Last night, I read JB's article on the .338 Fed and .358 Win in the new issue of Handloader, #254 August-September 2008. (The issue is now available for download if you subscribe to the online subscription option.) As usual, he does an excellent job of discussing the cartridges.

His loading data for the .358 Win really makes the ol' cartridge shine. With a Ruger M77 Hawkeye (22" barrel) his load data is getting 2400 fps with 250 gr bullets (Hornady RN and Nosler Partition) and 2550 fps with the Sierra 225 gr bullet. Heck, after reading the article now I want to buy a .358 Win even though I already own a .35 Whelen and a 9.3x62!

Cheers!
-Bob F.

IVE almost always gotten negative remarks from guys who, borrow our camps back-up rifle, as why the camp back up rifle is frequantly my 358 win BLR, and not something with "longer reach and more power" .....most newer guys are reluctant to use it when thier super blasters scope fogs or some other factor prevents its use.....funny how many now HAVE PURCHASED a 358 WIN BLR after killing ELK with that rifle, and its 250 speer over 45 grains of IMR4064....and how many guys in camp now use one as thier primairy ELK THUMPER,
personally I prefer it over my 300 mags, and the 340 wby I usually hunt ELK with gets swapped for it, occasionally when I want to hunt dark timber on steep slopes
the 358/BLR is a vastly under rated combo by those who have yet to use one and Id suspect a handy bolt action carbine or BLR in 338 FED would be almost identical...very effective

I'll have to stop procrastinating and subscribe again. I'm going to pick up my buddy today for a trip to AZ for prairie dogs and he is a subscriber, so I can snag his and read the article. I have a MRC 1999 stainless with a 21-inch barrel that I get those speeds with a 225 gr Partition. It was fine for bush veldt conditions last year for ND plains game.

The really important question is: When does that issue hit the local Borders, so I can read it for free whilst sipping one their lattes?

SOS

I'll stick with my 338-06 or 35 Whelen thank you...

My M70 358 can be loaded up pretty hot, and it'll throw 225's faster than you'd expect.

I'll be taking my 9.3x62 out pretty soon with (gulp) 286 grain bullets - no does the chrony need new batterys?

Spot

BobF,
My only disappointment (viewing the load data) is that both 338Federal and 358Win weren't run with 250gr and even 275gr projectiles to give a head to head comparison. We know they'll be close to equal or 'peas in a pod' but the 358Win has copped so much negative press from its inception that its worth pointing out that it's an either/or proposition when trying to select between cartidges. Only in factory loadings does the 338Federal have an advantage ... wouldn't a 180/200gr factory TSX loading be a welcome addition in the 358Win line!
Cheers...
Con

I signed up for the online versions and down loaded it immediately. What a great edition, 338 Federal-358 Winchester, 280 Rem and 45 Auto Rim. I am a fan of all of these calibers and have at least one rifle in each caliber. Just purchased a S&W Model 22 in 45 Auto Rim. It groups very well with everything. My 358 is a BLR, it shoots very well with IMR4320. I'm not suprized that these are both 200 +yd calibers. I am anxious to try TAC in both rifles. Now to find TAC within a 100 miles is going to be a problem.

My latest "must have" is a Stainless Ruger Hawkeye chambered for the .358. I don't need one, but I would really like to have one.

I ended up going the blue/wood route. All up with a Leupold 1.75-6x it weighs 7.5 pounds. I can see a SS 358 in my future.

Can't wait to read the article. I've been collecting data on loads for both calibers for about the past 10 years. I have 3 rifles that I load for, two 358's and one 338-08 (338 Fed)
They are both great calibers and fun to shoot.
358 MRC, 338-08 Model 88, 358 Savage 99.

Nice rifles.... I really want to know how much TAC I can stuff underneath Hornady 200 grain slugs in my .358...

I love that avatar, Steelhead! But then, I'm always up for giving Texas a hard time <g>.

2ndwind, I give a big plus one to that.

I can get 2650 fps with 200's from a 20" PacNor barrel using RL7. My load is a rather massive overload according to the books but shows NO pressure signs. I backed off a grain from the 2650 fps load and run 2625 fps or so. I was hoping JB would mess with RL7, but, I think he had such good luck with TAC that there was no reason!

