Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Jim Carmichael, Explain Yourself

So in other words;
We don't need a.308 or 30-06 because we have the .300 mags, don't need the 7mm-08, 7X57, 280 because we have the 7 mags. Don't need that little 260 (6.5 Panther?) because we have the .264 mag.
Horse Crap!

I have to agree with allenday, For general 33 cal. purposes in that bullet weight class I can see no reason to own a 338-06 when I can just load down a 338 Win Mag if need be. As he stated the 250 g. bullet in the 338 is really the horse to go to see this the 338s full potintial.
Sure the 338-06 is a good one, but the 338 Winnie can just do more and Jim Carmichael knows it. His vast field experience with the 338 has proven it to Jim himself.
Besides, his name isnt on it (338-06).

On the 338-06 side,the 06 case is a better fit in the Mauser box,than the 458 case.A M-70 or a Sako would be a different story.

Of course, by that logic there is nothing that the 338 Win Mag can do that the 338 Ultra can't do and better. And of course, you can always load the 338 ultra down <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />.

Anyway, I agree with Teeder.

I can see that you're all upset, but if you follow that line of reasoning, you could also then say that a .300 Savage also outperforms the .30-06.

Everyone shoots better with a lighter-recoiling rifles, no question about it. I shoot a .223 Remington better than I do a .458 Lott, for example. But there's a fork in the road at some point where a ballistic increase of 200-300 fps. across the board for a given caliber begins to count, and the .338 Win. Mag. is at that fork in the road for a .338 caliber cartridge, at least in my opinion. The .338 Win. Mag. and its ilk are only too big if you can't shoot, 'em, and with practice, most people can, at least if they THINK they can!

And yeah, I also very strongly believe that the .300s do indeed out-perform the .30-06, and that cleverly-worded phrase of yours "horseshit!" won't do a thing to change my opinion on that one, either..........

AD

I've read some of J.C.s work and was not impressed. He came on strong when attempting to emulate Jack O'Connor and even latched onto the 280 Rem.as "his" cartridge. Of course a lot of gun writers of those days did that in order to drum up a following
J.C might have been more succesful if he had hooked up with a different mag or two. There were damn few in those days, but O.L. was one of the better ones.
As someone mentioned he could have been the victim of an ignorant editor who would save space at the expense of the article.
The last O.L.I checked out had articles a whole paragragh long ,squeezed in between adds.
I'm getting much more discriminate now in selecting what magazine I will buy. If they mention Mt.Bikes, kayaks, or Lama's or if they show a picture of a grown man wearing short shorts with cuffs on the legs, his shirt tails tied at the waist, and no socks in his loafers I'll pass.

AD,

I didn't say the smaller cartridges outperformed the larger ones. I was just pointing out that just because some cartridge outperforms another doesn't mean the smaller one is useless. I'm sure the .338 mag is very usefull, and would probably own one if I lived in Alaska. However the .338-06 is an extremely balanced cartridge. It's got the diameter, bullet weight, and enough speed to cover most hunting situations without beating the shooter as much as the mag.
Dismissing it because it's not as fast as the mag is idiotic. It's like saying, why would anyone buy a .308 or 30-06 when the 300 RUM is available, even though the smaller two would be more appropriate to most hunting situations.
I'll stick to my first comment - Horse Crap!

Doesn't it boil down to what you want to accomplish and what weight rifle you want? If only the fastest round in a given caliber makes sense or is useful, then we need to get rid of hundreds of rounds that serve no purpose. If the .338 Win. (which I use and like very much) is good, isn't the .340 Weatherby automatically better, and the necked down .378/.338 better yet. Afte all you can load them down to duplicate any smaller cartridge. Well, actually, no. If .338/06 performance is all you need, why carry more hardware, and burn more powder to get the performance level you're after.

Hey, now! Don't go and start making logical sense about this whole thing! That's considered below-the-belt in discussions such as this. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

RSY

Steve_No, all,

Steve you have hit the nail squarely on the head and I agree completely with you. If we based our rifle buying decisions based upon need, all of us could get by quite nicely anywhere in the world with a 30-06 and a 375 H&H. Performance, it seems to me, is a relative thing. There can be no question that a Porsche will outperform a Volkswagen. However, with speed limits everywhere and of course none of us would even consider speeding, the exceptional performance of the Porsche is really wasted.

Besides, there is only one real reason for buying a new rifle and that is because you want it. No other reason is necessary.

Tom

I am about as big a .338 Win. Mag. fan as could be found, I have shot, hunted with and reloaded for this cartridge for over 36 yrs, have owned 12 rifles so chambered and own 5 now. Allen is, as he usually is, right on about this round and it's performance.

My interest in using a .338-06 is based on being able to build a rifle on a Husqvarna 4100 or Brno 21-22 series action; this will give me the lightest CRF rifle available and the power of factory .338 Mag. cartridges. A number of very serious mountain hunters I know here in B.C. have done this and our chronograph results bear this out.

I know that one can find a Husqvarna action in 7Mag, re-barrel it and have an extremely light .338 mag, but, the recoil level of this-I've tried it-is just too much for precise shooting. So, the very light CRF .338-06 is, to me, a niche rifle for my backpack hunting, I consider it to be superior to a .30-06 for this purpose, especially in Grizzly country.

I am interested in cutting equipment weight wherever possible as I am close to 58 and find backpack hunting somewhat more difficult than I formerly did. The problem is that I much prefer this to outfitter's camps and having a guide find my game, so, I have a real use for the .338-06.

