Several years ago, I read an article by John Barsness or John Haviland about light bullets in the 338. Many loads were listed. Now when I have a prairie elk hunt in September and want to try the 185gr TSX, I can't find the article. As I recall, RL 19 was a very good powder for the light bullets in the 338.

Unfortunately, I can't find RL19 in the Barnes manual #3 for this weight.

Does anyone remember this article?

I have RL19 on hand and H414 as well. Was hoping to use RL19 though.

We have 8,59 mm/.338" bullets available here in GE, down to 9,7 g/150 gr.
All of them are included in Quickload.

If you need any help please PM me.

Based upon articles by Mule Deer and others concerning R15 I recently bought some to try out. My thoughts were mainly to use as light practice loads. This week I tried both 200 gr. Hornadys and 210 gr. Nosler Ptn's. Both styles shot very well and recoil was noticeably reduced.
I referred to the pet loads given in the Nosler manual and found them to be pretty much right on.

I would choose H 4350 in the .338.

FYI, that load using the 185 TSX in the .338 is Connie Brooks standard load in the .338. I have already reported that she took 62 head of African game with as many shots. It works well.

I also like that bullet in the .340. Steps hard on the toes of the .300's when loaded to 3400fps and has the ability to use 300 grain bullets which challenges the .375.

AGW

I use IMR4550 & 200 Gr Nosler BT loads right out of their book. I load to 2900F/s and the recoil is not much more than a 30-06.

Never shot an elk... but if you use Accubonds I bet it will work out

I had OK results with slower powders and lighter bullets (200 and under) in the .338, but eventually tried RL15 and essentially matched the velocities of the slower powders but obtained better accuracy. It is definitely worth a try.

JB

Mule Deer, You're saying the go to powder is RL15? Forget RL19 and H414? Only use them if the RL15 doesn't work?

I am saying Reloder 15 should definitely be considered. In my experience it does just as well as slower burners with bullets up to 200 grains in the .338, and in some rifles better.

Somebody would have to seriously bribe me to use H414 in anything. It is dirty-burning, very temperature-sensitive, and touchy at maximum pressures.

JB

I've done a bit of work with a couple of 338's and the flyweights and R15 is the powder I would gravitate to first.

On a side note of all the TSX brand bullets that pesky 185/338 slug is the only TSX that has given me fits in terms of making it perk.

I've run it in 338/06's, 338 WSM's, 338's and 340's and to date I've not found a load that rocked consistently.

I've a friend from Ennis that shoots bug holes with R15 and the 185's in his 338 and one other bud from Boze that does.

But, for me I've not had the luck and it isn't for lack of trying (I believe 6 opr 7 boxes worth).

As for Connie Brooks using a flyweight bullet you don't spose there was a marketing method to her madness do you...grins

Now the 210 TSX is a whole nuther deal and bug hole is every 33 I've shot it in has been my experience.

Am I saying don't try it, no I am not. I am saying don't be amazed if it doesn't challenge you a bit.

Dober

Personally, I don't believe in light bullets for the 338 Winchester - nothing less than 210 gr. bullets. The really light projectiles start out faster, but they give up a lot of SD & BC, and I don't think they're as suitable for the sort of animals you'd hunt with a 338, not even (and especially not!) as as a one-gun, all-purpose, rifle-for-all-seasons proposition. I don't see any advantage (and plenty of DISadvantage!) in them except for less recoil. The 338 Winchester is a heavy-bullet cartridge in my estimate, and it should be used accordingly.

AD

Mark,
Just as an aside commment;

I have seen the 185 and the obsolete 175 X shoot very well and also the 210 X shoot so bad that the match grade custom barrel was removed and the action canibalized for another project.

I know we all say that rifles are individuals, but they really are, and in the course of doing rifle reviews for over 20 years. I found both horrible discrepancies and also unbelieveable consistencies.

In all, I still load for each as if it were the very first of its breed and that way I am never dissappointed and sometimes, plesantly surprised.

