This will be my first custom. I received my M1999 RHLA a couple weeks ago (wonderful action!), just finished hand polishing, Lilja barrel, and will fit with an Acrabond stock. My plan has always been to go with the 330 Dakota. I argue (to my self) that you get 100fps increased velocity, by the books, over the winnie but one of the real draws for me is that its something a little different. I've been doubting the importance of this last rationalization however and the wider availability of components for the 338 Win is starting to sway me the other way. $120 dies and 1.40/case for the Dakota are additional arguments for the old standard. So here are my questions:

1: Are the published velocities for the Dakota close to reality (3100 for a 210 NPT, 2800 for a 250) or can one expect more? I've worked with several 338 Win's and know what to expect.

2: If I get antsy later, is a rechamber to the Dakota straightforward?

3: Are there any other arguements for the Dakota that I'm not considering?

I'm taking the action up to Mr. D. Olsen next week and need to decide soon.

Thanks for any input you can provide.

Jay Kolbe

Jay, I've never owned or fired a .330 Dakota before, but from what I hear, this cartridge will indeed perform as advertised.

In this bore size, I stick with the .338 Win. Mag. It has all the power and trajectory I want (I go up a caliber if I need more punch, or smaller if I need a flatter trajectory) without too much recoil. I can get by with a 24" (or even 22" or 23") barrel in an 8 1/2 to 9 lb. rifle that's handy in and out of a scabbard and easy to carry up the mountain. The bigger .33s are not as user friendly for me or as practical, no matter how much extra velocity they offer.

One other point: The well-established reputation, popularity, and wide availability of the .338 Win.Mag. assures that this cartridge will be around long for a very long time, and ammo and brass will be easy to obtain, plus the resale will be better long-term. Proprietory cartridges from small manufacturers, in general, do not have a secure history, with Weatherby being a notable exception. And even then, ammo and brass remain much more expensive, and not as widely available.

Everything considered, I think you'd be happier with the .338 Win. Mag., especially if you're investing in a custom rifle from an established, well-known maker.

AD

I have a 330 Dakota M-76 with a 26" barrel. I have used a 250 grain Nosler Partiton load that chronographs 2870 fps in Africa to take several plains game. Recently, I developed a 225 grain load with the Northfork bullet, which chronographs 3050 fps. Both loads shoot sub-minute of angle. I like a 338 "anything" - they kill from any angle. Bottom line get what you want.

If you go .338 WM, you could later have the gun rechambered to .330 Dakota. You could not, however go the other way...

Going from the WM to Dakota, it would just involve rechambering (I don't know if the shank would have to be turned back, thus shortening the barrel, because I don't remember the length figures off the top of my head). It would also involve opening up the magazine and feed rails, to accomodate the larger diameter case. Also, the bolt face would have to be opened up, or the bolt changed altogether.

Going from the Dakota to the WM, you'd have to start with a new barrel, as the chamber would be too big (imagine sticking a 2-liter Coke bottle into a hole sized for a 3-liter bottle--the hole's too big, and you can't add metal). You would also have to make the magazine smaller, and tighten up the rails, which would be VERY difficult, and maybe impossible. Again, a new bolt would have to be built...so, short answer, you can't go from Dakota to WM, but you can go from WM to Dakota.

I know you don't want more advise, but maybe the .338 Ultra Mag would be another option? Dies and components would be more readily available, ammo cheaper than Dakota ammo, and you'd still have the performance edge. Just an idea.

All good advice above. Whatever you do just do just do it right and get all of the stuff needed for success.

I lean like Allen does for the path of least resistance and therefore the .338 WM. You could have the chamber made like John Ricks offered and have it fitted better to the real world of factory ammo and the actual belt and shoulder dimensions.

However you want something a little different and the 338 WM has never been a big hit anyway.

The thing that I am not sure of is if the Montana LA will take magnum length cartrides and feed them at RUM diameters. If it will then I would go with the .338 RUM. It's more of a standard than the Dakota and you can always load it down a little.

Not that I don't wish that a line of standard non belted magnums were not mainstream.

Look at it this way. Elmer Keith liked the 340 Weatherby and the .338 RUM may be even better.

[ 07-04-2003, 03:25: Message edited by: Savage99 ]

One factor you might want to consider: I'm not familiar with the magazine dimensions (width and depth) on the M1999, but in most actions, the fatter Dakota series will allow you one less cartridge in the magazine than with the standard belted magnum. Staring into the jaws of something you might shoot with a .338 caliber, one additional round in the magazine might come in very handy some day.

