Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Elk Hunting The 300 Wby Mag for elk- is there anything better?

Steigers didn't think the 338 was any big deal. He felt the 35's of similar velocity levels were more gun,a step up.

He liked the 300 Weatherby if you were going to shoot a 30 caliber magnum.

But he figured if you were going to get a medium bore for elk hunting(he DID believe in them), stop screwing around and get a 375 AI.He use the 250 BBC at 3150 and the 275 at 2950.

The last I spoke with him before he died, Bill told me if he were doing it today he would get a 375 RUM as a medium bore.

Of course he also had a rifle built on an Enfield action modified by Tom Burgess and chambered for the 45/404AI.

I bet that thing would curl your hair when it went off.

Amen. If it had to be a weatherby I'd take my 340 over the 300 wby. I'd take a 338 over the 340 though. I'd take a 300 win over the weatherby but would take a 30-06 ove the 300 win. So that leaves us with the 338 win or a 30-06, but I might take my 270 instead of the 30-06. I am glad I thats off my chest now!

The originals were called "Alaskans" for a reason.. Hint...

This is the first time I'm not agreeing with Bob. Sorry Bob. I love my 338 win mag. It is light accurate and the 338 win mag was made for elk and big critters. The originals were called "Alaskans" for a reason.. Hint...

Yep, so they could sell more of 'em.....

Used to see the .338 Winchester in the hands of more hunters here in Montana, but most of the guys know who used to hunt with it a lot (including me) don't much anymore.

I suspect the introduction of such a wide variety of premium big game bullets has something to do with it. The .338 was introduced primarily due to pressure from Elmer Keith and like-minded hunters, back when there was only one readily available premium, the Nosler Partition. Elmer and the others were fixated on heavy, high-sectional density bullets at moderate velocities, because those are what had worked for them on larger game animals when only cup-and-cores were available. He HATED the fact that Winchester brought out a 200-grain load at 3000 fps, when the 250- and 300-grain loads were perfect.

But newer bullets in smaller calibers penetrate at least as well, and often deeper, and the .338 Winchester doesn't have enough powder room or magazine length for the long, high-BC spitzers preferred by long-range hunters who might prefer .338 bullets.

I might still choose a .338 for Alaskan moose and African eland, as I did back when using the cartridge a lot, but the truth is smaller caliber cartridges work fine on both with bullets--which applies even more to elk, because they're not as large as moose and eland.

The .338 is a fine round, but it's a by-product of inferior bullets. Today we have better bullets that make smaller cartridges perform bigger. In fact, this has pretty much been the overall trend in hunting rifles ever since somebody cut spiral grooves in a musket barrel.

Used to see the .338 Winchester in the hands of more hunters here in Montana, but most of the guys know who used to hunt with it a lot (including me) don't much anymore.

I suspect the introduction of such a wide variety of premium big game bullets has something to do with it. The .338 was introduced primarily due to pressure from Elmer Keith and like-minded hunters, back when there was only one readily available premium, the Nosler Partition. Elmer and the others were fixated on heavy, high-sectional density bullets at moderate velocities, because those are what had worked for them on larger game animals when only cup-and-cores were available. He HATED the fact that Winchester brought out a 200-grain load at 3000 fps, when the 250- and 300-grain loads were perfect.

But newer bullets in smaller calibers penetrate at least as well, and often deeper, and the .338 Winchester doesn't have enough powder room or magazine length for the long, high-BC spitzers preferred by long-range hunters who might prefer .338 bullets.

I might still choose a .338 for Alaskan moose and African eland, as I did back when using the cartridge a lot, but the truth is smaller caliber cartridges work fine on both with bullets--which applies even more to elk, because they're not as large as moose and eland.

The .338 is a fine round, but it's a by-product of inferior bullets. Today we have better bullets that make smaller cartridges perform bigger. In fact, this has pretty much been the overall trend in hunting rifles ever since somebody cut spiral grooves in a musket barrel.

Holy chit small fry, It sounds pretty fu cked up the way you put it, but that's exactly the way I feel. Except for the 300 win over the 300 WBY. That's just pure horsechit... .. All the rest of what you said is true though...

I have both the .300 Wea. and .300 win. Yeats ago when I made my Win. I was thinking of a Wea.. But at that time the gunshop I dealt with build most of their Wea. WITHOUT any freebore.. My pal bought a beautiful custom Wea. from them, and when I read up on the loading data, with out the freebore, it was the twin of a .300 Win.. I have both and the Wea beats the Win. by about 100 fps.. Both are great elk rifles, but I have shot the Win much longer and much more.
When I first hunted elk, the Win. was just new in my collection.. I had hunted most of the 10 years before, with a custom .30-06.. I had great faith in it.. But on my first season, I had a good shot at a cow elk.. I put the crosshairs of the scope on her shoulder and squeezed... I missed.. To this day I do not know how I missed that shot.
A few days later I put a 165 gr. from my .300 right though the lungs of a huge cow.. Later that fall I shot a nice mule with the .300, from that point on, I had great faith in the .300.. My 06's have pretty much gathered dust since then..
Never owned a .308 except to take the barrel of to make something else.. I do have a nice little bolt action 300 Savage. But never took it elk hunting.. Went through a couple .338's but they lacked the flat shooting qualities of the .300's.. In the area I hunted elk at the time, that was important.. It was also in the prerange finder days.. I have since added a .340 to my safe.. I like it better than the .338, but I seldom shoot it much anymore.
It didn't kill any better than my .300..
Now with elk everywhere, and the meat not so important to our budget, I could use the 06, but when the chips are down, I usually take one of the .300's. They have never failed, and we have a great many memories..

What? Is this thing still going?

What? Is this thing still going?

...... C'mon, it isn't important like when I have to school some Philistine about putting ice in sipping whisk(e)y.

GHC do some people really do that?