AGW

While I guess I'm stuck with what I have, H414 and RL19 or RL22. I may have some IMR 4350 or 4831 laying around, but probably not much. I also have some IMR 4895 and Varget.

According to the stores here in Calgary, no powder has come into Canada for some time. They are short on ammunition and powders and primers. According to them, the only dangerous goods carrier that brings these items into Canada has not gotten around to transporting their orders for months.

Maybe Montana could just adopt Alberta?

Now there's an idea I've always been partial to. And just to not play favorites, BC, NWT and the Yukon would work. Might even go as far as Sask and Manitoba....but that's it.

To get back on topic, I agree 210 grain is my lightest acceptable bullet and I shoot a lot more 250. But, with 210, I've had good results with 4350.

We'll adopt Alberta as long as you Montanans buy bighorn tags.

I have had very good luck with .338 bullets under 210, notably the now defunct 200-grain Nosler Ballistic Tip, which knocked the snot out of whatever I shot with it, in North America or Africa. The 180 BT was also a good one. These bullets were mostly jacket, sort of like the new E-Tip with a little sliver of lead inserted. Expanded violently but penetrated deeply.

JB

I have been buying scads of .338 WW brass, 250 NPs and SGKs here in Vancouver, I think that Wholesale is in trouble and may be BSing about this.

I have been loading like crazy for almost 3 weeks now and have seen no shortage of conponents locally.

Well, I did kill a couple of mountain goats with a 200gr Win PP and, like you said, well not exactly like you said, it did put the goats right down right there in each instance.

But for most .338 purposes now, I go 210 or 250. And I could go heavier for brown bear or such, if I do it again, depending. I guess I should say when, not if. Got to keep a positive attitude.

Just curious, what the point of light bullets in a .338 is unless you only have one rifle, seems like a .300 or even an 06 will do fine with 180's and 200's, I've used a .338 WM and also a .338-06 quite a bit mostly with .250 NP and they work very well on our Sitka Blacktails with little wasted meat.Like I said just curious. To each his own. --- Mel

toltecgriz , as an aside I've often thought BC, Yukon, Alberta, Northwest Territories and Alaska would make a mighty fine country. Just a thought

Here's that ol' familiar "apples v. oranges" bullet debate again where proponents of lightweight X-bullets are rebuted by proponents of heavier jacketed bullets. Once again, by all reports, those X-bullets with their near-100% weight retention and controlled (smaller) expansion characteristics really must be in a completely different performance class than any jacketed bullet. I am still in the slightly-heavy-for-caliber jacketed bullet camp, probably only because I haven't yet killed anything with the X-bullets. Man, I just GOTTA get around to tryin' those things! Okay: this year, d@mmit, I'm gonna load some 150 TSXs in my 308 and go smack somethin', and the 165 Hot-Cors are stay home (arrrgh!).
_

Maybe take a look at the 130 tsx and really smackum......grin

No chance of BC, AB, NWT, YT leaving Canada and joining some coalition of disgruntled US states; the cultures are too different and Canada is far too stable a nation for such treason to ever happen....NOW, what about QUEBEC??????? Ya want maybe 10 million Frenchies....and even with their hydropower...????

olblue,

I don't know about other .338 shooters (many of whom use lighter bullets almost exclusively, such as the 210 Nosler Partition or Barnes TSX), but when I got my first .338, it was only one of three big game rifles in my "collection," the others being a .257 Roberts and a .30-06. So I experimented a lot with the .338, hunting with it almost exclusively for a couple-three years, and then quite a bit for another 10-15 years or so.

In that time I learned a lot of stuff about the cartridge, including that it doesn't kick nearly as fearfully as many people claimed (the reason I eventually reduced my rifle's weight from around 9 pounds to 7.5). In that time I used bullets from 180 to 275 grains in weight, but eventually mostly used two loads: the 200-grain Ballistic Tip at close to 3000 fps, and the 250-grain Nosler Partition at 2700 or so. They shot very close to the same place at 100 yards so could be used interchangeably.

