Hello the campfire:
I was having a hard time sleeping last night and started thinking about rifles I would like to build. I wanted something a little larger than a .30 cal but wanted to use the receiver and bolt from a common cartridge such as the 30-06. I was thinking of a 338-06, which has been talked to death here, but not enough bad has been said about it to discourage me. One of the assets this cartridge has is that it is based on a 3006 and would just require a rebarrel to work without messing around with the bolt face as would have to be done with other .338s
Then I thought, since the .308 is common and is for all intents a short 3006. What about necking up a .308 to .338 to make a .338-08. It would work in shorter actions, the receivers are readyly avalable and with the proper powder it should just about reach .338-06 ballistics. I know that there are all sorts of short mag.s out there now, but some of us like to build up our own rifles, abd this could cut the metal work substancally. Brass should not be a problem and you could possably use .338-06 dies with some work to load it. It could be a good choice for women youths, and someone who wanted a light weight rifle.
It would be sort of like a .280 in a .308 shell. Oh Yea that is the 7mm-08 isn't it.
Just the sleep deprived musings of a self proclaimed psudo- expert.
Judge Sharpe
I am not a woodworker or gunsmith but I play one in my little shop

Judge, my opinion, which is as biased as everyone else's, is the 338-08 is a complete waste of time. The original 308 is a better round in all respects. I built a 338-06 and genuinely like the cartridge but think, in the harsh light of reality, it doesn't do anything actually better than the standard 06' and doesn't do some things as well. For me, for the game that might actually "require" a 33 bore, the "real" 33's begin with the 338 WM.

Judge, for reasons I can't explain, I like the 338-06 better than the 35 Whelan but I like the 358 Winchester better than the 338-08. Go figure.

FWIW, I like the 9.3 x 57 better than either the 338-08 or 358 Win and there's no logic for that either. At least I'm consistently illogical .

I've got a 338-06, so you can see I like it. I wouldn't build a 338-08, though. I know Ken Waters had a write up on it some time ago, and he thought it was a good idea - but I'd go for the 358 Win if I wanted more than the original 308.

I like my 338 RUM. I can down load it or load it to the max. and it is a 33. I guess I'm not much help.

If you are building a .338-08, you are pretty much settling on 200-225gr bullets. This isn't a bad thin, the 210grNP seems almost made for the .338-06 / .338-08. I would think you could get 2600-2625fps from a 22" bbl. w/ the 210grNP in the .338-08. Not a bad little bruch round.

Brad, I know you are fond of the '06, but I can't see for the life of me how you can say the 338-06 isn't better than the '06 for large game. You can shoot the 250 and 275g bullets for the larger stuff, and you have the great loads in the 225 & 210g Noslers. For deer, the 180 and 200g ballistic tips with the greater frontal area and more velocity. For a lot of people, the 338-06 is easier to shoot than the maggie.

The area I live in (West Central Oregon) is full of Columbian White-tail deer, Columbian black-tailed deer, and black bears. The .338/08 is almost as if it was designed specifically for this area.

So is the 9x57 mauser, 9.3x57, .358 Winchester, .348 Winchester, .33 Winchester, .356 Winchester, 9.5x57 Mauser, .9.5x56 M/S, and even the .35 Remington. (Probably a bunch of others I've skipped over, too.)

If you want a capable, perfectly adequate, medium bore that is effective but only kills on the muzzle end (not the butt end too), go ahead and build it. I think you'll love it as a true "Woodsman's Shooter", not just the latest super-magnum to brag about.

does 8 X 57 have any meaning here? Nice length neck, decent throat, adequate powder capacity even with long heavy bullets,ecconomically availble dies and a fair selection of bullets. Right now there is a copious quantity of cheap surplus ammo. I must admitt it is a rather HO_HUM catridge even though it is superior to the .338-08. roger

But you can't fit an 8x57 in a true short action. I've often thought about building a 6.5# M7 in .338-08 for close in elk.

quote:

I was having a hard time sleeping last night and started thinking about rifles I

I hope you sleep better tonight.....last night's dream wasn't that good.

Sam, cause a 200-220 grainer from a 30-06 will penetrate as well and shoot flatter than any 250-280 grainer from the 338-06! Also, if you really need more than a 180 TSX from an 06 at 2700 to 2800 fps you really need one heck of a lot more round than the 338-06! The 30-06 in the real world shoots flatter, kicks less and kills just as dead...

Minus disagreeing with Brad on the 30/06 being superior to the 338/06 ( Brad of course I don't disagree with you enough to not own at least 3 or 4 06's at any one time! but yet only need one 338/06)....

It is really a matter of the 308 vs the 30/06 thing again....Depends on if ya want a short action or long action.....I myself preferred the long action on anything bigger than 7 mm....

The 338 bullets just have a high sectional density and weight to them and will get a pretty big job done.... Yeah those against it can come up with limitations, but those are pretty much in the obscure.. Like I don't traditionally hunt anything that can eat me if I muff the shot....
And yeah so 500 yds performance is lacking, but I don't shoot at anything bigger than a coyote at 500 yds, at least not ethically.....

I'd go the the 338.06, but if you build a 338.08 instead, I really don't think you are shortsheeting yourself a whole heck of a lot....

338 is a good bore size, whether a magnum case or not is behind the bullet.... they just do a good job on anything in the lower 48.. that is for sure....

cheers
seafire

quote:

Originally posted by fredj338:
But you can't fit an 8x57 in a true short action. .

