Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Elk Hunting 325 WSM or 338 WM?

The 175-gn Sierra Pro Hunters are extremely accurate from both my Kimber and Browning .325's, and you can load them down to a pleasant 30-06 level of recoil too. My favorite practice bullet at shorter ranges in the .325 FWIW.

We built a number of fabulously nice 338's on pre 64 M70 actions and lighter than standard Kreigers cut to 23".Stocked them in Brown Precisions and they worked, and shot, great.

IIRC none weighed much more than 8# scoped,and were pretty easy to shoot. Last time in Alaska my back=up rifle was a similar rifle on a Classic action.

I have no experience with the 325.

Without wading through all these posts and taking my time, I would say neither.
I would much rather do a .338 WSM based soley on the fact that there are much better .33 cal bullet selection than a .32 cal bullet selection.

I would say without a doubt

FLIP A COIN!

I shot my first elk with a 338 Win Mag. I have a pretty darn nice M-70 338 Win Mag custom rifle. I'm using a 325 WSM on my next elk hunt.

My 325 Montana is just such a sweet rifle. Powerful yet controllable. Easy to get to shoot well. My old M-70's are lovely rifles to look at but some of them flat suck to tote up steep hills. You can lighten them up some but by the time you get an M-70 to weigh within a pound and a half of a Montana you'll probably have spent twice as much to get there.


There are plenty of good bullet choices for the 325, yes the 338 has more but to me that's a bit of a red herring since the 325 has more than enough. I really don't think people try 20 different bullets in a cartridge they usually only try 2 or 3 maybe 3 or 4 at the most (obviously some of the loony's here will be closer to the 20).

The WSM's are going to be around for a long time. The 7 WSM does seem to be fading but the 300, 270 and 325 have far exceeded sales expectations. They are great rounds and will be with us for our hunting lifetimes. Anyone who says the WSM's are going away has their head in a hole and doesn't check sales figures.

I talked to Jeff-o and 340boy before they got their Kimbers. I think you can tell by their posts they are pretty glad they did. Move away from the M-70 and just buy a Kimber Montana in 325 and I think you'll be darn glad you did........................DJ

Nah... 300 WSM

Watching elk collapse like dynamited smokestacks from properly-applied 30 caliber bullets,I see no need for improvement;and if I could be convinced to go WSM again in an elk rifle,the 300 gets my vote (if I didn't just shrug and get a 7mm . Elk are just not that tough IMHO.....

I have both 300 WSM and 325 WSM in the Kimber Montana I like both I see no real deferece in recoil (BUT) the 325 WSM dose make a little bigger hole in the animal <G> and thats a good thing IMO....... Go for the 325 WSM :GRIN:

STA: I am admittedly too old and curmudgeonly to excrutiate over .015 in bullet diameter ...and the elk are too dead from either to care......

The difference between a 300 WSM and 325 WSM is nowhere near the difference between a Kimber Montana and a heavier older rifle. Point being try a Kimber in either caliber and I think you'll like it.................................DJ

DJ: That part I get completely; if rifle weight is paramount ,it is tough to beat a Montana,and having the performance level in the light rifle is part of the attraction of the "package". I'm going to the range shortly to shoot mine.....

The pertinant point to me is that if you want the most powerful Montana, it's the .325 WSM, and the "package" is completely manageable if not FUN to shoot. I also feel that the .325 is at least knocking on the door of the .338 WM while the 300 WSM is more of a 30-06 +P.

Does that matter? I don't know. It will to some, not to others.

I don't see a downside to the .325. Bullet selection isn't what it is for the .30's or even 33's, but then again as DJ says there's everything you need and then some.

And it fits right in with a .358 and 10mm Auto <G>.

Since I have a .338 that is 8# 12 oz all up [I am working towards 8# even] I guess I will say .338 Win Mag.

I still believe Winchester would have sold a ton of 338 WSM's

I would like to have a Montana but for elk I believe it would be a 300 WSM with 180 or 200 grain bullets.

If'n logic matters, a 300 WSM is the better choice... grin...

Jeff, the 300 WSM is a slolid 150+ fps faster in equal length barrels over the 30-06 using the old "standard" powders. With the new RL17 it's a solid 200 - 300 fps ahead of the 30-06.

Those speeds make it a fair bit more than +P!

Would add, I personally can see no reason for using a 180 in the 8mm WSM. Seems to me the point of an 8mm is to do something a 30 cal is less suited to, and that would mean a 200 - 220 grainer.

Right now my 300 WSM is pushing 200 partitions at 2,850 and I'm running 180's a 3,020 and 165's at 3,150... again, that's certainly far more than +P...

Just the way I see it.

Brad, what's your load for the 180's? If you don't mind me asking. If you're using RL-17, how much faster is it than your "old" loads?"

SP, my 180 load is 64.0 gr's RL17/WW Brass/Fed 210 primer/3016 fps

I've gone as high as 65.0 for 3,067... that load seemed fine pressure-wise, I just prefer to keep things a bit more mellow.

In my first (of five) 300 WSM's I tired most powders including, H414, RL19, RL22, H4831, H4350 and Ramshot Hunter. After running a lot of rounds with the above powders and both Magnum and Standard primers, I settled on H4350 and a standard primer as "the best" all-around 300 WSM combo. 2,950 fps is the average in most rifles with a low ES and H4350 is "temp insensitive." Only RL19 gave slightly more speed (maybe 15 fps), but since it's not temp insensitive like H4350 I passed it by.

With a top load of H4350 and a 200 grain Partition I'm getting 2,800... 2,850 with RL17. 50 fps increase.

With a top load of H4350 and a 180 Partition I'm getting 2,950... 3020 with RL17. 70 fps increase (though if I wanted I could easily get 100 fps more).

My top 165 loads with H4350 were right at 3,060. 3,150 fps is no problem with RL17. That's a solid 90 fps more.

Some guys will see greater increases than what I'm posting because they push the 300 WSM more. I tend to load a bit conservatively to keep everything easy on the rifle.

Here's a link to the subject:

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbth...Board/11/page/1/fpart/all/gonew/1#UNREAD

Brad,

Have you chronographd your RL-17 load at cold temperatures?

I'm surprised that you haven't tried Ramshot Hunter. Any particular reasom why not ? E

John, no.

As you know the temps have been pretty moderate lately. I have shot the H4350 loads over the choronograph in temps well below 20*F and they chron'd the same the other day when I was testing the RL17 loads at around 45*F. Alliant obviously makes the claim that RL17 maintains "Consistent maximum velocity in extreme weather conditions."

That's the last big unknown for me with RL17.

RL17 has also shown a very slight edge accuracy-wise over H4350.

IIRC, the only other powder Alliant makes the same temp claim for is RL15 and I certainly found the claim to be true.

All-in-all, so far I think the hype about RL17, and at least the 300 WSM cartridge, is absolutely true and is one of those rare things in the gun world (and the world in general) IME.