I was doing some thinking today about recoil. Does anyone have a recoil calculator that I could use to compare a .338-06imp vs. a .338 win mag? Everyone says that you get less recoil from the �06 version, but I would like to see some numbers about that. Same story would be for the .280imp vs. the 7mm rem mag. So where can I go to research this, or do any of you have some resources share with me?
My thoughts on this have always been that if you take the same rifle, bullet, and velocity, you will allways get the same amount of recoil. Whether this is true or not is what I am wanting to find out.
The 338-o6AI does produce a little less recoil than the magnum counterpart because of the smaller powder charge along with the fact that the bullet is travelling anywhere from 1 - 2oo fps slower. If everything else were equil except for the powder charge, the cartridge with lesser powder would have less recoil. Kind of like the 3oo WSM and the 3oo Win Mag.
I shoot a 35 whelen ackley, and while it has somewhat less recoil then a 338 mag, it is certainly in the same ballpark. Kinda like if you have 8 drinks vs 10, either way you are drunk.
If you find a 338 has offensive levels of recoil, I don't think you'll find a 338-06 doesn't kick. Then again, if you can handle a 338-06 fine, you should have no problem with a 338 win mag. Look at Noslers load book, it lists one of the powders with their 210 gr as being most accurate when loaded to 2700 fps, start with that level of load, then work up to max loads with the 225's and 250's.
Posts: 7213 | Location: Alaska | Registered: 27 February 2001
Yeah, the 338-06 may kick a little less than the Magnum, but keep in mind that stock design has a LOT to do with "felt" recoil. i.e.- a straight combed 338 Mag will be more comfortable than a high combed 338-06, regardless of the numbers on paper. No recoil calculator can take that into account.
These two are gonna be close, so don't be swayed too much by the numbers.
Perceived recoil has as much to do with the combustion of the powder and its venting from the muzzle as it does with the bullet and its muzzle velocity. Slower powders generally do not kick as hard, but you load more grains and they are more prone to be burning at higher pressures at the muzzle which causes the "rocket effect" as quasi-adiabatic expansion takes place. Longer barrels burn to a lower exit pressure and so produce less recoil. Muzzle whip can feel awful even with small calibers. The worst kicker I've shot recently is a 32 Win Special Marlin 1893 with a knife edge comb. It beat my face to blue mess. I've never known a recoil calculator that even remotely approximated the truth. My original .340 Wby outkicked my .458 Win Mag by a fair margin and my hot-loaded .45-70 Ruger No. 1 has never been equalled in my experience for soul stirring effect. What you want to see is a measure of the dynamic response of force against your shoulder (ie, the big shove vs the sharp stab), not just a number that represents the (average, peak, who knows?) recoil velocity or energy (neither of which are the correct measure of recoil in the first place).
My first hunting rifle was a .338 Win M. With the hottest loads it gave a kind of headace after some shots.... Today I use my .338-06 Acl. imp. for most of my hunting. I feel this rifle have got much less recoil, even if the velocity of a 250 gr. bullet is not far away from the .338 Win M. (A-frame gives about 2540 f/s, clocked). The 06-version tough uses about 15 gr less powder. The weight of the two guns are about the same, 4,5 kg.
I have been shooting a std. .338-06 for years & find the recoil less than a sim. stocked/weight .338 WM. Then again, the performance isn't up to a mag either. You give up a bit of performance (about 200fps in all bullet wts.) for comfort, but it's still a great round!
Posts: 7752 | Location: kalif.,usa | Registered: 08 March 2001
