I've tried a .340 Weatherby but found that it only used more powder and had more recoil than a .338 Winchester, but ws no more effective. Before you think that I'm recoil sensitive, let me assure that I have, and can, shoot a .458 Win very accurately off a bench. The two best bullets I have ever used in the .338 Winchester are the 210 and 250 grain Nosler Partitions. For Elk, the 210 grain is the best thing since Frosted Flakes.

Did you really think those animals could tell the difference of 150 fps? and that is with the 250 grn slugs as you drop in bullet weight the difference diminishes to about a 100 fps with 210s.

quote:

Originally posted by gunmaker48:
I've tried a .340 Weatherby but found that it only used more powder and had more recoil than a .338 Winchester, but ws no more effective.

I think the larger capacity of the 340 affords another 150 yards of sure hit range and perhaps a tad bit more energy, but little else. Where the 338 Winchester really shines in my opinion is that it offers medium bore thump combined with 30-06 ballistics in a package that most shooters can easily handle. Anyway one slices it, that's a tall order.

Buckshot,

You may want to check the difference in drop with they typical 210 grn bullet which would be the long range choice for the 338.

With a 200 yard zero the difference in drop in inches between the Win and the Weatherby is .6 @ 300, 1.5 @ 400, and 3 inches @ 500. The difference in energy is 80 ft lbs at 500 yards which is less than 3%.

For all practical purposes, there really is no difference in range between the two cartridges.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike_Dettorre:
Buckshot,

You may want to check the difference in drop with they typical 210 grn bullet which would be the long range choice for the 338.

With a 200 yard zero the difference in drop in inches between the Win and the Weatherby is .6 @ 300, 1.5 @ 400, and 3 inches @ 500. The difference in energy is 80 ft lbs at 500 yards which is less than 3%.

For all practical purposes, there really is no difference in range between the two cartridges.

Although there will not be much difference with your base figures I think trajectory comparisons should be done where both calibres are set to the same height above point of aim at a distance.

I use those Accubond bullets in my 338 RUM.
I really like them. They can kill just about any thing hear in the USA

The 338-06 is no slouch either. If you want to burn alot of powder then go with the 338 RUM. The 338-06 is a very efficient caliber especially with the 210 grainers and should be all you need out to 300 yards or so.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike_Dettorre:
Buckshot,

You may want to check the difference in drop with they typical 210 grn bullet which would be the long range choice for the 338.

You are most probably correct. I admit I didn't do my homework and was willing to give the Weatherby round the benefit of doubt. I think enough of the 338 Winchester that I'm on my second one, a Sako AV

The 338-06 will get-er-done at the range most people are competent at shooting, roughly 300yds or so. If you handload you can get pretty close to the factory 338 win mag territory so what more is needed. If you need to shoot further than than......get closer.

In talking about long range in judging cartridges---Bob Hagel once told, as dis a guy named Page, that under hunting conditions, 300 yards IS long range. At that range and closer the .338 does everything that I could ever ask or expect it to do.
(I may miss one, but as a retired English teacher I do check spelling and grammer!!)

The .338WM in a 24" tube, will give 2800 fps-mv with 250 NPs and the .340 will give about 50 fps. more, from what I have seen. To me, the .338WM kicks moderately and the .340 kicks worse than my .375s do, YMMV, but, I will keep my five .338s and never buy a .340.

quote:

Although there will not be much difference with your base figures I think trajectory comparisons should be done where both calibres are set to the same height above point of aim at a distance.

Using the same Nosler ballistics chart - so the distances above the bore centerline are identical - and Nosler published velocities:

Cartridge/bullet...............300....400....500
.338WM - 210 @ 3000...-6.9...-20.4...-41.3
.340WBY - 210 @ 3200.-6.0...-17.5...-35.8

The .340 is flatter by 0.9, 2.9 and 5.5 inches, and delivers over 195 additional fpe at 500 yards with the same Nosler 210 Partition.


