300 Win v. 338 Win

Hi Guys,

I landed a 110 LA for very cheap, and and am researching an elk round. I found 180 .277 bullets for my old 270 Win, so I am not interested in a .284. I want a .308 or a .338, with relative ease of brass/ammo availability, and something reasonable (no ultras, etc.). So this leads me to the old belted magnum cases, the 300 and 338 Win's. I am aware of their disadvantages, but they will suit my purpose just fine.

So here's the data I'm using to compare:

200 gr, .308 accubond at 2970fps

225 gr, .338 a.b. at 2880fps.

This comes from the Nosler manual, and both are quoted with 24" barrels. I use 40 degrees, 8500' elevation, and a 200 yard zero. With that, I find the 300 and 338 right on par energy-wise to 700 yards (the point where energy levels drop below 2000ft/lbs, the number I use to establish max elk range), with the 300 shooting about 15" higher.

Now, I know there is more to the comparison than just energy and trajectory, and that's what I want to hear.

Is a 200 grn in a 300 getting close to maxing out the mag box?

How would these cartridges act in terms of efficiency in a shorter (20-23") barrel?

What about shooting a 250 gr accubond from the 338?

Any other thoughts on these 2 rounds?


Thanks guys,

Adam

Quote:

---

How would these cartridges act in terms of efficiency in a shorter (20-23") barrel?

---

My .338 shoots 225's at a chronied 2910 FPS at 6500 feet, with a 24" barrel and a muzzle brake. I would think a little shorter barrel would put it down in the 2800 range, which is a perfect speed to work with BDC type scopes. I think the 225 grain bullet in a .338 is the best combo for elk, a great blend of speed an power. Kind of a .30-06 on steroids.

Quote:

---

What about shooting a 250 gr accubond from the 338?

---

I'd stick to the 225's, and the Accubond's shot very well in mine. The best group with these measured .428"
[img width=600 height=400]http://i234.photobucket.com/albums/ee261/ckink45/hunting/100_1813.jpg[/img]

I did have three first hand and one reported instance of tips breaking off in the magazine with Accubonds. The bullets that I saw problems with were .338-225gr (1), .308-180 gr (1), 7mm-140gr (2). I have never shot an animal with the NAB's in .338, but my wife killed her fifth antelope with the 7mm-140 last Thursday and the results were outstanding.

All of that being said, I feel that the .308 caliber is terribly deficient in the BC category. I would pick the 338 hands down for long range elk.

My .02

In this case, the 308 has a better BC: .588 for the 200gr., .550 for the 225 gr. and .575 for the 250 gr. 338's.

Thanks for the info too!

Quote:

---

In this case, the 308 has a better BC: .588 for the 200gr., .550 for the 225 gr. and .575 for the 250 gr. 338's.

---

Yeah, I guess it does. Now I reckon you need to answer your question about COL in the 300.

I would also consider some other things:

What is your backup plan if the bullet you like doesn't work well in your gun?

Does one cartridge have an advantage over the other if this happens?

What if, just if, Nosler is a bit guilty of embellishing their BC's a tad?

I have no problem with the 300, but for long range elk, I still think the .338 is the bomb.

Let us know what you decide and how it turns out..

The back up question is a good one. I think the 300 wins that one fairly easily. The Berger's and Sierra Game Kings still maintain high BC's, while most other hunting quality 338's start to drop in the BC's. . .

I'm sure Nosler's BC's may be a bit high, but they should still rank the same, as all the bullets we originally compared are all Nosler.

Now, most of the COAL's i find for the 200gr bullets are 3.5"+, and the standard box is 3.38", so I think in that regard, the 338 wins, as most of the loads meet that shorter COAL requirement.

In the latter comparison, the 338 seems like the obvious choice.

I don't know much about chambering, but could I have the chamber cut to match the short COAL so I don't need to seat the bullets out far to get it to shoot? It seems like it'd be good to keep 'em short enough to stay away from the front of the mag box if possible. . .

Quote:

---

I don't know much about chambering, but could I have the chamber cut to match the short COAL so I don't need to seat the bullets out far to get it to shoot? It seems like it'd be good to keep 'em short enough to stay away from the front of the mag box if possible. . .

---

I suppose you could, but I would be skeptical of having that much bullet hanging down into the combustion area. I can hear the crunching powder now...

I would ask a gunsmith, like Kevin Weaver.

http://weaverrifles.com/

Quote:

---

The Berger's and Sierra Game Kings still maintain high BC's

---

I don't think the Berger 200's would work. Even the 180's would be questionable in the mag box. They are REALLY long.

I have a friend who bang-flops elk with surprising regularity with a 300 WM and a 165 grain Speer SPBT. I know they work fine. My preference is a .338 Win. It kills with surprising efficiency and with less bloodshot meat than my buddies 300-165gr combo. Don't know anyone running 200's in anything less than a .30-378.

Quote:

---

200 gr, .308 accubond at 2970fps

---

That velocity sounds rather optimistic.

Yeah, I meant doing the chamber as described for the 338, not the 300.

The best BC's will always come with the longer heavier bullets in a given caliber. I do not like anything less than the 200's or so in the 308's b/c the BC's drop way off, and the ability for the bullet to carry energy at long ranges also drops.

The 338's are interesting to me, b/c the light to mid weight bullets are still maintaining decent BC's.

The only concern I have about the 338 really, is availability of components and ammo v. the 300. But in all other aspects it seems superior, especially when paired with my 270.

I have no more trouble with component availability for the .338 than with any of my other cartridges.

The .338 will fit it the mag box as is (with 225's, probably with 250's (ouch)). The case is shorter than the .300,(2.50" vs 2.620"), so you can have a little more bullet hanging out towards the lands for a comparable COL.

Guess I will shut up now and let others chime in.

BTW,
The shooting sticks you made for me are working great.

Maybe I just have a misconception of availability of components. I'm definitely leaning towards the 338 though.

I'd welcome other input though! Glad the sticks are functioning as they;re supposed to, I don't get much feed back on them.

Adam