Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters 338 redneck short magnum

Tacomic,

I have a perspective about this, the 338WSM. It might not fully reach the 338 Winchester numbers, which is fine in my book, it wouldn't have to.
The 338 Winchester isn't a failure, and it doesn't reach the 340 Weatherby numbers. In the same light, the 340 Weatherby magnum isn't a failure and it doesn't quite get there with the 338 RUM, but it's not a failure either.

I dare say that the 338 WSM would come within 100-150 fps of the 338 Winchester magnum with bullets up to 225 grains, and as you and I know, 100-150 fps in the field just doesn't matter either way.

Even now, with the 325 WSM already out there, Winchester could sell a pile of 338-WSM's... me thinks.



Bloodworks,

I agree. I also wonder if Gunhog isn't posting anymore because he he may have been injured, or worse. Let's hope not.

I don't know who else here has worked with the 338-WSM, other than Dober and Bob338. I think they both could offer some real world numbers that too would be safe.


The WSM case has enough capacity to perform without having to push it.


There are a few of us running the 358-WSM here at the 'fire. Loading to insane pressures just isn't needed.

I am VERY content pushing various 225 grain bullets to 2950 fps. and 250 grain bullets to 2800 fps.

I know of two powders that will do that in my rifle without beating up the brass, cratering primers, causing sticky bolt life, or stretching the case head beyond acceptable dimensions.

I seriously doubt that those velocities can be safely had from that WSM case with those bullet weights by reducing the bore diameter from 358 to 338. Let alone reach the numbers that Gunhog is advertizing.

I'd still like to see what his strain gauges have to reveal.



YMMV

Scott