.338, .300 or other?

Discussion in 'Hunting Gear Talk' started by rebelzgrl76, Dec 8, 2007.

  1. rebelzgrl76

    rebelzgrl76 New Member

    Messages:
    1,359
    State:
    CO
    I was wondering that if you had to chose which one of these; which caliber would you chose and why. Also what type of optics would you chose? Would mainly be use for large game and long distance shooting as well. Found a nice Weatherby .338. Just give me you thoughts on it.

    Thanks:wink:
     
  2. dafin

    dafin New Member

    Messages:
    1,461
    State:
    Manhattan,Kan
    Amy, I have owned a 338 and a 300. the 338 had to much recoil for me. I use a 264 win mag now. If I were looking for a new rifle I think I would look at a 270 Weatherby .My son in colo shoots a 300 Weatherby and is happy with it
     

  3. bearcat

    bearcat Member

    Messages:
    925
    State:
    Nokomis, Illinois
    The 300 will shoot alittle flatter and longer range. But the 338 would be awesome also.
    I know not much help. If I had the option I would go with the 338.

    Optics leopuld is hard to be for the price and then up from there. You tend to get what you payfor. I have a redfield golden five star that I really like. It is about 100 less than leopuld. IMHO stay away from tasco,simmins and the likes. When you are paying 600 plus for a gun that will bring down large game dont skimp on a scope to save money. It will only leave you heart broken.
     
  4. rebelzgrl76

    rebelzgrl76 New Member

    Messages:
    1,359
    State:
    CO
    Thanks guys.

    i already have a Remington 300 ultra mag with a Burris scope. Super nice rifle that I have manage to shoot only a couple times.

    I want to get him something different though. He's a big guy and has shot 2 whole boxes of 300 mags in one sitting:eek:oooh:. Im done at about ..oh..3 or so. :smile2:

    Im leaning towards a Burris scope.
     
  5. 223reload

    223reload New Member

    Messages:
    10,798
    State:
    Oklahoma
    I am small stature ,so neither sounds good for me ,I am lookin at a few of the winchester super short mags as a larger rifle ,I hear they fill the niche between less recoil and reach out there. just aint decided on a cal. yet prob. will be either the 25 wssm or the 270 wssm.
     
  6. River_monster91

    River_monster91 New Member

    Messages:
    2,233
    State:
    central kansas
    i would go with a .270 or a 7mm mag. both shoot pretty good
     
  7. rebelzgrl76

    rebelzgrl76 New Member

    Messages:
    1,359
    State:
    CO
    270 and 7mm are more geared towards deer (arent they). Im in bear, elk and mountain lion country! :smile2: 7mm are smooth havent shot a 270...dont think. Isnt a 762 same as a 7mm or am I wrong?
     
  8. River_monster91

    River_monster91 New Member

    Messages:
    2,233
    State:
    central kansas
    .270 or a 7mm mag will both drop elk. im sure you could kill a bear with a .270 and can almost guarantee a kill with a 7mm mag.
     
  9. porboy

    porboy New Member

    Messages:
    629
    State:
    TX Panhand
    More recoil in both than I like. Elk is the biggest game I hunt and my 30-06 and my 7 mag has worked great for all these years. I am like Richard, they are more recoil than I am comfortable with.
     
  10. Mark J

    Mark J New Member

    Messages:
    9,407
    State:
    Four Oaks, NC
    If you want to get technical, you can kill anything in North America with a .308.
    On the same level of technical a .270 and a .338 are a solar system apart in a firearm. The .270 is playing ball down the road in another ballfield.
     
  11. rebelzgrl76

    rebelzgrl76 New Member

    Messages:
    1,359
    State:
    CO
    Was over hearing a conversation between a salesman and another man, they were talking about the .338 and the .300. All I really remember was that the salesman preferred the .300. Said that the .338 had a bit more drop to it than the .300, but over all...not much difference. i was just wondering if any of you had any experience with either of them.