.

quote:

Originally posted by TX Nimrod:

quote:

Although there will not be much difference with your base figures I think trajectory comparisons should be done where both calibres are set to the same height above point of aim at a distance.

Using the same Nosler ballistics chart - so the distances above the bore centerline are identical - and Nosler published velocities:

Cartridge/bullet...............300....400....500
.338WM - 210 @ 3000...-6.9...-20.4...-41.3
.340WBY - 210 @ 3200.-6.0...-17.5...-35.8

The .340 is flatter by 0.9, 2.9 and 5.5 inches, and delivers over 195 additional fpe at 500 yards with the same Nosler 210 Partition.


.

Animals aren't impressed with FPE, they can't read..

Tx Nimrod,

Looks like I calcualte things a little differently.

When I look at comparing cartridges, I take all the top end velocities in the manual and then throw out the highest and the lowest and average the rest. For me that is a more realistic comparison.

When you do that with Nosler manual you only get a difference of 135 fps.

Plus in this case the Nosler data is a little misleading as it it for both 200 and 210 grn bullets so clearly Nosler would be somehow adjusting the actual velocities.

quote:

Originally posted by buckshot:

I think the larger capacity of the 340 affords another 150 yards of sure hit range

This would be 50 at most.

The only reason to buy a 340 Weatherby is if you want a Weatherby V rifle. Classic case of buying a caliber because of the rifle. Myself, I choose the caliber then research to find the best value in the rifle.

Sure hit range ?
I'm not sure such a thing exsits when the target is capable of moving.
I have seen very good shooters miss deer at 150 yards.
Sure hit range ? you could even miss with a club...tj3006

Sure hit range? No such thing. I once missed a whitetail buck at 40 yards, and then killed a mule deer 10 minutes later at a measured 327 yards. For me, there is no such thing as sure hit range.

The thing I like about the 338 win mag is that when you shoot an animal with it, it usually goes FLOP.

I have no problem getting 2930 FPS out of a 340 weatherby with a 250 gr nosler. If you hand load you can approach 2800 fps with a 338 (250 gr bullets).
Factory 338's are loaded pretty soft. Federal used to offer their HE loads for a 338 (250 NP) @ 2800 fps. This was a fantastic load for North America. It shot as advertised and was extremely accurate in my 338's. Then they discontinued the offering. I did get 12 boxes at discounted prices before that well went dry.
I would say that a 340 weatherby is a 100 yard stronger cartridge than a 338 (hand loaded) with the benefits being less guess work @ say 400 yards. A great tundra gun or long range elk rifle.
I love the 338 as well. It is shorter 24" barrel and for intents and purposes works as well as a 340 under 300 yards if loaded to its potential.
From a current factory perspective a 338 (250 gr ) @ 2660 fps is not the equivilent of a 340 wea (250 gr) @ 2930 fps.
You have to reload a 338 to get the best out of it, especially for longer range work.

EZ

quote:

Originally posted by eezridr:
From a current factory perspective a 338 (250 gr ) @ 2660 fps is not the equivilent of a 340 wea (250 gr) @ 2930 fps.
You have to reload a 338 to get the best out of it, especially for longer range work.

EZ

I have to agree with your statement. With all else equal, odds are in favor of the 340 simply because it has more capacity and factory fodder is loaded hot. I also believe a 200f/s difference is substantial, whereas 50 - 100f/s probably isn't.

That said, let me be clear: I am a 338 Winchester fan and am now on my second one. Few other cartridges offer such power without excessively punishing the shooter. That, I believe, is the reason why the 338 Winchester is a success (and the pre-64 model 70 didn't hurt either). If I were to choose a long range elk cartridge today, it would be in .338" and it would be the 338 Lapua in a tactical package.

quote:

Originally posted by DLS:
Sure hit range? No such thing.

