Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Tell me about the .340 Weatherby

I have some first hand experince with the 340 and a hunting partner who lives in da UP still uses his.
It is impressive, load up a good 250 (or 275 Speer if you have any laying about), a dose of 7828 then hang on to your hat.
It does have reach and hits hard when it get's there.
An old friend from my Alaska days had one that he used and he summed it up "shoots as flat as a 7 mag and hits like a 375" probably not entirely accurate but close enough.

My .340 has been around the world and is the last big game rifle I would ever part with. It's accurate, flat shooting and powerful. It's has the trajectory of a .270 and the punch of a .375 as far as I am concerned.

Two of my shooting mentors, both with a couple more gray hairs than me intro'd the 340 to me. From there I ran totally amuck with it thru 2 barrels and am on my 3rd now.

So I'll ramble on with a few thoughts about the round I like so much.

First off, if put together in an intelligent manner it's one of the most accurate rounds I've ever been around. Most of the 340's I've been around have been built with Schneider tubes and on 70's, 700's and Mausers.

The tubes have been from 23" to 26" and generally a 4.5 wt Schneider. My first one was on my 700 and was @ 23" (went 8 1/4 with a 3-10 on it in Conetrols) and would consistently put 5 of the 250 Horns into sub 3/4"..!

Someone asked why the .340 isn't mentioned more in 338 talk and my thoughts on this is that it's for a couple reasons. One the Mark V's can be a bit expensive comp'd to the average 338. Two, many people just haven't the proper coaching and counceling as to how to put them together so they won't be too heavy (I want it all up at the absolute most 9lbs, that's rounds, sling etc..). And they're not sure as to how to build them so that they're as user friendly as they can be.

Too many people don't have enough weight out front and have too much in the action (Mark V), so they go lighter on the tube than one should or end up with a heavy rig. Either is unacceptable to me.

I've used 8 Rem mag and 375 H&H brass to form .340 brass and finally just went to using Wby brass and being done with it. Now I think that someone mentioned that they felt that the Wby brass life wasn't very good but that wasn't my finding at all. My first two boxes I went 13 loadings on the one and 12 on the other.

I used mine a ton on chucks at long range as well for yotes and the occaisional pd or porky. The 250 Horn is one of two rounds/loads that I ever found that would tear up a porky. Had one winter where we did a somewhat extensive test and shot 47 porky's to see what would really tear em up and what wouldn't.

The round is a wonderful and decisive killer of big game and it does it's work very well to long range. And when you hit something like an elk @ 400-600 yds it does have an effect. And that's something I happen to appreciate in a round. I took a good bull last fall @ a skosh over 400 yds with an 06 and it took two rounds and sat there and looked around. That's not something that would I would expect would happen if I had been using my .340.

Now some witch and moan about the bump of the round. And it can be a bit feisty, but if people want to master it they can. It does take a bit more commitment than most rounds is all.

And if I wished to go across the pond and take on M' bogo I'd sure not feel out of my element in using a 275 SAF.

Great round and totally under appreciated by my way of thinking.

Dober

Ruger270man,

The first time I fired one I held it loosely and pointed it toward the ground. I was going to work up a load. The bolt knob entered between my thumb and first finger. I told the guy to send it off to get a KEEPER installed.

When it came back I worked up a load for the Nosler 210. This Mark V loved them. They averaged 3,212 feet per second and regularly grouped 3/4" at 100 yards.

Nothing penetrated like the original 300 grain Barnes.

I like the round itself, but like Mark, I don't really like the average rifle that it comes in (Mark V, though that's what mine is). My next one will be on a M70 action with a better stock. I haven't shot as many animals as Mark, but I've shot ground squirrels, jack rabbits, coyotes, and elk with it and have liked the results.

Stick one D'Arcy's handles on it along with a Schneider 4.5 weight on it and rock on. I'd start with a 25" barrel and it'll be an instant rock star for you.

Dober

Mark, why do you specifically call out Schneider? That's not a barrel name I see too much (as opposed to Lilja, Hart, Shillen etc.), is there something specific you like about it and the 340 or is it just a combo that worked great for you?

I ran the reduced "deer load" for my .340 thru the JBM calculator just to see what the numbers looked like on paper. Even this mild load is no slouch.

