Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Mule Deer - .338win question

Thanks Buddy.

In my experience larger diameter projectiles of heavier hit harder, you actually hear the difference. That being said doesn’t means kills quicker. Once a large enough hole through the heart to instantly bring the blood pressure to zero is as equally effective as larger hole.

Probably true, but what I like about the heavier or the tougher bullets is that one can break heavy bone and muzzle after passing through the lungs, and drop large animal right there. I have done that to moose several times. The only problem when the shoulder bone is broken is that rolling the moose to skin and remove the legs, then the neck and rib meat, and finally the back straps from one side and then the next, the broken leg makes it a little more difficult. We tie a rope or the winch cable near both hooves at the far side, and roll the moose toward the ATVs.

By the way, I could be wrong, but I don't think small animals such as caribou and deer offer much resistance to the tip of the heavier .338 bullets. The bullets may expand, but not as much as one would think. I believe that for caribou and deer a lightweight bullet around 185 grains-driven fast-is a better choice. The heavier bullets, unless driven very fast, may not expand as much on small game past 200 yards. I could very well use a much smaller gun to hunt caribou, but instead I just have enough ammo for different uses, and so far that has worked.

I remember a time when a friend of mine while checking his trapline asked me to shoot a large marmot that was very much alive, but caught in one of the traps (I also had a trappers license). Anyway, he told me, "don't worry about it, because that 230-grain FS in your chamber is not going to expand." Sure enough...I shot the thing from about 75 yards away, and it didn't even moved, so I thought that I have missed. He said, "don't shoot again. It's dead," and when we looked at it there was a very small entrance and exit hole. I would have had to force a pencil through it just to make the hole larger. I always remember that shot, because it was hard for me to believe that the poor thing would not blow up when the bullet hit.

Again, I could be wrong.

jorge and test1328,

If you're thinking of Craig's two SAFARI RIFLES books, the .338/.416 combination was NOT the professional hunter's choice for clients to bring on a 2-rifle safari. It was Craig's choice as the perfect combination in the first book, published in 1990, but the top five choices of PH's were:

7mm Remington Magnum + .375 H&H (19 votes)
.300 magnum (unspecified) + .375 H&H (18)
.30-06 + .375 H&H (13)
.270/.280/.308/7x57 + 375 H&H (15)

After that the votes dropped off rapidly, with the next combo (.300 magnum +.458) only getting 6 votes. The .33/.416 combination favored by Craig got one vote.

In SAFARI RIFLES II, published in 2009, the results were a little different:

.300 magnum + .416 (27 votes)
.300 magnum + .375 (20)
.30-06 + .375 (16)
7mm magnum +.375 (4)

In 2009 the .338/.416 combo got two votes.

You people over think way too much. If you let science dictate a bear charge your alll foocked period.

61+ years in Grizzly country, many L/O seasons alone far from quick rescue in event of injury, supered bush camps of 75 workers in forestry from the early 70s on to the early 90s and NEVER lost a bit of skin or a worker.

I totally agree with the above, from another experienced BC bush worker and I happen to prefer packing .338s, 9.3s and used to use .,375s, all with heavy for caliber Npts at fastest safe velocities in my handloads.,

I do this largely as MD does because they make me feel better. I have and would pack .30-06s and prefer 200 Npts.

Simple, the major issue is a good bullet, properly placed and learning to handle and shoot your particular rifle very well.

Would I carry a .308Win.......have and love it and with a 180 Npt at 2600+ and the light weight and low recoil, it is easy to shoot and perhaps the best option for those who cannot shoot a .338WM fast and well. Plus, packing a very light rifle may mean you have it with you when schidt happens where you may have left your 338 or 375 in your tent.

.404s, .458s and all that, had one and could shoot it, BUT, these are actually fantasy time for most hunters/bush workers.

Thanks, John. I knew I'd read it somewhere and as always, you are correct.

Interesting surveys, John. The 7mm as the outlier, I guess. Any thoughts as to why?

I'll proffer my opinion: Most of the PHs surveyed grew up in the 60s-70s when the 7Mag was all the rage. Also, it is my opinion most PHs are really not that savvy on ballistics & bullet performance of the more modern stuff.

LOL, yes, the recently de-limbed departeds would be better presented for funeral services standing out in the open flying a defiant FU finger rather than hiding behind, then having to eat all the chit the big material rifles blow through ya on the way by. [/quote]

So what bullet is rough on animals? I've only shot stuff with ball because it was supposed to be just fine. Hole in, hole out, zero extra damage. Animals ran a long ways before falling over with a hole (big) in the lungs.
I need to buy a press and dies one day and load for the 50. Have one box of barnes X for it, but thats as far as I got. Amax will open? Other choices?

We mainly shot ball, raufoss, and SLAP rounds through our M2's and then whatever the match bullet was for the Barrett. Mainly saw the effects of the M2 with ball on people and it was usually pretty much done for them. A chest hit with one and I never saw anyone limp away. Can't say how they worked on animals as I never saw/did any of it, but the 50 is brutal on soft skin things. With the SLAP rounds it was brutal on metal or hardened targets.

