I have a pet 338 WM but I have an interest in the 338-06 if it works well as a smaller-scale version of my 338WM.

Thanks-
Forrest

I would venture there isn't more then 100 fps difference between a 21 and 25" barrel, so pick whatever you prefer.

Great round

Dog

I agree with Mark R Dobrenski on the velocities except I've pushed the 210's to 2900+ with good accuracy in the improved version. The 250's are spot on.

-Catter

Dog

did any of you try the 275's? Normally they shoot great in my 340 and my OKH didn't like em at all

------------------
WyomingSwede

I'm feeling smarter already.

With H4350, my 22" bbl'd 338-06 did a smidge over 2,700 with 225's. 250's were right at 2,550. Perhaps I had a "fast barrel"... I tend to doubt it. I think 21" would be very nice with the 338-06!

I just can't see a need for more tube in this round. To my way of thinking it sort of defeats the purpose for the round in the first place. If I were going to carry a 24" bbl., I'd sooner have a 338 Win Mag... even then my last two 338 Win Mag's both had 22" bbl's!

Maybe I'm different, but I've never "gotten" this prejudice for long tubes. I often think it has more to do with brainwashing from the gunwriters of the past, or perhaps if a person it "too tall" (hah!) a longer tube carries better. I'm 5'10" and don't care to carry tubes longer than 22".

One Man's Thoughts,

Brad

BA

------------------
Andy Cooper

Thanks,
JB

I considered the same project a few years ago. The .338 will certainly be more efficient in an 18" barrel than a .30-06, (more bore volume for powder expansion) but neither of them will develop their full potential. Ruger should have made their mannlicher in a 20" barrel. The only cartridges they chambered in these that made any sense were the .250 savage and the .308.

Are you reboring or rebarreling? Keep in mind that they used the Ultralight barrels in the mannlichers. The muzzle diameter is pretty small on these (the sight band doesn't count). If you are rebarreling, only an ultralight contour barrel with the short breech will work, the wood is very thin along there.

I gave up on it, figuring it was too much hassle for too short a barrel.

------------------

I planned on rebarelling a .270. I haven't had a chance to talk to the gun smith yet about the dimension tolerances that I'll be up against. Thanks for your input. Good point.

JohnB

I think I'm the fellow "Bearmanmt" was mentioning regarding the .338-06 in RSA. One shot and we had one dead animal. The little Impala and hartebeest were not surprising but when I tipped over that big eland.....THAT was impressive.

Great cartridge, can't wait for it to be factory loaded and truly legitimized by Rem,Win or Federal some day. As well as chambered in factory rifles . I know about Weatherby, but at $42 a box and $1050 for an Ultra Lt Weight thats hardly mainstream availability.

FN

Then I'd be happy as a puppy with two peters!

"GET TO THE HILL"

Dog

P.S. Franks you been out shooting rodents yet? I blew up a few snow goph's today, great fun.
I'm gonna make a trip Sieben way soon,perhaps we can hook up at the Driftwood.

Drop me an e mail and its a date. Also have a great burger stop in Craig, just north of Wolf Creek. I've be very busy with work so try to give me a few days notice.

I agree with your .338-06 "wish list" as well. I think the cartridge marketing pendulum is slowly swinging back from the high velocity end, to the good sense end. Maybe we will have some useable cartridges introduced in the future , with the .338-06 as one of them.

I went up to a gun nuts place on Sunday as he was bench shooting a .30-.378 WBY with 180 X bullets at 3500+ fps. I'm sorry I can see few valid uses by very few hunters for such a rig. Less is more in my book. Unless its cape buffalo.

Yes ..Gophers out in force. The eagles have been really taking their toll. Easy pickings when its a pure white background.

It was nearly sixty degrees yesterday and the River was as full of geese, ducks and swans as I have ever seen............what a sight!

Frank N.

[This message has been edited by Frank Nowakowski (edited 03-27-2002).]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Brad:
RustG... I'm confused... how are you in disagreement? On the one hand you seem to be saying a heavy 24" bbl. is nice, but a lighter 22" bbl. is better...??? I said, even though I'm 5'10", I still like shorter, 22" (and less) barrels... what are you saying? Just curious.

BA

---

The 24 incher I mentioned was a heavy sporter (quite heavy), esp with the muzzle brake it had on it. This was too long, and too heavy for me, for being a short guy with short arms, it didn't balance well.
A 22(or 24) inch thinner barrel may be a better idea next time around, and no brake.
WhomingSwede mentioned having long arms, and a longer barrel balanced better for him, with you saying "hah! about it, so I disagreed with you, that for him, with long arms with a longer barrel, and me with short arms and a shorter barrel, being better. Just a matter of preference. ~~~Suluuq

I'm only 5'10"... shorter barreled rifles "feel" better to me than longer ones. Guys with long arms or guys who are "taller than the should be" (hah, LOL... like Frank N.!) like longer tubes because they "feel" better to them... those guys also get the benefit of more fps, but finding clothes and shoes that fit is harder... so you see, everyone wins!

Brad

I am 6' 4" and have the proverbial arms like a gorilla and my knuckles are close to dragging on the ground . 36 " sleeves are too short . I find that 24 inch barrels really work well for me , although I wouldn't want a barrel any longer than that on a general purpose hunting rig .........

quote:

---

Originally posted by Brad:
Just to clarify... I never mentioned Wyo Sweded, nor was I disagreeing with him or commenting on his post... my "hah" is/was meant as a "LOL," not a commentary... that's just how I write. Hence, my confusion because we're saying the same thing.

I'm only 5'10"... shorter barreled rifles "feel" better to me than longer ones. Guys with long arms or guys who are "taller than the should be" (hah, LOL... like Frank N.!) like longer tubes because they "feel" better to them... those guys also get the benefit of more fps, but finding clothes and shoes that fit is harder... so you see, everyone wins!

Brad

---

The "hah!" along with your "brainwashing" comment, as well as WyoSwede being the only one saying longer arms need longer barrels for balance, with you saying you haven't been prejudiced over lengths and liked shorter ones, was quite easy to become misunderstood. Simple mistake. ~~~Suluuq

Brad Amundson

How does that 338 250 grain bullet work on bear, and, would you go heavier?

GS

[This message has been edited by Socrates (edited 04-01-2002).]

I have used the 250's (Swifts/Nosler partitions) on; Livingston eland, red hartebeest, blue wildebeest and elk, also one elk with a 225 partition. I really didn't feel I was lacking on any of them. Though on the eland I would never try anything other than a broadside or straight on shot, NO rear/raking shots on them. Though on an elk, in the right situation, such as; close, unalerted bull , I would do one. I think the .338-06 with a 250 at 2500 has the poop to do the job.

I have never hunted bears, they don't interest me. But if charged I would not want ANY .338-06 I would much prefer my three seven five.

FN