Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters 340 whtby?

How much felt recoil and is this a good one gun for every thing from deer to grizz round? Also cost of ammo and what other caliber would you compare it to? Have a oppertunity to get one and was woundering if its worth the effort dont want a safe queen.

I don't recall the recoil figures(which vary with the rifle weight) but my Weatherby accumark has a healthy kick to it.
Ammo. is expensive, but reloading is the way to go with these guys, IMO.
It is comparible to the 338 Remington Ultra Magnum and to a lesser degree, the 338 Winchester magnum.

A lot of people claim the .340 kicks a LOT more than the .338, and of course it would have to kick somewhat more. It does kick enough to put some people off, but I would think that anybody who's shot a .300 Winchester Magnum much could learn to handle it.

Also, recoil increases with bullet weight. There is no real reason to se 250's on most big game, and the lighter ones do kick less--and shooter flatter as well.

JB

I like mine but felt recoil is a very subjective thing depending on a lot of factors. However, in ft-lbs, for a rifle in the 8.5-9 lb range, it's in the 40s-50s IIRC but that's not the whole story because it's also "a quite fast kick" which in my mind and with my rifles makes it feel more than a 375 H&H. But with a good stock, Decelerator pad, little or no drop at the comb it's certainly tolerable.

Recoil aside, it is flat shooting often compared with a 7mmRM for instance but with the energy (ft-lbs) of a 375 at the target, quite a combination. It's not needed for certain in the lower 48 but for elk where a light mountain rifle is not needed it is quite spectacular...if the bullet goes in the right place.

Gdv

Don't expect to get a handwritten invitation to Elmer Keith's Museum anytime soon.

Unless you're really advocating the 300-grain bullets that used to be commonly available for the 338 bore.


.

Yeah, poor old Elmer. He never did graduate from the 1925 school of bullet design.

JB

Now, now, Elmer Keith continued to experiment throughout his active life.

Not many folks in any field totally change their life model after they're in their sixties and this includes the highest educated PhDs too.

Elmer Keith would have been in his sixties in the 1960s, way before any of today's super and premium bullets were even dreamed of.

Can't really hold that against him.

But his recipe of tough 250+ grain bullets from a 338 still kills elk.


.

I wrote an article about 20 years back called The Cartridge Debate, Who won? comparing Elmer Keith with Roy Weatherby as they wared just as much as the popularized JO'C Vs EK.

In the end I concluded that they had graduated to the same thought, as Weatherby was into bigger cases and higher velocities and Elmer finshed his career with the .338/378 KT.

The only real difference between these two men and their hypotheses was the bullet weight they chose. Roy dropped the .338/378 prototype which he experimented with way before anyone else and stayed with the 300 case necked up forming the .340 and Elmer shortened the .338/378 case, as the powders of the day were not up to a full length case.

Elmer used a 275 grain Speer bullet in order to get the penetration he desired whereas Weatherby used a lighter weight Partition. In the .300 Weatherby, he used the 150 Parition which is light by common opinion, though I never knew what weight he chose in the .338 bore.

As to the viability of the .340 Weatherby for deer to grizzly, absolutely. I had my MArk V magnaported for an article I wrote once on muzzle breaks and it appears to reduce the recoil of this round very substantially, certainly down to a .300 Winchester level with very little muzzle rise.

As a proposition for a handloader, it is among the very best cartridges for the travelling hunter. 185's - 210's for deer to elk and 225's for anything larger. The 250's, 275's and 300's are there, but not needed as there are no animals that cannot be killed with a 225 grainer, that would be killed with a few extra grains in the same caliber. There are very few animals in this world that cannot be taken with a .340 Weatherby at any range in which you can direct a bullet.

AGW

I've been a 340 looney since the late 80's, I belive I am on my 4th tube.

I believe that the round is not for all but it also is not that tough for people to get used to either. IMO it is a round that if one is to shoot it well then they should plan to get it out and shoot it fairly often, as it do have a bit of bump to it.

For the most part those that have shot and used mine have always remarked about how user friendly they are compared to what they thought was coming.

Barrel weight and contour is IMO very important. If you have a tube that mics between .65 at the mzl to .7 at the mzl it is gonna be very nice to work with.

Now if you stick a tube on it that is less than .65 it may well be a bit caustic!

I will not have a brake on a rifle as I believe that brakes are for cars.

I do however like magnaporting as I hold a rifle very lightly and as such the mzl jump can get me between the running lights from time to time. And no doubt about it the maganaport process will help with this!

My present one is on an old M70 with a Schneider tube on it, in a piece of African Walnut via Brown.

As bullets goes there is a pile of very good bullets for it. Presently I am using the 200 NBT and the 210 TSX.

I would add that the lion share of the game I've taken with the 340 has been with the 250's. That is because my rigs tend to shoot the heavier 33 bullets a fair bit better.

For the lighter slugs the 180's Accu's, NBT's and the 200's Horns, NBT's and the 210 TSX's have all been extremely accurate.

I can't imagine a thing in this world that I wouldn't take on with the 210 TSX.

I'd say get after it, the world of big 33's is a fun one to me.

Good luck to ya

Dober

Have been using a 340 Wby for close to thirty years.

Occasionally using Bob Hagel's load for the 210 Nosler Partition on pronghorn antelope, but mostly loading the 250 Nosler Partition.

Haven't lost any game with it.

Why buy a large .338 caliber rifle and not shoot 250's?

In my view the combo was made for each other. I don't think the
caliber is fully utilized by going light.

