My commercial FN mauser is ready for a barrel,
so I figured it's about time to barrel it up. I
already have a Redding 3 die set in 338-06 A.I.,
but no rifle so I figured to that route.

I believe a 1 in 10 twist is about standard?
Anyone care to recommend a barrel length and contour?

Thanks,

Don

On any medium bore I like a barrel that is 24 in. and ends up .650. I just measured mine it is 24 in. and .625 and is a fine old FN in .338-06. My rifle is plenty light enough with this profile and a Zeiss scope in Talley mounts.

I'd go for the 1-10 or 1-9 twist...either is fine.

I'd toss the AI dies and spend a small amount on standard dies as in the end you'll spend less and have a fine cartridge as good. The AI version offers little to nothing here.

I'm partial to light rifles with short barrels so I'd go 22" with a #2 contour.....625 muzzle diameter max.

However you do it your way as it's your money. A lot of folks like 26" barrels.....

I have a 338-06 FN/Shilen.The standard length mag box limits my powder choices.I can't get enough 4350 in the case to work with 225grs,too slow.With that action,if I was you,I would go the A.I. route,but not for any gains in velocity,just more powder choices.

Thanks guys.

Your suggestions were what I was mulling
over but couldn't decide? So I went somewhere in the middle.

.338-06 A.I.(more powder)

#3 contour, measured 22" from front of receiver.
(middle ground between 22" and 24") (#3 contour
is between the #2 and #4 recommendations)

Incorrect caliber stamps always make me nervous.
I've got 100 Lake City brass. Any reason
these won't work?

I went #3/22.5" on my .338-06 but would round up to 23" today. The LC brass will probably have less cap. negating your choice of AI. I would have to check, but I think RP has the greatest cap. Great cartridge in std. or AI version.

Don..I tried LC brass in my 338-06AI and even with sorted headstamps there was too much shot to shot variation in velocity when I used the LC brass..

I'm using Win and RP brass for mine now..

Zeeriverrat

Winchester has the most capacity,so that's my recommendation.

WW (Win) brass seems to be thinner and offer just a smige mor capacity. Never had any trouble forming it out to AI's

If you want capacity then go with Norma. It normally gives me about 3 grs more water capacity in a 280. It will almost always give me .005" head expansion at 65,000+/-. So I use it to set my pressure limits for my wildcats.

Nice 30-06 Lapua brass is hard to beat.

I'm having one done up just now (well, not an AI version) and I'm using a duplication of the standard model 70 sporter barrel (0.600" @ 24"). I'm going to have it cut at 58-59 cm (23-23.25").

I've had 338-06s with #3 contours (like Hart and Shilen) and both were plenty meaty for a little-'ol 338-06.

In fact, my Whelen has a #3 Shilen that is plenty heavy...

I'd think about getting a lighter barrel rather than a heavier one... JMO...

quote:

Originally posted by ramrod340:
If you want capacity then go with Norma. It normally gives me about 3 grs more water capacity in a 280. It will almost always give me .005" head expansion at 65,000+/-. So I use it to set my pressure limits for my wildcats.

Nice 30-06 Lapua brass is hard to beat.

OK. I guess according to Zee my Lake city idea
isn't going to pan out. I only chose that route
to avoid the headstamp issue.

If Norma brass is my best bet, then 338-06 A
Square brass from Weatherby will do. A little more expensive, but Norma brass always
was more costly.

9.3X62 - I'm using the Douglas #3 contour which
is lighter than the Shilen, I believe? I'm
not a featherweight freek, so 4 oz. max. isn't
going to affect me any one way or the other.

I did consider the 23 inch barrel recommendation, but an article in my files
written by Geoff Steer (Guns & Ammo, Dec. 1985) indicates he used a 22 5/8" long barrel on his rifle so as to fit a saddle scabbord.

Since I specified a barrel 22" from the front of the receiver for my FN, I suppose it will be pretty close to Geoff's 22 5/8" length.

Finn Aaagaard's Mark X 338-06 utilized a 22" barrel according to his article in American Rifleman of December 1986.

Both Geoff and Finn used heavier barrels, but
I don't expect that to matter much?

I load for a .338 round very close to but with slightly less capacity/velocity than the standard -06 version and have not found it lacking in real world power. The AI version to me sound like a good way to reach most published velocity without reaching real high preassure.

As for brass, I use reformed .270 Win brass for mine that way when you look at it you can tell from appearence that it isn't a 270. As far as capacity, I compared water capacity of a 338-06 and my wildcat and they were almost equal even though mine is slightly less case size. Then I noticed that the 338-06 brass was Federal as compared to the smaller being Winchester. In my own workings I've found Winchester and Rem to have the most room.

quote:

9.3X62 - I'm using the Douglas #3 contour which
is lighter than the Shilen, I believe?

Yes. That is correct. As it turns out, the #3 Hart and # Douglas are virtual photocopies of each other. Anywhere in the 22-24" is going to work out just fine. Good luck with your project.

Thanks, 9.3X62.

Same to you and your project!

Thinner brass for more capacity... Take a look at what they accomplish with thicker 308 millsurp brass. Seems like splitting hairs to go out of your way to get thinner brass, I certianly wouldnt worry about it.

Wstrnhuntr,Have you worked with a 338-06?If so what was your COL?

My Barrel is 22",for handling ease.

quote:

Originally posted by Wstrnhuntr:
Thinner brass for more capacity... Take a look at what they accomplish with thicker 308 millsurp brass. Seems like splitting hairs to go out of your way to get thinner brass, I certianly wouldnt worry about it.

I usually tend to agree with you about the
thickness of brass, but in this case I think
the emphesis was on consistancy from shot to shot. Milsurp can be lacking there?

My own concern was I simply dislike having
a 30-06, or even a 270 headstamp on my 338-06 ammo. Norma brass with the 338-06 A Square headstamp is a whole lot more tolerable.

Now I realize Norma brass is more expensive.
It will give me peace of mind. And to to me,
that will make it "cost effective". Rather
like buying a cadillac when a chevy will do the job.

quote:

Now I realize Norma brass is more expensive.

Yes but. Unlike a varmint round where you shoot the rifle 1000s of times. A normal hunting rifle 60-80 pieces will normally last you a lifetime. In the overall picture an extra $50 on brass is a small price to pay to make yourself comfortable.

If you are going to the trouble of an AI one of the reasons is to add capacity. Why not add the most you can.

Don, you can get the Norma from Huntington's for a decent price.
http://www.huntingtons.com/cases_norma.html
I bought 100 for down the road when the 06 brass wears out, plus you may need headstamped brass some day.

quote:

Originally posted by fredj338:
Don, you can get the Norma from Huntington's for a decent price.
http://www.huntingtons.com/cases_norma.html
I bought 100 for down the road when the 06 brass wears out, plus you may need headstamped brass some day.

Thanks, Fred.

Best price I've seen so far!

quote:

Originally posted by ramrod340:

quote:

Now I realize Norma brass is more expensive.

Yes but. Unlike a varmint round where you shoot the rifle 1000s of times. A normal hunting rifle 60-80 pieces will normally last you a lifetime. In the overall picture an extra $50 on brass is a small price to pay to make yourself comfortable.

If you are going to the trouble of an AI one of the reasons is to add capacity. Why not add the most you can.

AGREED!