200 grain Hornady SP @ 2761 fps =

3384.8 foot lbs of muzzle energy:


Here is what the trajectory read out said:

100 yards: +1.8 in.
200 yards: 0.00 2377.1 ft. lbs ME
250 yards: -1.3 inches
300 yards: -8.4 inches 1970.6 ft. lbs ME

Metallic Cartridge Handbook by McPherson and Fackler said that brass formed from 8mm Rem Mag cases has about 5% less internal volume than Norma/Wby brass. Said to reduce max loads by about 5% to compensate. Example, Wby info might say max 88 grains MRP and 250-grain Partition. Reduce the 88 grains to about 83-84 grains Max for the 8mm Rem Mag brass as an initial Max point. Your rifle may take the entire 88 grains MRP in that brass w/o problems.

Two of us bought rifles in Southgate, one from their display and one NIB - they only had two in stock. We tossed a coin, and I got the display rifle. Mine would get sticky with Rem brass and 84 grains MRP and 250-grain NosP or Hdy. His would take all 88 grains with no trubs. His max loads Chrony'ed over 3000 fps, but accuracy fell off so he backed down into the 29xx fps range for his loads.

Just run the 8mm brass through the .340 sizer and, it is ready to load - fairly low cost way to get .340 brass. I did not shoot mine enough to go broke paying for Wby brass.

It would shoot 1-inch 3-shot groups at 100 yards, as long as I remembered to hang on and keep still. It shot the NosP and Hdy 250-grains about the same as I recall. My last target has two overlapping 3-shot groups, with a 1-click windage adjustment between groups. The budget Tasco scope adjustment tracked. The Tetra one-piece base lets all four screws reinforce each other, and the hour glass studs let the scope rings align as needed.

Takes concentration to shoot it well - try to remember it kicks and blasts just as hard if I flinch. Three three-shot groups per session is enough for me.

The 250-grain NosP and the Hdy looked so alike when seated that telling them apart was nearly impossible w/o marking the rounds.

http://www.realguns.com/articles/318.htm article on .338 RUM has a chart comparing the .338 Mags with 225-grain bullets.

Good Q. I've not seen a dog, they're accurate as all get out, and they clean up better than anything I've seen to date and lastly they handle the life cycle of the barrel (from beginning virginity to fried) better than anything else I've used yet. (many people have thoughts and comments on barrels and yet haven't run them thru their life cycle and I'm interested in how they break in, how they shoot from begging to end, how they clean up and yeah how and when they die)

Long and the short I totally love the Schneider tubes and how they do their thing.

Dober

I have a Sako Finnbear that wears a Schneider 12 twist tube in 340. My most accurate load was with 225 Hornady Spire Points. I had a few boxes treated with Arizona Ammunition's proprietary coating (not moly but similar) and had great luck. The barrel I have is 'fast'. I get 3000 fps with 250 grains loads pretty easily. Not often that you can duplicate Roy's factory stuff. It is throated to take 300 SMKs seated to the bast of the neck so that I could built a long range single shot with that reamer should I decide to. I fixed my mag so that i can seat out to 3.85 with this rifle. Wears a Micky swirly in a subdued color scheme and probably weighs about 8 1/2 all up.

I built one in the early nineties and have taken about 12 elk with it now, caribou, deer, even a couple come-what-may coyotes. It is as Ross Seyfried once said a .375 that shoots as flat as a 270-- kind of the same thing Jorge was saying. It's not magic but has a fairly leggy engine with enough steam to boot fairly heavy bullets over 3000 fps. My hand loads with 250-gr bullets wouldn't quite get past 2950 fps but 225-grs would hit 3100 and the 210's trip the Chrony at just at 3200 fps. But the Swift A-F 275-gr would hit 2750 with ease. That's a brown bear bullet if I ever saw one. I agree with Dober in that I wouldn't feel at all under gunned with that bullet against cape buff or about anything for that matter.

I seem to gave taken more elk at 400 yds and over than many here according to a past thread but I don't plan it that way. But when you do get shots at that range and provided you've done your homework there are not many cartridges that are better. It is a long range hammer to use an over wrought phrase. I'm being careful not to exaggerate but the elk I've killed with it from 400 to 550 yds went down like elevators with bullets through the chest/shoulders.

My 340 was right at 8.5 lbs all up and I wouldn't want it heavier but I also had a 375 H&H that weighed the same and I found the 340 the more challenging. Not necessarily greater recoil but at least the same, and faster. Much depends as has been said on the platform. Mine was on a Rem 700 action, Shilen barrel, and in a Brown Prec stock with a Pach Decelerator pad which worked very well.

I've hand loaded everything with few exceptions. My rifle is an honest 1.5" 'r at 100 yds with everything shot through it. The most accurate bullet after all these years though is the 210 TSX which gets down to the MOA mark-- but not quite. Considering the size game hunted with this cartridge this does not bother me in the slightest.

