I've had three stainless 338's, a Ruger, Remington and Winchester... only the Remington was a genuine moa piece.

I'm picking up another stainless Win 70 if I can find one that has a receiver machined flat (vs. rounded and pointed south!).

Whatdya think?

Brad

PS... apparently D. Miller doesn't think so as Lee's 338 sounds as if it's producing great groups!

As long as things are assembled right then it will perform. The major cause of mechanical failure is improper assembly.

There is a tiny difference when the benchrest game is played but back to regular rifles and other variables are much bigger than the cartridge.

Of course a large sample of.338 Win's with featherweight bbl's will not group as well as old M-70's that have that barrel of almost target weight.

Ask on the benchrest forum. There are .338" bullets for long range target and I bet the .338 Win does well once you get past the headspacing problem.

The only cartridge that should be scrapped is the .22 Hornet. And that's only because I think most of them don't shoot because of the too thin necks. Solve that problem somehow and that one will shoot well also.

My personal 338, metal work by Belk and wood by me, barrel by Boots Obermyer and it will shoot under 1/2" with almost any load and all loads to the same POI...I use Lothar-Walther barrels these days and they ALL shoot fantastic.

------------------
Ray Atkinson

ray@atkinsonhunting.com
atkinsonhunting.com

As to it "recoiling all out of proportion to its killing power"... honestly, I don't understand that. With a big, soft recoil pad and well-proportioned stock, the recoil of a 338 isn't too bad... maybe you had a bent stock (monte carlo) and got beat-up?! I'd rather shoot a 338 Win Mag than a 300 Wby (for instance).

Regards,

Brad

It has been an outstanding hunting tool for me, and lucky enough to drop moose with one well placed shot. The recoil may surprise you if you don't hold the stock tightly against your shoulder, but other than that it does exactly what it was designed to do without much fanfare. I love this cartridge, and so a great number of Alaskans. It may well be the most popular cartridge up here, along the .30-06, and the .300WM.

I have never heard before that the .338WM is a hard cartridge to chamber for. It is a belted magnum like any other belted magnum, except that it has gained a reputation as a great elk cartridge. I am most impressed with mine, so much that if I buy another rifle it will have to be another .338WM.

[This message has been edited by Ray, Alaska (edited 04-02-2002).]

The 338 Win is a very popular round and increasing in popularity daily..It has fine bullets and most shoot well, at least that has been my experience...Bullets by Woodliegh, Nosler, GS Custom, Northfork, Hornady and Sierra all shoot fine in my personal gun and in all the 338 that I have built...Recoil is the same as my 300 H&H with 220 gr. bullets IMO......Penitration is about the best I've seen from any caliber and it kills as well as a 375 H&H IMO..It isn't overly fast and thats a big plus because all bullets perform with perfection in the 338...Mine shoots under 1/2" and shoots all loads that I have tried to POI horozontaly and from zero to 3" high vertically, now I don't think a gun can do any better than that...

Also I need to correct the above post in that the metal work was done by Jack Hogue, Milan Id. not Jack Belk as I stated above.

------------------
Ray Atkinson

ray@atkinsonhunting.com
atkinsonhunting.com

The .338 Win. Mag. is capable of superb accuracy, pure and simple, and any other slant on the subject is based on very limited, ignorant experience with the cartridge. Quite frankly, any rumor about inherently poor accuracy when it comes to the .338 is due to silly over-statement (or is it understatment?) by overrated riflemakers: Nothing more or less than all that.

I have a .338 Winchester by Mark Penrod that is a true tackdriver, as but one example. D'Arcy Echols recently built a .338 Win. that produced groups in the .400s", and I have yet another .338 Winchester on order (I must have owned twenty of them since 1980) with the very, very talented, honest, and trustworthy Mr. Echols right now. If it was a "dog" cartridge, it's had plenty of time to reveal that side of its nature to me thus far, but it hasn't - and not by a country mile!

More importantly, I know a great many dead-serious hunters who have used this cartridge extensively, and for much more than shooting whitetails from stands (from the comfort of an unfettered, heavily supported, de-conditioned backside) across soybean fields. After all, the animals that are typically hunted with the .338 aren't exactly the size of sage rats, or have I been missing something???????

One of my hunting/shooting partners has taken over 200 big game animals with this cartridge, and I know of another world-class hunter who has taken far more than that number with the .338 Winchester, and for over 35 years.

Cash talks, bullshit walks, as they say.............

AD

[This message has been edited by allen day (edited 04-03-2002).]

If everything is trued, squared, and verified how is X cartridge different than Y cartridge???

Mike

------------------
Victory through superior firepower!

The three shots were touching and I could cover them with a dime. I think the .338 win is a very accurate cartridge, tho any round can be chambered in a faulty rifle. Only the 30's can match it for bullet selection and I consider it the most versatile round on the planet.

Some folks are scared of the recoil, which is negligable. If you can shoot a light 3006 then you can shoot a .338 win. Maybe you need to load off the lands. My rifle gets bitchy if the bullets arent seated right............J

I've chambered many of them, and find them no more difficult to "chamber" than anything else.

My personal favorite 338 Mag has a Walther Barrel on it, and after 509 rounds, most everything will under an inch.

The only thing I really do differently on all Belted Cases, is chamber them very tight.

The gun will not close on a GO gauge, but will close on a cartridge.

Once you get them deep enough to close on the GO gauge, headspace is way to long.