I used the 200-grain Ballistic Tip for game up to about 500-600 pounds in weight. As noted above, this was a very thick-jacketed bullet, and for all practical purposes penetrated as well as the 210 Partition (I only recovered one in all the years I shot it, from a quartering on shot on a gemsbok; the bullet broke the near shoulder and spine, and ended up under the hide of the rump on the oppsite side). But it expanded more violently, thus killing more quickly, on average.

The 250-grain load was used for bigger stuff, up to over 1000 pounds in weight. I also tried Barnes X's and the Winchester Fail Safe (230 grains), but never could get any of the original X's to shoot all that well (except the light 175-grain, which still did not shoot nearly as well as the 200 Ballistic Tip and did not shoot any flatter). I hated the moly coating on the 230 FS, as the residual moly in the bore made other bullets shoot weirdly. The 275 Speer turned out to be a joke.

So I eventually just used the 200 BT and 250 Partition.

If you want to argue that a light-bullet load in the .338 can be bettered by a .300 magnum, I won't argue. In fact, I hardly ever use the .338 anyore because eventually I ended up owning a LOT more rifles, and found that a .300 will neatly kill any of the non-dangerous game a .338 is suggested for, with less recoil and a slightly flatter trajectory. I also found that something of even bigger bore size is even more versatile on truly big game. The old 9.3x62, loaded with modern 250-grain bullets, does the same jobs as the .338 with 250's, but with noticeably less recoil.

But if anybody does only own a .338 (or maybe a .338 and one or two lighter rifles) a light-bullet load is indeed very good for certain purposes. In fact, if I were rational and NOT a gun writer, I probably would own a 7x57, .338 Winchester and .416 of some sort, and spend more of the money I "waste" on firearms in hunting around the world. And one of the loads I'd use in the .338 would definitely be something around 200 grains, pushed to around 3000 fps. Such a load may not be quite as flat as a 180-200 grain load from a .300 Weatherby, but it's close enough. Believe me, with the right bullet it knocks the snot out of game like caribou, elk, gemsbok, blue wildbeest, etc.

JB

After using a lot of cartridges, I am warming increasingly to compentence and comfort as a ballistic philosophy.

The .338 is good, the .340 is very good, and the .338/378 too much, and more like the .378 Weatherby in recoil and muzzle blast concussion.

I have loaded 175, 185, 200, 210, 225, 230, 250, 275 and 300 grain bullets in .338 caliber and even though I once had some 160's never got around to trying them.

One thing hunters tend to not consider, is that the animals mostly hunted are within a similar weight category such as 200-500 pounds. That is the reason so many contributors suggest alternatives that also work like the .300's and .30/06 as an option.

Because of this, the .338 loaded with lighter bullets is emminently suited to these same animals when loaded with the lighter bullets.

The bigger game often talked about like the bears, is really not the usual game that will be used with these rifles and will be taken in single digit quantities for most, and single animals for the majority.

This means that those .338's will be used for lighter game in the majority and seldom if ever used for larger game requiring 250 grains and more.

I think it is a good thing to use a bullet suited for the game hunted. For plains game, deer, black bear, goats and sheep, those lighter .338 bullets are perfectly suited and balanced for those animals and provide flatter trajectories and are milder to shoot that the 250's and 300 grainers.

If your rifle likes them, I would encourage you to use them and familiarize yourself with your .338 so that when that big trip of a lifetime does come up, you are both ready and rehearsed with your .338 in order to perform as you intend.

Having said all that, I have a very warm spot for the Winchester Featherweight rifle, so much so that I could set up a trio in identical format to cover 99% of my hunting.

All would wear the same scope and have identical length of pull, be floated, bedded and water proofed inside the barrel channel.

The calibers I would choose are all similar in the case design to permit identical feeding characteristics and magazine capacity.