You can equal the .330 Dakota's velocity and the .338 Winchester's magazine capacity with a .338 wildcat built on the 8mm Remington case with no other modifications. A close friend of mine has one and it is a genuine performer. Brass is relatively cheap and plentiful and he reloads with ordinary .338 Win dies backed off of the shellholder the proper amount.

Actually, I don't think you can go wrong with a .338 caliber (as long as it doesn't have that gawdawful "venturi" shoulder and freebore of the Weatherby).

Thanks to all for the help. I think you are right as to the 338 to 330 conversion, the chamber drawings suggest that you may not even need to set back the quarter turn. I'm very interested with the comment about what John Ricks does to modify the chamber dimensions for the WM. I reload exclusively (factory availability of 338 ammo would only be an issue in a pinch), after the first firing, does the modified chamber help? I generally fireform, fast powder and bullet on the lands, for the first shot with a case and then neck size as long as that case chambers smoothly.

Tex--Your 338 loads seem to agree with, or are just a touch faster than listed loads. Do you feel like you've gone as far as you can with the round--ie. any pressure signs at the loads you listed in your rifle? I plan to go with a 24" barrel so things will slow a bit.

I am beginning to lean toward the winnie based on everyone's comments (I'd consider the RUM only if better brass was available.)

Any additional input would be helpful. Thanks again guys.
Jay

You want something different. If you aren't worried about the cost too much, from the little I've heard you can expect as much MORE performance from the Dakota factory loads as you can from the Winchester's.
Same as you can rechamber from WinMag to Dakota, you can go from Dakota to RUM if you wanted, but I bet that you won't rechamber from whatever you get anyway. Montana chambers for the Dakota, and I will bet at least $3 that they get as many rounds down as they do with the WinMag.
The initial cost of dies and brass is more, but after that, they are your's. You may by - what? - a total of 500 pieces in your's and your grandson's lifetime, and I bet another $3 that someone will make bras for these $$$ Dakotas everywhere for as long as the barrels will shoot.
(You can also form from Jeffery cases, which aren't going ANYWHERE!)
I think the Dakota line is an awesome idea, and it seems if more would use them the component prices would come down a bit.
Not only do you get more performance than the WinMag (either from faster bulelts or lower pressures/temperatures = less barrel wear) but you get something your buddies want to shoot!
Down sides are the inital layout for dies and brass, the chance of being without ammo out in Podunk Alaska, possibility of everyone running out and getting a 330 Dakota and spoiling your party.
Also, as far as rechambering goes, you could always go to the Imperial or Canadian magnum, the 3.65" Jeffery case, similar to RUM, and be even more differenter.
If this were my first custom gun, I'd chamber it for something special, knowing I could always pick up a used Ruger in 338 WM if I decided I needed one.

I had a 7Rem. mag rechambered to 7mm Dakota & have realized a solid 200fps increase over the 7rem. mag. I looked into the .330Dakota as well & it is a straight rechamber according to the folks @ Dakota. Unless factory ammo is a big deal to you, I would go .330Dakota. 200rds of brass will last you a life time of hunting. Some of my 7mmDakota rounds have been loaded 8 times & are still going strong. Accuracy should be a bit better due to the lack of a belt, case life as well. If you are building it from the ground up anyway, the only extra cost is the higher price for dies & brass.

Another vote here for the 330 Dakota. I had rifles in both calibers, and I sold the 338 win. mag. I guess that about says it all. The feeding, case life, etc. are all great benefits of the Dakota cartridges. There is no point in starting with a 338 Win. with the idea that you can rechamber it in the future. Just go ahead and start off with the Dakota and you will be glad you did. RL22 and magnum primers will be a good starting point for loads.

I have started annealing my 330 brass after 4-5 firings. This prolongs their life - shot some as many as 10 times. I always use once fired brass for hunting loads. The 250 grain Nosler Partition load is max in my rifle and the 225 grain maxed at about 3100 fps, however the group started to open up.

Savage99,

I can see why you would say the 338 Win. Mag. is not a big hit, especially if you live in the lower 48. But as Ray said, it's one of the most popular cartridges up here. Same with the 30-06, a cartridge that still takes brown bears year after year.

Around here .338's get traded in once the recoil sets in. As you Alaskans say there is nothing in the Northeast worthy of such a powerhouse.

Here is the thread by John Ricks.

www.serveroptions.com/cgi-bin/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=5;t=004190

[ 07-04-2003, 03:38: Message edited by: Savage99 ]

Savage99, you're not going to understand the value of the .338 Win. Mag. if you don't hunt game bigger than NE whitetails, pure and simple...