The beauty of RL7 is you get the speed without getting into compressed loads, which have NOT worked out for me with the (2) .358's I've loaded for.

TAC ain't a problem either, concerning compression.

jbmi,
Drop me a PM with an email address ... I bet I can help you out with collected load data for the 358Win as I've been doing the same for quite awhile.

Having read JB's article a few times now ... one thing really irked me ... you can't claim the 358Win has a 3% theoretical advantage over the 338Federal, then show data with a 358Win 250gr at 2400fps, then claim the 338Federal is only good for 2200's with a 250gr. Kind of doesn't make any sense.
Cheers...
Con

That's good to know. What kind of speeds are you seeing with it?

I've been waiting to buy some until I closed the House Deal from Hell that I've been embroiled in... (and get paid, I mean). That should be happening on Monday. I'll buy some TAC. What's a good starting load with 200's? Anyone know a max load?

Funny thing about .358... not "ha ha" funny, but more like "OUCH!" funny... I tried all of the "normal" powders for it- 3031, 4895, aa-2250 (I think it is), and so on... powders that others report good velocity with, and I just never could even get anywhere near what other people would report for velocity.

So I'm always a bit skeptical when I hear of a powder doing magical things in .358... but I'll try TAC, it's worth $20 to mess around with if nothing else! :-)

RL7 has been the "magic powder" for me with .358. Accurate, fits in the case, I get 12-15 reloads minimum out of the brass, and 2650 fps from a 20" tube.

-jeff

I'm certain there is much that is 'magical' to you.

Compliments will get you nowhere, big guy!

So what kind of speeds are you seeing with TAC, Steelhead? It's on my list of things to try ASAP.

don,t worry about getting the last 100 fps( concentrate on accuracy, the load we use(its 250 speer over 45 grains of IMR4064 /215 fed primer) pushes the bullet to about 2280-2300fps in most BLRs but it hammers ELK with well placed shots, worry about hitting where you intend and getting the rifle sighted, in correctly, I use a 3.5" high at 100 yards thats abit high at 200 yards and about 10" low at 300 yards, place the horizontal cross hair on the back line at 350 yards, and your good to go

Kinda disappointed with TAC and Norma 201 being the only powders mentioned in the article. Ramshot powders are not widely distributed and neither is Norma. Can't find either one within 150 miles of me. No one carries either brand.

I email Ramshot and they gave me name of a place 1100 miles away.

Hell, I can't find most powders within 1000 miles of me, but I can order them all.

Order up some RL7 then. With 200's and under, I betcha you'll be pretty happy.

If nothing else RL7 is the powder of choice for making light pistol bullets haul ASS in a .358. 140-gn hollowpoints at 3000 fps are big fun. They shoot "good enough" to be interesting in my rifle, too.

I just think it's nice that you two are getting along.

Life is strange.

I did order TAC after not being able to find any after a long time looking it. My email is toast currently so I can't re subscribe to the online edition.... a PM with the loads using TAC in .358 would be greatly appreciated.

Now that everybody has had a say, here are some comments:

The reason only "weird" powders were mentioned in the article is that they were the ones that got the velocities desired without extreme compression. I have been loading the .358 since the 1970's and tried all the usual suspects, including 3031 and 4895. There is is plenty of data for those powders already out there, if that's what you want to use.

Instead, I was looking for powders that would match factory data in the .338 Federal, and beat the .338 Federal in the .358. The powders mentioned were those that worked best.

This is an ongoing problem with any handloading article. Some people basically want the same old stuff, because they use the same old powders. They could easily find this data either in loading manual or older articles. But repeating the same old data was NOT what this article was about.

In fact, I try not to repeat the same old s--t in any article I write. If you want the SOS, there are any number of other sources for it.

I did not include 250-275 grain load for the .338 Federal because they are too slow. With bullets up to 225 grains, the .338 is indeed about 3% slower than the .358--but once bullets above 225 grains are loaded too much powder space gets taken up, and the loss in velocity is greater.

Plus, as I pointed out in the article, the entire concept of the .338 Federal (especially vs. the .358) is a flater-shooting, higher-pressure round capable of longer range shooting, especially with lighter premium bullets.

