Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Thinking of a .338-06

Especially the part about the loaded round looking good. Does any cartridge round look better than a 338-06? I think not.

DB, thanks for the reply. I guess it is a campfire tradition and yes, I'm sure I want to do this. Do I need a .338-06, no.

Will I possibly change my mind and go with a different chambering, yes. I've always wanted a 6 mm-06 too.

I'd like to make another trip to AK and if I do this would be the rifle I'd take, if I have it re-barreled. I also like new projects, loading for and getting "new" rifles to shoot.

The .338-06 is just the latest on my list. You do realize you're asking why I don't go with a chambering you have two of in your safe but don't use much? I could happily hunt the rest of my life with just my '06 but I don't use mine much either, go figure.

I do like the looks of the 338/06 Ackley Improved & 35 Whelen Improved the best.

I was considering a 338-06 pretty hard. Had never really wanted a 30-06 because it was too common. I like things that are different just because I guess.

However, I ended up with a 30-06 and loading it with Hornady 208 grain ELD M's. I haven't shot a deer yet, but all summer my test medium has been hogs. I have shot them from 50#'s up to one a hair under 300#'s yesterday. Fragmentation on small pigs has been outstanding. Creating absolutely devastating wounds. There is enough weight that penetration has been excellent on the big pigs too. Nothing shot with it had moved a step yet. All have fallen over and kicked a little at most. I'm at over 20 pigs right now. Just did three more yesterday.

Recoil is stiff, but I cannot see the need for anything else. It has been a long quest for me, but I think I have finally found my perfect round for killing big and small DRT

You're bored

Norma, Weatherby and Nosler brass are all marked "A-Square" because Art Alphin couldn't sit on his fingers during the SAAMI process to legitimize it.

I built one almost 20 years ago. Nice round. I find the 200 gr NBT, NAB and 210 NP ideal for it. My friend Dober has used his almost exclusively with the 200 NBT. Great elk bullet.

It's about the about the simplest cartridge to form from standard brass, and I think it's the best looking LA round ever.

However, I find no need for one for all the obvious reasons already stated.

Here's a nice article Finn Aagaard did on the round back in the day:

http://nitroexpress.info/ezine/NickuduFiles/Members-PDF/Aagaard-338-06.pdf

Thanks for the link Brad. Always learn something useful when I read on of Finn's articles.

Back when writers actually did their homework.

Substance in articles is becoming quite rare.

FWIW, I did much reading years ago before having Hart put a barrel on a 700. 23"

Shot 200 NBT at 2910
215s at 2790
225s at 2675 - Hornady, Speer and NPTs.

ALL would shoot 1/2 MOA, using either a 6x42, a 2.5-8x, or 1.5-6 B&L. 3-shot groups.

Used WW brass, partial sized, and IMR 4320 powder, what my reading led me to for accuracy and speed. Absolutely flattened 2 deer with it.

Lastly, spoke to a guy in the ammo biz before having mine built. They had done standard and AI, and in HIS experience, had no gain in speed with AI. They took elk to near 400 yds, exiting off shoulder with 225 NPT, silver dollar exit, and no tracking The 210 PT works fine, but only saves a couple inches drop at long distance, but loses energy. I prefer its BC/SD. The 200 Noslers HAMMER deer at 2900+ FWIW.

Great round, more a "Push" than Snap vs a 338 WM, though that rifle was about 3/4 # lighter. If building one today, I would go no longer than 22.5", no shorter than 21 for balance. Blast is modest. I would have a target weight of 7 to 7.5 # bare rifle. Also, I would have a contour of around .650 min to .675 or "700 Mag" contour max.

They Kill well, shoot accurate, and modest on recoil, IME. Too bad the rifle choices were not more abundant like the 338 Fed at one time, and ammo to match.

Useless.

Have another gallon...

Idiotic.

Aagard's penetration test seems to validate some of the common sense advice for the 30-06 and the 200 grain partition.

But I can certainly understand having to scratch an itch, logic be damned.

Done it a time or two myself, including a Weatherby ultralight in 338-06

Yeah, I've had three .338-06's over the years. It's a good round, especially for those who want something different on a .30-06 case. But eventually I decided either the .30-06 itself (especially with 200 Partitions) or the .338 Winchester downloaded a little covered the same ground. Also found the 9.3x62 more effective with heavier bullets than the .338-06 or .338 Winchester. This may not sound like a real rifle loony decision, but there it is.

Very disappointing......

If it’s “confirmation bias” you’re after, the Hunters Campfire forum is your huckleberry...

LOL, that was topngue-in-cheek, just a response to MD's apology for not making the "loony" decision.

But yeah, I know what you mean, how would you propose to annihilate the caravan??

Is there an animal in NA that will survive a hit by any decent 200-225gn bullet launched by a 338-06? I doubt effectiveness can be surpassed in any meaningful way. There could be better long range choices I suppose.

The .338-06 and a .257 AI are the last remnants of my wildcat fling. The .257 AI is the perfect deer rifle for the kind of hunting that I do, but the .338-06 is more about the rifle in which it is chambered, rather than the cartridge itself. One of these days, I will pass it along to someone who will appreciate it as much as I do.

What I've discovered in 30+ years of gun writing is many (if not most) readers want to read about stuff they use, and if the author writes about their favorite stuff then they feel justified--and a kinship with the writer. If the author praises their choice, then he's a blood-brother. Which is why gun writers who try a lot of stuff and report it all works on some level, for some purposes, are often considered blood-brothers.

In the past couple years I've done articles on rifles and cartridges from the .33 WCF to 6.5 PRC, after considerable dinking with rifles made more than a century ago and modern "customs" made a couple months ago. Have also shot a bunch of big game animals over 52 years, and been standing beside hunting companions as they shot at least as many. Have performed and observed a bunch of big game autopsies, and tested a lot of bullets in various media.

I'm still a rifle loony, but have yet to see major differences in how widely similar cartridges kill stuff, given bullets that penetrate and expand sufficiently, within certain broad parameters. Am still learning stuff every month (or week), but would be very surprised if somebody develops a bullet or cartridge that kills big game noticeably "better" (whatever that means) than similar rounds/bullets. Have seen 700-pound animals dropped on impact with 100-grain .25-caliber bullets, and go 200 yards with 300-grain .375 bullets put in just about exactly the same place--with both bullets recovered under the hide on the far side. As a result, am not convinced of the magic in any cartridge/bullet.

But we all love to bat such stuff around endlessly. In the past week have seen posts asking about whether the Nosler AccuBond is adequate for "big deer", or the performance difference between the Barnes TSX and Tipped TSX, despite all those bullets being around for more than a decade.

Yeah, there are differences in cartridges and bullets, but the biggie is shot placement by a considerable margin, not 1/2" smaller groups, 20% more bullet weight retention, a few 100ths of an inch in bullet diameter, or even twice as much initial bullet weight. If the bullet expands and penetrates sufficiently through the vitals, the animal will die quickly. If the bullet doesn't penetrate the vitals, the initial diameter or weight doesn't make much difference, despite the belief in magnum magic. Have seen this over and over again, as have others including Finn Aaagard, who I knew pretty well.

That doesn't mean I've quit "experimenting." But it does mean I no longer believe in magic.