Gun manufacturers are always "inventing" something new. If you want a short action cartridge we have the 7-08 shooting 140's at 2700, the 308 shooting 150's or 165's at 2700 or so, and now the 338 Fed shooting 210's at 2600 FPS or so. With a limit of 300 yards on a reasonable shot at live game for the average man, what difference on sub 400 pound game animals could there possibly be? The 7-08 is the same as the 7 x 57 by most accounts, the 308 is the same as the 30-06 for most accounts except 200 or 220 grain bullets, and the 338 can be represented by what the 358 win did for years.

What difference on sub 400 pound animals could there possibly be?

Assuming bullets of the same construction, animals 400 lbs and under would probably not know the difference.

The 7mm08 would have less recoil...

The 338 Federal should have a little more thump up close...

The 308 would have more thump at a distance...

Fair question!! No answer ;except perhaps recoilroger

of the three, for your conditions, i would say the only difference would be felt recoil. i personaly never cared much for the .308, it's a good round no doubt at all, proven it'self in the worst conditions, i just don't like the recoil from. it just seems to have more recoil than other rounds of similar power. maybe it's because the first and last .308 i shot/used was a savage 99E when i was about 14/15 yrs. old.

Jimmy,
You hit the nail on the head. Any one of the rounds listed and about 100 near those in caliber and/or velocity would take care of 95% of all big game hunting. But the factories have to come up with the "short" this or the "ultra" that to sell more guns. Besides what would all of the shills that pass themselves as gunwriters write about? The 30-06?

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:
Assuming bullets of the same construction, animals 400 lbs and under would probably not know the difference.

The 7mm08 would have less recoil...

The 308 would have more thump at a distance...

Not true W/the bullets listed.

The 140gr .284 bullet will have a much, much higher ballistic coefficient than the 150 gr .308, even somewhat better than the 165 .308.

@ longer ranges, the higher BC .284 140gr bullet, when launched @ 7mm-08 mv will actually be traveling a quite a bit faster than either of the .308 projectiles when they are launched @ 308 mv.

Thge 7-08 will have more "punch" @ longer ranges.

As far as the 338 federal?

No better than a 2600 fps full power 200gr bullet load in an 8x57.

granted the 7-08 will be the longer range king of the bunch, for up to 300 yards though how would a man choose a caliber between the 3? It comes down to perception perhaps? As to what real difference in field performance out to 300 what could there really be?

In practice and at those distances with a reasonable shot, none at all...
This is the question I've been asking myself, too, many a time.
But the answer is always the same: with proper bullet placement, a good bullet, and a caliber that is not unreasonably small; there is no practical difference. Apart from the recoil.
One could also argue that with a poor shot there still is no difference: the animal ends up wounded.

- Lars/Finland

I think the 338 was developed with animals bigger than 400lbs in mind.

I appreciate manufactures "inventing" new products and so should everyone on this forum. I want the "perfect" caliber and cartridge for the game at hand. Not a "fill-in".

quote:

Originally posted by Mikelravy:
I think the 338 was developed with animals bigger than 400lbs in mind.

And a full house load W/a 200gr bullet from an 8X57 would handle anything on this contenant.

Although it would not be my 1st choice for the great bears, it would be the equal to a 30-06.

It would certainly be more than adequate for Elk or Moose out to 300 yds.

quote:

Originally posted by Buliwyf:
I appreciate manufactures "inventing" new products and so should everyone on this forum. I want the "perfect" caliber and cartridge for the game at hand. Not a "fill-in".

That sounds like the 7mm-08 on deer.

we all appreciate the gun venders staying in business and giving us something to argue about! A stainless steel BAR with an 18 inch barrel shooting the 338 Fed would be interesting, a bolt action 6 pound full up 18 inch carbine shooting the 338 Fed is interesting, a 22-24 inch barreled bolt action 7-8 pound 338 Fed asks the question "why not a 30-06"? The problem is that the gun manufacturers do what they think will sell the most and just continue to ignore me!