C'mon boys, I'm not talking about a magic bullet here, rather I'm talking about the usable 3" or 4" trajectory flat shooting rifle calibres produce, you know, shooting down a pipe as it were. This is the exact characteristic that gives rifle calibres a point blank range of 270 to 325 yards without excessive holdover or high sight settings that cause mid range misses.

Eezrider,

Not sure what you are comparing here as it appears you are comparing your handloads which are about 100 fps over book max to factory loads which are generally designed to be safe in any rifle.

If you go to the Nolser manual and look at Max for 250 grn slugs the velocities for the two cartridges and trhow out the high and the low and run calculate the average the difference is 68 fps.

Looking at a broader set of data would seem to be a more acccurate comparison than the result in 1 rifle and 1 factory load.

Mike,

There are listed hand loads up to about 2760-2780 fps listed in the manuels. I will try and get a reference when I get back to my home office. I believe I said approach 2800 FPS.
The old Federal HE's did chrono @ 2800 and were extremely accurate. I about stopped handloading for that cartridge when those were available.
The 340 Wea factory (250 gr) loads do chrono 2900 fps and change out of my rifle.
I currently use Rl 19 in my 338.
You will see quite a bit of difference in manuals. I approach all of them cautiously in my loading endeavors.

EZ

Mike,

I just logged onto the Nosler web site and keyed in the 338 Win Mag load data on line.

1) 250 gr NP; 71.5 gr H4831 ; 2780 FPS

2) 250 gr NP; 75 gr RL 22 ; 2745 FPS.

These are listed as max loads and I have never tried these loads or chrono'd them so I cannot verify the results.

EZ

I've owned both in identical rifles. I found the double radius shoulder and freebore a detriment to accuracy in the .340; it also exhibited appreciably more recoil than the .338 (remember, these are IDENTICAL rifles). Velocity gains were minimal, on the order of 75 to 100 fps (chronographed on an Oehler M35).

There is nothing that the .340 can do that the .338 cannot, particularly if you have a magazine long enough to allow the bullets to be seated properly forward. I made a one-shot kill on a springbok (a rather small target) in Namibia with the .338 at about 350 meters, or nearly 400 yards, so its long range capabilities are not lacking. I sold the .340 and shoot the .338 as my go-to rifle for large game.

I have a friend with a custom .338/8mm RM. It is a better design than the .340 and in his 24" barrel it will do an honest 175 fps more than my .338. For whatever reason, it seems to have less recoil than the .340 I owned, although the weights and stocks of the rifles were similar. If I wanted more power than a .338 (which I see no need for), I would use the .338/8mm wildcat with its "normal" shoulder and lack of excessive freebore.

I have a 340 wby and my wife has a 338 win mag. The wby mkV action comes with a 26" bbl where as most 338 wins have a 24" bbl. That being said, I have a 350 fps advantage over her 338 using 225gr TSX bullets over RL22.

The recoil is significantly different between the two. But the 340wby is a definite step up from the 338 win, but probably isn't necessary.

The 338-06 is probably the best bang for the buck out there, and I would recommend it over any 300 mag.

John

When the time came for me to buy a rifle to use for hunting out west for elk hunting, I spent alot of time resurching which caliber. One of the most important things I stress to anyone who asks my advise on the same, is for them to be honest with themselves in terms of how well they handel recoil. As i planed on using this rifle mostly for elk, I also wanted a rifle that could shoot lighter bullets like Nosler BTs well for deer.

I once had a conversation with a guy I met in Colorado who had killed more elk than i will most likely ever see while hunting, and i asked him which caliber should I buy. He replied "if you ain't recoil shy, buy a 338wm, as with elk you just can not hit em to hard". He then told me of (and I have no reason to doubt him)having to shoot a big 6x6 bull in the left hind quarter and the slug travelled all the way through the elks ham, guts, lungs, out the off shoulder, and dropped the bull after it took a few steps. While he and his friend were skinning and deboning the elk, his friend noticed a large bllod spatter on a near by sapling. They both thought could this be where the bullet ended up, and shure enough they dug it out after cutting the sappling into above the entrance hole. The bullet was a 225grn Partition.

