Ok here the dilemma I own two rifles one a Winchester pre 64 70 in 300 H&H and a 1966 Sako Finnbear deluxe 338 Win. If you had to choose between the two as your only long range big game gun which one would you select ?

The .300 H&H.

+1 on the 300 H&H, classic cartridge, can really hum when handloaded, and doesn't knock the snot out of you.

The 300H&H.

The Sako for Me by a long shot.

338

NOT having any experience with either of the 2 cartridges mentioned why the 300 H&H over the 338WM ?

300 H&H

4 for the 300 H&H , 2 for 338 Win Mag. One needs to go to pay for the other unfortunately . I have some nice 30-06's which can be loaded to near 300 H&H levels, but I own no mid bore magnums. I prefer the aesthetics of the 70, and maybe I'm comparing apples to oranges with the two. opinions appreciated.

That was gonna be my next question. If ya have an 06 is there a need for a 300 H&H ?

300 H&H

Well, the H&H can be loaded to 300 Win. Mag levels.

Good point, but in all honesty, I wouldn't own either one if I owned a 30-06. I think, for me, the next logical jump up would be the 338

How long is long? When I have it at the range I shoot my .338 WM to 600 yards on a regular basis. Took my elk with it last November at 487 yards.

FWIW, I just traded off two .338 Win Mags to go with a .300 Win Mag as my "one rifle for all big game". At my age, the recoil from the .338s has become objectionable.

Theyre both great choices, take the one that fits you best

Black Bear, Mule Deer on down 300 H&H.

Elk, Moose, Bison, Big Bear and such 338 WM.

Gunner

1t, If you have a .300 H & H, you have NO NEED for an 06!!

My choice would be the .300, when I move from .30 cal. I would go to a 375 H & H..
While I usually agree with gunner500, not this time.. Have had three or four 338's and a .340 now.. I haven't seen any thing they can do better than my .300's.. If I need a bullet of 250 grains or more then I would go with my.375..

I guess that might be true if ya handloaded. But if ya don't I think the 06 would be wiser.

As a cartridge choice it would be the 338 win mag. Rifle standpoint, the pre 64 wins. If you were asking about an Alaskan like mine, It would be a no brainer....As for the guy that switched to the 300 win mag because it "recoils less than the 338 win mag", he's smoking something. The 300 win mag holds more powder and if you are going to run one, you might as well use the 200 gr. pills in it (especially if you already own an '06). They (300 win mag) kick harder than any 338 I've ever shot. Pretty plain and simple really...

Plus one on all accounts.

bsa, usually, I agree with what you have to say, but this time I must disagree.. The hardest kickers I have had lately have been .338's especially when loaded to the top with 200 grain bullets.. I could better the speed with less recoil from my .300 win. As I said, if I need more bullet than available in .30ca. I would move up to my .375...
It was always easier for me to get top speed and acc. out of my .30 cal than it was with the .338..

You don't "need" a 338 for elk, moose, bison. I've seen bison taken with a 270 and elk taken with a 243. 338 probably has some benefit for truly big bear, but many have been taken with less powerful cartridges.

This is true.

You don't see these two compared very often. As to the question, I'd let the rifles tell me which one is most accurate.

You're right bw. I'd probably try to hang on to both of those classy rifles and since he's asking about, "which one for "long range", that's exactly what I'd do. Shoot them both at extended range (side by side) and let that be the deciding factor..

300 H&H

I ran some numbers with newer stuff like the 200 gr AB and the 225 AB...the H&H wins in drop and drift;but not by much and the newer bullets close the gap.

At 400 yards there is not much difference if you pick and choose loads.By the time you get to 1000 yards (!)the Holland wins by about a foot in drop and 7-8 inches in drift.

With older, standard bullets that I shot out to 600 yards with both (180 NPT and 210 NPT), the Holland wins but the two cartridges look pretty similar to 400 yards.At 600 they looked different.I suspect a turret would cure the problem.


Recoil is too complex;the Holland is among the mildest recoiling 300's,and a 338 with light bullets is a different animal from a 338 with 250's.

On mature bull elk, I found the bulls are about equally impressed with either,so after watching this a few years, my 338's went by the wayside in lieu of the 375H&H and have never been replaced;if I need more than a 7mm or 30 cal,I want a 375.

Not that a 338 is not "good"...just not on my menu.You need to think pretty hard to justify either a 338 or 375 in North America, but if we work at it, we can still do it.

A warmly loaded 30/06 comes close to factory loads for the 300 H&H,but not good hand loads to full H&H potential, where it beats the 30/06 pretty easily.

Keep the 300 H&H. They are both fully capable cartridges, the H&H is just classy.

Sell 'em both and buy a Montana 300WSM, way better.

300 H&H.

Yep, the 300 H&H, although I suspect a .338 is a great cartridge, the old 300 H&H will do what your askin'

It would kind of help if we knew what the OP's idea of long range is, and what animals he is shooting.

I'd not be concerned about recoil in either of those rifles. Both are heavy enough to mitigate plenty of it. I've had several magnums in 7mmRM, .300wsm, .300wm, .300 wby, and .338wm. Currently running a Sako .338.

Not according to the recoil charts: http://forum.gon.com/showthread.php?t=56996

I've never shot a 338WM but have shot a few 300WM . I've heard that the 338 has a slower push as compared to a sharp jolt of the 300. Some say the "felt recoil" of the 338 seems less than the 300, other say differently. Fit of the rifle ,stock design, recoil pad, ect. can have a lot to do with that.
The guy that sold his 338 in favor of his 300 evidently felt the "felt recoil" more from the 338.

