Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Elk Hunting Can this Elk rifle be beat?

In my hands your rifle would be 5-6 MOA and I'd be crying for my mommy by the second group. Seyfried was shooting cloverleafs at 200 with his Champlin. Of course they were his loads and he's a world class shooter. Also he had the means to have the barrel replaced if it wasn't up to his standards. I've always heard the .257 WB was the best Weatherby round for all around general usage (Caribou and down) but I've always thought the .340 and the .375 Weatherby's were the rounds to own and sadly I've never owned either. I have an extensively worked on CZ 550 from a local Bench Rester that shoots 270 TSX's into cloverleafs at 2600 fps. I don't want to mess with it, and the Mcmillan does the same with 225 TTSX Barnes factory, so as much as the grass is greener, my stuff just plain works and I'll keep what I have.

Semper fi, beretz. Those are some nice rifles and a heck of a elk. If I had already had either a .338 Win or a .300 Wby, I doubt I ever would have bought the .340 Wby, when I first went to AK.

Lee, and others who think the .340 Wby recoil would be too much, have you tried wearing a good recoil pad on your shoulder when at the range? This is a sincere question. It makes a huge difference. And I'm not suggesting anyone needs to get a .340, as any of the other rifles mentioned above work great I'm sure. I was just making the point that the .340 has as flat of a trajectory as any other mass-produced cartridge that can produce 2,600 ft-lbs of energy at 500 yards.

On the recoil pad thing, my father, when he was getting ready to go to Alaska with me, is recoil sensitive with rifles. He was considering taking my Rem 700 BDL 300 Win Mag, but thought the recoil would be far above what he could tolerate. I sent it to him with some Federal 180gr TSX loads to try---along with the recoil pad. He was shocked at how little the recoil bothered him. He had shot it when he was 22 years younger, and didn’t like it at all, but it didn’t bother him at all with the pad on his shoulder, and he was getting 1/2" groups with it.

Similarly, my 11-yr-old son doesn’t like to shoot his (inherited from his older brother) .243 Youth model a ton, but with the Past pad, pictured, below, he likes it, and on Saturday, most of his 100-yd groups were right around an inch.







Here are my best two groups with the .340 on Monday (shot while wearing a similar pad, like this one: https://www.cabelas.com/product/sho...-s-rifle-recoil-pad/2370690.uts?slotId=2):



The padding really does make a difference at the range, but you’ll never need it for one or a few shots in the field, especially if you have something exciting in the crosshairs.

Yes

I use a lead sled with 25 pounds of shot. Reduces the recoil on both of my rifles to 30-06 levels and I'm fine there. As you mentioned recoil isn't much of a factor in the field, unless your prone with a .340 WB. You've made a great choice, live in the best state in the union for sportsmen, and you've obviously mastered a specialist's caliber.

My answer to your question, is no, I don't think your elk rifle can be beat. However, its a knife fight for the number two spot...

It's hard to beat the old .340. It simply hammers things.

When I first bought the 340 Accumark, because of all the press, I bought a bunch of 200gr and 210gr cartridges, hoping I could handle those. I fired a couple, and realized that it was not that big of a deal.

I have far from mastered anything. I can shoot it from the bench, and have shot game with it, but I am far short of a master with anything. But I can shoot it well enough for some situations, and I'm trying to get better. As with all, always, I have a lot of work to do to get better. I'm unlikely to do anything with it that a 30-06 in good hands won't do, which I fully understand. Almost all of the game I have shot was within 100 yds, which I always work for. I probably won't see it, but if an elk was 350 yds - 400 yds away and about to disappear, I might prefer its capabilities.

"The 340 can be sluggish and difficult".....I remember that in Handloader, in response to "G.D.V."

I always thought the 340 would be the ticket; never loaded for one, but it seemed like Ross said, the 338/RL-22 could "rub shoulders" with big brother, at least with most published data at the time. Pretty much loaded two 338's to within 100-150 fps. of the 340 with 225-250g. bullets

It really ain't no slouch with RL-25 either and 250's.

When were you “snooping” around my house? memtb

Nice groups! 👍 The wife’s .338, can’t match that. Hers is acceptable, but not great! memtb

Here's a .338 Win Mag I wouldn't want any lighter.

