What kind of accuracy do you get from your rifle in this particular caliber?

What did youu have to go through to attain that degree of accuracy? (Major smith work, trigger job, only handloading, etc.)

How does the stock shape affect felt recoil for you? A friend who upgraded from an older Savage in 30-06 claimed that his new Win 70 in .300 Win didn't kick as hard as the old Savage. Just some background to the question.

We are getting more grizzly bears in the areas that I hunt, and while I don't expect one behind every bush, I am considering a .338 to make a little better "first impression" than my 30-06.


Good hunting,
Graham

My Ruger M77 Mk II .338 WinMag, out of the box, shoots 1-1/2 inch 3-shot groups at 100 yards off the bench and about 2 inch groups off bipod standing. My friend's BAR, about a little bigger group, but adequate for hunting big game out to 250-300 yards.

Never did anything with my .338 to increase its accuracy potential. Using 225- and 250-grain factory loads, I feel it is more than adequate for any North American game.

For a hunting gun, the recoil of the .338 WinMag is not a factor. If recoil is a factor then a .35 Whelen or .338-06 might be considered. Anyway, I think that the .338 WinMag is about as good as it gets for North American big game.

Namibiahunter

I have a Ruger SS MKII 338 winny, a custom Ruger 35 Whelen and a Weatherby ULW 338-06 and any of them is better than the 30-06. The 35 Whelen is a darn good medium range hammer and with 225gr TBBC would be tough to beat. If you need more range than 250yds then go with the 338 winny but remember the trade-off in recoil and weight.

I had a Ruger Hawkeye 338 Winmag. I never shot it with the factory stock because I had a Hogue over mold stock from my previous MarkII 300 winmag (the hogue stock for the Mark II fits the Hawkeye perfectly). I put the Hogue stock on the 338 and every load I shot with it would never get bigger than an inch. Most where 1/2 inch and one load I shot was 1/2 inch at 200 yards. Thats from the 338. My previous Ruger 300 winmag was also accurate. I would shoot golfballs through the center at 100 yards.
I've had two Rugers and they have been the most accurate rifles I've owned so far out of 2 Remington 700's & a Savage.
Also, for me the recoil of the Ruger's feels a lot more comfortable than the other brands. My savage 30-06 just plain hurt. My Ruger 300 with it's factory stock didn't hurt. My Ruger 338 with Hogue stock was barely more than the 300 and was still more comfortable to shoot than the Savage 30-06.

Maybe I got luck with the 2 Rugers I got, but for me, 50% of the Remington I've owned where accurate, the one Savage I owned, I couldn't shoot worth a damn, but the 2 Rugers I've owned Shot amazingly Accurate, and the 338 was my favorite in this brand along with being my favorite brand of rifle.

I shot all hand loads, but tryed ten different loads that all shot under an inch. I used 225 & 250 gr bullets. It seamed like I couldn't find loads that wouldn't shoot in these rifles

Oh yea, and all the groups where shot off sandbags with a $150 Nikon Prostaff 3x9 Scope in the factory Ruger rings

This is just what I was wanting to know. Thank you all very much. Recoil is a minor factor, since I can practice form and technique with smaller calibers. Thanks for the thoughts on stock shape relating to felt recoil. A subjective test, but still worth something to me in research. Thanks again,
Graham

My old 338 Ruger mark 2 was the "boat paddle" plastic stock model. It stung a bit every time I pulled the trigger, but was good for 0.8 MOA with the 225 gr Woodleigh. The laminated stock was much better, recoil wise, and when bedded, it was also good for 0.8 MOA.

No trigger work, it was usable out of the box.

I was eventually talked out of the rifle by a friend who desperately wanted it. It is one rifle I truly regret parting with.