1tn. When I had .338's to get the speed I needed for open country, I had to run the little case at max. or just above, something I never did with other calibers.. That was to get a 200 grain close to a 200 out of a .300..The recoil was very heavy, and recoil usually is not a huge factor for me.. I could take it but I sure knew the gun was going off..
A second thing most choose to over look is lighter bullets in a .300.. Most feel if you shoot a .30 you need 180 or 200's.. I have shot those quite a bit, but 150's and 165's also are useful in North America.. When I had my Wy. sheep permit, rangefinders, turrets etc. were not common.. I knew the hunt area and using horses, would or could result in a very long poke at a ram.. To make a long story short my chance came at very long range.. I had my old .300 loaded with Nosler BTBT 150's at 3400fps.. At 500 yards it dropped less than 2 feet.. I needed it all.. I had 257 wea. flatness with 50 grains more bullet.. The old 06 is a very fine caliber.. I used it from the time I was 15 til about 25.. Then I found the .300's are even better.. They are not something everyone needs, but if you do need it and can use it, they are excellent.. The other thing I have noticed is they have achieved a great popularity.. All on their own.. No write pushed the .300's like the .270, 7mm mag. or .338.. People bought 'em, shot 'em and realized the are one heck of a cartridge..

Yar: I recommend you keep them both!
If "I" can do it you can find a way yourself!
Best of luck to you in solving your quandry.
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

Your chart didn't prove anything, as it was comparing different bullet weights, and doesn't even show the rifle weights used!

A 300 Win mag and a 338 mag, fired in similar rifles designs at similar weight, with same weight bullets, will recoil similarly!

In fact, a guy can often use a powder like RE15 for lighter bullets in a 338 mag to get similar velocity to the 300 win mag, while using lighter charges of powder...which equals less recoil.

That's what I would assume you're gonna feel more recoil from a 338.
I agree when you need to make a long shot the 300WM has an advantage over the 06.

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.

I grew up (from the time I was 12) with a heavy barreled sporterized m1917 (11.5 pounds all up). So when guys talk about 8-9 pound rifles being heavy, I just sit back and laugh my azz off....I like the older Sako's too. They are damn good rifles, they just don't fit me as well as the pre 64's. I'm especially fond of my new "Alaskan" . One of my favorite .338 win mag bullets has a BC of .565 and hammers the heck out of elk. I wouldn't be afraid to use it for elk past 600 yards. The 300 H&H is sweet and has more nostalgia than the 338. Like I said before, I'd load up some accurate ammo for each rifle and see which one performed better.

I run 150-168g in my .30-06s, 180g in my .300WM and 225g in my ..339WM. The .338WM definitely kicks hardest.

.30-06, 150g AccuBond @ 2975fps
.30-06, 165g North Fork @ 2901fps
.300WM, 180g North Fork or Barnes MRX @ 3032 and 3033fps respectively
.338WM, 225g AccuBond @ 2742fps


3 elk with the .30-06s, 2 each with the .300WM and .338WM and the elk taken with the .30-06's traveled the least after the shot. Next in line was the .300WM with the .338WM coming in last. Granted, one of the elk shot with the 165g NF went straight down, got up, took a couple steps and went straight down again with a second but unnecessary shot.

Give me any of the above and I'd be confident in the results.

Damnnation, it's too early to put in for 2014 tags.

Try some 200 gr. partitions in that 300 winny since you already had a 30-06 that can shoot 180's. Run those 200's at 2900+ and let me know how it recoils.

Long range, 300 H&H with 200 gr pills. Pre 64 300 H&H is just cool.

While I don't own either calibers (300 H&H or 338 Win Mag) I do own a 300 Win Mag which is a fine caliber for most large game in NA. I do however reload for the venerable .338 Win Mag for a hunting buddy. From my limited experience, the 338 Win Mag seems to readily accept the (heavy for caliber) 250 grain bullets, and it would probably be my pick. If I didn't already own a 9.3x62 I would probably own a 338 Win Mag. The recoil from my 300 Win Mag, my buddy's 338 Win Mag and my 9.3x62 (with 286 grain bullets) are fairly stout but, very manageable. That said, any caliber followed by H&H has to be considered a classic. Flip a coin!

If your model 70 originally came in .300 H&H, that is a pretty rare bird indeed!!! My brother loads his 30-06 Model 70 classic Sporter up to what I can "300 H&H Lite" velocities with 165 Game Kings and 180 Partitions. The H&H is pretty close to the 300 Win Mag in factory loads, but my brothers .300 WSM is actually a bit faster. With that said, remember that the H&H is pretty much loaded to original specs which is to say 1925! A LOT of the improvement in gunpowder came as a result of US artillery propellant developed before and during WW2. Those powders were he basis for Roy Weatherby's loads in the late 40's and early 50's. Before that, we were lagging a bit behind the Germans. That's why the old 8mm Mauser could run pretty close to the original 30-06 load even with bigger bullet and smaller case capacity. The factory spec for a 180 grain in the H&H is 2880 fps, but the normal "safe" reload will run that same bullet out at close to 3100 fps. Supposedly, you don't need a 26 inch barrel either with the factory loads, but can get away with the 24 incher like with the WSMs. The funny part about the H&H is even though it does not have the fat, straight walled case that you are supposed to need for super accuracy and efficiency, it is supposedly a tack driver. It also has a longer neck than a 300 Win Mag, so maybe less problem with long, heavy bullets. My understanding is the 200 grain plus bullets is where the 300 Weatherby really outshines the standard length magnums. One of the gun writers made a 300 H&H wildcat a few years back that had the case blown out to more of a 30-06 30-06 Ackley improved type case taper and shoulder profile and what he found was that it really wasn't enough of an improvement over the good old original to really be worth the effort. It mostly just burned up more powder for not a whole lot of gain. I think it would be cool to to rechamber a new 30-06 FN built Model 70 Super Grade in 300 H&H.