Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles 300 H&H vs 338 Win mag.

3rd paragraph gives rifle weight. I used this chart cause all rifle weights are the same #8.You can use the same weight bullet in both the 338 still has more "recoil energy" Whether or not it's "felt recoil" I guess depends on the person pulling the trigger

Same holds true for the 300 Ya can use lighter bullets which would also give ya less recoil

Nope.

With the powders the 300 generally uses, it will use similar or heavier powder charges than the 338. Hence more recoil with similar weight bullets, according to the numbers.

In reality, the recoil is really similar with same weight bullets. If one wants less recoil than a 338, stepping down to a 300 won't do much. In fact, lighter bullets at higher velocity can cause more recoil speed, sometimes making felt recoil as bad or worse as the heavies.

Never thought that would show up here. I must have made that chart 8 years ago.

All guns were assumed to be 8#. It's in the text above the chart.

I've owned two .338 Mags and 3 .300 Win mags. In my opinion, the .338 is certainly worse. I mostly used 168 to 180g bullets in the .300s and 210g to 225g in the .338s. When loaded to the potential I found the .338s to be a good bit more stout. The theoretical physics behind it backs that up as well.

Well that explains why some say the 338 has less "felt recoil" than the 300.
I think this is going to be a lot personal opinion on "felt recoil"... I personally don't find the recoil of a 300WM to be bad... would I want to sit at the bench and shoot it all day...NO.

Buzz I've posted your chart here before. I like it, plain and to the point...thanx

Don't have any experience with the 300 H&H but love my 338. Had a 300 WM that kicked the snot out of you when fired. I attribute some of it to the stock profile. To me anyway my 338 isn't too bad, but I grew up shooting 1oz slugs out of a 12ga pump! Plus the 338 dropped this years elk at 452 yards so I am happy. Now if I could find one in a pre64 that I could afford.

What we might be talking about here is what Mule Deer refereed to as "muzzle pressure"...which gives the sensation of greater recoil in the 300's.

Hopefully he will pop in and explain it.I recall an article he did on the subject back when the 300 WSM came out, or thereabouts.

I had a pal who was a recoil wimp of the most dreadful sort... but a fine shot. He could wale away frequently with my 338 and 210 Partitions but just withered under the fast snap of the 300 win mag with full house 180's...this in similar weight rifles, so I dunno....everyone has to shoot and determine for themselves.

I've had both, but pre 64 model 70 in 300 H&H is just plain cool!!!! The 338 mags I've had were both ruger 77's, are really good just kicked harder than my remington 721 and my mauser 98 in the 300 H&H. If it was up to me I'd find a 375 H&H and a 300 and call it good, if I'm going to do some recoil might as well do it in style, life is going by too fast!!!

"A Pair of Aces"

Aside from the 375, other good options, if you need something heavier than a 300, would be a 358 Norma or of course a 9.3x62. Both give up something in the trajectory dept to a 300 or 338, but they are more efficient with the larger bore giving less recoil than something with the same energy but a smaller bore.

OPs choices didnt include a 375

I wasn't responding to the OP.I already did that....Read mooshoo's post. I was responding to mooshoo.

Are you the new moderator?

Bob,I was surprised when you and couple other guys in the know chose the 300 H&H over the 338WM...why??

Late to the party, but, another vote for the .300H&H...

Me too.I have the Finnbear in question.

That decides it for me, the 300 H&H.

1tn: I'm not "in the know" on LR shooting as they define it today.....

Probably chose it because I have shot the H&H and 338 a lot out to 500-600 yards and like the 30 caliber magnums better for that stuff.

I ran the numbers but they are there for everyone to see,so won't recite them here;besides there are too many bullets to compare. I suppose it helps that I have killed some bull elk out around the 500 yard mark with H&H-type ballistics from a 300 Win mag.

Plus, I like the pre 64 300 H&H rifle better than I like the Sako.

So the truth comes out, but somehow I already knew that

bsa that is just how I grew up...

Got nothing against a Sako as they are quality rifles; especially like the short actions for 243 and 222,etc....little jewels.