Given this, what would be the point of loading it with 250's at 2200 or 275's at 2100? If spitzers, neither would expand reliably much beyond 100 yards. If round-noses (to save powder space) they might expand a little farther, but so what? Would they penetrate deeper than a 225 Partition at 2400, or a 210 TSX at 2600? Woukd they shoot as flat?

The entire history of rifles has been a trend of lighter bullets at faster speeds. This is because bullets keep getting better, in terms of both exterior and interior ballistics. Yet every time another increment in this progress takes place, somebody is determined to take a step backward, and load a cartidge DESIGNED for lighter, faster, deeper-penetrating bullet with heavyweights that will compromise the new cartridge's virtues.

If anybody wants to load the .338 Federal with 250 or 275-grain bullets, they should. It's a free country. An approximatel;y correct powder charge can be arrived at easily with a little figuring. But WHY? If you really want to use a 250, buy a .358--or .35 Whelen or .338 Winchester or any other round designed for that use.

Now I'm pissed, where is my magazine!

After reading all the posts here I had to sign up for the online version could not wait any longer...great info..I was ready to load up some .358 win using TSX 200 gr..I will definitely pickup some TAC first.

Just got done loading up some 160gr Barnes TTSXs in my 338 Federal using R7 (recommended by Barnes) and the Benchmark load that John mentioned. I will hopefully have results soon enough...

-Dan

I hope Kimber notices how hot .358 has gotten these days, and chambers the Montana in it.

Yer tellin' me? I have to wait until it's out on the news stands

So JB is going to make us wait to read that article, he never did get back to us over on the reloading thread on the 338 Fed. Then we found out that hunting in Africa was more important than us

Maybe I got a slow lot of TAC, I never did get that good of velocities with it compared to Benchmark.

I do like the 338 Federal though, and any and all input (even from JB) is appreciated. I'll just wait patiently to spend my 5 bucks...

Hey, I resemble that remark!

SOS

Good idea Jeff! I just hope they make it in a long action. That way when owners realize what's really hot, they can just rechamber to the Whelen!

Steelhead, does this rifle have the standard 22 inch barrel on it? The 7.5 pounds all up is interesting, I was thinking the rifles would be in the 8.5 pound area with a scope, maybe bigger hole, less steel or...shorter barrel??

I have been waiting for the article since John mentioned that he was writing about the .358. Has anyone received a hard copy in the mail? I didn't get mine yet. I have been holding off loading for my .358 until that article came out. Been using 3031 with very good accuracy under a 200 GR Hornady Interlock.

Can someone post the loads for the .358?

BTW, there is a lot of(old) data out there. Ken Waters Pet Loads is a good source. I too was looking for "new powder" loads.

I just get pi$$ed off reading these threads, my mag won't be here for at least three weeks. By the time it gets here, it's almost not worth reading the article after reading pages of posts on it.

You see it as it came from the factory (22" barrel and all), except for the 1.75-6x Leupold of course.

The scope IS included in the 7.5 pound number given.

7.5 pounds is about right where I like a rifles weight! I may get a straight 4X FXII however for what and where I hunt!

Does TAC need a magnum primer? Does Mule Deer's article mention magnum primers?

Ramshot's data for the .338 Federal featured the Rederal 215, so that's what I used as well. In general I've found that Ramshot powders often work better with magnum primers, except in the very smallest cases like the .223.

6 Pound 338 Federal scope & all

jwp, clean out your PM box, please

Roy

10-4

JB writes:

"The entire history of rifles has been a trend of lighter bullets at faster speeds. This is because bullets keep getting better, in terms of both exterior and interior ballistics. Yet every time another increment in this progress takes place, somebody is determined to take a step backward, and load a cartridge DESIGNED for lighter, faster, deeper-penetrating bullet with heavyweights that will compromise the new cartridge's virtues."

Exactly !!

I can hardly wait to read that article.

Me too....I wish my copy of Handloader would hurry up

I like the 358 and 35 Whelen because they do so well with standard bullets and have an extremely useful point blank range. I feel it is foolish to worry about them as long range cartridges because there are Soooo many of them out there. Here in Texas I have never taken a shot over 200 yards unless it was at a coyote. I did kill a coyote at around 300 yards with my Whelen. I also like the 250 grain bullets in both 35's, though the vels aren't that high in the 358 2250-2300 fps is and always has been a very useful velocity range.

