Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Tell me about the .340 Weatherby

George you know of course that your 340 could be easily rebarreled to 375H&H with few or no other alterations(check feeding, etc).

Something close to a #4 contour would keep weight manageable(similar to a 375 Ruger African barrel would be great).

This may save you a few bucks, but not sure.In any event you would have the familiarity of the old rifle.

3 of my Elk hunting friends used to shoot them (one still does). They were all Weatherby Mark Vs with fancy wood --- beautiful rifles. 2 of the 3 guys couldn't shoot them well. Just too much recoil. The third guy has dropped back to 210 grain bullets and I suspect is loading them @ less than max.

Amazing how many owners use light bullets. Might as well shoot a .300 Mag and get better BC.

Hence my comments about getting them built right, the factory Mark V's will fit some folk but I don't think they'll fit the majority.

If they had them built right and the weight where it should be then they'd have rifles with decent weights and rigs that were very accurate and very shootable.

Dober

Here are some loads I worked up.

.340 Weatherby Magnum

Bullet Load Powder O. A. L. Velocity Energy Comments

175 gn Barnes X
93gn H 4831 3.635" 3138 Original Surplus
93gn WMR 3034
93gn H 4831 3241 Mulwex Manufactured (Hodgdon)
94gn H 4831 3281 Mulwex Manufactured (Hodgdon)
95gn H 4831 3.641" 3307 Mulwex Manufactured (Hodgdon)
92gn H 4350 3.603" 3364
85gn 760 3280
87gn 760 3310
85gn IMR 4350 3158
87gn IMR 4350 3290

185 gn Barnes TSX
83gn 760 3.665" 3150 Mild
84gn 760 3162
92gn Rel 22 3252
93gn Rel 22 3268
94gn Rel 22 3310 4501
95gn** Rel 22 3372 4672 .517" Best Accuracy (2 touching-seat deeper)
87gn H 4350 3161 4106 Mild
89gn H 4350 3252 4344

200gn Speer
93gn H 4831 3092
91gn Rel 19 3092
93gn Rel 22 3173 4472 MOA. Best load this bullet
63gn* AR 2206 2656 3134 Reduced Load
65gn* AR 2206 2722 Reduced Load

200 gn Barnes X
90gn Rel 22 3218 26" Tobler barrel/Rem 700 action

210 gn Partition
90gn Rel 19 3124 4552
91gn H 4831 3010 4256 Original Surplus
93gn H 4831 3.621" 3116 4529 .7 MOA
93gn WMR 3104 4494

225 gn Speer BT
91gn H 4831 2981 4441 Original Surplus

225 gn Hornady
90gn Rel 22 3088 4765 ,7 MOA 3 shots
92gn Rel 22 3101 4806
91gn H 4831 3012 4537 Original Surplus
93gn H 4831 3042 4624
89gn Rel 19 3030 4588 1.5 MOA
90gn Rel 19 3121 4868

225 gn Woodleigh
90gn WMR 3.553" 2925
91gn WMR 2981
92gn WMR 3.585" 3037 Warm Load
90gn Rel 22 3042 Good Load - Seat out 1/2 turn
93gn Rel 22 3238 5240

225 gn Barnes TSX
90gn Rel 22 3.679" 3049 4648
91gn Rel 22 3086 4681
92gn** Rel 22 3100 4809 .908" Best Accuracy
92gn Rel 25 2865 Mild
94gn Rel 25

225gn Barnes TTSX
91gn Rel 22 2924 Mild
94gn Rel 25 2904 Mild
95gn Rel 25
89gn H 4831sc 2720 Very Mild


230 gn Fail Safe
91gn WMR 3.674" 2965 4341
89gn Rel 22 2994
90gn Rel 22 3025 1.5 MOA

250 gn Hornady
86gn Rel 19 2861
87gn Rel 19 2903
88gn Rel 22 2917 4726
88gn H 4831 2839 Original Surplus
89gn H 4831 2870 4574 MOA 3 shots
88gn WMR 2910

250 gn Partition
88gn Rel 22 2921 4738
89gn H 4831 2895 4658 MOA Best Accuracy
89gn WMR 2927 4756

250 gn Swift Sirocco
88gn WMR 2908

250 gn Grand Slam
88gn Rel 22 2902 4678
88gn WMR 3.602" 2889 4634

250 gn Woodleigh
88gn WMR 3.553" 2852
89gn WMR 2925 .7 MOA load
90gn WMR 2941 4803
87gn** Rel 22 2907 4692 Best load this bullet
88gn Rel 22 3.659" 3005 5014

