I'm not impressed with the .33 Nosler.
It shoots a bullet weighing only 25 grains more than a plain old .300 Weatherby, but 35 fps slower than the Weatherby, and with a slightly worse ballistic coefficient. Does anyone believe that a slightly slower bullet, weighing only about half as much as a .22 long rifle bullet more, would be even noticeable?
One would think that they could have made more of an improvement in the last 72 years.
It's the case being shorter for better bullets. I'm sure you still don't get it though.
What's not to get?
The .300 Weatherby (with 200 grain bullets) fires a faster bullet with a better BC, and therefore is better at wind resistance and trajectory than the .33 Nosler at ALL ranges, though the advantage is slight.
As for action length, so what? A couple of ounces? Shorter bolt throw? Anyone who knows how to work a bolt slaps it back to the stop, and short stroking is not a problem.
The reason the 6.5 Creedmore is more popular than the .260 Remington is the case and chamber shape are such that you can use longer (better BC) bullets. Dennis DeMille of Creedmore Arms developed it for long range target shooting.
So I reiterate: The .33 Nosler, despite its hype, does not seem to be a meaningful improvement over the 72-year old .300 Weatherby. I can't comment on the .340 Weatherby because I have no knowledge or experience with the .340. I would not be surprised if it beats out the .33 Nosler as well. My concern is that "new" cartridges that don't offer meaningful improvements don't seem to last long in factory loadings.