You've also recommended on this forum to shoot charging bears under the chin...

tomk,

I agree with what Jorge said. In 1990, when the first SAFARI RIFLES books appeared, the 7mm Remington Magnum was still popular, but it was incredibly popular during the 1960's, 70's and 80's. It's hard to imagine for hunters who weren't there during the peak of the 7mm RM hoopla, but it's popularity was far more than the recent .300 WSM and 6.5 Creedmoor combined. One of my fellow gun writers worked at a local sawmill here in Montana in the 1970's, and joked, "Every worker had a hard hat, lunch bucket and a 7mm Remington Magnum."

Its popularity also extended to Africa. When I hunted Namibia in 1999 with father-son team of PH's, both had 7mm Remington Magnums, and really believed in them. Have run into several other, older PH's who'd been using the 7mm RM as their general plains-game rifle for decades, and more than one had taken buffalo with his.

In fact, many American fans thought the "Big Seven" was far more powerful than ordinary rounds like the .30-06, and many didn't know other 7mm rounds existed. Some hunters from that generation still go into a sporting goods store and ask for a box of "seven em ems," and when the clerk asks what 7mm cartridge, don't know what to say. Some hunters even believed the 7mm Remington Magnum was somehow more powerful than .300 magnums, because there was "something magic" about .284" diameter bullets--and a few gun writers even promoted that theory.

The 7mm Remington Magnum's popularity started declining in the 1990's, perhaps because so many new premium bullets appeared in factory ammo, and really took a nose-dive when the .300 WSM appeared in 2002. For the next few years I saw a BUNCH of used 7mm RM's on the used rack at Capital Sports & Western Wear, the local gun store I frequent. Mostly they'd been traded in for .300 WSM's, because it was the latest hot round. At its peak the .300 WSM's popularity was somewhat similar to the 7mm Remington Magnum's, but only last 3-5 years, instead of decades.

Ray,

Unless an expanding bullet doesn't open up for some reason, it starts to expand when it hits skin, and normally totally "mushrooms" by the time it penetrates its own length, or a little more. This is why the most tissue damage occurs around the entrance hole and just beyond it. I've seen enough "deer-sized" game taken in both North America and Africa with the .338, various .35's, 9.3's and .375's, to know this to be true, but it's also been demonstrated in test media many times.

Thanks for the correction, JB. I guess I "misremembered" what I had read many years ago! Guess I followed Craig's advice and ignored the PH's!

After thinking a bit about what I used in Africa and the effects/differences between a .338 and a .300 Mag I would have to agree that I haven't seen a big difference between the two on elk. I didn't own a 300 mag when I went to Africa, so that wasn't a choice for me at the time. Since then, I've killed a handful of bull elk with both the .338 and 300 Mags and cannot honestly say that I thought one hit harder or put elk down quicker. I always used the 225gr. Accubond or 225gr. Hornady Interlock in the .338 Win. Mag for elk. I also always used the 180 gr. TSX in the .300 Wby Mag for elk. So I suppose the selected bullets may be why I didn't see any difference. I'm still a sucker for the .338, but I would never not use the 300 mags if that was my only option. I've also killed quite a few elk with the 30-06 and will say that both the .338 and .300 mags seemed to have a bigger effect on the elk, i.e. their initial reaction when shot. The .30-06 always killed them just fine, but I would often see little or no reaction to the shot and then they would run off and die. I went with the .338 over the 30-06 because of the mental anguish I hoped to alleviate by hopefully dropping the elk closer to where I shot them. It did seem to help in that regard.

If I was hunting in Grizzly country, whether in the lower 48 or in the AK interior, I think the 300 Mags would be just fine and I wouldn't have a second thought about using them (provided you were using a good 180 gr. or larger bullet). Hunting on the AK coast for big Brown Bears, I have always opted for the .338 Win. Mag. but using 250gr. bullets. I've also carried the 375 H&H for Brown Bear, although I've never had the opportunity to shoot one with that cartridge to date. Those big bears give me enough pause to use the larger calibers. Then again, I hunted with a bear guide up there who carried a 7mm Rem. Mag. and didn't think twice about it. To each his own.

Thanks John & Jorge.

Interesting stuff...the anomaly is a trend...:)

Yeah here too. Marketing. We had to have them for deer hunting in the 70's as they were the answer to having to track deer and all that 500 yard shooting. Of course too, 175g bullets were absolutely necessary to buck brush. Had a light Rem 700 which was great at realigning neck vertebra. That wasn't enough gun, I guess, so eventually moved on to a lightweight 338 to continue my penance.

Just booked a PG and MAYBE buff with Wintershoek Safaris in 19. Taking the 338 w 225TTSXs for Sable and gemsbok. The 300 Weatherby (my favorite rifle) will stay home..

What?!
You use the 300 on an elk and take the 338 to Africa?

Sheesh.