Originally Posted by Coyote_Hunter
For me the math is easy, Two Ruger MKII rifles, one in .300WM, the other in .338WM. Both have Zytel .with boat paddle stocks. Have not weighed the rifles but assume about 8.3 pounds with scope.

300WM = 180g @ 3033fps using 70.0g powder, calculated recoil = 29.2 ft-lbs
338WM = 225g @ 2742fps using 69.0g powder, calculated recoil = 33.8 ft-lbs

"Shoulder math" concurs with the calculated recoil - the .338WM hits harder, and noticeably so.


Here are some similar calculations made on JBM ballistics software:

Assume a .300 WM and a .338, both in 9 lb. rifles.
.300 WM = 180 gr., 69 gr. powder, 3100 fps MV, - Recoil velocity 14.0 ft/sec., Recoil energy 27.4 ft.lbs., Recoil impulse 3.9 lb/sec.

.338 WM = 225 gr., 70 gr. powder, 2850 fps MV- Recoil velocity 15.4 ft/sec., Recoil energy 32.2 ft. lbs., Recoil impulse 4.3 lb/sec.

The .338 in these identical weight rifles has more recoil, and does so at a higher recoil velocity, than the .300- so much for the theory that the .338's recoil is more of a 'push'. It is not.
It boils down to stock design, how the rifle fits the shooter, recoil pads, etc. that factor in to the subjective nature of felt recoil. One of the hardest 'kicking' rifles I have ever shot belongs to my daughter in law- it is a Savage .270, shooting factory 130 gr. ammo.


I'd rather be a free man in my grave, than living as a puppet or a slave....