bsa: 1) I'm probably not as good a shot as some of you guys, so recoil certainly is a factor with me.
Funny, I have found the 300 magnums to be more unpleasant to shoot than the .338 and .375. In fact, my first center fire, a 700 ADL in 06 felt worse than my 338 and 375.
I've had rifles that were mirror images of each other and found the same thing as you. 300 definitely kicked more. Guys here don't get it though. The 300 win mag has a capacity of 93.8 grains H2O and the 338 win mag 86gr. H2O capacity. I've shot same same rifles side by side and thought the 300 had a sharper kick while the 338 and 375 had more of a push. Call me crazy too... I also see more benefit in having a good 338 over a 300 win mag: 338 with the right bullets will shoot almost as flat as a 300, but the 338 can fling heavier bullets for bigger animals. I just see it as a more versatile cartridge. In the hands of a capable hunter, either will work but I'd feel more confident with a big heavy bullet from the 338 than a lesser one from a 300 magnum. I know on elk, I've seen the 338 put them down quicker than any 300 magnum. However, every elk is different. Maybe the elk I shot with my 338 were just big puzzies, because they just didn't make it any more than 1 step. Nothing else I've used has effected them like that. Not even the 9.3x62mm with 286gr. partitions...
... Get ready for the chit storm to come down on us by the guys that have not had a chance to compare similar rifles side by side...