275 gn Speer
87gn H 4831 2742 4591 .7 MOA Load
86gn WMR 3.598" 2812 4829

300 gn Woodleigh
83gn** Rel 22 3.541" 2684 4800 Same POI as 185/225 TSX & 250 Wood

* Denotes reduced loads using Mulwex AR 2206 (Similar to H-4895) and Fed 210 Primers
** These 4 bullet/load combo's shoot to the same point of impact. (Interchangeable loads)

John

I cannot comment on the .340WBY. I don't own one. Never fired one. I understand that the recoil is very heavy. I have a .300 WBY, a .338-06, a .338 Win, and a .375 H&H. I never felt a need for the .340.

I agree to a large degree with Bob about the 375 vs the 340. If I wanted to use one of the bigger boys again I'd go 375 as I could build it 8 lbs or very close to that all up and have a relatively user friendly rig.

The recoil of the two is very different to me. And I see that when I shoot 375ish loads in my 375 Wby as well.

As I mature (ok get older dang it) I have less and less desire to hunt with a rifle that goes much over 8 1/4 lbs all up and ready to rock. Can I tote the heavier ones yet, yeah I can but I prefer not to.

I would like to have one bigger gun and the 375 H&H seems like a very good candidate.

One place I don't have much experience with the 375's is the 250's and speeds. I have used the combo with a 250 Sierra to take elk but I don't think the load was close to hitting 2900.

Guess what I'm getting at is a question for Bob and others is do you feel that most 23-24" 375's can get a 250-260 bullet to the 2900 range? I've always considered a bit over 2800 to be the max but I may well be a bit out of touch about it. (nice way of saving face and say that I have no friggin idea...grin)

I'd use a 6x36 Leo with dotz in it so whether it's 28 or 29 really doesn't matter just a curious question is all. And, from my use with the 235 TSX in my 375 Wby I've seen incredible accuracy so could go that way as well. But, the new 250 TTSX is really calling my name. But dang, that 260 Accu is one sexy beasty bullet and that's how I pick my bullets..

I likey Bob's idea of a 8 lb 375 for my uses here. Be a heck of a yote rifle and when I hit a elk at 400+ yards the darn thing wouldn't stand around wondering what on earth happened. It'd have some reaction and or hit the deck! (last fall I stuck two from an 06 into a bull @ a bit over 400 and it was like I hadn't even hit it, and yeah I know the next 10 or so may well react totally differently..grin)

Dober


(and the coup de grace is the 375/250 combo would match up well with my 270/150 combo-anyone still reading all this..grin)

To the first part as others have mentioned the Wby stocks don't work for everyone. Either they do work well for me and/or the stock material of my rifle (it's a Fibermark) helps dampen felt recoil. Either way in conjunction with the Decelerator pad I've never found my rifle's recoil that bad. (OTOH I'm kind of a big 230lb knuckle-dragger so I may just be too dumb to notice)

As to the .300 mag comparison the .340 can easily be pushing the 210gr TSX past 3100fps. This is going to be around 200fps faster than a .300 Win and the 200 TSX. My ballistics #'s have the .340 flatter out past 400yds which is all I'll ever need. Dropping down to the 180gr TSX in the .300 will still only get you to within 100fps of the .340 and trajectory is basically a wash out to 400 but you've given up frontal area and now a decent amount of bullet weight. I certainly don't see the .340 conceding much.

BUT...if one wanted to go to 225, 250 or even 275gr bullets the .340 gives you that option where the .300's clearly start losing ground. (where I start to really see your point is when people start shooting sub-200gr bullets out of .338 magnums. Not sure I get that part.)

Dober I have used that 250 gr load with 4064 and later, RL15 going back quite a few years....IIRC the barrels have been 3-4 pre64 factory tubes,M70 Classics,an A&M CM, and the present Krieger 410 SS.....all have been 24" or 25".

I have not had a problem hitting 2900 (2875-2940)from any of these rifles.I won't state the load because rifles vary, but case life has been fine,and I have had no problems of any kind.

For example,when we lost WW brass for the 375 I was a bit concerned that Remington would be different; last year,I bought some and worked up to those velocity levels with the 250.The cases are going on the 4th firing, and the primer pockets are just as tight as they were with the new brass....there is no undue swelling of the brass,and it rechambers easily in my rifle.