What if any benefit is there by dropping bullet weight in the
.338 caliber? Outside of less recoil.

I have one in a standard MkV synthetic, a lightweight rifle by no means. Mine does have a muzzle brake, but it now has a threaded collar where the brake used to be...I shot it once with just earplugs in. It feels a bit sharper than the .375 off the bench when both are using the heavier bullets, at least it does to me. A 210gr XLC, have not tried the TSX in this one yet, at 3200+ would probably kill most anything unfortunate enough to step in front of it.

This may not be important to you, but ammo does appear to be a bit costly. I don't have any Weatherby calibers, so take this with a grain of salt. I just see the prices in Cabelas. Perhaps those that use the round a lot have some advice here.

Of course, handloading does go a long way toward solving this problem, but I still think that Weatherby cases will cost substantially more than say, the comparable .338 WM. And if you shoot a lot, the .340 Weatherby may give you a stabbing pain in the wallet.

Cost of components didn't matter to me when I only had two rifles. Now that I have more calibers to load for, I notice it a lot more.

Good luck with your decision!

Bob-I've been a 340 user for quite some time now, I've seen a fair array and quite a # of game taken with it. Bottom line is I've to date found no difference in killing power from one end of bullet weight to the others.

I did graviate to the 250's mainly cause they were so darn easy to get to perk. In the days gone past the only stout lightweight was the 210 NPT and while it killed very well I just couldn't quite get the accuracy I could with the 225's and 250's.

So, being the accuracy nut that I am I went to the 250's.

In this day and age and with the bullets that we have I have no problemo using the 210 TSX on anything that I would use the 250's on and with a bit less recoil. So I guess I could also look at it in the light of besides more recoil what is to be gained by going with the 250's over the 210's.

And honestly I am still a heavy for cal man, I just don't feel it is in the real world all that big of deal.

I use the 340 and other big guns (anything above something off a 06 case) cause I want to not cause I feel a need to.

I see your point about the lighter bullets and against the big 30's but to me most all of this is just ballistic gack 101.

Take a good bullet, put it in a good place and good things happen.

The more I am around this killing stuff the less I worry about what round and or bullet I use.

Dober

SU35

Because you don't need it? I've taken elk with the 250-gr Nosler and I'd use a 250 Nos or TSX or the 275-gr A-frame for brown bear but "down here" in the lower 48 there is no benefit that I can see and the down side is more recoil. I've shot from a hip to the opposite shoulder on a departing elk with the 225-gr Nos Part.

Right now my 340 has a .72" diameter Shilen (I don't know what contour) barrel as measured just in back of the front site band, balances at the front of the magazine well with a lttle weight forward and weighs 8 lb 9 oz. going out of the door. I wouldn't go heavier nor lighter. Mine has a Brown Prec classic stock on its third paint job with a 2.5x8 Leup in QR rngs. Nothing magic but it works and I have confidence in it and like it. The only thing I don't like as I get older is the weight; even 8.5 lbs seems a lot by the end of the day in the mountains.

To reiterate you need to handload unless you like spending $50 per box with premium bullets.

Gdv

Interesting thread this is...
In my shooting with my 340wby, I have never used anything lighter than 225grains.
That 210TSX or partition does sound tempting.
If memory serves, it was Hagel that had such good luck with 210gr partitions out of his 340's on elk??

340boy,
After trying about everything out there my 340 is finally perking at well under an 1" with the 210 TSX over R22 and Fed 215s at 3100+ fps. Previously, it's best loads were in the 1.25" area. Of all the premiums, the TSXs are doing the best but then 1.5" at 100yds. is plenty for the work it does.

Gdv

I fully agree with you guys. I've hammered mule deer and elk with the 338 with one shot kills. Hardly any meat damage to either and dead before they hit the ground. Believe it or not I
saw the life leave their eyes through the scope when I hit them.
180s on deer and 250's on elk. So I know how the 338's can kill.

Just seems that if we pick a particular caliber of rifle we
want would want to take advantage of the best possible bullet weight to fully utilize it.

Have the new bullets made this caliber obsolete?

If I just go 210's I might as well just shoot 30 cal. 200's.
All I'm doing is duplicating a 300 with a 338. Not a bad thing if that's your only rifle.

And now I'm hearing on this site that 200's are not even
necessary any longer that even lighter than 180's are all that's needed.
140 to 165 class of bullets for the largest of non dangerous game. (I'm still hesitant to send a light bullet up the six of an elk though and that's one of the main reasons I use a 338 in the timber.)

If this be the case, why waste our time and money on larger calibers and just go 30/165, or 28/140 or 160, ect, ect.

ramble over...

SU-you ask have the new bullets made this cal obsolete? I don't think anymore so than any other cal out there.

When I was using a 300 I did like the 200's but in all honesty aside from Greenhorn I don't know of anyone out there in looney land using them.

Your last point about the 30/165 (except I would use a 180)etc is still very spot on.

I've long said that once we get past a 270/280/.06 everything else is just wants and not needs (for the most part)

Dober

It has been reported that a whitetail deer has been taken with a 14-221 Walker using the lighter weight 13 grain bullets instead of the heavy-for-caliber 15-grainers.

If we're going to use lightweight bullets we should stick with the 243 Winchester or 223 Remington.

We should honor our forefathers.

Tradition, man, tradition !



Next thing you know ya'll will be advocating 200-grain bullets in a 44 Special and a 185 JHP in the 45 ACP.


.