Kutenay--

The 10+15x50 Duovid is a very fine piece of equipment. It is a little heavy for general hunting, however--in short, a big honking binocular. I am also of the mind that 15x hand-held is not nearly as efficient as some folks might imagine. It probably needs a tripod to really take advantage of the high X's. At least that's my opinion, after having used several 15x (and owning one, a Minox 15x56). They work great from a vehicle or tripod, but in the field the slightes vibration tends to nullify the extra X's.

This is the reason I have the 8+12x42, which I've found to be a great all-arounder. It weighs 34 ounces, somewhat heavier than many 8x and 10x glasses these days, but when you want to glass EVERYTHING it cannot be beat.

The 8x42 Ultravid is also a nifty piece of glass, lighter than the older Leicas but still with that solid feel. I have gotten a look inside, thanks to my friends at Leica, and believe the solid feel will translate into the hunting field. The optics, of course, are second to none. For straight 8x it cannot be beat.

JB

In my experience the VW outperforms the Porshe at the Drive-In, but not at the Nightclub.

JMO, discussions like this are similar to debates about the number of angels that can dance on the head of a pin. Neither are worth great thought, and certainly no heat. I would like to say however, that the 7.62x39 is a cartridge that only the unwashed masses of the 3rd world should love, but alas, it is not so.

www.ContemplatingMy.Navel

Thanks JB, I was thinking tripod-the Leupy compact that I have with my current Leupy Compact 25x spotter and the 10x15 Leica, but, your comment is making me think that the 8x12 is probably a better choice. We have these pesky antler restrictions here in B.C. and I find 8x not quite enough to discern the correct number of points in some circumstances.

You have hunted here, so, you have an idea how rugged the terrain is, I like to know something is kosher before spending three hours going half a mile to shoot. I am not interested in trophy hunting, per se, so I hate packing the extra weight of the spotter.

I also find, that a 10x bino is more tiring to use for hours than an 8x, probably just gettin' old!

Kutenay,I had my 30-06 Husqvarna-FN '51 made in to a 338-06 instead of 338WM because four in the box seemed a better fit than the three magnums.The bolt face is easy to open up,and a touch with a Dremel fixs the extractor.But you lose the fitted Mauser box.Yes, I know the box will work with magnums,I have a 264WM FN with the same box,but it's not the same perfection.A thin 22 barrel will get you a honest 2650 with 225 accubonds.And the rifle will be so much better looking than those pre'64 M-70 you Lug <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> around.

Yeah, I know....ugly old junk and that p.o.s. Dakota, plus that junker Mannlicer-Schoenauer, gawd, my rifles are just such crap!

Of course, the F.N action weighs more than the Mod. 70, so, there is not much point in doing this if you want a light rifle, but, at least you won't be saddled with those terrible, tinny, OLD Mod. 70s......!!!!!

Having owned both the 338-06 and 338 WM I agree with Allen's comment's. That's not to say the 338-06 isn't a neat round... it is. It's just that dang "fork in the road" is, for me, right where the 338 WM sits. Kutenay's light-338-06 idea has merit as the tube can be made thinner and the barrel can go as short as 20". I used to want a sub-8lb 338 WM but as I've gotten older I really find a moderately barrel-heavy 338 WM that goes 8.5 lbs "all-up" much easier to handle.



Still, I really don't think of the 338 WM as a "Magnum"... it's a very balanced and shootable round for its power. Its bore-volume/case-capacity ratio is nearly identical to the very non-magnum 30-06. The comparison doesn't stop there either as the 338 launches bullets of similar SD's/BC's (albeit heavier) at similar velocities for similar trajectories... I've always thought of the 338 as a big 30-06 and a very worthwhile round to master!



Lastly, a relatively mild load of H4895 wil turn a 338 WM into a 338-06 for looong brass life and easy practice... the reverse can never be the case except with a 30" barrel!

I don't think anyone is disputing that the .338Mag is a great cartridge. It is. What I want to know is what qualifies the .338-06 as one of the dumbest "calibers" ever. Then Mr. Carmicheal goes on to say how great the .280 AI is for elk. I'm not bashing the .280AI, but why is such a great elk killer and the .338-06 is so dumb for elk. It just doesn't add up.
Also, is there really that much difference in effectiveness between a 225 grain at 2700fps (.338-06) and a 250 grainer at 2700fps (.338Mag) on elk? Large bears and moose maybe, but elk? Come on! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

Teeder, I think your question's have already been answered and the conversation's drifted to another vein.

Some 338-06's will get 2,700 with a 225, most go 2,650 with a 22" tube. The 250's will go 2,500-2,550. Not bad but it still lags 150-200 (+) fps behind a 22" bbl'd 338 WM. End of all life as we know it? No. Bounce off elk? No. The 338-06 is to the 338 WM what the 308 is to the 30-06. Most of us, for a genuine, all-purpose hunting round draw the bottom line somewhere around the 30-06, not the 308... and I dearly love the 308!

Don't sweat people's opinion's cause you have and like the 338-06! Go forth and use the 338-06 and slay all manner of beast's for the rest of your life because, practically speaking, you're more than right that there's not a lot of diference... BUT, a guy's gotta draw a line somewhere and that's a very individual thing! Me, I'd always choose the plain-jane 30-06 over the 338-06.

Brad,

No, my question of why it's so dumb hasn't been answered, but I'm going to let this dead horse lie in peace. I think only Mr. C. could quantify why he made that statement.
I'll continue to use and love the .338-06.
I'm done ranting now! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />