I have a Winchester Model 70 Classic stainless in .30-06 that I am thinking about re-barreling. The question is, what cartridge? The rifle will be my "mountain rifle" for elk and possibly mule deer, i.e. something that is short and relatively lightweight for easy carry (I'm thinking 22" barrel). I already have a .340 Wby. on a Montana M1999, but its 26" heavy barrel was a pain to lug up and down mountains last fall. Here are the options I am considering:

8 X 68
.338-06
9.3 X 62
9.3 X 64 Brenneke

I am leaning towards either the 8 X 68 or 9 X 64; any suggestions?

I've got a 338/06 on a G33/40 and it is a fantastic round.

I also run a 340 in a heavier rifle and the lil G33 is getting the call more and more.

I know which way I would go.

Mark D

Second that vote for 338/06. Its a good cartridge and you can use the .338 diameter bullets from your .340 and .30-06 cases from your existing equipment to make your loads.

Is fire-forming .338-06 cases from .30-06 cases as easy as it seems? Is there any concern at all with necks stretching thing, or is it good to go?

I'd have to go with the 9.3x62. Excellent big game caliber with great history. It would be something a little different and thats always fun.

quote:

Originally posted by myoderru03:
Is fire-forming .338-06 cases from .30-06 cases as easy as it seems? Is there any concern at all with necks stretching thing, or is it good to go?

Yes, it's that easy. A tapered expander in the sizing die easily handles expanding the neck. I never even used to worry about fire forming new brass back when I had a .338-06. No special concern about necks stretching.

Of the cartridge choices you mentioned, my choice would be either the .338-06 or the 9.3x62. I favor the 9.3x62.

My two cents...
-Bob F.

338-06 for elk......easy one.

If you're having some obvious problems with the rifle that you feel are barrel related a rebarrel is probably in order. But I’ll tell you that 8MM or 9.3 drastically reduce the sheer numbers of bullets that you can use in the rifle today as a 30-06. On the North American continent 30-06 is going to handle it. The only reason I feel there is for going bigger is flatter trajectory or more energy when hunting game that hunts back or an area that has animals that will hunt you. I’d just make it a better 06.

Make mine a .338-06 as well. Brass is easily made from .30-06 or Whelen. You can buy headstamped brass from Norma, pricey but no effort involved. I would think a 22"#2 about right. Throw on a Leup. 2x-7x compact & be right at 8#.

I just did the same thing and my quandry was whether to do the 9.3x62 or 9.3x64. Danny Peterson tells me both feed with 100% reliability from standard pre-64 actions. After looking at ballistics with the 286 grain bullets and brass and ammo avaliability I went with the 62mm version. That leaves the 64 mm version (or a 358 Norma) for the next project.

Maybe think about chopping some weight from the .340 . Seems a shame to have a rifle in a near ideal elk cartrdige , and then maybe never get any use out of it because it's too heavy to pack in the hills.......

sdgunslinger,
I like the .340 the way it is; the long heavy barrel gives it a nice balance and it is a tackdriver. I can shoot 4" groups at 400 yards from the prone position (NOT from the bench) with factory 250 gr partitions. I will probably end up using it on the bulk of my future elk hunts, especially where horses are involved for at least the initial pack in. However, for this project, I am looking for something different because I will be packing in this fall solely on foot, with no horses. Last year after packing in 10 miles on a self-guided early season high country mule deer hunt in Colorado, the .340 was starting to feel real heavy. The long-barrel just doesn't make it all that "handy" for true back-pack hunting.

Thanks to all for your advice. Despite all the advice to the contrary, I think I am going to go with the 9.3 X 64. The prospect of being able to launch a 250 gr bullets at 2750-2800 fps, 286 grainer at 2600+, and 300 grainers at 2530 (i.e. = .375 H&H) out of a 22" barrel is pretty darn intriquing. I guess I am too much of a ballistics-whore to think practically and go with the .338-06. Besides, the 9.3 x 64 was invented circa 1910, actually pre-dating the .375 H&H. Now I just need to find some RWS brass...

I would go for the 9.3x62 for no other reason than I like metric cartridges. My second choice would be the 338-06. Have you considered the 35 Whelen? I just sent a M70 Classic SA (7-08) to Pac-Nor to be rebarreled for 358 Win. Lou

quote:

Originally posted by myoderru03:
I have a Winchester Model 70 Classic stainless in .30-06 that I am thinking about re-barreling. The question is, what cartridge? The rifle will be my "mountain rifle" for elk and possibly mule deer, i.e. something that is short and relatively lightweight for easy carry (I'm thinking 22" barrel). I already have a .340 Wby. on a Montana M1999, but its 26" heavy barrel was a pain to lug up and down mountains last fall. Here are the options I am considering:

8 X 68
.338-06
9.3 X 62
9.3 X 64 Brenneke

I am leaning towards either the 8 X 68 or 9 X 64; any suggestions?

Ahhh, I'd think twice about a short "lightweight" (say 7.5-7.75lb) 9.3x64. Recoil will be brutal...

If you want a nice light 22" barreled number to carry up and down hills for game up to elk, the obvious choice is the 338-06. Get as light a contour as possible on a nice light action and you could come in at 7.5-7.75ish lbs (scoped) 338-06, with tolerable recoil.

Alternatively, you could scrouge up one of those Weatherby ultralights in 338-06 and be done with it...

Plus you'll have do a bit of work to get that 9.3x64 to fit in the box and the bolt face will need to be opened.

I used to run a 9.3x63 and kind of liked it but after running a 338/06 in a nice light rifle I would not go 9.3x64 for sure.

If you really want/need to go 9.3 then I would go with the 62.

Just a thought or two.

Good luck to ya

Mark D

I would strongly suggest from my personal experience a 338-06.

I have a 700 action, with McMillan mountain rifle stock, Pac-Nor 22 inch barrel, topped with a Leupold 2.5x8.

I am getting 2850fps with Barnes 210gr TSX. (max)
Right around 2725 with Horn 200gr SP and 210gr Nos Part. (mild)

I am using Varget and Rel 15 for powders and winchester brass that is just necked up with one pass. You can get properly headstamped brass through Huntington's, but it is expensive.

I have killed three elk with the 338-06 and have been impressed. Does a great job. I have also shot a few deer with the cartridge. It will do anything the magnums will do out to 300-350 yards as long as I do my part. The magnums will shoot faster, flatter and hit harder.

I also own a Remington 7600 pump rebored and chambered for the 338-06. Leupold 1.75-6 heavy duplex scope and back up peep sight.

I also have another one being built on an sporterized 03A3 action. The original 06 barrel was shot out on it. The stock is a very nice piece of functional walnut but not extravagant. Got rid of all the white spacers and added a Remington R3 recoil pad. I put on a Pac-Nor 23.5" fluted barrel. Heavier than my Mountain rifle, but has really nice balance. Plan on wringing out some 180gr Accubonds. I should be able to come pretty close to 3000fps. A Leupold 3.5-10 is going on top.

As you can tell I am a pretty big 338-06 fan. But it is not the be all end all.

My second choice would be the 9.3x62.

That's my two cents. nothing more and nothing less. You will be very pleased if you build one.

SD-a pump in a OKH, what a cool rifle! That has always been on my wish list.

If you don't mind me asking how much Varg and R15 are you pushing that 210 TX with to get 2850?

I am having trouble with H4350 and the 210 TX as it fills the case too much and wants to push the slug back out.

I've used R15 with the 180 NBT and its shot great.

Thanks for your time

Mark D

Mark, my working load in th e.338-06 is 54gr RL15 in Norma brass under the 210grNP. I get a bit over 2750fps from my 22 1/2"bbl. I tried the old XBT but accuracy was just not there. H4350 is becoming my powder of choice for 210gr & 250gr bullet, accuracy is slightly better than RL15 in my rifle, but you do have to use a drop tube to get 60gr+ in.

I'm going off the top of my head, but I think I'm using 56.5-57gr Varget with 210 TSX. As per usual start lower and work up.

When I first got the 338-06 I had read an article somewhere that says Rel 15 is the perfect powder for the cartridge. So I started using Rel 15 for the NP and Hornady and think it's in that same range. I would have to check the details at home.

I went with Varget with the TSX's because of the temperature tolerance and I found a place I can buy it cheaper and in 8lb containers compared to the Reloder series.

The pump is really fun to play around with. I acually had it built for my Dad. He's shot a Remington 760 Gamemaster 270 Win for over 40 years. But he wanted something a little bigger for elk.

I admit that I wanted something different to play with. I actually got the idea from the Big Bore Cartridges book.

SD and Fred-many thanks.

Guess I'll have to get a drop tube. H4350 works so well in my rifle I kind of hate to change.

But, I may need to. I'll do a bit more work with the 210's and R15 and Varg to see where it goes.

Have either of you fellas used the 200 Horn much for game? It shoots so well in my OKH and also in my 338 WSM that I would kind of like to use it.

Have some concerns on elk though.

Thx

Mark D

Pardone me for interrupting, but I am sitting here trying to figure out what is wrong with the 30-06 for Elk and Mule Deer?

quote:

what is wrong with the 30-06 for Elk and Mule Deer?

22WRF,
Absolutely nothing. But I felt the 338 caliber gave me an edge on bigger critters. I am a huge 270 fan, but felt it lacking on the elk that my Dad and I have shot. With all else being equal a bigger diameter bullet will be better IMO. I looked very hard at the 35 Whelen, the 338-06 and even the 8mm-06. I felt that the 338-06 had a very slight advantage "on paper only" over the Whelen. The 8mm didn't have the bullet selection. All three outperform the 30-06 with heavier bullets.

Mark D.
I have used the 210gr NP and the Hornady 200gr on deer. I felt that the NP was too much bullet. The Hornady works great. I wouldn't hesitate to use the Hornady on elk if that's all I had.

Now this is my opinion, but I feel the 225gr is the ideal weight bullet for the 338 caliber. So I feel that a lower weight premium bullet in the 210gr range is equal to a 225gr cup and jacket bullet.

My philosophy for bullet selection is all based on SD for regular cup and jacket bullets.
a SD of 240-250 for deer.
a SD of approx 280 big cervids/antelope
a SD of 300 for dangerous game

With premium bullets allowing you to drop down in bullet weight. I have been especially impressed with the Barnes TSX's.

For me I can't imagine taking a perfectly good 30/06 and "try " to one up it. A 30/06 with 180 grain bullets is plain deadly on all sizes of game to a distance further than most of us can reliably shoot. I wouldn't change a thing but I'm kinda partial to my 30/06. My 30/06 is a lightweight 20" barrel M70 that shoots under an inch at 100 yards with 180 grain bullets of several brands this gun has taken Deer, Elk, Antelope, Mule Deer, Bighorn Sheep, Mountain Goat and I can't remember what else for me from 30 yards to 425 yards ( 425 was a bull elk, one shot kill ). What are these others going to do "better" for you?
And at what expense?
There is always a trade off, yes bigger bullet and a lot more arc to the trajectory making a 250-300 yard shot suddenly look impossible with the bigger slower bores. For me this would be unacceptable because of the terrain I typically hunt, maybe if you are limiting yourself to where and what type of hunting you'll do then the bigger slower slugs may be just what you need.
Good Luck

Snellstron-nothing wrong with a 06 at all, especially IMO one set up the way you do.

A 180 was pretty much always my choice in the 06 and for the most part it ran at 2700 fps. You can get a bit more, but my tube was 21" and that was about it without really getting after it.

Now as for your comments about drop (I assume you meant out of a 338/06) here is a thing or two to consider.

Out of my 338/06 the 180's run at 2900. That is plenty of smoke and plenty of speed.

The 200's run right in and around 2800. I've yet to of got a 06 to run a 200 at much over 2600.

And lastly the big boys, the 250's run at 2600. I would give a serious bet that a lot of 180 factory fodder does not run a whole lot more than that.

Just a thought or two.

Mark D

I would be interested in trading bolts with you, I have a 300win mag m700ss, I want to rebarrel to 30'06. Shoot me a pm if you are interested.

Isn't the 8x68s a magnum bolt face?

I think the 30-06 is great all around gun. Jack of all trades, master of none theory.
If I had to pick one rifle for all big game hunting, It would be a very hard decision between the 30-06 and 338-06. If you factor in commercial availability the 30-06 wins.

I think smaller calibers are better for deer (270 happens to be my favorite). Larger calibers are better for elk (338-06 happens to be my choice).

But the original question was:

quote:

8 X 68
.338-06
9.3 X 62
9.3 X 64 Brenneke

Already has a 340 Weatherby so 338 caliber bullets are already on the reloading bench.

And rebarreling to a 30-06 would not be a mistake either. But the bottom line, a 338 caliber vs a 308 caliber bullet is better on elk. IMO

338/06 vote here also....

Mine is a model 70 with a 24 inch barrel and a 2 x7 Leupold on it, with a Boyd's Laminate stock...

My Leupold Scope is the Shot gun version with the heavy cross hairs.. which helps in thick brush, yet is great for open country on game the size of elk...6 or 7 power give me all I need for 300 yds open country shooting...

Cheers
seafire