As to recoil,yeah, it is there, but like you say,not as heavy, fast, or sharp as the 340 or 375 AI with that weight range of bullets.I flop prone with this rifle all the time with no concerns about getting whacked around too hard...kind of a big "push"...

And "yes", the trajectory is very similar to a 270 with a 150 gr bullet.Zeroed 3" high at 100 yards, I am about 4-5" low at 300,and about 14" low at 400 yards.This means as you know, that a hold top of shoulders will catch an elk with a solid chest hit to that distance....you will still be holding on hair on Bullwinkle.

Have not run dots but bet it would work swell. Will they put dots in a 4X?

Yea, Bob, I know but as much as I like the H&H I was curious about the 375 Ruger plus I have slowly been trading my PFs for CRFs for my own "compare and contrast". Being a lefty I've spent the majority of my shooting years "push-feeding". I now have three CRFs but have yet to hear angelic choruses break out in song or to feel a tingling feeling go up my leg .

I may yet do what you suggest or even keep my 340-- I've become quite fond of it in spite of it's few shortcomings one of which is, like Dober says, a little more weight than I like anymore.

I have to admit a real liking for the 375s too-- there's just such balance there.

George: 375 Ruger is, of course, good as well and does the same things with a bit more velocity.

Anything else you want to know?

George,

Didn't Ross tell you, more or less, that the 338 Winny now occupies the niche of its bigger brother?

Being a huge 338 Winny fan, I'm about to tube one of my Sakos in 340 Roy.
If you had a big, fat Sako Finnbear action, what tube, bullets and why?

Thanks for the input!

[size:14pt][/size]Yes, he did, in a lengthy response to a letter from a reader-- me. . IIRC, with the intro of the Win Failsafe and then the Barnes X, one of which (Barnes X I think) he tested in Australia on feral donkeys, he felt the effectiveness of a cartridge went up "a click". He did then opine at one point that he felt the 338 Win had "closed the gap" with the .340 with these type premiums. He might have been the first to mention the new mono- bullets and the Failsafe lifting each cartridge class up to the effectiveness of the one above it.

'Course, the 340 becomes more wicked too but maybe there is a threshold beyond which "less is more" is true.

Rebarreling to a 340 I'd probably follow Dobers experience and try a Schneider no shorter than 24" but probably go 25" and ~ .65" at the crown. ROH, I'm not sure what contour that is. Bullet? Depends on your application of course. Are you going heavy, ultra long range with 300-gr high BC fast twist or a general hunting arm with say 210-gr TSXs which I can tell you will suffice for elk to 500 yds. I would stay away from the Wby "free bore" if you plan on hand loading everything just because I had it in another Wby chambered rifle and it gave me fits or at least I thought it did.

I would not have weight go over 8.5 lbs include scope and mounts because I'd use it for elk in the mountains and I'd try to get just under that. There are lots of bullets but the TSXs are perfect for the Roy-- 210 - 225 grains-- a good compromise of weight, SD, BC, velocity, weight retention (I e, a shoulder at 100 yds). And they are usually very accurate.

At that weight, I'd tap the receiver for 8x40s and even epoxy the bases in. Even then, I shot the rear base loose at about 500 rds

It's a very good cartridge.

.650" at the crown sounds like a number 4 contour, roughly what Remington uses on the Model 700.

Nope, Think I want to get one now, nothing wrong with any excuse for buying a new gun.

George,

Thanks for taking the time to have some input.

I have a pile of the Barnes stuff, 250 Partitions and even a decent stash of FailSafes. I generally use 225 or 250 Hornady's for everyday in my 338's.

I am looking at the long throat for the 300 target bullets just hve that option.

Who knows, it seems like a dandy cartridge, but I don't think I'll get a Sako down in that weight range!

Cause I hold a rifle very light, and tend to be a stock crawler for me mag na port works very well with rounds like this.

Dober

I Concur. The .340 Weatherby is very responsive to Magnaporting.

John

I bet it way overpenetrated on that 'yote.

It is my understanding that porting of most any kind (mag na/brake) becomes more efficacious as velocity increases, right? If that's the case is would make sense that the .340 would benefit from such things.

Having said that my .340 throws a pretty big party at the muzzle when fired as is so I'd have to imagine a brake, while it might make a substantial difference in recoil, would be nigh intolerable. I just don't dig brakes. I've never shot a Mag Na ported anything (though my .500 S&W seems to have a similar top muzzle vent but still no rifle) so I was wondering what the blast was like compared to a brake?