Funny, that looks more like a Zebra to me

Hard to tell. Is it black with white stripes or is it white with black stripes?



Bruce

As usual, JB's article was top notch. I'd like to see a side-by-side comparison of the 338 Federal and the 8 x 57 Mauser. In my mind there's not much difference other than the 338 Federal comes in lighter rifles and operates at higher pressures.

A side-by-side look at the Hodgdon data using the same weight bullets shows a ~100 fps edge to the 338 Federal. But with the ballistic coefficient edge going to the longer 8mm bullet, I doubt there'd be much difference at 400 yards.

The big difference would come at the end of the hunt. I'd hate to pack my 9 lb 11 oz Mauser 98 all day.

Yeah, I would too! That's the big advantage of the .338 Federal: It fits in a short action, and thus is available in really light rifles, especailly the Kimber. Plus the availability of really good factory ammo.

Me Too, I was looking @ The 338 Fed., until I realized that It seemed to be very close To My Custom 98/8x57. A shorter action and a little more frontal, but not enough to make a difference.

If I didn't already have a compact .358 I'd be all over a 338 Fed from Kimber.

I just received the August Handloader with the 338-358 article in it and look forward to reading it. I've always favored the 358, but might consider the 338, but then, I just might buy a new Ruger in 358. Confused? - so am I.

If you are the first in line to buy one, I'll be second! Hopefully Kimber will chamber the Montana for the 358!

djs,

I've got my 358 Kimber - had it for two years. The problem is ammo! What we need is for Winchester to produce the ammo on a regular basis, then companies will consider chambering it.

Headache

The .358 is where I landed in a Ruger, the synthetic is a bit lighter than the woodstock version, I would have continued to save if Kimber was going to offer the .358 in the Montana, but that could take a while. I guess Federal put me off a bit when I asked them about buying components, then I don't shoot long distances, and .35 is fatter than .38 or some such gun gack nonsense.I am not worried about ammo in either one!

I've got a 358 and love it, the barrel is a touch longer so I get a bit more speed anyway.

Spot

Finally did some shooting at the range this weekend. Tried the Reloader 7 loads I mentioned from Barnes and also the Benchmark load that John mentioned. All with the 160gr Barnes TTSX.

I think it really likes RL7. I tired 40, 41.3, 42.6, and 44gr loads and the 44gr load was the worst at 1.025". This group measured .357". Not to mention it was shot with a Leupold 6x42 with a German No. 4 reticle.



Best group so far with Benchmark measured .739".

clark98ut,

My .358 loves RL7 for loads from 140-gn pistol bullets at almost 3000 fps, to 200-gn bullets at 2625 fps... Good stuff!

What's the going price of a Kimber in 338? I like the looks of the one in JB's article.

As per my previous comment, my issue showed up today, three weeks after the first readers commented.

Junior1942, it'll be $1000-ish. Perhaps $1100. For a Montana version anyway.

Closer to a month.

Mine hasn't gotten here yet. They must be dropping them off in Canada on the way north...

The frickin newstand at Safeway has them, for crying in a bucket! Pretty damned annoying...and no, don't anyone tell me to subscribe online. I'n not taking my laptop into the crapper!

Dennis

It ain't so bad, once you get used to it! Trouble is, your legs go to sleep faster, with the extra weight on them.

Jeff

I thought I was the only person that that had ever happenned to...grin

Ive loaded Hornady 250 grain round noses in my 338F (Sako 85) and made 2320 fps (44.5 grs H4895, F-C 338F brass, F210 primer). My main reason to try them was 'just cuz', hadn't seen any mention of loading a 338F with anything heavier than 225 gr. I did some testing, settled on 44.5 grs & 2320 fps, and was content. They probably wouldnt out penetrate a 210 tsx (my main load @ 2625 fps) or similar, but they look cool, and I bet they'll work just fine when I slip into the timber to hunt elk in September.

The 358 ain't got nuttin' on it

Just got my copy. What I find REALLY interesting is on pg 5. Swift announcing a new 308cal bullet in 108gr. A-Frame and ScirrocoII versions at that!
108gr ? Musst bee a typograffikle airer.

