Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Elk Hunting .300 Win Mag or .338 for elk

How do you feel these 2 cartridges compare. Thanks in advance.

The .300 Win shoots a little flatter, the .338 Win can shoot a little heavier bullet. A bullet from either one IF PUT IN THE RIGHT PLACE will kill an elk, but so will a bullet from a .30-06, .270 Win, .308 Win, .243 Win, or ….

Either works fine.

You are splitting hairs to find any important differences, given accurate rifles, the right bullets, and a hunter who knows his trajectory, can dope the wind and knows how to shoot. Angels dancing on the head of a pin...

Are you choosing between two rifles you already own, for an upcoming hunt? If so I'd choose the one you're most confident with.

If you're trying to decide which to buy between those two, I'd go .300 WM. It's plenty for elk and with less recoil, most people would tend to shoot it more than a .338. And that's more important than the cartridge, IMO.

.300wm!!

The .375 H&H is far superior to either. I read it here on the Campfire.

I wouldn’t mess with either one. No one can handle the recoil. (Also learned on the fire)


Or, you could read smokepole’s post.

If you can shoot them equally well, then the larger heavier bullets definitely won't hurt.

But always depends on the projectile, although the 338 is definitely good elk medicine even with plain bullets.

My preference is the 338wm, but either will work just fine if you use appropriate bullets. As far as recoil, I tend to prefer the 338wm over the 300wm.

Most bullets made for the 338 are made pretty stout too. I remember reading it in one of the gun rags that this is because bullet manufactures know the 338wm will be used on animals from elk on up, so the pills they use are made with that in mind. Be it thicker jackets etc... According to one of our newer authors here, he wrote this 20 years ago: "If there's a quintessential modern elk cartridge, the .338 Winchester qualifies"... Very true, even by today's standards...

338 win mag every time.

And don't believe all the keyboard commandos, shooting a rifle chambered in 338 will not loosen your fillings.

338 WM. 250 gr. NP.

My other choice for Elk is my 35 Whelen. 250 gr. NP.

I’ve killed nice bulls with both. Both will get the job done in fine fashion, assuming good bullet placement. But the 338, as expected, will be a little more “dramatic”. My bulls I’ve shot with my 300 were taken with 180 grain Partitions, 180 grain TBBC’s and 200 grain AccuBonds. I have taken elk with my 338 using 210 grain Partitions and 225 grain North Forks. That last load with NF’s...just flat impressive. All have been DRT’s from 150 yards out to 360 yards. It just packs a wallop, subjectively speaking.

378 Wby is the ticket. Why muck around with weak stuff like the 300 and 338 WM’s...

I've used a 270, 30-06, 300 Win Mag and 9.3x62. The ones hit with the 270 were just as dead and many of those were hit with old cup and core bullets. I know people that have taken them with a 243, again with cup and core bullets. I've seen a 270 harvest a bison. Hit them in a good spot with a decent bullet and mission accomplished. Either of the 300WM or 338WM are more than plenty and nothing wrong with using either or a 378 Wby if you can shoot it well:)

378 is too fast, the bullets just pencil through.

Me too. I have two identical rifles in .300 & .338 (M70 Classics). The .338 somehow seems less harsh off the bench than the .300.

I think it depends a lot on the bullet you choose. ie, your charged by a huge grizzly. You wand the 300 win with a 200gr bullet or the 338 win with a 250gr bullet? That's not to say the 200gr bullet probably won't work, I'm sure it will but I also think a 338 dia 250 gr bullet will work better. On an elk at even 200yds, results will be the same if you do your part.

I guess that's true. And I forgot about those charging grizzlies.

I'm going to amend my answer... 416 RM is the ticket.

Then it just comes down to whether you want a 350 gr mono or 400 gr Partition. But that's an entirely different 12 page thread...

There you go again, advocating a pest cartridge that just won’t work on raking shots. Far better off with a more assured solution. .416 RM will probably get the job done, but more oomph will be better.

Campfire counsel at its best!