It's certainly not needed for elk or moose but it's very good for that type of game and at long range. I think it would be an excellent choice for grizzly or brown bear. Its not for everybody but for someone who who is willing to put in the time and wants a powerful cartridge in a caliber with a lot of good premium bullets it's a very viable choice. Understand, though, it not the cartridge you build a light rifle around.

Well said Geroge!

Dober

It is a heck of a hammer on both ends . I feel a guy should go shoot 8-20 rounds through a .338 Roy or Ultra mag. before he dumps his money on one. The recoil is fast and brutal.

I find the Weatherby stock extremely uncomfortable to shoot as well. The design of the stock punches me in the jaw really hard, due to the high reversed slope or hump of the comb.

The .338 Ultra mag. has a wider array of rifles and stock designs, MUCH cheaper brass and similar velocities compared to the Roy.

I don't find the recoil of either round "manageable" at all. You have to really be paying attention when you touch one off. I saw a friend of mine get knocked out cold (the scope hit him) while shooting a .338 Ultra, due to crawling the stock. He's a big guy, but lost concentration. I am a stock crawler, especially prone, so for that reason, among the others listed, I won't own one.

It is a specialty round for seasoned shooters/hunters, not for the new guy that isn't familiar with stout recoil. I like to shoot for fun and I don't find the big .338's fun at all, but that's just me. Flinch

I agree with Flinch, the recoil was simply to much for me. I sold mine, then years later bought a 338 WM and haven't looked back. Funny thing is I love my 338, but hated the 340. Might have been the stock, but what ever it was it slammed me hard everytime I shot it.

...........Who was Popeye`s plumpy sidekick who loved hamburgers?....LOL!!!!

You run into this with both the FL, blown out 375 cases,and the Ultra Mags;and for some reason, when powder charges reach into the mid 80's and low 90's,bullets heavy and velocity high,the recoil in portable rifles goes up disproportionately.

I ran into this with the 375 AI,and the 340 Weatherby when I tried them ( belonged to friends)and the wildcatted 358 STA,which I built.Those large doses of slow powders and the heavy bullets made recoil BOTH hard and fast.

Then I figured out that a 375H&H weighing 8 pounds could sling a 250 gr bullet over 2900 using only 77-78 gr of faster powders like 4064,and later RL15.My last chronograph session showed 2940 with RL15 from my Krieger barrel.And recoil, while there,is a lot more manageable than any 340 or 338 Ultra.

You can say you are somehow handicapped by the ballistic differences between 338 and 375 bullets,but I have shot this load against my pals 340 Weatherby and to 400-500 yards there is not much difference at all.And with todays bullets (235 and 250 TX or TTSX,Northfork,Swift)the 375 combo is just as effective on game, and more manageable to boot,and IME seems to make bigger holes.

If you like going beyond 500 yards I suspect the big 338's will shade it,but at shorter distances,if you want a 340 without the baggage and boot, the old 375H&H and todays lighter high tech bullets, will deliver it without the excess baggage.

I believe that is a very good point Bob.

George: I've used the combo on brown bear with the 250 BBC,and a pal has used the 235 TX on moose,eland,kudu,gemsbok and elk.All the traditional medium bore fodder.So we know it works as well as the other mediums.Which makes sense because that's the kind of stuff H&H had in mind when the cartridge was invented.

As to the recoil...well I have flopped prone and shot from the bench with the 338, 340, 375,375AI,etc,and the big wildcat 35,all quite a bit.The 375 with the quicker powders and lighter charges just lacks that heavy, hard snap of the 340 and its' ilk.The Holland recoils slower..and to me just feels more manageable...

You just don't have the recoil related issues Flinch mentioned...very shootable combo.

Admittedly these are small differences going either way, and I think the 340 is a great cartridge...but if you like something more manageable, even if just a little,the H&H with lighter, tough bullets provides it.

Having or having had a 340, 300 mags, 375 H&H, 375 AI, and a 416 I have to agree. Though my 416 Rem was a lb heavier at 9.5 lbs, even it didn't recoil so fast. My 458 Lott was a different story.

I have actually decided what you have just written and am trying to sell my 340 (a left hand 340 is not in high demand) and meanwhile picked up and tuned a 375 Ruger for use with the lighter mono bullets or bullets like the 260-gr Accubond. The Ruger is also 8.5 lbs all up. Im not a 700-800 yd game shooter so the lesser ballistic ability of these 375 slugs relatively to the 338s will make very little difference to me.