The cartridges are even simpler and are based on shootability and competence only. They are, .25/06, .30/06 and 9.3 X62.

After that all I need is a .45 caliber magnum for African heavier game and I am done.

Now again, having said all that, I am in MD's camp where I own more rifles than I have hunting opportunities and need to continually use a variety of cartridges in order to increase experiencs further and grow as a writer.

If you have a .338, I encourage you to use the bullets you are comfortable with, remembering that the .338 is a game cartridge and no bullets within that caliber are designed for varmint hunting, although they will work in that capacity as well.

I have taken game and seen game taken at ranges requiring hold over even with the 175 grain bullets and they work very well. I like the 185's even better and never saw much need to the 200's when the 210's so prevalent.

It's your rifle, shoot what you like and enjoy the learning.

AGW

I favor the 225 gr. bullet weight for the 338 Win. Mag., which has about the velocity and trajectory of a 165 gr. bullet out of the 30-06. I provides just about the ideal load density for the 338 Win. Mag. case with most powders, and it shoots flat enough for just about any hunting purpose, plus it has enough mass for just about anything you'd care to hunt, and noticably less recoil than 250s as well.

It doesn't seem to matter if you're hunting mule deer or eland, a good 225 in the right place puts them down right now, without fuss. The idea of hopping between bullets of various weights for a given cartidge isn't something I care to waste my time on. I'd rather pick one good load for a given rifle and stick with for all the hunting I'd going to do with that rifle, and in the case of the 338 Winchester, a good 225 (Barnes TSX in my # 1 rifle) serves that purpose for me.

One of my friends uses only 250 gr. Nosler Partitions in his 338 Win. Mag., and he's used it on over 200 big game animals over the last 28 or so years, including all manner of deer-size stuff, plus elk, brown bear, lion, leopard, and Cape buffalo, as well as much, much more. He knows that that big 250 gr. bullet will do all that the lighter bullets will do in terms of terminal performance, and much that they won't do as well of the really big, tough stuff. He wouldn't use any other projectile, and no one could likely talk him into trying anything else, either..........

I just saw this now. Two years ago I decided to experiment with my .338, and loaded the 160 grain bullet with 66 grains of 3031 for 3278fps (published velocity). The load shot amazing with less than 1" groups a 100 yards. The intended purpose was longer shots on mule deer (not Mule Deer.. :D). The load performed well on back to back shots on a buck and doe to 450 yards. First shot was below the front shoulder, exiting through the opposite side, was not much left of the opposite shoulder. The other was a frontal neck shot. No bullets recovered. After reading much here about longer shots, I have scince abondoned (sp) this project in favor of the 225 grain MRX for a better "all round load". Just my info about the 160 grain. R.

MD,AGW and AD have posted just outstanding comments in the three foregoing posts, I learn a lot from all of these gentlemen. After 39 years with the .338 Win., it is my all-time favourite round and after various experiments, I hunt with 250 NPs at about 2750-2800 fps-mv and have had NO problems, ever.

I am shooting a lot of 250 Hornadys for practice and am just beginning to experiment with 250 SGKs, for the same reason. The Hornadys shoot well and the SGKs very well, but, the NPs group superbly and they just seem to always work.

I don't feel much difference in recoil in my 9.3x62 and 9.3x74R rifles and my .338 Win-250s; the .338 seems a tad faster, but, not to the point where it bothers me. I just prefer simplicity as I am not too bright and thus keep on using those old 250 NPs for all my hunting.

I have used the 230FS since I obtained my 338. I have had other bullets that I intended to load, but the FS shot so well, and penetrated like no tomorrow, I never used anything but the Winchester factory load. I only used the 338 for the odd moose or elk. For everything else, I have used my 25-06 (no you don't need anything bigger for Alberta deer).