I grew up shooting 12ga 2.75" 1oz and 1.25oz magnun foster slugs and then lator sabot slugs weighing from 1.125oz to .75oz, and let me tell you they both recoil harder than any 338 I ever shot, so recoil for me was a non-factor.

After months of resurch I bought a M700 SST/SYN in 338wm. One only need read my UN to get a idea how much I love the 338wm.
It is by far the most accurate of the 338s out there, recoils less than a 300wm but not that much more than a 30-06 W/200-220grn to be unmanagable. In short you simply can not name a better all around cartridge for use on animals from mice to moose than the 338wm. I have been a relaoder as long as I have been hunting, so the 338wm is especially well suited for reloading and really comes into its own as one of the most vecitile catridges out there as I get excellent accuracy with everything from 180 grain Nosler BTs, 210 and 225 grain Partitions, and it also shoots 225grn Accubonds, 225 Interbonds and 200 and 225 Interloks far more accurtaely than ever will be needed for hunting.

The only draw back I have with my 338wm, is I dont get to hunt with it as often as I would like to. And when i do get to hunt with it i dont get to shoot it much, as of all the elk I have killed with it, I only had to shoot them 1x ea. I did learn you simply can not use too tough a bullet, as my friend who also shoots a 338wm shot a nice big bull at about 60yrds broad side through both lungs, and the bullet did not exit out the oposite side. Made a he!! of a mess out of everything it went through though.

I shot my elk using first 225 partitions, then the last ones with a 225 Accubond, and they both worked superbly. I used the Accubonds as they shot sub-MOA out of my gun, but I can not say for sure if they kill any better.

For elk , moose, or even bears you can not beat the 338wm, you just can not, equal it but not beat it. If I were going to Alaska to hunt Griz or Brwonies I would not hesitate to take my 338wm loaded with 250grn A-Frames.

I will admit if I was a AK resident and a dedicated grizly or brown bear hunter and I was going to buy a rifle spacificly for use in hunting them I would most likely buy a M77 in .375H&H or 416 Rigby if I could AFFORD TO do so, but if i could not, I would feel fine with my 338wm and 250-275grn A-Frames.

IMHO unless you move on up to calibers like the 338-378 Weatherby, you will not see a significant enough increase in performance to justify doing so, and calibers like the 338-378 Weatherby will subject the shooter to levels of recoil one must experience first hand to be belived. You are talking charges of around 110-118 grains of powder VS 75grns in the 338wm. If you are looking for or actually need that much KO power, you would still be better served with a rifle in .375H&H or 416 Rigby.

Gentlemen,

I have owned a 340 Wea since 1982 and multiple 338's since the early 90's. I cannot tell alot of difference in recoil. They both kick pretty good. I use full house 250 gr loads in both.
Using best handloads a 340 will best a 338 about 150 FPS (2930 as compared to 2780 FPS with 250 gr bullets) at the muzzle. That is about an extra 75 yards in range.
As far as accuracy, probably has to do more with your barrell. My Wea wears a 26" match grade Krieger cut barrel. It is extremely accurate! I have mulitple 338's. 2 mod 70's and a custom Kimber of Oregon (which is one of my two favorite rifles).
There has been significant research and data done on the 338 with regard to reloading. It is a very popular round and probably out sells the Wea 20-1.
If as much experimenting was done with the 340, you might find you could squeeze out another 25-30 FPS at the muzzle. I can without "signs of pressure" but I have no data to support the pressure levels and I think a 250 @ 2930 is probably enough. I like the 338's because of the shorter 24" barrel, I have a stainless Mod 70 that I restocked and trimmed the 26" barrel to 24". I only lost 10FPS over the chrono. A change I was glad I made.
I love both these cartridges. The 340 was one of my first projects out of college and acccompanied many times to Alaska and have so much confidence in it, it is probably my go to rifle but the benefits are marginal. It will spit out a 210 Nosler at 3200 FPS for a long range rifle but I feel it is best with the 250's.
All my 338 rifles shoot great. One of them is going with me on my first trip to Africa as my plains game rifle to accompany my Mod 70; 416 Remington.