Both are great and very capable cartridges with proper bullets. My wife has been very happy with her .338 WM since 1995......and counting! memtb

Ralphie, this is the reason I won’t let my wife participate on the “fire”.....she would discover that she can’t handle her .338WM! memtb

How do they compare? They both offer pretty much the same handicaps.

Flip a coin. Anyone who'd killed enough elk with BOTH chamberings so as to be a credible resource, is likely to tell you there isn't a statistically significant difference between them.

They’re both too big.



P

In the last 6 or so years the camp at which I’m a grateful attendee has killed elk with:

270 Win
7 Rem Mag
7 Mashburn
30-06
300 Win Mag
300 Weatherby
338 Win Mag

Bullets are mostly of the Partition, Accubond, Scirocco variety.

All elk died.

Amazing!

243
270
7mm-08
7 Rem mag
30-06
300WM
338-06
338WM
35 Whelen
375 H&H

Partitions, monos, trophy bonded, cup and cores

Have seen/used all of these combinations work. The only time there was a rodeo, is when the nut pulling the trigger did not do the job.

I like 338 for elk, not needed but I like it. I do have a 416, maybe I should dig that out the next time I go elk hunting.

I have both. I like the .338 more than the .300's I have. Mostly because I find the .300's have a faster sharper kick with 180's. I am trying some 200's this year to see how I like that recoil.

Truth be told I only use the .338 occasionally these days. Almost all my hunting ius with an '06.

I like the .338 for a couple of other reasons too.

First, I believe that I can see more reaction when I hit an elk with the .338 than the .30 cals. It may be my imagination but its mine.

Second, the ballistics of the .338 compared to my '06 is very close. The .300 mags, especially the .300 Weatherby are somewhat different.

I’ve never owned a .300 Winchester Mag but one .338 was simply less accurate than I could bear. I favor the .35 Whelen and 7mm and .300 Weatherby's most days, but I may switch to the perfectly adequate 7x57 on the downhill side. Any .300 Mag is more than adequate for elk beast as is your .338 WM. Heard that on the Campfire, too....

I've shot more elk with a 338 than all other cartridges combined. I always used 250 grain Nosler Partitions. Different versions depending on decade.

Having said that, I've sold my last 338 Win Mag (I've had 4) and a couple 300 Weatherby rifles. I'd use 180 or heavier Partitions in either of those and feel 100% comfortable.

But I know people that use 270's and are happy with those. I am not confident in being able to get a perfect broadside shot.

I’d put the 30-06 at the bottom. Heard that one barely died.....

Bugger,

If you believe "a perfect broadside shot" is necessary with the .270 Winchester (or even smaller cartridges) when shooting elk, then you are a victim of of the "lore" of mediocre cup-and-core bullets .

I wonder why I carry anything else! The Mashburn is pretty nice though.

The Mashburn is no good 'cause you can't buy ammo at 7-11.

I read that right here.

Amen to that. With good bullets it’s been very good to me. And man do they usually shoot pretty easy...




That’s a fact SP! Danged this is darned near useless!

I think elk are tough to kill particularly when they are on high alert or already have been shot at. While no doubt a 243 will do the job. I’m not a fan of a dedicated elk rifle that doesn’t start at 300 Win if you need to stop not just kill them.

Once there with good bullets it just doesn’t make enough difference to the elk so it is purely your preference.

The most rabid & knowledgeable public land elk hunter I know shuts his business down a month to hunt 3 states, practices at long range all year. He was using a 30-378 Weatherby and now uses a 7mm STW all personal preference.

Elk are tough critters

Either of the two are excellent

Big heavy boolits.......know how to to use the rifle

Most of all know your limitations

Another bit of useless trivia; since about 2005 our CO elk hunting gang has killed elk pretty dead with:

.308 Win
7mm Weatherby
7mm Rem Mag *
.338-06 (1)
.340 Weatherby (1)
.270 WSM
.30-06
.300 Win Mag *
.300 WSM *
.300 Weatherby *
.30-378 Weatherby
.35 Whelen

Might have missed one somewhere along the line. Most numerous recently(*). I think I’m the only one in recent memory that hunted with a .35 Whelen and 7mm Weatherby. The .340 Wby and .338-06 shooters have long since departed the pattern.
Happy Trails

.300 WM or .338 WM?

