Trying to decided what to do with this project. It started life as a Ruger M77 338 wmag. I decided to lighten things to make a mtn elk rifle. So a 1# stock. Turned down the barrel blind box and shortened to 22".With scope weight is 7.2# When I can hang on to it groups are 1.25-1.5". Hang on is the key word. Even with light bullets recoil is very SHARP. It makes my 358 Norma feel like a 243. Anyway it now collects dust because I built my own 338cal wildcat. With a 2" longer barrel I give up 50FPS and about 20% less recoil.

Now what to do with a very light magnum action set up. I tried the 300WSM but couldn't get it to feed correctly without major surgery and the velocity I was getting didn't justify that.

Ideas?

Rebarrel it or sell it to someone who's never shot a light 338.


Okie John

quote:

Originally posted by ramrod340:
Now what to do with a very light magnum action set up. Ideas?

Recoil compensator. The good ones work fine. roger

Rebarrel to 7mm Rem Mag would be my choice. Minimizes feeding, magazine issues as both the .338 Win Mag and 7mm Rem Mag are based on the same belted case. Recoil will be less with the 7 mag compared to the .338 mag. The .300 Win Mag may be too close to the .338 Win Mag in power to make a noticeable difference in recoil so that's why I said rebarrel to 7 Rem Mag. Or, if you wanted to just do something a little different, then put a 24 to 26 inch barrel on it chambered for the .264 Win Mag.

-Bob F.

I couldn't sell it without saying it KICKS and still sleep at night. LOL Yep I'm talking about rebarreling. But what? I have a 308 Norma in progress and when I tried the 300WSM the recoil still got your attention. I have a 7x57, 280, 280PDK and 7STW. I was thinking of something like a 264, 270Wby or even 257Wby.

The barrel is .6" so a compensator would look real large on it. Plus I really don't need another 338cal.

Ramrod,

Since it works now as a .338 WM except for the recoil, staying in the 2.5" short magnum brass family would be the inedicated rebarrel as mentioned above. Also you would want to be throwing less massive bullets to bring the recoil down.

Since you don't mind wildcats, that opens the field somewhat.

If your use is to remain "mountain elk" I would look at the .284/7mm and .308 options. Since you already have a .358 Norma, no resaon not to have a .308 Norma. Dropping down to 7 mm, it is very difficult to avoid choosing the 7 mm Rem Mag.

Shoot premium 165s with the .308 Norma or premium 140s with the 7 mag, and the recoil will be a heck of a lot less.

jim

quote:

Now what to do with a very light magnum action set up.

This is a very good reason to build a .257, .264, or .270 weatherby

quote:

Originally posted by ramrod340:
I couldn't sell it without saying it KICKS and still sleep at night. LOL Yep I'm talking about rebarreling. But what? I have a 308 Norma in progress and when I tried the 300WSM the recoil still got your attention. I have a 7x57, 280, 280PDK and 7STW. I was thinking of something like a 264, 270Wby or even 257Wby.

The barrel is .6" so a compensator would look real large on it. Plus I really don't need another 338cal.

Telling buyers it kicks won't necessarily kill the sale. After all, didn't someone tell you a 7.5# 338 would kick? Of the choices you mentioned, I think I'd go with a 24" barrel in 257 Weatherby.


Okie John

quote:

didn't someone tell you a 7.5# 338 would kick

Well to perfectly honest I don't recall anyone saying it. I had shot the rifle before I made it lighter. While I was smart enough to expect more recoil I didn't expect it to be as SHARP as it is. While I can handle the recoil the barrel lift is so sever that a quick second shot seems like it takes hours.

The weight is 7.2# might need to add the .3# in the form of lead at the front of the stock.

I think it must be at least partially the shape of your stock. I have a less than 8 lb. .404 Jeffrey which, though a handful, is not all THAT uncomfortable to shoot.

If it was mine, since I enjoy the older (but still effective) rounds, I'd make it into one of these three, my preference shown in the order mentoned:
- .275 H&H, or
- 7x61 m/m S&H, or
- .264 Winchester

You need to rebarrel it to a 458 Win Mag, and let unsuspecting novices at your local range shoot it.