I've not a ton lot of experience with the 338 but I do a considerable with the 340. I'm going on my 4th 340 tube and all have shot sub moa no problem. (all on a M70 or 700 action).

All the 340's that I've played with have shot this way and I've shot more than a few of them. (many of my buddies use em)

Anyway really, get a gun to shoot and get to doing what really matters! And that is

'GET TO THE HILL"

Dog

AD

------------------
Doug Humbarger
NRA Life member

"GET TO THE HILL"

Dog

I looked at over 50 last spring, this year is gonna be the best year yet!!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Craftsman:
Maybe Jarrett was talking about belted cases in general. The tolerance between the go and no go guage for a belted magnum is only .003 inch which requires a great deal more careful workmanship to chamber than the .005 average on non belted cases.

---

[This message has been edited by Sparticus (edited 04-07-2002).]

I LOVE the 338 Win Mag. I doubt there's a finer, all-purpose, A to Z HUNTING ROUND on the planet... ok Mark, I'm a bit biased towards angular shoulders vs. rounded ones!

My first 338 was a Ruger M77 which had a bore as rough as a corn-cob, though it grouped everyhting fairly reliably at around 1.75". Not being satisfied, I got a Rem 700 which grouped most anything at an inch or less! Disliking Model 700's I got a stainless Winchester 70 when they came out. It had a chamber that, I believe, was cut at the very end of the reamer's life-cycle. The chamber was so small, off-the-shelf RCBS dies that had worked on my other two rifles wouldn't size the brass small enough to feed reliably... RCBS had to cook-up a special die for me (at no charge... what a company!) that would size the brass small enough to feed! In retrospect, I should've sent the rifle back to USRAC to have them replace the barrel (at their expense!)

I too head-space off the shoulder when loading belted Mags.

Just wondered if I'd get an opinion on Jarrett's comment...

I think he's an unbelievable promoter of the "good-ole-boy school"... beyond that, I'm not so sure he's any better than hundreds of Model 700 smith's who can build straight, squared, trued, tuned rifles that shoot well...

Brad

I wasn't going to bring this up, but I do have a Jarrett .338 Win. Mag. in my collection that was built for me back in 1991. It was built with a 24" 1 in 10" twist Schneider barrel, a McMillan Griffin & Howe pattern stock, Leupold scope mounts (the rings were lapped), a blueprinted Remington 700 action, plus Pete Grisel steel bottom metal. The metal was finished in black Teflon.

This is an accurate rifle, but only with 225 gr. or 250 gr. Hornady bullets. With these bullets, I can count on five-shot 100 yard groups of 3/4" or so. This rifle simply won't shoot any other bullet or load well at all. Barrel fouling has always been minimal with this barrel, which is a plus.

Part of the problem with this rifle in my estimate is that this gun was set up as a switch-barrel. To achieve that capability, the recoil lug was welded to the receiver........! Now I'm not very bright in a lot of areas, but welding warps steel. Now that being so, why would anyone bother to carefully blueprint and action and install a very precisely-ground recoil lug, then crudely weld that lug in place.

I don't care for this rifle, and I never have, even though I've hunted with it quite a bit in years past.

AD

[This message has been edited by allen day (edited 04-08-2002).]

[This message has been edited by Brad (edited 04-08-2002).]

I too am a bit of a dolt and can only do "under the truck" grade welding... that doesn't sound like a credible solution for an "accurized" rifle... apparently Mauser, and by extension Winchester, had it correct all along... machine the lug into the reciever!

PS... saw your response over at HA... I'll mail my new Address... thank you for the kind offer!

PSS... Mark is in Billings today at the gunshow... I was going to go but daylight savings put a crimp in my plan and a two-hour drive didn't sound fun!

Brad

quote:

---

Originally posted by Brad:
Sparticus, read the post that started the thread... usually a "good" place to start, LOL!

[This message has been edited by Brad (edited 04-08-2002).]

---

Second paragraph.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Brad:
http://www.jarrettrifles.com/calibers.htm

Second paragraph.

---

I'm not interested.

Jarrett's comment regarding the 338 Win Mag on HIS web-site is actually quite a bit "stronger" than how I "presented" or "interpreted" what HE actually said... his statement struck (and still strikes) me as odd.

The guys who owns one(or more).338 Winchester rifles that are highly accurate will remain skeptical - and I'm skeptical.

I any event, I don't think that there's any one riflemaker who has a lock on the "accuracy market", nor do I think that some of these guys have all the answers when it comes to fine accuracy solutions or fine riflemaking. A few of these cowboys would like you to think that they've got it all figured out, but sorry to say, they do not, and I don't care how much press they receive.

Personally, I've owned too many superb .338s that were highly accurate (five shots under an inch or better by definition) to ever think that there's something inherently wrong with the cartridge. Target copies available by request.

AD

[This message has been edited by allen day (edited 04-09-2002).]

"GET TO THE HILL"

Dog

perhaps we could get after chucks as well,you know field test a 06 and a 7 ork ork ork. Yeah I know bad joke! Sorry I couldn't resist

HBH

quote:

---

Originally posted by Brad:
Sparticus... you seem intent on having a pissing contest over words.

I'm not interested.

Jarrett's comment regarding the 338 Win Mag on HIS web-site is actually quite a bit "stronger" than how I "presented" or "interpreted" what HE actually said... his statement struck (and still strikes) me as odd.

---