If you have both, take the one you shoot best. And the other as a backup.

If buying and you already have a .308, .30-06 or 7mm RM that shoots well, I'd go .338 WM.

Currently working up loads for the new 155g .284" Federal Terminal Ascent for my 7mm RM and .280 Rem with the intent to take them this fall. If the loads don't work out I may take them again anyway. Have not taken elk with the .280 but have taken more with a 7mm RM than all my other rifles combined.

Currently shooting Barnes 175g LRX in my .300 WM. Have not taken an elk with that load but did drop a nice mulie buck with it. The buck was on the ground before I recovered from the recoil. Nosler 225g AB are my choice for elk in my .338 WM, but unnecessary - I use 225g Hornady SSTs for practice and think they would work just fine.

The .338 WM provides noticeably more recoil than my .300 WM, although both rifles are essentially the same - Ruger actions and barrels, Ruger boat-paddle (skeleton) stocks. Calculated recoil for the .300 is around 29 ft-lbs while the .338 about 36. By comparison, my 7mm RM is at about 24 ft-lbs with either my 140g or 160g loads, My .280 Rem is around 18 ft-lbs with a 140g Nosler AB The .280 load delivers more velocity and energy at 500 yards than a typical 150g .30-30 delivers at 100. If I can get the Terminal Ascent up to 2850fps at the muzzle, which should be easy based on my tests so far, the .280 becomes a viable elk rifle well past the 600-yard limit of my practice. Daughter #1 will be carrying a .270 Win with a 150g Nosler ABLR in her .270 Win. With a calculated 18 ft-lbs recoil, half that of my .338 WM, that load is also good well past 600 yards. (Both the .280 Rem and .270 Win loads deliver over 2100fps and 1500fpe past 700 yards at 7000 feet altitude.)

The point is, you don't need to put up with a lot of recoil to have an effective elk rifle/cartridge combo at typical ranges. If long range is your game, the .300 WM would be my choice. A high B.C> bullet, like the 200g Terminal Ascent, launched at 2950fps will deliver 2000fps and 2000fpe past 875 yards at 7000 feet altitude.

Get or use a rifle you like. Headstamps and bullets matter, but so does enjoying the hunt.

I could like any and all of those myself.

I was going to type the same thing, but decided to sit on my fingers.

Glad someone said it...

To be honest I haven't shot an elk. But I've shot my share of moose and caribou. It works very well for both of those.

I personally have killed them with 30-06, 7wsm, 300 WSM, and 300 Rum. Also carried a 7 Dakota and a 300 Win Mag. I’d pick the 300. Better trajectory with an adequate bullet (likely a 200gr bonded or 165-180 mono). I do like the 7 Dakota for a flat shooting killer too. I choose flatter shooting calibers as it’s been a few elk since I’ve shot one on this side of 250 yards, 3-500 seemingly more common....

Both quite suitable

There is nothing wrong with the .300 win mag but the .338 is "special" for me. I really like 225 grain partitions and accubonds. I hunt a lot of heavy timber. The possible additional range of the .300 isn't really applicable. More bullet weight, more penetration is nice when the elk are in timber, standing / moving in strangely contorted positions, so there might be bigger bones than expected in places not really expected.

Tom

Brad,
You forgot the 416 Wby. With 300 TSX bullets it is speedy. Keep it under 7.5#.

Split the difference and get a 8mm Rem. Mag.

Yes, but....but....but...were they all fired through CRF actions?

Where are you hunting? How far are your shots?

For me, I use my .338WM the most because I don't get long shots hardly ever. With a 250gr Woodleigh Weldcore or a NPT it's plowed through even on off angled shots. In timber you don't get to pick your shots much so having confidence in deep penetration is nice. Out in the more open areas I've used lot's of different cartridges. Even .257" bullets have worked.