Sure it does, its got .020" on it

My copy arrived yesterday -- exactly a month after the first poster. And a week after Safeway got bulk copies through the distributor.

Whine mode off... .

So I read the article...pretty much tracks with my reasons for building a .338 Fed last year. JB is one critter ahead of me in the game fields, but I intend to correct that as soon as I can.

He described it as efficient; I've always thought of it as useful. I also do like not having to pour so much powder down the tube, since it's not only expensive but occasionally a trifle hard to come by up here.

Dennis

will the Remington components .357 180 HP work in the .358Win, they are about 6 cents each I think.

Jimmy

Sure, .357 pistol bullets work fine, one can even use 9mm or .355" pistol bullets in a .358 win. while you may not get great accuracy it would only be a plinking or small game load anyway...

I've run two pistol bullets in my .358, a 140-gn Speer hollowpoint made for .38 Sp, and a 158-gn XTP made for .357 mag.

They are really fun, and cheap to shoot, and you can get them SCREAMING along with RL7. The 158 is quite accurate in my .358 too at around 2 MOA; plenty good for offhand screwing around.

From how they blow things up, I have a suspicion that they would be HELL on a raccoon, but I have not yet gotten to try them. I also suspect that the 158 into the ribs of a deer would poleaxe it.

Mule Deer

I remember reading some tests done by Richard Mann and Charlie Sisk on the .358win and i thought they said that Ramshot X-terminator was a good performer in the .358, did you test this powder? or is it too fast a burn rate? Thanks for any replies

Jeff, if/when mine gets back from Ruger (where it had to go as they cut the chamber too long) I am going to try the Remington 180 grain pistol bullets. Most of my shots are at under 50 yards. Do you think I could get 3000 fps with the 180 and RL-7?

I have seen velocities like that with RL 10 shooting the 180 Speer and the 180 Hornady SSP. They looked like overloads. I keep the velocity under 2800 with 180's and all is well.

Imr 4198 will work with 180's as well.

I have wondered what kind of velocity a 140g xpb would give and if it would be a good moderate range bullet for deer.

I am not sure what a 140 xpb's construction is? You can calculate velocities and loads in fact with loading programs. The Powley Formula is free and others may be also.

http://kwk.us/powley.html

http://kwk.us/powders.html

You can get 3000 fps with the 140's, and into the 2900's with the 158, but with the 180's I would guess that as Savage says the 2800's would be a reach.

I forgot to mention that seating the pistol bullets may or may not be a problem. I had to modify the seating die, as it would crush the shoulder before it seated the 140's. This is a Hornady "New Dimension" die; I don't know if other dies have this "problem".

Just got a chance to read this article. I really enjoyed it!

It's interesting how many people are using the pistol projectiles in the 358Win ... this is one substantial benefit to the 35cals over the 338's. The potential for cheap practice or small game loads is just about unlimited, particularly if you include cast pills. I'm using the Rem 158gr and Sierra 170gr FMJ over a light load of Blue Dot for plinking duties. Yesterday I even had a 12 year old shoot his first centrefire ammunition using my 358Win with plinker loads. Smile said it all ... we have another shooter/hunter in the fold!
Cheers...
Con

I have been toting the virtues of the 358/356 for years. The 356 has a little less case capacity than the 358, but no elk or moose can tell the difference. I just wish hornady would start selling it's leverolution bullets for handloaders. Either way, it doesn't matter at the distances most timber elk at shoot. I want to purchase another 358 in the new ruger compact platform. It should be great for high timber climbs for elk.

Dan

According to the Speer manual, the 358 Winchester is loaded to 52,000 psi pressure (same as the 308). The 338 Federal is loaded to 62,000 psi. In modern rifles, the 358 could probably be loaded to 62,000 psi and give even better performance.

Suggestions, loads or comments?

djs,

Since you ask I will pimp my 200-gn load that hits 2640 fps again. This is a .358 load.

It uses what should be a crazy-ass overload of RL7 but it shows no pressure signs, brass life is near-eternal, easy extraction, shoots fine on hot days, etc.

I had pimped it to JB prior to his article in hopes that he'd give it some love, but he went with TAC instead.

I have no idea what the pressure is. It could be one of those things that only works in one rifle- mine- and so I keep hoping that someone will do a pressure run-up in THEIR rifle and tell me what they see <g>.