I would think that a properly designed for the application, mushroomed 338 projectile on impact would open a bigger wound channel and possibly allow the animal to bleed out faster.

quote:

Originally posted by Jimmy P Coaltrain:
we all appreciate the gun venders staying in business and giving us something to argue about! A stainless steel BAR with an 18 inch barrel shooting the 338 Fed would be interesting, a bolt action 6 pound full up 18 inch carbine shooting the 338 Fed is interesting, a 22-24 inch barreled bolt action 7-8 pound 338 Fed asks the question "why not a 30-06"? The problem is that the gun manufacturers do what they think will sell the most and just continue to ignore me!

I think many gun manufacturers are protecting their own proprietary cartridges. The 338 Fed is a nice cartridge but Browning would rather you buy a 325 wsm in a BAR or BLR. Remington wants you to buy a 350 rem mag in the model 7. Ruger seems the only one willing to chamber it. I think they understand that some people don't want the kick of the 338 RCM. The Frontier rifle was a nice platform for it. I think the lightweight or compact would be a natural fit.

I bought one of their 22" Hawkeyes in 338 Federal. I did it because I have a handy little Ruger 77 RSI in 308 with a 18" barrel. I lose about 120 FPS. It does it's best work with 150-165 bullets so it's neutered a little. I liked the 338 Fed because it's a 308 based cartridge that gives similar ballistics to the 308 with heavier projectiles. In my rifles, a 200 grain 338 FED has the same trajectory as 150 gr 308 due to the short barrel. My 338 is really more for CXP3 game. I have a 257 Rob for deer/antelope/predators and my 308 is my "all arounder/brush/stalking rifle". The 308 will really will do anything the others will do out to 300 yards but who really want just one rifle?

In reality, no difference.

In the dream world of gun writers there is a HUGE difference in how each bullet would impact the animal. One month, when they're selling a certain manufacturers' cartridge, the 338 is a must have and had manageable recoil and is required to put the animal down. The next month you need the 7mm as it has plenty of punch and you don't need to be rocked back by the 338. The third month you need the .308 for some crazy reason, perhaps because its good for all game.

Get what you want in a rifle you can shoot well and PRACTICE, practice and practice some more. Drop a magazine subscription and buy gas and bullets with the money saved and practice. You'll get less "advice" and be a better shot.

That said: I too like that gun companies need to stay in business and have to be innovative. Good for them for selling lots of rifles.

quote:

But the factories have to come up with the "short" this or the "ultra" that to sell more guns.

That pretty much sums it up. With proper bullet placement and bullet construction, any one of them will easily put down a 400 lb or less animal.

With any of the calibers and cartridges named, recoil will vary with the weight of the gun, shape of the stock, type of recoil pad, etc., etc. Bullet performance will vary with type of bullet, distance of the shot, what the bullet hits (bone or not, vitals or not), angle of the shot, whether the animal was relaxed or excited (running) when shot, etc.

Perhaps the most important consideration is the availability of ammo. Like a friend of mine, who has worked 40 or so years in the sporting goods store his Dad started, says, "It's almost impossible for a retailer to keep a good inventory of all the new cartridges, and it's even less likely that store in a remote location would have some."

I've never warmed up to the 308.. but love about any other bullet diameter put in that case...

I hunt with a 260... but recent picked up a 7/08 barrel for a Savage to play with that round....
I really like that round also..

Seems to me tho, a man with a 243, 260 ( or 7/08)and a 338 Federal, would be covered for about 99.9 % of ANY type of game hunting that someone would want to do in the lower 48....

of course I still have to own a Model 70 chambered in 06 with a 3 x 9 Leupold on it...

after all ( to me at least) that is the classic American do it all big game hunting set up..

quote:

Originally posted by wildcat junkie:

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:
Assuming bullets of the same construction, animals 400 lbs and under would probably not know the difference.

The 7mm08 would have less recoil...

The 308 would have more thump at a distance...

Not true W/the bullets listed.

The 140gr .284 bullet will have a much, much higher ballistic coefficient than the 150 gr .308, even somewhat better than the 165 .308.

@ longer ranges, the higher BC .284 140gr bullet, when launched @ 7mm-08 mv will actually be traveling a quite a bit faster than either of the .308 projectiles when they are launched @ 308 mv.

Thge 7-08 will have more "punch" @ longer ranges.

As far as the 338 federal?