AD

If you want something bigger than the .338 Winnie , forget the Dakota . Go with the RUM or the .340 Weatherby . Brass and dies are much easier to come by for either one of those ......

[ 07-04-2003, 06:40: Message edited by: sdgunslinger ]

The 338 WM is one of the finest cartridges ever developed for BIG, big game, though is certainly not out of place for anything in Montana. Like Allen, I really see no need for more. Availability is world-wide. Perfromance is undisputed. The 338 WM is really a "bigger 30-06." That is, it pushes heavier bullets of similar BC/SD to similar velocities as those of the 30-06. The 210 Partition has generally been my choice as an all-arounder and is comparable in BC/SD and velocity to the 165 grainer in the 06. I've always gotten 2,950 fps with the 210 in my 22" bbl'd 338's and have found it decisive on elk.

BA

[ 07-04-2003, 09:21: Message edited by: Brad ]

As to my comment about Rem. brass. I know it will work. Had to use it in a 300 Ultra I briefly owned. But, even with brass fireformed with factory loads weights were all over the place, case stretch was far more pronounced than with Winchester or Norma, it looked pithy. It worked and is cheap but it really would bug me over time. This is to be my go-to gun for a long while--I'm building a system and I don't want that workaday junk as a part of that system. Anybody want a batch of 300 rum brass? I'll give it to you for postage.

The above is part of why the Dakota appeals to me. I'm well aware that it only gains me about 12 yards point-blank range and is delivering a whopping 200 additional ft/lbs at 300 yds and its way more expensive to load for. It's the image of the cartridge that sells it. Jeffery heritage (casehead as God intended it-not as bastardized by big green), Don Allen's projected image as the latter-day Howell or Rigby. Fancy working rifles. Sucked me right in. Belted rounds remind me of early 60's hotrods, I can't seem to convince my self that H&H (as opposed to Roy Weatherby) designed the parent case almost a century ago. I'm spending what's to me a great deal of money on this rifle and I'm going to be petty about the whole thing.

I'm probably going to go with the Dakota--I'd rather regret something I have done than regret something I havn't done. Midway now sells the brass discounted by the 20. Anyone else wants to chime in on how great the 330 Dakota is, thisud be a pretty good time.

I fully understand the value of the 338 WM and would have one if I did not have a battery that overlaps it. It's a very good round except for reloading and as pointed out that can be adjusted for.

As to it "catching on" I suppose one could know the exact number of sales of all aspects of the cartridge and then place it as popular or not. Around here some oldtimer had one in a Browning BAR. I don't think it was any advantage on New England game as all agree.

If a nice one came my way I would get it for the fun of it. But there is so much overlap in cartridges and calibers. Not long ago one could say that Partitions were only made in this and that caliber but now there are premium bullets almost everywhere.

As to the actual choice for the Montana in this topic I would go with the .338 RUM from what I know and like. Perhaps it's brass could be made from 404 Jeffrey's if so wanted.

A lot depends upon the actual dimensions of a specific belted chamber to discuss this one more time for a second. When one gets a factory belted chamber that's at and over the limits of the listed tolerances and then finds that the belts on the cases don't come close to matching as John Rick's points out you have a gun that's not really satisfactory for reloading. There are some really nice belted chambers out there however. I just got another .300 WM with an excellent chamber that the RCBS dies that I had seem custom made for. Thus a .338 WM as pointed out before me, as made by an informed gunsmith, is still the path of least resistance. I would enjoy tell the story of such a rifles custom chamber over a campfire.

"the 338 WM has never been a big hit anyway."

above quote by Savage 99............don't know where you've been all these years but the 338 Winchester is one of, if not the most succesful medium-bore American cartridge extant.......Hard to reload? I think not and quite accurate as well.......and very effective on what you point it at...
Anybody who knocks the 338 doesn't know what he's talking about.......

Oh calm down bob cash. The .338 WM is not very popular in most of this country. The fact that it was named the "Alaskan" seems appropiate and that's where it's a nice size but not the only one.

Here is a post with RCBS die sales www.huntandlodge.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=17&t=000233

[ 07-04-2003, 20:09: Message edited by: Savage99 ]

Like I said, the 338 Winchester is THE most popular American MEDIUM bore, as borne out by RCBS die sales........
What's your point?

Your right bob cash. I should have read the section I am in and seen that it says "from 27 to .366 rifles" as a definition of medium bore.

This means that I have only a dozen or so medium bore rifles all sighted in and ready to go and not one of them a .338 WM.

Thanks for pointing this out to me.

Let me get this straight....

1. Choice is between 338 Win and 330 Dakota
2. The action will take a 338 RUM, and several have suggested it
3. The owner is a handloader, wants something different, and hates Rem brass.