Video tape the whole works and please post here...

Actually, the 264 WM idea is the best one I have heard. That would be a truly sweet setup in that rifle!

Ramrod,
I don't have any advice on your recoil issue, but I like the layout of that rifle. I apologize for changing the subject, but is that a Mark 2? What kind of stock is it and what did you do with the angled front screw? I remember your 7X57 and like the rifles you put together. Thanks.
JZ

You might try a Limbsaver pad before you give up on the 338 WM. If not, my choice would be 264 followed by the 257.

I love the 270 Win but for some reason the 270 and 7MM Weatherbys never turned my crank.

quote:

Originally posted by ramrod340:
[.... While I was smart enough to expect more recoil I didn't expect it to be as SHARP as it is.

Hey Ramrod, You might try a simple change of Powder so the recoil impulse is different.

Or. you might try "downloading slightly" to a 338-06 level for awhile. Just heard back from a good buddy who did that with his 338WinMag for awhile and now he is up to Full Power Loads with no discomfort. In fact, he mentioned shooting it this Summer in a T-shirt at the Range with no problems.

quote:

While I can handle the recoil the barrel lift is so sever that a quick second shot seems like it takes hours.

Have you considered Magna-Porting which just makes maybe 4 small Trapizodal Slots atop the barrel. Not a muzzle brake at all, but it would help with the muzzle rise.

quote:

The weight is 7.2# might need to add the .3# in the form of lead at the front of the stock.

Now that you have the weight down, it seems a real shame to go adding weight back. I believe that would go "down" on my Priority List and save it for last.

What kind of recoil pad do you have on it?

And, you could always rebarrel it to the same 338WinMag but with a heavier barrel conture and a bit more length. That would be the same as adding the weight to the front, and I'd put this just above adding actual weight as a next to last choice for me.

I really like the 264 WM option!

Canuck - I think you are 100% correct. I think it is more the stock design and weight distribution that causes the sharp lift of the barrel. My 358 is only 8# and the recoil is nothing like this. I always like the 7S&H as well. What is the .275 H&H. If it is a full length H&H it would take a lot of work to fit.

Jbabcock - Now it wouldn't be near as funny as those tapes shooting the 600Nitro encore.

The 264Wmag does keep coming to my thoughts since I already load it for a friends rifle.

Jz - Yep it is a MKII. I bought the stock from a maker in Ft Collins, CO in the early 90s. It is mostly Kevlar. Weight was 16oz. I sent him my barreled action to use as his mold for his light stock. Then a year or two later I tried to buy another and he had moved or went out of business. I have a brown precision 1# and it is real close. I had to glass in the bottom to make it blind. I simply glassed in a washer in an angled hole to take the slanted screw. Thank you for your comments on the wife's 7X57 she is very proud of it.

Changing the pad would be a pain the paint goes over the base so it is only the rubber that shows.

Hot Core - I'm currently playing with loading it down. I have a load of RL15(If memory serves) loaded at warm 338-06 velocity(per the book) Maybe 13 grs less powder will reduce the sharpness.
The only experience with magnaport is on my 44mag. Any experience with the effect on a rifle?
I agree I would really hate to add weight but, I do feel that the current distribution is wrong. It needs more weight in the front to tame the jump.

I'd just rebarrel that Ruger with a heavier contour 24" tube and keep it as a 338 Win. Mag.

AD

I gotta agree with Hotcore on this and I have had/shot a whack of .338s for many years. I would start by loading the 210 NP to about 2600-2700, fit a Limbsaver and even consider Magnaporting. You could re-barrel as Allen says, but, that might alter the balance of the rifle in a negative fashion.

I have chrono'd the regular Fed. Premium ammo with 250 NPs at 2575 average mv and this load might be just the thing for that rifle. I can tell you that the rifle itself is about ideal for hunting here in B.C.s mountains where much of the Elk hunting involves climbing many feet in country too steep for packhorses. A really light rifle is very handy then, especially on the shady side of 50.