Details upon request, as they say.

Jeff and others...shouldn't RL10 do better with the 200's than RL7? Just inquiring. powdr

I'd like to try some...

When loading 180's in the .358 Win with RL-10 I worked up loads over the chrono with the old 99. A velocity of 2800 seemed ok but more powder drove the bullets even faster. I had no idea what the pressure was? There were no obvious excessive pressure signs.

It just seems that, in theory, 2800 fps is a lot out of the case.

RL-10 is excellent in the .358 and other rounds.

I want to try the Partition bullets in the 358 I just bought.

A friend has been using a .358 Win. for at least 30 years on all of his Alaska hunts. His rifle was made up on a Sako action and I think he always used a 250 grain Speer. I doubt he ever shoots past 200 yards and has to shoot any thing twice.

Long gone Alaskan guide Hal Waugh spoke highly of the .358 Win. for brown bear and his wife Julie's old Mod. 70 .358 Win. was down the road from me for a few years.

Wow, talk about resurrecting an old thread...but I love it. I remember reading JB’s article with anticipation and wish I had kept a copy of it.

I still have my 338Fed that I had made (on a Rem 600 action). It has killed a ton of deer and a couple elk. I use the good old Hornady 200gr SP. it is nothing fancy but flat kills everything without the blast or recoil of “bigger” rounds. At 6.5 pounds all up and ready, it is a joy to carry plus with its Leupold scope and McMillan stock, it can handle any accidental abuse.

I like the 338 FED too, have one as part of a 3-rifle set of stainless Ruger Hawkeyes, 223/6.5C/338F, that are all bedded in McM Hunter stocks. I like the 210 grain Partition, since it is intended for use on game that it larger/tougher than I'd care to tackle with its siblings in 223 or 6.5 Creedmoor.

I actually own the Hawkeye that JB used in the article! He sold it to a member, who in turn sold it to me. Also came with a copy of the magazine with the article signed. Complements my Gack collection. The gun is accompanying me on a Michigan elk hunt in a few days, but I more than likely will shoot it with a wood/blue 358 rather than the SS that JB owned. Both shoot very well though.

Since this thread, I completely reworked my .358 Model 7. I had Pac-Nor reprofile the barrel to a standard Rem sporter, put it in a B&C Alaskan stock, and swapped the scope to a 3-10 Swaro AV. And worked up a 200-gn Accubond load to try instead of 225 NPT I've used on the last half-dozen deer. The scope change was for low-light more than anything. This is my primary blacktail rifle. Love the cartridge. I will reiterate that RL7 is fantastic up to 200-gn bullets (will touch 2700 fps w/ 200's).

I think I saw that Hornaday was coming out with headstamped .358 brass.... anyone try it?

In that article (August 2008 - I believe) JB wrote something like Hornady 250 grain SP not expanding and he used Hornady RN bullets in that load development. He also used 200 grain RN Hornady bullets in that article. I always wondered about if those 200 grain SP bullets also didn't open up at 358 velocities. I've never tried them.

I use most manufacturers' 200 grain RN in my 35 Remington rifles - they all seem to work OK. 250 grain RN Hornady bullets in the 358 Win rifles (I only have one now) and 250 grain SP bullets (Hornady and Speer) in my 350 RM's.

JB if you're reading this, would you please comment on 200 grain SP Hornady bullets and their use in the 358 Win?


Thanks.

Bugger

They work very well for most deer hunting in the .358. The only complaint I've heard from anybody was a guy in Maine who wasn't impressed with how deeply they penetrated on the big-bodied bucks he hunts, especially on angling-away shots.

I always devour any .358 Winchester article in the gun rags. I read every thread I can on the forums. Research is good. Rusty

I have never stayed in a Holiday Inn Express, but I have used the Hornady 200 SP's on a bunch (6-8) of deer. They WHACK them. If what you want to do, is keep <bleep> simple and kill deer with a .358, look no further.