We’re getting 2950 with the wife’s.338. ( 225 TTSX’s and RL 22), from a 24” barrel. No idea of pressures....but it seems fine. Still “not” in the class of the 340! memtb

[u][/u]

That’s a real nice “packing” weight, which translates into a real nice “kicking” weight! A shame you can’t have both.....without a “weed burner”! What does it go with a sling, and a full magazine? memtb

Yeah, “G.D.V.” was me. 🙂 I don’t remember the exact chronology of events or time but RS wrote a nice article about the 340 and his Champlain rifle in G&A, as mentioned above by Lee W, which lit a fire under me also. That was circa early ‘90’s. A bit later (?), again in G&A he now downplayed the cartridge a bit. I don’t quite remember now if he meant the then-new mono’s elevated everything in effectiveness or it was just his, sort of, revised observation of the cartridge from a handloaders perspective.

At any rate, curious, I wrote a letter to the editor/RS and he responded with a fairly lengthy opinion in the next issue or so.

My own 340 was simply a rechambered 338 and so hand loads were interesting to compare coming from the same tube. There was definitely enough difference for any loon to glom onto; think 308 vs the 30-06 as a more common example. A ~ 15 grains case capacity difference when both cases are loaded to the same pressures means roughly a 4% velocity differential with equal weight bullets. Mine showed that with the 250’s hitting ~ 2950; the 225’s, in the neighborhood of 3100 and the 210’s about 3200 fps. This was with only a 24” tube but with the “Wby throat”.

As a 338, this same tube gave velocities in the 100-150 fps range slower. However, the time spent with it as a 338 was much shorter and I tried fewer loads than with it than as a 340.

Caribou and a few bull elk were taken in the 100-150 yd range, but unlike many have stated on this site, most of my bulls came between 400 and 500 yards for one reason or another, hillside to hillside or big open clear-cut scenarios, etc. I eventually after much experimenting with bullet weight settled on the 210-gr weight and finally the TSX at that weight pushed at around 3200 fps.

I realize ME is a rather dubious figure aside from other considerations and correct bullet placement but when you can lay over a ton of ME on an animal’s chest-shoulder area at five hundred yards, in my experience, the effect was dramatic in the eight or so bulls I took at about that range. Hyperbole aside, all were legs-up, crushed, or legs-folded, down like an elevator.

It’s a great cartridge, as are many others in the right application, and IMO, it shines in elk, moose or bear country if it can be handled proficiently and one doesn’t mind a little heavier rifle. Necessary? Of course not.

ETA: the 338 is of course a classic cartridge in its own right. Funny, but in my rifle, going from the 338 to the 340, I really couldn’t discern a real difference in recoil. Subjective I know.

To my eternal shame, I didn't find out how much recoil effected you until I got my first custom rifle that was "fitted" to me. All my life I was shooting a LOP a 1/4 of an inch too short. I need at least 13 3/4 of an inch as I'm a knuckle dragger. The Weatherby rifles I owned all had 13.5 and it was an exercise in pain to shoot them. I ended up selling all but one. Finally I wised up, had all my rifles spaced to at least 13/3/4 and bought prescription shooting glasses from Decot. Then because I'm a geezer I put brakes on both rifles. Yes, I'm deaf too. When I listen to the radio in my home, so do my neighbors.... But now I can go to the range and not have to go to the ER on the way home.

Lee, several of those lines made me laugh.

BTW, here is the one 225gr TTSX bullet I recovered from that moose. It went through a couple of feet of bone, muscle, and other stuff, and ended up on the far side under the hide. The other two went clean through. All three were fired within a few seconds (the second two to make sure he didn't go far or get away), as he was running for the trees. Impact velocity likely was about 3,000 fps.

It took a lot of years for the bullets to catch up to the .340 Weatherby. With a handful of exceptions, the bullets just couldn't withstand the impact speeds and everyone shot at least 250 grainers if they weren't Partitions back in the day. As cliche as it sounds, the TSX/TTSX series are a real game changer for these high energy rounds. I have just one recovered TTSX from a raghorn somewhere and it went through a branch I didn't see at 387 yards, and its not as pretty as yours. Mangled would be the word I'd use. But because I'm a rifle geek too, I consider the recovered rounds from game as much of a trophy as the animal itself.