If, you were in Canada and that is a MKII, CRF Mod. 77, I would gladly buy it from you for my backpack rifle for just this type of Elk stalking. Good luck with your "problem", it's a nice piece.

How do you feel about an 8mm Rem. Mag? I'll bet that would really kick nicely!!! Or, do an Ackley Improved on the Chamber and create the 8mm Rem.Mag.AI....Oh my!!!

Since you don't seem to go for the recoil compensater, you might try building yourself a 3/4" cheek piece out of closed cell medium density foam rubber and attach it with rubber bands.Easy to do and if it helps( and it should) than take it off and buy one of the leather wrap ons. If you or your wife are handy you could get some nice patterened cloth, foam rubber from a key board rest and some good quality velcrow and hit the sewing machine.

I really think you should go with the compensator. I have no less than 8 rifles with them and the guys at the range still talk to me.

[ What is the .275 H&H.



The .275 H&H is the 7 m/m Rem Mag, sorta...only it was introduced in 1910 on their side of the pond, not 1962 as the Rem was on our side. It is belted brass of the same head and belt size as the .375 H&H & .300 H&H, but short....exactly the same length as the 7 m/m/ Remington Mag to be precise. The shoulder angle is sharp enough that today it could be called an "improved" cartridge. Only obvious difference is a tiny bit more taper to the case body, and a nice little sorta "mini-weatherby" radius at each end of the shoulder...at least that's the way cases from my matched pair of H&H bolt guns in that chambering came out when fired.

Anyway, I personally don't think there was any real improvement of performance in the 7's until the 7 STW came out about 65-75 years later. I obviously love this "little" H&H cartridge....

My rifles are carried a long time between firings, often up and down some pretty steep country. That rifle looks pretty good as is...
Cheers...
Con

Alberta Canuck,

But, doesn't the .275 H&H use .287" diameter bulets as opposed to the standard 7mm diameter of .284"? Woodleigh is showing .287" listed for the .275 H&H on their web site.

http://www.woodleighbullets.com.au/Bullets.html

-Bob F.

quote:

Originally posted by ramrod340:
...I'm currently playing with loading it down. I have a load of RL15(If memory serves) loaded at warm 338-06 velocity(per the book) Maybe 13 grs less powder will reduce the sharpness.

Hey Ramrod, I do not remember the Powder my buddy was using, but he simply took a Minimum Load out of one of the Manuals that was equal to a 338-06(which he also had at that time) and though it was a bit more Powder than the actual 338-06 Load, he could not tell a difference in the recoil. Then he just used that Load (which shot great) for a couple of years and then eased his way up to normal 338WinMag levels.

He had a 338WinMag a long time ago before he ever got into Reloading and whatever the Factory ammo was he was using "hurt" him to shoot it as a teen ager. I'd say it was more a function of that particular rifles alleged recoil pad, but it had him very recoil shy when we first met.

quote:

The only experience with magnaport is on my 44mag. Any experience with the effect on a rifle?

Only second hand info on the rifles, but something close. How `bout a light weight Shotgun with 3" Slugs and a 20" barrel?

Another buddy and I have quite similar 870s, except his is Pro Ported(the Shotgun equivalent of Magna Port by the same folks). There is a worthwhile advantage to the Pro Port if as you mention the Muzzle Rise is a concern. He has some kind of old video camera and took fliks of me shooting both. The Pro Port on his barrel did make a difference in muzzle rise. Since they were both 870s, we even switched the barrels just to be sure it was in fact the barrel and the reduced muzzle rise tracked with the barrel.

If you can find someone with a similar non-Ported 44Mag, I do feel sure you would appreciate yours being Ported. I have a Ported "Bushing" for my 45ACP and I do not notice it as much on it. But if you shoot it a lot over an entire day, your wrist is just not as tired(so to speak).

quote:

I agree I would really hate to add weight but, I do feel that the current distribution is wrong. It needs more weight in the front to tame the jump.

No doubt adding weight will help do that. If your rifle feels like a Banjo when it is in your hands, then I would definitely agree. I have heavy and light rifles, but they all have to feel right coming up to my shoulder so I'm not fighting the rifle into position.