I switched to the 225 NPT for my own reasons (I.E., not because the 200's weren't working great) and got interesting results. I killed about a half-dozen deer with them; the last two were virtually identical 3x3's hit virtually identically through the lungs at about 35 yards. Plus a forkie last year also through the lungs. Anyway, point being, a 225 NPT at .358 speeds makes a very "polite" hole through deer lungs; no jellying, minimal bruising, just a big hole. I have pics of the lungs if anyone is curious. I also "caught" a 225 NPT in a spike buck. It was a quartering away shot at about 20 yards and skidded along the spine.

I'm hoping the 200 NAB is the best of both worlds. With the boat-tail and plastic tip getting enough powder in the case while staying with 2.82" COAL restraints is a bit of a pain. I had to trickle the powder (RL7) while tapping the case to settle it as I trickled.

Finally.... howdy JB! Been a while.

My experience with the 200 grain SP on deer at woods ranges has been spectacular. As best I can remember all broadside and angled shots have exited with massive blood trails. I've had several non-exits on frontal/straight ahead chest shots but I wouldn't expect an exit from many bullets there.

Jeff,

I haven't tried the Hornady .358 componnent brass, but have tried it in several other cartridges, including (of the top of my head), .17 Hornet, .22 Hornet, 6mm Creedmoor, .243 Winchester, .250 Savage, 6.5 Creedmoor, 6.5 PRC, 6.5 GAP 4S, 7mm-08, .275 Rigby and .300 Weatherby Magnum. In every instance, it's been very good stuff. (May add others as my memory continues to churn.)

Thanks. My rifle is exceptionally easy on brass so I've been running the same WW .358 brass forever. My only experience with Hornady brass is 6.5 GAP 4S.

This is deer lungs meets 225 NPT at about 30 yards.

What remained of the 225 NPT I caught in a deer, along with its massive rack.

This is an exit wound from a Hornady 200 SP, small buck, 20 yards.

Starline also has .358 brass available

IMO, after seeing my 350 work on WT, a 225 Sierra is a great bullet on deer, but one did get stopped on a 10 point my buddy took. Great expansion at around 200 yds. Deer was basically DRT. A 225 NPT would probably have exited, not that it would have mattered though it would be My choice on Elk. When a mishap happened with ammo at the airport he freaked out going to New Mexico but found some factory 200 RP and slayed a HUGE bull. I believe that RP May be the Hornady SP. IMHO it’s lacking in SD and BC. To me a 225 is where you want to be in 358. 140-158 handgun bullets are heck on milk jugs to 200-300 yds, and would ruin a coyote.

In 338F, hard to go wrong with a 185 Barnes, good 200 if COL allows potential powder room to get speeds up, and the 215/225 PT.

Both best up to 300 yds but one can stretch if you get placement with expansion. Penetration should not be an issue, especially as expansion drops over distance, decreasing frontal area which impedes penetration.

Many hunting situations can be well handled with a properly loaded 338 or 358 as many here have proven. LR hunting hype is what keeps selling hi-velocity to many who rarely need it. LOTS of game is taken and presented at short to modest ranges.

Can anyone tell me the recipe that was discussed in the 2008 article using TAC, or at least one they use? Looking at Ramshot's page they don't list TAC with the 358. I just picked up my first 358 and want to start loading for it for this fall. Ideally looking at 225 or 250gr pills.
Thanks.

For those with desire to read more on the 338Fed, there is another great blog on this site that covers that cartridge from all sides.

In Gun Gack II MD was running a 225NAB with 48gn Ramshot TAC with a CCI 200 for 2524 fps and a 250 Hornady RN with 45.5 or 46gn. I'm sure he started lower and worked up.

Good luck and shoot straight y'all.

From the article:

200 gr tsx with 52gr TAC 2749 fps

225 gr SGK with 49gr TAC 2552 fps

250 NPT and horn RN 48gr TAC 2404 fps

Tagging for the info!

Me too.

Thanks, Dinny

Tag, I have a Hawkeye in .358 I'll be loading for very soon.

I used the Barnes 180gr TTSX and 52gr TAC on a 200lb NC bear. Shot was 265yds and the bear dropped in it's tracks.

Thanks, Dinny

Tag

I am very pleased with my Marlin 336 ER and my 94 AE both in 356 Win.

I contacted Ram shot over these cartridges, they reccomend X terminator over TAC?

I don't remember why

. I also like CCI 250 for primers.

What caliber would the win .308 case be if it was a straight wall? Has it ever been tried?