I want to try the 185 TSX because I have been drawn for an early prairie elk zone where there is very little cover and the shots may be long. According to the load from a disk program, if that 185 reaches 3050-3100fps, the MPR will be identical to my very familiar 25-06 deer load and my 22-250 coyote load. Like Kutenay, I'm not always that bright. Having to only remember 10" low at 400 seems pretty easy to remember if a whopper is caught out of the military base.

I found that I have more of the FS than I thought, but if it has a weakness, it's not as flat shooting as some other 225 bullets. I do know for a fact, that it will penetrate a moose from end to end at 80 yds though. How many bullets can do that?

Finally made it to the range. Still unable to locate any RL15. Had to settle for RL19. Used Fed cases, WLRM, Barnes 185gr TSX. Had to use the Nosler #5 Manual which says 78gr max for 3120fps with 180gr and Barnes #3 manual which only lists RL19 for the 185 XLC (81gr). I settled on a load before I reached 78gr with the TSX. 78gr was causing sticky bolt lift. I was getting over 3100fps, but today was hotter than expected. There are no pressure signs that I can detect.

My smallest 3 shot group was 0.772" and my average was 1.045". My last group brought my average up, but my shooting technique was wearing down by then. (This rifle routinely shot 0.87" groups with the Winchester failsafes.)

Sighted 3.5" high at 100yd, I will be dead on at 300yd and only 10" low at 400yd. I think my load is ready to go!

I will post pictures if I should get to use it on prairie elk.

The .338 caliber was introduced with a 1:10 twist to stailize the 300 grain factory loads. When these loads were discontinued, and providing you use lighter weight bullets only, as the 300's are still available to handloaders, then you will find that that 1:10 twist may not be the best option for those lighter bullets.

Although I do not subscribe to the often made generic statement, that you cannot over stabilize a bullet, it is a fact that twist rates should be slower if you want to optimize the accuracy potential from lighter bullets with shorter bearing surfaces.

I have tried 175, 185 and 200 grainers in the .338 caliber and never got the accuracy levels equal to the heavier bullet weights in that caliber. The exception is the 185 TSX as it is homogenous and designed with a longer bearing surface equal to some longer cup and core weights, so stabilizes and provides reasonably good accuracy levels.

The problem the .338 faces today, is that is has bullet weights with construction that is suitable to a very wide range of animals. The versatility and capability of this cartridge and caliber is extreme. The good news is that there are so many bullets available for it, that you do not need to plan loyalty around a particular bullet.

I have seen riflemen do that, drool over a bullet and build a rifle around it only to find that their expensive project rifle does not like the bullet in question.

Also, you illustration of teh vareinces ionteh loading manuals is of key value to your posting. I hope readers take heed of this when working up loads.

I find we are in a time where we have more components than ever before but the loading data can be very questionable. It pays to average out manuals if you want to use them for "reference" and work up very slowly using accuracy and excess pressure signs as your monitoring plan, in conjunction with a chronograph, because if you are getting high velocities with no excess pressure signs, you are still running high to very high pressures.

AGW

As an addendum to what AGW posted, in general I have found less problem with bullets being over-stabilized to day than, say, 20-30 years ago.

From fooling around with the Juenke machine, my guess is this is because today's bullets are much better balanced than they were a while back. A very-balanced bullet will spin nicely even if the twist is theoretically too fast for its length. I have gotten very fine accuracy, for instance, with 85-grain Sierra boattails in a .260 Remington with a 1-8 twist--and the 200-grain .338 Ballistic Tip is one of the most accurate bullets in my 1-10 twist .338 Winchester. Have also gotten very fine accuracy with the 120 Ballistic Tip in several 7mm's with the standard 1-9 twist, even in relatively fast rounds like the .280 Ackely and 7mm Remington Magnum.

So a lot depends on the quality of the bullet.

JB

I've gotten excellent accuracy from Noslers 180 gr Ballistic Tip, loaded over H414. I'm getting just over 3000 fps with 3/4 or so groups at 100 yards, and about 1-1/4 at 200 yards. I don't know that I'd like to try a shorter range game shot with this combo.