On the other hand, if you like a rifle with a bit of Weight Forward feel to it, I can understand that as well. Sure makes them "Hang" well when shooting Off-Hand. It might not look real well, but you could break out the Duct Tape(like Red Green does) and tape some Wheel Weights to the Forearm long enough to see if you would like the extra weight or not. Just hate to see you do something permanent, dislike it more than the way it is right now and have to undo the mod.

No doubt the 338WinMag is a fine caliber and it would be a shame to dis-assemble all the weight savings. But, it is your rifle and you need to do what it takes to make it a rifle you will use rather than become a Safe Queen.

Best of luck to you which ever way you go,

quote:

Originally posted by mike_elmer:
How do you feel about an 8mm Rem. Mag? I'll bet that would really kick nicely!!! Or, do an Ackley Improved on the Chamber and create the 8mm Rem.Mag.AI....Oh my!!!

Full length 300 H&H based rounds such as the 7STW and 8mm Rem will not function through the standard Ruger 77 action.

But here is another vote for the 264 win mag. It is a much under appreciated cartridge, and is a blast to shoot with 100 or 120 gr bullets.

off the topic but......Allen Day????.....that is a great pic of the buff and you!!! How wide is he????......'bout 5 feet spread if the pic does justice!!! GHD

The longer cases can be made to function. You need a longer magazine and follower and to cut the ejector and bolt stop.

http://www.riflemagazine.com/magazine/article.cfm?tocid=1186&magid=84

I'm off to the range tommorrow. Loads that should give me the same velocity as my wildcat. Just for grins I have a little lead I'm going to try on the front to see it it cuts down the jump. Will post my findings.

Thanks for all the input.

quote:

Originally posted by BFaucett:
Alberta Canuck,

But, doesn't the .275 H&H use .287" diameter bulets as opposed to the standard 7mm diameter of .284"? Woodleigh is showing .287" listed for the .275 H&H on their web site.

http://www.woodleighbullets.com.au/Bullets.html

-Bob F.

Originally it did use .287"-.288" diameter bullets, depending on who commercially loaded the ammo.

However, in later years, the custom rifles I've seen used .284" bores.

Doesn't really make any difference, as one would have to order the reamer to cut the chamber anyway. As the reamer is going to be a "custom" effort either way, it is no problem to specify a neck for .284" diameter bullets.

Spent the day at the range. Fired some 338Wmag loads 210 at 2725 using 60grs. My 340PDK does 2705 with 57. The recoil was managable.

We did a test. Took a Leadsled. The 338Wmag, 340PDK, 358 Norma and 300Wby. Then measured the sled movement without weights. The 338s moved the same the 358 and 300 further. Forming two pair. Recoils calculate forming two pair as well. The 338Wmag would JUMP out of the rest. The others went more straight back. The 340PDK lines are the same as the 338Wmag but it is about 4-6oz heavier and the balance point is 1.5" towards the front.

The felt recoil in order was 340PDK, 358Norma, 338Wmag and 300Wby. The 358 calcualtes 40# the 338 only 30#.

So now I have a factory 338Wmag and a wildcat 340PDK both capable of giving the same velocity.

If I were to do it again I think it would have been better to leave the barrel at 24" it would have added a little weight but I think more important move the balance point forward.

If you port/brake it the muzzle rise will be greatly reduced. When shooting it at the bench use a lead sled. When hunting you won't feel the recoil.

I guess the question is, what rifle do you want? Sounds like your 338 'cat will do the job you had in mind, but not so light and handy. You're idea for a short-bbl lightweight 338WM is commendable if only on the grounds of being different. I say magna-port it and put a better pad on back (you can paint it if you like) and work up to moderate WM loads. A couple shots in the field you won't notice, you just have to figure something out for range practice - but anyone coulda told you that from the spec's.
Full speed ahead, and damn the aneurisms!