I see elk all the time on my ranch. I get landowner tags for 6 bulls every year. I'm 3 miles from the Jicarilla and about the same from the SFNF. I've killed many bulls and one is silly to use a cartridge like the 338WM. Elk can be killed efficiently with most 30 caliber rounds.

I can kill an elk with a 22lr too, so who the fu ck cares if you think using a 338 is "silly"?... Is every cartridge silly, if you can use a lesser cartridge to kill something? We might as well all just use a 223 rem, if we all thought that way. The 338 wm was made for killing elk. It does a damn fine job at it too. The main thing I've noticed about the 338wm, is it decisively puts them down. If I were in your position, though, I'd be using every cartridge I could, just to make things interesting. 6 bull tags a year? Damn, must be nice... I have to work my azz off to find them, while you can just sit in your field and pick them off like nothing.. Where I'm hunting (4% success rate area in public land), I don't want them to run off very far, or someone else is likely going to tag my bull. I use a 338wm.. Nuff said..

^^^^^^^^ This ^^^^^^^

I hate to continually agree with you......but, you’re right so damn often! memtb

I think someone on this forum, an individual of some repute decided that a lightweight 416 Remington was about the perfect elk rifle

Maybe he will chime in

Excellent choice for shots taken under 400 yards, beyond that.....maybe something that shoots a bit “flatter” for the longer shots! memtb

yep this reply made me chuckle & grin ! > best reply

I am envious of you big gunners. All afore mentioned rounds work just fine. Whatever gun you use, be proficient with it. All my elk were killed with my Marlin 30/30, iron sights. Troublesome basin, back when I was young!

Never hunted elk, but have shot eland ~2,000 lbs at just over 300 yards with a .338 (250 grain Woodleigh) as well as a leopard and other PG (225 Partition) and it worked well. On other hunts, shot lots of PG including waterbuck, zebra, kudu, etceteras with a .300 Win at various ranges (200 grain Swift A Frame) and it worked well, too. Took the .300 Win to Argentina and killed a large red stag decisively, same 200 grain A-Frame and it dropped at the shot. My buddy on the same hunt killed his red stag with a .338 (225 grain TSX). It was no deader than the one I killed with my .300.

If you are recoil sensitive, I took a .30/06 loaded with Barnes 168 TSX to Africa in 2018 on a cull hunt and was impressed with how well it killed various species, including waterbuck.

My conclusion is that careful bullet selection and shot placement are the critical factors, not bullet diameter. Pick the rifle and cartridge that you shoot the best.

Clearly rude behavior.

6.5MM Creedmoor is proven on elk to over 500 yds.

How far are you planning on shooting?

Well, don't hold out John. What bullet did you use, and I'm wondering if you copied S&W performance center or did they copy you? Nice rifle and nice bull... Looks like a perfect shot too..

Yep, really nice.

I shot one that scored 380 and that one looks pretty similar. What was the final score?

Lots of mass.

Good eating.

DF

BSA,

"The 338 wm was made for killing elk."

Interesting statement--and partly true. But the .338 was actually made decent penetration with cup-and-core bullets, even though Nosler Partitions existed back then. Most hunters had no clue about how much Partitions improved the penetration of lighter, smaller bullets in smaller cartridges--especially the true believers of Elmer Keith. Which is apparently why some hunters (though fewer and fewer) believe the .338 is absolutely necessary for "tough angling shots" on elk.

Have killed quite a few big game animals with the .338, from deer-size game to Alaskan moose to eland. It's a fine round, but not anywhere close to necessary these days for killing elk.

Are cup and core bullets better than they used to be?

He’s not shooting 6 a year himself dumb ass.

One of the most “decisive “ elk kills I’ve seen was with a 243, guess it was made for killing elk.

Nuff said.

Looks like a rough hunt...

I'm guessing John Burns will say factory ammo - 130 VLD hybrid in the Federal Gold Metal Berger line.

“Not necessary”.....very true! But spare tires, insurance, seat belts are not “necessary”.....but are pretty darn nice to have for that “unexpected” situation! Just saying! memtb

No, it's more like a suburbanite driving a Peterbilt bobtail as his commuter vehicle in the rat race, you know just in case he ever has the need to pull something....

