Of these 2 the 338 win and the 340wby NOT taking ammo availability into consideration etc.
Just choosing between the two cartidges which of these 2 would you choose?

after studing both balistically,i went with the 338 win mag,had it built on a mark-x mauser action with a 26 inch number5 conture stainless steel douglas barrel, resting in a bell and carlson fiberglass stock,the 340 wby is also a great round. regardsjjmp

I have a bit of a prejudice against the Weatherby radiused shoulder and freebored chambers. In my opinion those features are not conducive to the best accuracy.

I owend two identical rifles in .340 WBY and .338 Win. I never did get the WBY to shoot the way I wanted, but had little trouble working up a very accurate load for the WIN. A single example does not a rule make, but all things being equal, the more conventional cartridge design is easier to work with.

If you need the additional 100 fps, I have a good friend with a .338/8mm Rem Mag. It duplicates the case capacity of the WBY with a conventional shoulder and no extra freebore. His gun provides both outstanding accuracy and performance. But do you really need the 100 fps?

I've shot and hunted with both quite a bit....

I have no problem with the Wby. case design at all... in fact it looks cool!! BUT, like was already stated, it really doesn't give much better performance at all.

I've seen Wby's that shot very good, so it is possible to have a good shooter from them. And, besides the Mark 5 i owned, i built a 340 Wby. mag. on a 700 Rem. action that shot quite good too..

I have my Nosler #5 reloading manual sitting right here. With 250 NP's the MAX Nosler got out of the Win. mag. is 2,780 fps with a 24" bbl... The MAX they got out of the 340 Wby. is 2,829 fps and that's with a 26" bbl.!!

That should answer your question right there...

DM

I've loaded extensively for both and to me the 338's the more practical one although there is no question at least in my mind the 340 has a bit more punch and is just as accurate. I still own both and with 250gr NPs, the 338 comes in right at 2730 whereas the 340 is at 2950. Give or take, that's 200fps. So if you consider 200 fps and a lot more energy to your liking, the 340s a good choice. jorge

American loading manuals seems to have very mild .340 loads. I belive Ross Seyfried once mentioned that the reason for the tame loads in one manual was that they didn't have a 340 pressure barrel to test the loads in so they were very conservative.
My brother have a .340 with a 27" barrel and can get 2950-3000fps with 250gr Woodleigh WITHOUT pressure problems using Norma MRP powder. That was according to a Norwegian loading manual. Case life was shorter so he has backed off a little IIRC.
If you look around, there are plenty of 250 @ 2900fps loads available.
340 wby with 250gr bullets at reloadersnest, top load over 3000fps: http://www.reloadersnest.com/query_bw.asp?CaliberID=72&BulletWeight=250

Top 338 win load with 250gr bullets at reloadersnest tops out at 2750fps...



Edited for spelling

I've had several of each. Currently use the 338 long throated. 340s are very accurate don't let anyone say otherwise. 340s go 200 fps faster. 340s kick way more. They're both great, if its your biggest gun get the 340 if its a general hunting gun and you own bigger get the 338.

Ballisticaly the Wby is better but it kicks harder. I'm not so sure if the Wby shoots any straighter.

Question: What are you shooting at and what's the distance? Out to 500 yards you can take an elk with the .338. Goes without saying you can use the .340 too. But who can shoot out to 500 yards? Who wants to shoot out to 500 yards?

The .338 will fill all your needs. The .340 is extra. I just don't know why you need all that velocity/energy for. Get a .338-06.

I've shot both & in sim/ wt. rifles, I'ld take the 338winmag. There is little diff. in traj. out to 400yds so the extra recoil just isn't worth it for me. My buddy hunts w/ a very nice 340wby on a Sako action, Mcmillan stock & magnaported. It weighs in just under 9# ready to hunt & isn't bad at all from the bench. Now that particular rifle I would buy.

i thoroughly enjoy shooting my 340. have just acquired a 338 in the ruger gun, and waiting to get to the range. the 340 does have some recoil, but just put it out of your mind when at the bench and i'll bet you shoot better if you concentrate on the target rather than the recoil.

quote:

Originally posted by jorge:
I've loaded extensively for both and to me the 338's the more practical one although there is no question at least in my mind the 340 has a bit more punch and is just as accurate. I still own both and with 250gr NPs, the 338 comes in right at 2730 whereas the 340 is at 2950. Give or take, that's 200fps. So if you consider 200 fps and a lot more energy to your liking, the 340s a good choice. jorge

Exactly. I've got my 340 Wby shooting 250s at around 3000fps. Very accurate, the recoil is not noticeably different in the field. (maybe to some shooting groups on the bench- I don't).

C'mon Jorge, he did say:

quote:

Originally posted by Jarrod:
NOT taking ammo availability into consideration etc.

Go with the 340Wby, get a short throat and enjoy......

I can't resist chiming in - how about a 338 RUM? I've got one in a Rem 700 LSS and it is a great shooter.