The test on the sled shows the actual recoil force to be the same as my wildcat. However the felt recoil (muzzle jump?)is much higher.
As I was leaning it against the wall this morning next to my wildcat I noticed something strange. It looks to me like they reversed the angle on the butt plate when I had it installed. When I place both rifles flat to the floor on their butts the wildcat has roughly a 1" drop at the muzzle. The 338 has a 1" rise. Don't know if this will show what I'm talking about. The butt is flat to the floor. The line on the door centers in the boreline at the Muzzle. The chamber drops below the line of the muzzle. Seems to me the muzzle already has a head start on it rise. Would this not increase the muzzle jump??

So if I need to change the angle anyway and replace the pad. Should it be Limbsaver, Decellerator or the new thicker Decellerator. I've never been high on the looks of the Limbsaver so I was leaning towards the new Decelerator.

Experiences??

The change in angle WILL make the gun jump, up and out, in my experience. Cut the stock about 1/8" at the bottom, and none at the comb side. You prolly need about 1/4"; but better to cut twice than to cut it too far the first time.

When shooting, the rifle will then rotate up and out less, and feel more under control. It will also slap your head much less.... HTH, Dutch.

Well, if the two 338's move back the same distance and the WM goes upmuch more, then that one has that much more recoil.
Seems to me the more barrel rise the less kick in theshoulder I get, so you may find that lowering the angle of the pad actually increases shock in exchange for better follow-up.
If I were you, I'd get a decelerator, and put it on as-is. Shoot it to see the difference. A different pad will already sit on the stock differently. If you aren't opposed to Magna-porting, that will reduce muzzle rise without changing fit. You may find that shooting this little beast requires a different stance, more forward-leaning than you might. With that shoulder disposition, you may want the present pad's attitude for better spread.

Broken record time. The brake man the brake and get something between your cheek and the stock . Don't let that stock come up and slap you ; Take a gentler ride on it. Have it so you are bareing down on it to get a good sight picture. roger

quote:

Broken record time

I hear you. Right now with the butt like it is the scope is too low already. If I added an elevated cheekpiece I wouldn't be able to see through it at all. I tried it with a spacer at the top of the butt. Lowered the stock and gave a better line up with the scope. To try it with a cheekpiece I will need to get higher rings I think.

Hey ramrod

Take it to Briley here in town and have an inch cut off and recrowned, then have them put on one of their flush muzzle brakes. They look good and are a little different in that they look like expanded metal and are the same diameter as the barrel. They are good and you can hardly see the junction of the brake and the barrel, expensive though. About $150 for the cut off and recrown and $250 for the brake.

That's what I'm going to do with my 338 Mato when it gets here.

I would try giving your rifle at least 1 1/2" of down pitch (about the same as most off the shelf shotguns). Put your rifle with butt on the floor, use a door as your vertical reference, tilt and adjust the rifle so that the top of the receiver (back/lower end) touches the vertical reference line and tilt forward until the barrel tip is about 1 1/2" off the vertical while the action is still touching the vertical reference line.

At that point you should be able to see hom much the top of the recoil pad heel has moved from the floor. Just for grins say that is 1/2"

Double check the process and measurement.

Take your pad off. Scribe a line from the top of the heel to a point 1/2" forward of the toe (using our example).. Cut the line and re-attach the pad.

This should help the mizzle jump.

As to recoil I would have the barrel cut back enough to fit a flush muzzlebrake.

You liked the caliber, why change?

drgondog,

I agree with you 100% I think adding drop to the muzzle would reduce the jump.

As to the brake. While I know they reduce the recoil there are several issues in this case.
I don't like brakes LOL
The barrel is already 22"
The one place I talked to said that due to the dia of the barrel they might not be able to install a brake. They would need to measure to tell me for sure. Guess they didn't trust my micrometer.
Due to the dia of the barrel the brake if it could be installed would be larger than the barrel. So it would look like a boss system hung out there.

I have my 338 Wildcat that I love, it is only 4 oz heavier. I get close enough to 338Wmag performance that the animal on the receiving end will never know the difference. If I need heavier I have a 358Norma that I love to shoot.

So I'm to the point that I sell it (on classifieds now), change it to something I will shoot or put it back in the safe.