No better than a 2600 fps full power 200gr bullet load in an 8x57.

I disagree, from Federal;
At 500 yards;

The best 7mm08 140gr load has 1165 ft lbs

The best 308 150gr load has 1155 ft lbs.

The best 165gr 308 load has 1180 ft lbs

The High Energy 165gr 308 load has 1375 ft lbs

I contend that the heavier 165 gr 308 bullet would have more "thump" than a 140gr 7mm.

Energy (ft-lbs)
Cartridge Type Bullet Muzzle 100 200 300 400 500
Premier® AccuTip™ 165 AT BT 2670 2292 1957 1661 1401 1176
Premier® AccuTip™ 140 AT BT 2542 2216 1925 1664 1432 1225

I guess the Remington data is off the mark

Funny how we get on the gun writers' butts for always having to write up something as new or great, or for writing the same old "Straw Man" debates such as .270-vs-.30-06.

Yet, we are always hot to throw out the same old "Will the animals shot with one of the following./...really know they difference?" question.

If you really want to get into that theme, just what is the function of "power" with any cartridge? Isn't it to give the bullet a flat enough trajectory we can hit something with it? And, to pentrate the animal deeply enough to get to the vital organs? And maybe lastly, to ultimately deliver a bullet that is big enough, or expanded enough to tear up enough vital organs or leak out enough blood that the animal dies where we can find it?

With those standards, how many different cartridges of any kind do we need that have been developed since about 1900-1905? Ditto rifle models?

quote:

Originally posted by Jimmy P Coaltrain:
Energy (ft-lbs)
Cartridge Type Bullet Muzzle 100 200 300 400 500
Premier® AccuTip™ 165 AT BT 2670 2292 1957 1661 1401 1176
Premier® AccuTip™ 140 AT BT 2542 2216 1925 1664 1432 1225

I guess the Remington data is off the mark

Just goes to show that by selecting the "right" bullet, you can effect not only your remaining energy, but trajectory and terminal velocity as well.
Terminal velocity and bullet construction being most important at distance IMHO...

Basically, all 3 of these cartridges start out with the same "engine" ie case size.

On animals under 400 lbs I see very little difference.

As the animals get bigger I would prefer the 338 Federal, because of its heavier bullets.

The 308 is one of my most favorite hunting calibres. When I "need" more, I go to something with a bigger "engine", ie bigger case, bigger bore.

The 338 win mag shooting 250's out of a 8.5 pound rifle is applicable and a .243 winchester shooting 100's out of a 6.5 pound full up rifle is applicable. In many cases for many people perception equals reality and that is all good..makes the world go round... There is not much truth in perception but thats what makes this stuff fun and why we argue about it!

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:

quote:

Originally posted by wildcat junkie:

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:
Assuming bullets of the same construction, animals 400 lbs and under would probably not know the difference.

The 7mm08 would have less recoil...

The 308 would have more thump at a distance...

Not true W/the bullets listed.

The 140gr .284 bullet will have a much, much higher ballistic coefficient than the 150 gr .308, even somewhat better than the 165 .308.

@ longer ranges, the higher BC .284 140gr bullet, when launched @ 7mm-08 mv will actually be traveling a quite a bit faster than either of the .308 projectiles when they are launched @ 308 mv.

Thge 7-08 will have more "punch" @ longer ranges.

As far as the 338 federal?

No better than a 2600 fps full power 200gr bullet load in an 8x57.

I disagree, from Federal;
At 500 yards;

The best 7mm08 140gr load has 1165 ft lbs

The best 308 150gr load has 1155 ft lbs.

The best 165gr 308 load has 1180 ft lbs

The High Energy 165gr 308 load has 1375 ft lbs

I contend that the heavier 165 gr 308 bullet would have more "thump" than a 140gr 7mm.

Your quote on the 500yd energy of the 308 150gr load just proved my point & the 165 was only a bit better than the 140 7mm-08 load.

If you want to compare the "High Energy" 308 load then you should compare it to the "Light Magnum" 7mm-08 @ 3000 fps mv.

In any case, the 308 is not proving to have more thump @ longer ranges W/150gr bullets & only slightly more (15 ft#)W/the 165gr bullets (in standard loads) & that standard 165gr 308 load will not have as flat a trajectory as the 140gr 7mm-08.