I do believe it trumps both of these in power, and doesn't have the belt or the funny shoulder of the Weatherby. Plus, I don't think many hunting guns have their accuracy limited by the inherent cartridge characteristics anyways.

I think you would be well served by either of these choices.

Lastly, the RUM kicks, plain and simple, the Rem 700 and scope weighs around ~9 lbs or so. 3000 fps with a 250-gr a-frame is pretty damn effective, though! Muzzle blast is also impressive to say the least.

I have shot both extensively, owning two .338's and one .340 Wby. The .340 is one of my real honeys and places 225 grain North Forks at 3100 fps in one hole if and when I do my part. I like speed and flatness out of my Elk rifle and the .340 does it in spades. The RUM I am sure could give a little more speed, but look at the additional 8-12 grains of powder and consider your shoulder. Good shooting.

phurley,
I'm disappointed in you. If ever there was a chance to promote your 358STA's here it is ... better than both

Jarrod,
Unless long-range is a major requirement ... the 338WinMag would be my choice.
Cheers...
Con

.338, plenty of horsepower and you can get it in a Mauser, model 70, or a tough Ruger stainless. It's a .30-06 on steroids.

Con ----- I didn't want to hijack JARROD's post by bringing up the STA, and I have great respect for the .340 Wby. When I wanted to graduate from Elk to Moose I got me first .338 and .340, and after hunting Elk extensively with them for years, stepped on up to the .358 STA's. I shoot a lot of the other big boomers including a .338 Lapua, .416 Rem and .416 Rigby. The why is that I am a died and wook Elk hunter with a few trips to Alaska, Alberta and Africa thrown in to make life interesting. My shooting buddy says I have a phobia for big bullets going fast. The largest thing he shoots is a 30-06. He is right of course, but I just started shooting the .243 and .25 WSSM's searching for the perfect grandson rifle. With six grandsons you can see my need. I don't care what it is, I shoot it and enjoy every minute. Happiness is reloading on a rainy and snowy night just to get to shoot when the sun comes back out. Good shooting

Like Jorge & MTM have alraedy said, the 338 is a great cartridge and the 340 is about 200 fps better. I have and shoot both and while it took a bit of tinkering my 340 out groups my 338 hands down. Some people don't handle the recoil of the 300 mags so they won't handle either the 338 or the 340. If you want to shoot a bit to get used to the recoil the 340 gets my vote.

338 win works great and I know its not factor in this but 338 was available at 7-11 in colorado and 340 was not sop I ditched the 340. add the shoulder and freebore problems it was not worth it for 200 fps. 338 win all the way

I think the 338 Win is one of the best cartridges on the planet for elk, moose and such. Penetration is excellent with 250 grain Noslers and bullet drop is on par with the other rifles I shoot. If I had only one rifle for the States it would be the 338. I don't see much advantage witht he 340. I think a 340 would be a fine cartridge though, I would prefer the 338.

quote:

Originally posted by Jarrod:
Of these 2 the 338 win and the 340wby NOT taking ammo availability into consideration etc.
Just choosing between the two cartidges which of these 2 would you choose?

Jarrod,

I'd be biased on this... I have shot both and was looking for a 340 in a Weatherby Accumark... I couldn't seem to find a 340 when I was ready to buy but did find a 338-378... It burns a BUNCH more powder perhaps but it is one sweet shooter...

The double radius shoulder isn't a real issue and the freebore is there to manage the pressure the Weatherby's are known for.. Doesn't seem to affect accuracy so that's not an issue either...

The Weatherby's do have a substantial recoil over the Win Mag so you might want to take that into consideration....

Ken....

I have never shot a 338 but I did own a Champlin arms 340 Weatherby which was a dream of a bolt action rifle... great wood, perfect balance and shot great. I took it on several african safaris and at the time shot 250 grain X bullets and the effect on game was devestating. The gun was then stolen. It was my favorite bolt action rifle. One has to load the 340 Weatherby with x bullets carefully as they are longer.

I'd pick the 338 Winchester magnum for all of the above mentioned reasons. The 338 Winchester in has to be one of the easiest calibres to make shoot well -don't know why that seems to be so, but that has been my experience.

If it is a long range hammer you desire, I'd give serious consideration to Remington's 338 Ultra mag. I believe it easily replaces the 340 and 338-378 Weatherbys, and it does so economically. What Remington was thinking when they dropped this number from the Sendero lineup, I'll never know.

quote:

Originally posted by buckshot:
I'd pick the 338 Winchester magnum for all of the above mentioned reasons. The 338 Winchester in has to be one of the easiest calibres to make shoot well -don't know why that seems to be so, but that has been my experience.

If it is a long range hammer you desire, I'd give serious consideration to Remington's 338 Ultra mag. I believe it easily replaces the 340 and 338-378 Weatherbys, and it does so economically. What Remington was thinking when they dropped this number from the Sendero lineup, I'll never know.

For target shooting the Sendero is good, for packing it is like carrying a log around.