I was influenced by RS, again, writing about his use of mono’s in the ‘06 while shooting feral donkeys in Australia. His observation was these new bullets elevate the ‘06 to a whole new level of lethality (and by implication would do the same for any cartridge). This was again sometime in the nineties. IIRC, he was using the new Winchester Failsafe then.

This led me on the road to try what was available at the time including the .338 Lost Rivers Tech bullet, 210-gr (IIRC) of a lead-less, alloy of copper, brass, and best wishes. I had a CO bull the last evening of a hunt come out of the timber into a long, deep meadow right at diminishing light. It stopped broadside behind a cow at 475 yds by a quick ranging. The first shot dropped it prone, hit through the shoulders; as I saw it struggle a bit and dark was closing in, I hit it again and one more time.

The three shots actually could have been covered with a tea saucer; two were through and through, and the third, a contrarian, took a left turn and was found somewhere in a hind quarter, maybe four feet away. It actually could have been reloaded again as it was intact except for a flattened nose. The two exits were only pencil-sized. This bullet apparently was too hard acting almost as a solid at this range and velocity which was probably still 2k or more.

If I have the chronology of events correct, I had already tried the Barnes X bullet in several rifles and ran into pressure problems with a couple esp as I got to near max loads; I ditched it. Then came the TSX and finally the TTSX. These gave excellent accuracy and performance without pressure problems. I took ten PG in Namibia in 2007 with ten rounds of the .375, 270-gr TSX and recovered only one on a stout, lead, female zebra. It had smashed both shoulders.

Of the twenty or so heads of game that I can remember taken with the TSX/TTSX BULLETS I’ve recoverd only three one of which one is named above; another traversed a waterbuck sideways after hitting a small twig twenty yards in front of the animal and was found under the off-side. The last hit a 300lb mule deer buck under the chin while coming hard-on, and travelled 4.5 feet landing near the scrotum. The “zebra bullet” and the “mule deer bullet” are thousand-Word pic’s which I’ve posted before.

Im not saying they are perfect bullets or others are not as good in slightly different ways, but for me they are good enough not to stray from. This year, Lord-willing, I’m taking a 300 WSM and a very lightweight 284 for elk. In the first, I’ve a 168-gr TTSX loaded and in the 284, I’ve a 140-gr TTSX in place. Both are at about 3075 fps MV with resultant trajectories about the same to 400-450 yds.

If you can get them to shoot, I think the Nosler Partitions are never a wrong answer in NA. That said, there was a time I would of been interested in a Trophy Bonded bullet. Now the TTSX takes all my money. I've quit looking at anything else. Within their envelope of speed there is nothing better in my rifles. I've just got my hands on Barnes's new LR TTSX in 375, and I'm gonna load them up for this years elk hunt in the next 30 days or so. I'm hoping for great things from this next gen bullet.

Well, for me: I don't shoot at game animals over 300 yards any more. So a 340 Weatherby isn't something that I'd "need".

I've used a 338 Win Mag with 250 Nosler Partitions more than all other combinations combined - for elk. I keep reading that the 338 is more than what is needed. But I like the way it worked for me. Now, it seems that I'm getting long in the tooth (came up on me suddenly). Next elk tag, I'm not sure that I'll be using the 338. If I do, I might try lighter mono's.
I sold two 338's and I might sell my Win 70 338 with claw extractor. I have lots of brass and bullets though, even a couple boxes of factory Nosler 250 grain Partitons and if I sold that 338 then what??? With all those bullets and brass I'd need to buy another 338, I suppose.

But if someone wanted a 338 Win 70 with claw extractor and bunches of brass and bullets and factory loads...

I have a few other belted mags -- more than I "need" too. I don't think a 340 is in my future.

As GDV indicated bullets, powder, and rifles have come a long way in just a few years. In the 70's a MOA rifle was something to be cherished, and like Bigfoot, everyone had heard of one, but no one you knew had actually seen one. CNC/CAD machinery made hand fitting a distant second place and now even rifles less than 500 dollars are MOA or better. Boddington just wrote an article that said the 30/06 is now probably the best elk caliber out there now days. Due to the advances in powders and bullets. Boddington for many years was a 375 H&H/340WB/8REMmag proponent for elk. Especially if it was a hunt he was paying for. I'll continue to hunt my 338/375 rifles for elk until I can't climb the mountain anymore.