Just like 300 WM and 338WM shooters, I would say 9 out of 10 suburbanites can't drive a Peterbilt.

Nah, more and more are equipped with automatics...

Other than wrapping it around a telephone pole, they could probably drive it...

DF

John, assuming one uses a 200gr Nosler Partition in the 300 and a 210 in the 338, which one is more decisive on game like elk, grizzly/brown bears and moose? How both compared to a 375 H&H?
The only reason I ask is my father used all of the above rounds and said he thought the 300 might kill a little quicker than the 338, but that the 375 had an edge on both of them. Most of his hunting was with african game.

Here's my quickie Campfire version: Have not been able to see any difference between the .300 with 200 Partitions and .338 with 210s--except 200s from the .300 penetrate noticeably deeper. In general, yes, the .375 (or similar rounds, such as a 9.3x62 loaded to modern pressures) does have an edge. But a lot depends on where you hit them, and many hunters don't differentiate between "bone" shots and rib heart-lung shots.

For the longer version, you might want to read my chapter on killing power in Gun Gack II.

The 416 Rem is well proven.

JB, would you include the 35 Whelen, as having an edge as well?

Maybe, though haven't seen it used nearly as much as the .338 and 9.3x62. Though have seen even smaller .35s, from the .35 Remington to .358 Winchester, used on deer-to-elk sized game quite a bit, and they do appear to have an edge over smaller calibers. But again, that seems to be an overall trend, not an every-time thing, and also depends of course on the bullet used and shot placement.

A couple examples of extremes.

Once shot a whitetail doe shot at about 50 yards with a .35 Remington, using the factory 200-grain Core-Lokt ammo, the deer quartering toward me. I aimed at the shoulder, and at the shot the deer did the little heart-shot leap, then disappeared into the thick woods right next to it. I expected a blood trail, but didn't find one. But I knew the bullet had hit the deer, and probably right where I aimed, even the factory open sights on my Marlin 336. This took place on top of a ridge, so I started transecting the opposite slope, an hour later finding the deer dead close to 100 yards below the ridge--hit right where I'd aiming, the bullet breaking the shoulder and going through the lungs and top of the heart before exiting the rear of the ribs. Did not find any blood trail until I'd already seen the dead deer.

A hunting partner in Africa shot a big Burchell's zebra at around 150 yards with his .375 H&H, using a handloaded 260-grain Nosler AccuBond at around 2800 fps. The zebra stood broadside, and he put the bullet in the shoulder, right behind the big joint. The stallion ran off, falling after 200 yards, with both lungs pretty much destroyed, and the bullet expanded perfectly under the hide on the far side, retaining 85% of its original weight. Have seen a bunch of other "elk-sized" African animals shot with the .375 and a similar load, whether 260 AccuBonds or other good 260-270 grain bullets, and when hit right none has more than half as far before falling. But that one did.

Thanks JB.

I've been interested in the thinking that somewhere around .35 caliber and up, rifle cartridges have more killing power. I've heard anecdotal reports over the years from various people. And I think Nathan Foster has written about it.

Jason

yer all wrong, in 1975 i gunned my first of many big bores, 152 guntube launcher. M551a1. I have to admit its kinda funny to watch out of state hunters bring the biggest thing they have and end up eating tag soup. I still have the 1896 30-40 krag my grandfather used on elk. Have they gotten more armored or folks just to lazy or dont know how to hunt anymore.most folks i know here in eastern orygun use calibers from 6.5 to 30-06. Hell i have a new old winchester 670 300wm, never ever scoped it never fired it just donr need it.

I do admit we hunt only private land

300 win with 180 grain bullets that your gun likes your all set, have fun, dont pay any attention to the wise guys here!

The comment about elk being tough to kill, and the .270 needing a perfect broadside shot are interesting. I started my hunting career with a .270 and truth be told if I never used anything else, it would likely have not made any difference other than saving a great many thousands of dollars in custom rifles, reloading, scopes, etc. My first dozen elk were with a .270 and it worked perfectly.