Now, 3 prominent ballistics labs use the 338 RUM for ALL testing of 338 bullets, due to inherent accuracy, low velocity variations, and range of powders that it shoots well. They all use Rem brass, and do not sort it by weight. Average 338 RUM brass is 276 grains, yet it only 0.24 inches longer than the 338 Win, complete with belt, at 231 grs.

The 338 RUM is a massively strong case, and very resilient. I have reloaded it a LOT and made my share of mistakes, twice driving bullets 200 fps faster than MAX, and the bolt handle lifted as if nothing was out of the ordinary. Neck sized cases grow less in length than the 338 WM. It is NOT a necked up 300 RUM, and is a much better case design than either the 300 or 7MM RUM, which are greatly overbore. Expansion ratio per inch of bbl is a dead ringer for the 300 Win Mag...not bad company.

The bottom line is that it may not be worth the concern over Rem brass to overlook this fine round.

I got mine on a lark, just to see what it would do and put it through the ringer with a critical, if not jaundiced, eye. I now believe it to be the finest medium bore cartridge ever produced...there is nothing it won't do better than a 338 Win, 330 Dakota, 340 Weatherby or 375 H&H. Yet it retains an uncanny ability to shoot accurately with reduced loads, and you give up nothing loading down to 338 Win velocities with IMR 4350...not even RECOIL...For example, 75 grs of 4350 drive a Nosler 250 partition 2775 fps, while the 338 Win needs 75 grs of R22 to do 2745 fps with the same bullet.

If you need to crank it up, dump in 91 grs of R25 and get 2975 to 3020 fps with the 250. Or, how about a 300 gr Hawk at 2720 fps?

Long range, flat trajectory? Virtually every powder from 4350 to IMR 7828 will drive the nosler 180 BT well over 3500 fps, and R25 will push the 225 gr Nosler partition to 3230 fps.

Nosler Manual 5th Edition has good data on all 3 of the rounds you are considering....take a look at them and see if the brass worries are worth it.

The man asked 3 simple questions:
1: Are the published velocities for the Dakota close to reality (3100 for a 210 NPT, 2800 for a 250) or can one expect more? I've worked with several 338 Win's and know what to expect.

2: If I get antsy later, is a rechamber to the Dakota straightforward?

3: Are there any other arguements for the Dakota that I'm not considering?

To answer #1, do you have a 330 Dakota? I do, and the velocities are true.To answer #2, you have to know something about chambers. He has recieved good input. To answer #3, you have to be familiar with the 330 Dakota. The man did not ask for your favorite .33Whatever. As usual, someone asks three very specific questions and the crap starts flying. I apologize if I sound a little cranky. But it happens EVERY TIME. Someone asks for an answer and they get two tons of opinion.How about answering the man's questions. And if you can't answer him without throwing in your favorite pitch, shut the heck up. By the way, go with the Dakota. It kills everything like lightning.
Sincerely,
Henry

Henry, apparently you missed this:

quote:

---

Originally posted by snowcat:
Any additional input would be helpful. Thanks again guys.
Jay

---

If you really hate the RUM brass that much Jay, well you've got to do what makes you happy. Sounds like you'd be happier with a Dakota.

I went through a similar decision process when I decided to rechamber my rifle. I was considering the Dakota or comming up with some other wildcat on my own. I really liked the idea of it but when I found my action was big enough to handle the RUM the thought of Custom/expensive dies, expensive/PITA forming of brass, etc made it a no-brainer to go with the RUM. That's what made me happy.

Not ONLY did he ask for "any additional help", but he said , "I'd consider the RUM only if better brass was available".Therefore all of the comments and advice on the 338 RUM are not only pertinent, but helpful.

Snowman is investing a fair amount of change in this rifle and it is up to him to consider or discard any advice or information based on his own beliefs and preferances.

[ 07-05-2003, 02:54: Message edited by: Sabot ]

Simple, the 338 Lapua blows 'em all away, why the hell not use it. They're done on M70's and M700's both, so I see no reason a MRC wouldn't work either. It's shorter than the Ultra but has more capacity. Should get at least 3000 fps with 250's and 2800 with 300's in it.

Don't like it, why not the Ultra? Brass??

I weighed 3 "different" lots of brass with water on the 300 Ultra and "ALL" were within .2gr of each other, yep, that's 2 tenths of a grain capacity ES. Case weight was over a 4gr spread, but not internal capacity... I was shocked to say the least.

Same MV as the 338WM with less pressure, or higher MV at the same pressure... you decide, just someting to consider first.