A friend of mine took that bullet, loaded to 3400 fps or so in a wildcat very much like the .340 Weatherby, up to Saskatchewan one year, and shot right through two BIG black bears at typical bait ranges, maybe 35-40 yards. Accoridng to Paul, the bears went "uh!" and fell in the bait pile.

The jacket is 3/4 of the weight of the 180 BT. Somebody once called them "an X-Bullet with a little sliver of lead in the nose."

JB

The lil 180 NBT has been one incredibly accurate slug for me. I've run it in my 340, OKH and WSM and it fly's very well.

Dober

I routinely (almost exclusively) use Nosler 200Gr BTs for my 338 WM and find them to be very accurate and I have a 1 in 10 twist.

I am a big fan of the 338 and I am happy to see so many others are too.

It seems I am normally like a talking dog when ever I go to the range.

Glad you have had success with that combo., temmi.
I have a 340wby and 338win both that I really like, but have never tried anything lighter than 225grains.
That may have to change...

Last year I watched my bud absolutely nuke a 5 point bull at a bit over 200 yds with my 338/06 running the 200 NBT.

The bullet took out a front, broke the neck and we found it up in the skull about to exit by an ear.

Dam NBT's won't work though you know...grins

Dober

Ballistic Tips are sure a bone of contention on this site!
I got some 250gr 9.3's BTs that shoot great out of my CZ.
I will have to shoot a yote with em- sure to be a severe test of that bullet.(Just kidding!)

grins

I've worked over more than 1 dog town with the 180's out of my .340. Never had any issues with penetration with them...ork ork ork

Dober

Yeah, I can believe it.

The thing I wonder about, especially with my 340 and elk-
I may be hunting dense forest during the morning, and perhaps a park or meadow in the evening(or visa versa) and the thing that I guess worries me, what if I have an up close(say 50-100yds or so) shot on a bull, can I put a 180gr BT starting out at what, 3300fps through his shoulders at that range and velocity without the bullet going to pieces?
If I was sure I could do that, than I would sure consider it, especially considering the reduced recoil and (perhaps) accuracy potential.

I have noticed how expensive it's to reload rifle ammo these days. For example, a box of 50-each 225-grain TSX at the local Sportsman Warehouse costs $43.00, while a box of .338-caliber Federal Vital-Shock, with the same bullet, costs $49.00. By the time I develop a good load for my .338 I have spent more than what I would pay for a loaded box of ammo. It may be different for you, but I have found it very difficult to attain the accuracy of the Federal ammo mentioned above while keeping the cost of reloading down.
-------
Now, going back to the original question and a lightweight bullet: Federal loads 180 PP, and also 180-grain Partition for the .338WM. I will list the velocity/foot-pound, and trajectory for the 180-grain NOS bullet(sighted at 100 yards for a 200-yard zero):

Muzzle = 3120 fps/3850 foot-pound.

100 yd = 2860 fps/3265 foot-pound. Bullet drop = +1.4"
200 yd = 2610 fps/2730 foot-pound. Bullet drop = 0.0"
300 yd = 2380 fps/2265 foot-pound. Bullet drop = -6.4"
400 yd = 2160 fps/1865 foot-pound. Bullet drop = -19.1"
500 yd = 1950 fps/1520 foot-pound. Bullet drop = -39.2"

I would think that such a 180-grain bullet used for antelope and deer at longer ranges than usual should work fine, although in reality I have never hunted these animals.

This was a very good and interesting thread. I've finally landed on the 210-gr TSX myself for my 340 and any ungulate hunting. I would go heavier for brown bear for example but the 210-gr TSX is so far the most accurate bullet I've tried from 275-grs down to this weight. I've not tried bullets on the wee side of 210-grs having in the past mentally dismissed them per the low SD/poor penetration argument-perhaps not always valid anymore. But, aside from any practical and advantageous benefit to the 180-gr NBT, for instance, booting that weight to 3400 fps is an interesting thought.

Gdv