EZ

Back in 1995, I bought a Winchester Model 70 Stainless equipped with a BOSS muzzle brake. At the time Barnes was offering their 210 XBT bullets, so I bought 150 and moly-coated them (no particular reason for the moly-coat). Seating these bullets 0.040" from contact with the rifling and a max load of IMR4350 powder produced 1.5 inch 3-shot groups at 200 meters and a muzzle velocity of 2950 fps.

With this load, I have taken a black bear, a black wildebeest, a nyala, a springbok, a blesbok, a zebra and a red hartbeest. All anmals, except the springbok, were 1-shot kills, with the critter not taking more than a few steps when hit. The 2 "toughest" animals of the bunch, the zebra and black wildebeest fell in their tracks.

Would any of these animals died any quicker deaths with a .340 Weatherby, a ,338 Lapua or .338 Edge? I seriously doubt it. By the way, I misjudged a very strong cross-wind when I shot the poor springbok and the bullet hit too far back, unzipping him. He went about 200 meters with his guts hanging and dragging, until I could finish him off.

Bottom line, if you like a .338 Win. Mag., a 338 Lapua or a .338 Bronto-slayer, go for it. In the end you still have to place the bullet where it counts.

Just my $0.02 worth.

quote:

Originally posted by TX Nimrod:

quote:

Although there will not be much difference with your base figures I think trajectory comparisons should be done where both calibres are set to the same height above point of aim at a distance.

Using the same Nosler ballistics chart - so the distances above the bore centerline are identical - and Nosler published velocities:

Cartridge/bullet...............300....400....500
.338WM - 210 @ 3000...-6.9...-20.4...-41.3
.340WBY - 210 @ 3200.-6.0...-17.5...-35.8

The .340 is flatter by 0.9, 2.9 and 5.5 inches, and delivers over 195 additional fpe at 500 yards with the same Nosler 210 Partition.


.

Is that doing them so they are the same point of impact as a given range....say both 2" high at 100 yards or whatever.

With regard to longer range shooting and not having to adjust for hold over. The 340 is quite a bit ahead of a 338 Win Mag (WITH FACTORY FODDER). Most current 250 gr 338 loadings are at 2660 FPS advertised.
The Weatherby is 2900 and change. That is about 250 FPS. Typically these projectiles slow down about 200 FPS / 100 yards so It might be said the 340 is a 100 yard stronger cartridge.

Before every 338 fan jumps up and down. The 338 is now a hand loaders project to get the most out of it and you can approach 2800 FPS with a 250 gr slug in a 24" barrel.
Federal made great 338 loading in the HE line both with 250 NP's and 225 TB Bear claws at 2800 and 2900 FPS respectively.
They shot as advertised and were both extremely accurate in all 3 of my 338's. I was appauled when they discontinued the offerings. I called and asked them why they quit and they said they did not sell enough of the ammo (????)
When the 340 was introduced the 338 advertised velocity with a 250 gr was 2660 FPS and the Weatherby data was about 2950 FPS so the published data showed a significant velocity advantage to the 340.
It was not until many years later that with tinkering and using modern powders that the gap closed between the two.

If I could buy a new gun today (338 caliber) it would probably be to find a mod 70 stainless classic in 338, clean up the action and trigger, cut the barrel to 24", put a Mcmillan Sako hunter palm swell type stock on it with a good 2.5 X 8 Leupold and add a Talon finish.
But I have already done that!

EZ

If one would want the best out of the 338 Win mag, I would recommend bullets in the 210-225 gr range.

