. Quite the opposite. The 308 is an excellent round. I'm simply showing that what you claimed was "not possible" actually was. Remember there are no absolutes, we must assume everything is possible until we prove that it isn't.
11-07-2006 | 12:54 PM
#37
Boone & Crockett
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 11,474
Likes: 0
From: Wall SD USA & Jamestown ND
RE: the 338 federal is looking promising
My 308 loads come from the Sierra and Barnes Manuals. I took the top velocity load from each. Like I said, I don't shoot factory loads so I can't really compare them. I will have to check the Federal catalog and see how it compares to the chronographed loads from my Manuals. One other thing I would have to add is that I would have to chronograph the Fedeeral loads as well because seldom do factory loads produce their advertised velocities in standard rifles as they often use longer pressure barrels to come up with their stats. Anyway the comparison listed above on the 338-06 and 30-06 would hold very close to those of the 308 and 338 Federal. I can only be sure when I start working with the 338 Federal.
11-07-2006 | 01:21 PM
#38
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,572
Likes: 0
From:
RE: the 338 federal is looking promising
ORIGINAL: ipscshooter
How do .338-06 180's and 225's compare? The big factor is velocity, as that number is squared. Size of the bullet makes less difference. As you pointed out, Mass gets divided by 2.
How do .338-06 180's and 225's compare? The big factor is velocity, as that number is squared. Size of the bullet makes less difference. As you pointed out, Mass gets divided by 2.
11-07-2006 | 01:23 PM
#39
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,572
Likes: 0
From:
RE: the 338 federal is looking promising
ORIGINAL: bigbulls
I would really like you to post or PM me what cartridges you do own. I am very interested to know if you have one or more that don't do anything that you couldn't do with another cartridge that you already have.
And how do you figure that a standard .308 load is crappy. It is well known tht the HE and light mag loads are very seldom the most accurate loads for a givencartridge.
Here is just one example of how it is better than the .308 Winchester............... I havea .338 Remington ultra mag. It has a 26" barrel and very substantial recoil as well as just being a heavy gun. Why wouldI take this rifle in the elk woods (dark timber)whereI know for a fact that I will not be shooting over 150 - 200 yards at the most. In this situation I would want a light weight rifle with a relatively short barrel that is able to deliver a heavy bullet with substantial energyat medium ranges and with relatively light recoil for quick follow up shots. The .338 Federal will do this better than the 338RUM and the .308 Winchester. It will bequicker handling rifle than RUM and will deliver more energy and a bigger and heavierbullet than the .308 Win can.
I would really like you to post or PM me what cartridges you do own. I am very interested to know if you have one or more that don't do anything that you couldn't do with another cartridge that you already have.
And how do you figure that a standard .308 load is crappy. It is well known tht the HE and light mag loads are very seldom the most accurate loads for a givencartridge.
Here is just one example of how it is better than the .308 Winchester............... I havea .338 Remington ultra mag. It has a 26" barrel and very substantial recoil as well as just being a heavy gun. Why wouldI take this rifle in the elk woods (dark timber)whereI know for a fact that I will not be shooting over 150 - 200 yards at the most. In this situation I would want a light weight rifle with a relatively short barrel that is able to deliver a heavy bullet with substantial energyat medium ranges and with relatively light recoil for quick follow up shots. The .338 Federal will do this better than the 338RUM and the .308 Winchester. It will bequicker handling rifle than RUM and will deliver more energy and a bigger and heavierbullet than the .308 Win can.
If that isn't the most accurate load I sure as hell don't need anything else.
11-07-2006 | 01:24 PM
#40
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,572
Likes: 0
From:
RE: the 338 federal is looking promising
ORIGINAL: ipscshooter
Federal's site lists ONE 180 gr. load with your ballistics, and 4 or 5 180 gr. loads with "standard" ballistics. I'm not sure it's appropriate to describe the standard rounds as "crappy", they're just standard. Not light magnums or whatever... And, if you're allowed to compare your super duper load, I suspect it then becomes appropriate to see what a handloader could do to max-out a .338 Federal load and compare that. I chose to compare a standard .308 load to a standard .338 load.
Federal's site lists ONE 180 gr. load with your ballistics, and 4 or 5 180 gr. loads with "standard" ballistics. I'm not sure it's appropriate to describe the standard rounds as "crappy", they're just standard. Not light magnums or whatever... And, if you're allowed to compare your super duper load, I suspect it then becomes appropriate to see what a handloader could do to max-out a .338 Federal load and compare that. I chose to compare a standard .308 load to a standard .338 load.