While I have both a .300 and a .338, I have killed more elk with a puny little .308 than anything else. If you can shoot precisely, it is all you need quite often. The only thing the .300 offers me is an extended range which is certainly a feature I will take advantage of at times. December hunts tend to be longer range affairs and the added velocity is welcomed when the shot is an extended one. However, when the shots are in the 400 and under range and the winds are calm, I see no need for a magnum cartridge at all.

It took me a few years to realize all a magnum gives you is perhaps an additional 50-100 yards, that's about all. A .270 or .30-06 will take 99% of all game in the lower 48 and probably 95% else where.

What 1% of game in the lower 48 will they not take?

I've always regarded the 270 Win a scaled-down, light-recoiling 300 mag. Similar trajectories and killing power.

Before he died, I corresponded a bit with George Hoffman, Professional African Hunter, and the developer of the 416 Hoffman (which eventually became the 416 Rem Mag). His elk rifle was the 270 Win. All his nearly 50 elk were taken with the cartridge he told me.

Elk aren’t hard to kill, just a wee bit hard to hunt!

The greatest difference is in bullet development.
Larger belted magnums became a thing because 303, .270 and 30/06 factory ammo was inconsistent and loaded down.
Handloading was just for a few of the gun nuts and Nosler Partition was expensive and less accurate than the plain old Sierra, Speer and Hornady stuff. I was handloading at this time.
Many of my friends moved into the larger chamberings because bullets failed, the larger left larger residual pieces of bullet in and around the vitals.
These days are quite different, bullets can be extraordinary and super reliable.
I suppose local conditions and tactics might influence things but here on the west slope of the Rockies a .270- .280- 30/06 is ideal , in a light , short and easy to carry version. Enjoy your Sunday

Yes, it’s about the bullet, not the cartridge.

I never had much of any problem "hunting them" WAM; its been in the "finding them to kill them" part that's been rough on me! lol

In my lifetime I have shot them with several different 7mm's, an 06, (14) muzzleloader, 300 Bee, and 300 WM, out to and past a laser measured 540 yards. To this day I still feel that there is a noticable difference between the 300 WM and the 7's. I will always favor the 300 WM. But I think the old adage, that you should shoot what you can shoot, and with good bullets, you will do well.

I'd spend more time worrying about which bullet than trying to decide between those two rounds.. Either will work just fine, as will a metric ton of other rounds. For elk, I like a really solid bullet that will provide excellent penetration. I've made the mistake of using lighter constructed bullets and learned the hard way.

Jim, I think you said it better than I did! Happy Trails

Twenty years ago I started with 300's on up. As time went on and the tags were consistently filled, I moved to 308's .270's 30-06's and in '19 - the 6.5 CM. As many have said, you need a good bullet in the right place.

Anyone who has shot them enough to be proficient at distance can tell you the statistically significant difference is the price per round for practicing. The cost per round hunting is not significant compared to the total cost of the hunt.

I'd pick the .338. I'm not terribly recoil-sensitive, but if I'm going to get into the recoil level of those two cartridges, I might as well be throwing the bigger bullet. Plus, there's a warm, fuzzy feeling that comes over you knowing you have a .338 Win. Mag. in the safe sighted-in and ready to go.

AMAZING!!! on an animal that looks to be every bit of 150lbs. LOL OHHH my, this is some truly humorous stuff here

Which is solid evidence, that there is no such thing as “too much gun”! memtb

My vote is "neither". Neither is required for elk, and I've never owned either. Once the powder charges get much above 60 grains, I stop having fun and start flinching involuntarily. If you are wondering if you've got "enough gun" for elk, I suggest looking into the Cheytac rounds, or the Allen Magnums from 7mm, shooting 160gr Accubonds at 3550, or 200gr bullets at 3300, on up to the REALLY ENOUGH versions.

In my experience the .505 Gibbs is an absolute minimum for elk, but only when loaded to the max with monolithic bullets.

The .505 Gibbs is a good cartridge but,for elk I like the .500 A2 or its little brother the .495 A2.

Maybe, but I'd want to do some penetration tests first.