This is true,Fred,however if he does build a .338-08 it only makes sense to me to do it on a std. 98 length action anyway to take advantage of the long heavy bullets without infringing on the powder room.It should also be throated adequately.

What in the world does anyone save by using short actions and compromising a cartridge's true potential? In a hunting rifle the weight differential is a joke. roger

True B, but if you have a short action, then only the .308 based rounds will do. You know, dance w/ the gal you brung.

I agree on the action in this case. Use a long one. If you have a short one, make something else out of it. The action is really only a part of the cost of a rifle. Buy a used Remington or some such and use it.

The problem is as pointed out before. The short actions work fine for 308 and down. When you talk about a 338, you either have to live with light bullets or seat them so deeply it will really cut down on an already limited case capacity. I have always shot a 338WM as a medium, but when I built another, I went with the 338/284. It gives the case capacity of a 338/06 in a shorter round. I didn't use a short action, however. I used an intermediate mauser and took advantage of the longer magazine for heavier bullets (or lighter monolithics). The last is an issue no one mentions much, but with bullets such as the X bullets, you need more magazine.

quote:

Originally posted by Art S.:
I agree on the action in this case. Use a long one. If you have a short one, make something else out of it. The action is really only a part of the cost of a rifle. Buy a used Remington or some such and use it.

The problem is as pointed out before. The short actions work fine for 308 and down. When you talk about a 338, you either have to live with light bullets or seat them so deeply it will really cut down on an already limited case capacity. I have always shot a 338WM as a medium, but when I built another, I went with the 338/284. It gives the case capacity of a 338/06 in a shorter round. I didn't use a short action, however. I used an intermediate mauser and took advantage of the longer magazine for heavier bullets (or lighter monolithics). The last is an issue no one mentions much, but with bullets such as the X bullets, you need more magazine.

At the risk of sounding arrogant; you got it right , Art.

Well, guess I'll toss my .02 in here.

I got interested in the ctg. when I was on Shooters.org.

I had a 338-08 built on a Rem M7 action with a #3 22" Montana Rifleman bbl. I chose to use 200 gr bullets.

I did not need a 338-08.

It did not fill a gap in my arsenal. I already have an '06, 300 win mag, 338-06, 358 winnie, 35 Whelen, 375H&H, and too many 45-70s.

I had it built CAUSE I WANTED ONE, pure and simple! I wanted something that you don't find in every hunting camp. I wanted something truely different. Sometimes, that is enough of a reason.

Now that I have it I find it is a fine ctg. for my elk hunting as long as I keep my shots under 200-250 yds. It is a joy to shoot, easy to load for, and nice to carry.

Talk about using a short action, the M7 is really short compared to a 700 SA.

BTW, you can get 338-08 dies too.

Elkslayer,

Good thinkin!! I don't have one of those either...goin for a spin on the FXDL tomorrow and I'll have to give it some thought!!

Neat Idea!!

well what about a 338-284

There are guys that have told me the .308 will do everything an '06 will do. I agree with them if you keep the range under 200 yards and use 150s. Now take the bore diameter up a step or two and the 06 case capacity will take it over the top of that .308 case. I can't see trying to push a 225gr .338 out of that .308 case. So, yes it will get "just about" but not there. Have you noticed the successful .308 wildcats are all in smaller bore size? It just don't match up to the .30-06.

Hello the campfire:
Gosh I did not know that I would generate such heat with a simple question. I did not find any re-load info ion the .338-08 so did not know if it worked or not.
Thanks for all of the ideas.
My main objective was to use a 3006, 308 receiver and bolt so that I would not have to open up or close down the bolt face for a differant cartridge base size. It was simplely idle speculation right now, but I hope to build another rifle soon.
I will most likely go with a 30-06 or a .280 Rem. anyway because I like those loadings. I had thought of a 338 just to have a little larger bore. Why? I don't know except that it was there. If I built a .338, I would most likely go with a .338-06. I might go with a 7mm-08 just for fun, but I would not gain any thing over the .280 Rem. The world of firearms is a wonderful place
The first thing is to find a good receiver. That will tell me which way I want to go.
Judge Sharpe

Judge, here's some food for thought. I was at the range today with my 338-06.24" bbl, 185 Barnes TSX in front of 57.5 gr of Varget shoots 1/2" groups at 100 yds. Retained weight in dirt backstop 171 gr. lost 1 pedal. Which is close to a Nosler 250gr Partition in retained weight. Velocity over my chrono was 3003 fps.I would think you could get 2850/2900 out of a 338-08 in a short handy little rifle.

Well, I had a dream just now, staring at the bottom of my pint glass, of a 416-308 Imp, shooting a 300g Spitzer at 2400 fps from a 22" bbl. And it was a Win M70 fthwt that chambered it! If I can get black to sleep, I'll see how some FN cast 400g do. Should be mean on whitetail.
[dares anyone to bring up headspace issues/]

My vote goes for a 338-06. To heck with all the naysayers. Hits harder than an 06, bullets have better ballistics than the 35's.
If you need something more, you might as well have a 375 or 416.
I'm getting a solid 2850 fps with Barnes 210gr TSX's.

You said it all SDhunter! I get 2810 fps with a Nosler 210 Partition which has proven to be a deadly combination for elk and the one shiras bull moose I've killed with it.

Judge...
Man the 358 Win. is that cartridge... basically, you'd just be reinventing the wheel.
Now if you want some food for thought/dreams make that a .338-284 win. and you'd have something.