M70:
My .338 Ruger is the stainless model with the laminated stock. I use it mainly for moose and it sports a 1.5-5x Leupold and also has a set of open sights. I still got some 225 gr. Northforks that I'll use until they're gone then go to 225 Gr. Partitions. I can get a pretty consistant 1 1/4" group off the bench with this rifle and I wear a Past recoil pad when I'm at the range. I got the rifle partly for it being stainless and partly for the open sights. I prefer a set of open sights on a rifle as backup should something happen to the scope.
Almost immediately after I got it, I repalaced the trigger with a Timney and had the rifle glass bedded. Something I've found best to do with all of the Rugers I've owned. One short coming of the laminated stock model is that it is slippery in your hands when wearing gloves. I've also noticed that when the stock gets wet, some of the wood near the butt begins expanding and you can feel it raise up. It's never been a concern of mine but...
I intend to keep using it since it's a moose rifle and can take abuse and the elements. I do think, that if I were to do it again, I'd look around & spend the money on a pr-64, Mod. 70 in .338 and have it worked over if necessary. That's just me tho since I love the pre-64 and have decided no more Rugers for me. Hope this helps some. Good luck. Bear in Fairbanks

I had a .338 Ruger Stainless/Laminate that shot 200 Btips and 250 Hornady SP into 1" at 100 yards. This was the easiest load development I have had with a Ruger. The gun was heavy and recoil was not bad. I sold it as I ran into an equally accurate M70 Classic Stainless at a good price that was a 1.5 lbs lighter and decided to keep it instead.

Lou

I have 2 in ruger 77's with the tang safety. one shoots less than 1" groups at 100 yards wth sierra 250's and a large charge of h4831. The other is my "beater" and sits in a ramline plastic stock and shoots little groups with 210 grain noslers.

I replied in your other thread about gun choices, I had a stainless M77 MKII in a brown laminated stock. Picked it up cheap from a gun show.

First thing I noticed was the terrible trigger, it was pretty heavy and had a lot of creep and overtravel. I swapped it out for a Timney which worked wonders for my accuracy off the bench. The gun was an easy 2 MOA rifle at first but the trigger helped.

Handloading also helped some, but my gun was really partial to the Winchester Fail Safe 230 grain loading. Might've been the moly coating, but they shot well for me and took a moose and elk with that load quite effectively.

Accuracy was kind of hit-and-miss at the bench though until I relieved the barrel for the length of the stock and glass bedded the action. Once the barrel was floating and everything tightened down in place it was close to MOA, definitely plenty for big game hunting!

Those "boat paddle" stocks were ugly as sin but they worked!

M70,

I have an older model 77 tang saftey. It is not the prettiest gun but it shoots great with handloads. It will shoot 250 gr. Nosler Partition at less then an inch at 100 yards with H4831 powder. Nothing has been done to the gun. All the old tang safety Rugers I have shoot great with handloads. I just returned from Africa in June and had six one shot kills with it. The .338 is a great round.

Greg

I have a stainless MKII that would shoot sub moa from day one. I did have my local smith tune the trigger to 2.5lbs. It wears a Leupold compact 3x9x33 and recoil is not that bad. The one annoying thing about this rifle is that it loves factory Remington 225gr. Core-lokts. It shoots the same exact group with them every time with the first two in one hole and the third about 1/4" to the right. I have not been able to duplicate this accuracy with any handloads though they will usually hover around the 3/4" mark. This has become my favorite rifle of all time and I carry it religeously now.

quote:

Originally posted by Dr. Duc:
Those "boat paddle" stocks were ugly as sin but they worked!

That's the truth!

While it was fine on lighter kicking rifles like my old 270 and 223, on the 338, it was a bit punishing.
The laminate stock that it was swapped for was much better at soaking up the kick.
JMHO.

I have owned two of the Mark I rifles and they shot just fine. One of them put 20 shots into a 2" hole at 100 yards while working up a load with 250 grain Barnes X bullets. That was with a 3X dot reticle Leupold scope.

I posted in your other thread as well.

To get mine to shoot I had to mess with it but it started out as much my fault.
You see, I was lead to believe I "needed" a muzzle brake. I let the shop owner send it to North Hollywood gunsmithing while deployed to have a "integral" muzzle brake installed. It was nothing more than three rows of holes drilled in the muzzle.

My first time out I could get no better than 5" patterns. When I returned from the next deployment I had the brake cut off, the muzzle recess crowned, steel-tex(sp?)bedded, and had the trigger reworked to a clean 2.5#. It is now one of my prized rifles.