Wind offset is a factor of time as much as it is of Ballistic coefficient. A 210 running at 3000 fps +/- will reach 300 yds in under 1/3 of a second. A 250 gr at 2500 fps is about 20% longer to target.

Energy Retention is still good for any 4 legged critter in NA with the 225's out to a touch under 400 yds.

Nothing wrong with the 250's though. But with the heavier bullets the 340 Wby shines with more than ample case capacity.

John

I would like to add comparing the 340 Wea to the 338 WM is not a whole lot unlike comparing the 458 Lott to the 458 Win Mag.

There was a significant difference in performance 10 years ago but the gap has narrowed with modern powder that have help the smaller cartridges gain ground.

There may not be over 100-150 FPS difference in the performance of these comparisons today.

quote:

Originally posted by eezridr:
I would like to add comparing the 340 Wea to the 338 WM is not a whole lot unlike comparing the 458 Lott to the 458 Win Mag.

Nobody says the 338 winmag has anything wrong with it, that is the crux of the win vs lott argument. I question the 150 fps difference, it hasn't held up in my testing, after all any powder used in the 338 win can be used in the 340 wby. But much breath has been wasted on the two. There is a difference, is it necessary not really.

John

My info with regard to the 340 Wea is loading 7828 and or RL-25 to achieve approx 2930 FPS. factory ammo in my gun shoots about the same. I do have a custom Krieger barrel on my 340.
My 338 2780 FPS loadings have been with Rl-19 and 22.
All these over a Oehler 35.
The Federal 338 HE did clock 2800 FPS avg (250 Noslers and 2900 (225 bear claws). I could not reach those levels by loading on my own plus the accuracy was outstanding.

Current experimentation with AA 2230 in a 458 Win Mag and 500 Hor yielded 2150-2200 FPS. These loads were 4 grains under Hornady suggest max.
I believe most folks run their lotts up to 2300 FPS (500 gr). I have heard you can go up to 2400 FPS and others say no. If you have a chrono, there should be little argument.
My custom rifle barrels typically shoot 75-100FPS faster than their prior factory units.

EZ

Sounds okay, I run RL22 in anything that will take it (have 8lb jugs of the stuff). In the 338 win, I am pushing close to 2800 with 225 gr. The 340 pushing the same bullet and powder is close to 3200 fps. The 340 is using a 26"bbl though. Still splitting hairs.

2150 in the 458 is about right with 2230. Wouldn't push it much higher. The lot can get almost 2400, but 2300 is much easier on the shoulder.

John

I think this thread illistrates an important point.
For the vast majority of hunters the .338 is all the cartridge on wood ever need.
Now those few and i mean few hunters that have any buisness shooting game at 500 yards the .338 weatherby might be worth the investment.
There aint 1 guy in a 100 with the skill and experience to take game at 500 yards.
I shoot as well or better than most but I would pass anything less than a perfect shot at 400.
I mean brodside good rest and and no wind at all.
If you are a guy who shoots a few 100 shots a year stick to 300 yards.
If you live in the country or work at a rifle range or somthing , and shoot a ton then take your long range shot.
...tj3006

I hope I'm not hijacking the thread when I ask this, but it is related to what's being discussed.

So really the main difference between the .338 Winchester Mag and the .340 Weatherby is a matter of range. Right?

seems to me that what it boils down to is that it is everyone's choice, and the animals do not know the difference between the .22 cal. or the .505 gibbs.

quote:

Originally posted by someoldguy:
I hope I'm not hijacking the thread when I ask this, but it is related to what's being discussed.

So really the main difference between the .338 Winchester Mag and the .340 Weatherby is a matter of range. Right?

No....

quote:

Originally posted by someoldguy:
I hope I'm not hijacking the thread when I ask this, but it is related to what's being discussed.

So really the main difference between the .338 Winchester Mag and the .340 Weatherby is a matter of range. Right?



No....

OK.
No real concern of mine, just academic curiosity as I no longer own a .338 WM.