Technology has changed with solid copper bullets, range finders and ballistic reticle's.

15 years ago, I would have bought the 308 Winchester, loaded up some 150 gr. VLD type bullets, and used them on everything.

Today, I would choose the 338 Federal simply because of the increased frontal area. When you take a .338 caliber bullet and open it up it turns into a fairly large weapon! Yes, the 7mm-08 can shoot 140's faster but with a range finder and ballistic reticle, who cares about the extra speed?

You also mentioned elk so again I give the nod to the 338 Federal. Shooting the 185 gr. TSX it will retain its weight, petal into a large wound channel, and easily go through a front shoulder on a large bull.

Using the high weight retaining Barnes bullets; the .338 caliber is the best hunting caliber IMO.

7mm08 just sounds so much cooler
It's name has the ring of a hybrid caliber. A perfectly designed mesh of abilities.

338 federal sounds like something Pancho Villa had. Finding ammo for it would also be tough if you had to.

As far as larger game goes, I'd hunt elk with any of them, though none of them would be on my short list of choices. They'll all do the job, but not flawlessly in every situation.

I cannot believe that a 33 calibre hole thru the heart will make an animal die faster than a 24 calibre hole thru the heart. The trick is to reach the heart. A 338/250 at 2700 may give the necessary momentum to reach it and go thru on a large target, for small ungulates there is no need.

In the real world not all shots are at a broadside animal. That is where a 300mag with 200gr bullets or a .338 with 225-250gr bullets really shines. They will allow you to make killing shots even on a bad angle.

Truth be told, with the exception of optics, there has been precious little real improvement in hunting rifles since the introduction of the 8x57mm cartridge and the M98 Mauser rifle. But, let's not tell the Missus.

quote:

Originally posted by Jimmy P Coaltrain:
I cannot believe that a 33 calibre hole thru the heart will make an animal die faster than a 24 calibre hole thru the heart.

No, no quicker in a practical aspect. However what if you "nick" the heart with the 24 caliber? My point is if that same path was travelled by the .338 bullet, it would no longer be a "nick" , it would be fatal.

Reality is the .338 caliber bullet is going to pound a much larger hole through animals and increase odds on marginal "graze hits"

Blood trails are also much better and that's a fact.

quote:

Originally posted by nordrseta:
Truth be told, with the exception of optics, there has been precious little real improvement in hunting rifles since the introduction of the 8x57mm cartridge and the M98 Mauser rifle. But, let's not tell the Missus.

This is true. However there has been excellent advancment in bullet construction and ballistic co-efficents allowing the 338 Federal excellent velocity AND weight retention allowing long range performance. Your typical 8 X 57 Mauser round nose bullet isn't much good past 200 yards.

quote:

Originally posted by ar corey:

quote:

Originally posted by nordrseta:
Truth be told, with the exception of optics, there has been precious little real improvement in hunting rifles since the introduction of the 8x57mm cartridge and the M98 Mauser rifle. But, let's not tell the Missus.

This is true. However there has been excellent advancment in bullet construction and ballistic co-efficents allowing the 338 Federal excellent velocity AND weight retention allowing long range performance. Your typical 8 X 57 Mauser round nose bullet isn't much good past 200 yards.

The only 8X57 loads that have the "typical round nose bullet" that isn't good past 200 yds are the pathetic 32 Special level loads from American ammo makers.

Good hanloded Nosler Ballistic Tips, Accubonds & Partitions are well suited to 300 yds or perhaps a bit more in the hands of a accomplished rifleman.

quote:

Originally posted by MHC_TX:
In the real world not all shots are at a broadside animal. That is where a 300mag with 200gr bullets or a .338 with 225-250gr bullets really shines. They will allow you to make killing shots even on a bad angle.

As will a 140gr .284 bullet of bonded construction.

quote:

Originally posted by ar corey:

quote:

Originally posted by nordrseta:
There has been precious little real improvement in hunting rifles since the introduction of the 8x57mm cartridge and the M98 Mauser rifle.