Good luck

SnowCat:

While I will put on my flak jacket and helmet for this, since there are some guys on here who think I am anti magnum anything:

Although I own a couple of 338 Mags and a 338/06, to each of us, something strikes us that has mystique to it. An appeal whether it is practical or not. ( Some guys really get nasty if your opinion conflicts with their little view of the world, and look at someone putting forth the logic that You use to justify your opinion, as a direct attack on their little corner of the planet).

No one NEEDS a bigger 338 than the Winchester if you are looking at efficiency. It declines a lot after the Winchester version. However, the DAKOTA is a classic and expensive designed rifle. It is a cut above and for the eclectic crowd. Yeah, dies and brass might be alot more expensive, but even an expensive die set is a cheap investment, in ratio to what you will spend on powder and bullets over the life of a rifle.
If you don't try to get every little last fps out of brass, it will last quite a while. Do you really need to say, have 500 rounds on hand?

Of all the Dakota lines, if I was going to buy one, my choice would be the 338 Dakota. No logic, just sense of balance and useful on what I hunt. It is just class. Some of these guys arguing that this magnum in the real world adds 10% over this round, makes a lot to do about nothing.

If I ever buy a 416, I will buy in reality what is probably the DOG of the 416 World, the 416 Rigby and will buy it in a real class rifle. But it has history going for it, tradition and in my book class. Class like the 375 H & H or the 300 H & H. They have just been around a long time and have been doing a good job. Even though newer rounds do even better, HOW much more better?
10%? 15 % Big deal.

So many people think that they need the biggest and highest horsepower round they can get to have an " efficient" hunting round. I read an article one time by Jack O'�onnor about the 257 Roberts.

He rated the 257 Roberts as an adequate Grizzly or Brown Bear rifle if the animal was not agitated, with a 120 grain Round Nose.

If one of us posted a thread to that effect, how many people do you think would be all over that telling the author what an idiot he was?

IMHO, if you want efficiency and cost effectiveness go with the 338 Win. If you want class, and something different from the other guys in the camp, do the 338 Dakota. ( the latter would impress me more if we were sharing a camp fire).

I have used the 338 Win. Magnum a lot in Africa and the USA, even shot a number of Cape Buffalo with it..I have never, not once, felt the need for more power in 338 bore, so why borrow the extra recoil and "blast"!!!..the bigger 338s do blast and kick considerable more..I can shoot them buy why, but they are just not needed....If I want more gun then then I will use my 375 or 416 or whatever...

A 338 with a 320 gr. Woodleigh at 2400 is an absolutly awsome elk/moose killer in the timber and a 210 Nosler at 3000 plus does a good number on anything that walks, talks, breathes or wobbles...It does it all without all the fuss.

Brent -

You won't believe this, but I was doing the same capacity testing as you on the 338 RUM...getting the same results. I think the weight variations are in the extractor ring cuts in front of the rim. Either that or a 1.4% variation in brass density. In any event, volume is verey consistent. weighing them is probably a waste of time.

PS - The 338 Lapua ctg length is 2.72 and the 338 RUM is 2.76...pretty close.

I own a 300 Dakota and like it a lot. I chambered for it for many of the same reasons you are discussing. One thing I did want to point out that doesn't seem to have been discussed much is the Dakota brass.

There has been a lot of "dogging" on the RUM brass, and a few people talking about about how many reloads you should get from the Dakota brass - which is true (if not loaded too hot). However, in my experience I don't know that you should necessarily assume the Dakota brass is any better than Remington stuff. Do a search for Dakota brass and read some of the posts. They've had Bell/Mast make some, Norma and last I heard was Jamison(sp) across the street from Dakota Arms. I haven't used the newest stuff and would be interested in feedback from those that have. The .330 Dakota stuff at Midway etc. may still be the Norma stuff, I don't know.

Just worth thinking about. Like I said, I like the cartridge line, I just wanted to point out the other side to the brass issue. If purely a hunting rifle, most of the brass issues are irrelevant since they will all produce minute-of-elk accuracy. However, I know that spending thousands and doing your own reloading you may want to punch some paper and have access to high-end components.

Snowcat

If Savage99 is not in favor of the .338 Win Mag then that is just one more point in it's favor. Never has a more misinformed individual handled a rifle and presented himself as such an expert.

It sounds like you have your heart and mind set on the Dakota. It is a fine round and will kill anything on North America as will the .338. If you can live with those costs associated with the round then go with it. I favor the .338 as Allen and Brad but you can not go wrong with either.

Johann,
300 gr. the 320's are for my 9.3x62...it was a typo.