This is true. However there has been excellent advancement in bullet construction and ballistic co-efficents allowing the 338 Federal excellent velocity AND weight retention allowing long range performance. Your typical 8 X 57 Mauser round nose bullet isn't much good past 200 yards.

Fair enough; bullets are indeed better and the SAAMI 8x57 performs like 30 WCF or 32 Special, making it a 200 yard round at best. Let's refine my point. Will any cartridge invented since the 7.92x57 .323 spitzer (C.I.P. 8x57mm IS) kill "sub 400 pound game animals" better within 300 yards?

I have read a lot of posts where people show energy levels and ballistics at distances of 500 yards, 1000 yards.

In my rifles the 308 bullet drop from 300 yards to 600 yards is 12 MOA. That is 72 inches. The difference in bullet drop between 500 yards and 600 yards is 32 inches.

Should these people be shooting at animals at these distances?

How do they compensate for bullet drop, wind drift? (Maybe they just shoot straight away?)

I guess the 7 x 57 only "nicked" the hearts of the game that it has been shot at, we all know its a piker in the field. Now that the 338 Federal has come along things will be different!

QUOTE]Fair enough; bullets are indeed better and the SAAMI 8x57 performs like 30 WCF or 32 Special, making it a 200 yard round at best. [/QUOTE]


Anyone who handloads, most likly uses spitzer hunting bullets in their 8x57, and also likely loads closer to Euro specs than to SAAMI. In that instance, their 8x57 is no more like a .32 Special than an '06 is like a 30-30.

It is not at all difficult to get 2,900 fps out of an 8 m/m 154 gr. bullet...or over 2,500 from a 200 gr. 8 m/m Nosler.

I like the .338 Federal and plan to buy or build one just for grins, but I don't see any advantage over the 1888-designed 8x57 round when the "8" is loaded with modern bullets to modern pressures.

Nor do I see any particular need for short and super-short actions for hunting rifles, especially when compared to the so-called "Mexican"-length CRF Mausers. For bench rifles, where utmost accuracy is required , yes, modern very short round actions have some distinct advantages, but none that I think will be of much use in the hunting field.

I consider the 7 X 57 and 8 X 57 case to be superior over the 338 Federal case. Mainly because is must be built on a regular long action. This is great for the .338 caliber of bullets because to get the co-efficients up you must make them longer and short action can be a major problem then.



9.3 X 62, 30-06, 8 X 57, 6.5 X 55, .308(mmm... classic beltless eye candy)

The 338-57 O'Connor is about THE perfect bush caliber. O'Connor wasn't stupid. He knew how recoil effects shooting and touting a 338 Win. Mag. isn't always a good idea.

http://www.chuckhawks.com/338_OConnor.htm

While the Chuck Hawks article talks about round nose bullets as inspiration for the O'Connor round, I believe recoil was the main factor. I have not shot one but the 338-57 O'Connor would be a wonderful round to shoot and still have lots of punch.

If I was rich I would have a 338-57 O'Connor in my battery.

In Saskatchewan where I live moose and elk territory is mainly close quarter bush. Ripping a 210 gr. TTSX through a moose with the O'Connor would be fun and leave a nice firehose blood trail to follow.

quote:

Originally posted by ar corey:
I consider the 7 X 57 and 8 X 57 case to be superior over the 338 Federal case. Mainly because is must be built on a regular long action.

I don't know that I agree with that one. The case is not superior. The 7x57 does require a long action but if you're going to have a long action...why not the 338-06 which would be superior to the 338x57? I don't see the point of a 338x57 now that we have the 338-06 and the 338 Federal. The purpose of the 338 O'Connor was to load a 200 bullet at 2400 fps. You can download both the 338-06 and the 338 Fed to that velocity.

I was agreeing with what Alberta Canuck wrote:

I like the .338 Federal and plan to buy or build one just for grins, but I don't see any advantage over the 1888-designed 8x57 round when the "8" is loaded with modern bullets to modern pressures.

I also agree the 338-06 is superior to the 338 O'Connor. Both are built on long action.

If I could afford to build my dream rifle it would be an 8mm-06. The .323 gives better B.C. than the .338 comparing the TSX 180/185.

.323 also has excellent frontal area and creates nice big holes with firehose bloodtrails.