    I dont think that I would put a 270 and a 300 in the same ball park. Bear and elk are so much more dense than whitetail and I want to be able to hold a 200-300 yd shot. :confused2:
     
  12. catfishrus

    catfishrus New Member

    Messages:
    1,569
    State:
    north carolina
    i dont know much about either one but maybe something to consider would be the cost of ammo. i would think the 300 would be easier to get in my part of the country but yours maybe differnet. if the skys the limit on scopes i would look at a zeiss or swarovski. it will make a difference in that long range shooting but will make a big differnece in the pocket too. i have the swarovski....sweet!:smile2:
     
  13. rebelzgrl76

    rebelzgrl76 New Member

    Messages:
    1,359
    State:
    CO
    well the sky is the limit. I mean, if you're going to put that much in a nice rifle, might as well, grace it with a swarovski. :wink:

    Ammo aint an option, its available
     
  14. aaronm283

    aaronm283 New Member

    Messages:
    137
    State:
    missouri
    you wont be disapointed with the 338. Great big game gun. My number one choice for elk. Dont let storys of high recoil scare you off. My 11 year old boys has used my 338 the last two seasons. I also like my 375 h.h for bear
     
  15. seokfisherman

    seokfisherman Member

    Messages:
    442
    State:
    Oklahoma
    If you really want to get technical a .22 long rifle is capable of killing everything in North America. But I'm not going to try to kill a grizzly with a Ruger 10/22. Elephants have been harvested with primitive archery equipment. It all comes down to what setup fits you, and shot placement. I own a seven mag, a .243, and a .257 Weatherby Mag. among others. My little .243 stays loaned out during deer season so I don't get to use it very often. I have harvested a lot of animals with my seven but have recently switched primarily to my .257. We have relatively small deer in Oklahoma and this round is perfect for my style of hunting. I have a 4.5x to 14x Burris on this rifle which has worked out well. When I'm trying to decide between two guns I usually wind up buying both of them. Next week I get to shoot my buddys new .30-.378 Weatherby. I sure hope I don't like it.
     
  16. massa_jorge

    massa_jorge New Member

    Messages:
    2,137
    State:
    TEXAS
    why not a .30-06? it will kill an elk, a black bear, or a mountain lion. you have a much wider variety of bullet weights to choose from than with a lot of the larger calibers, and if you are already shooting the .300 saum recoil is nil.
    the more you shoot a given caliber and study ballistics for different bullet weights, a 2-300 yard shot is not too difficult to pull off with a good rest. i made a 411 yard shot on a mule deer with my .30-06 and dropped him on his nose with two broke shoulders.
    bottom line is what you are comfortable shooting over and over.
     
  17. Mark J

    Mark J New Member

    Messages:
    9,407
    State:
    Four Oaks, NC
    I agree totally. A 200-300 yard shot is a piece of a cake if you shoot just a little bit.
    Your everyday calibers like the 06, the .308, and the .270 have plenty of power left at 300 yards downrange.
    Proper bullet selection for the type of game is the biggest key.

    But if you just like an excuse to buy a new rifle. Have at it.:smile2:
    You cant mess with money.
     
  18. bc179whitetail

    bc179whitetail New Member

    Messages:
    81
    State:
    St.Louis Missouri
    I would choose a 300 but thats just me. Also a nikon 4x12x50 is what I like I have three of them. Good Shooting
     
  19. seokfisherman

    seokfisherman Member

    Messages:
    442
    State:
    Oklahoma
    I agree completely about shooting a setup your comfortable with. Besides you can't kill it if you can't hit it.
     
  20. poisonpits

    poisonpits Well-Known Member Supporting Member

    Messages:
    9,789
    State:
    arkansas
    Name:
    johnnie
    i dont know what a 338 will do to an elk or bear but i do know its way yonder overkill on arkansas whitetails.2 cuz.of mine took bucks with 338 this year and the deer were tore up bad.both shoulders and half the backstrap was ruint on both deer.ive shot the 300 and its a fair rifle if you keep the bullet low and in chest or perferably the heart.if all your after is horns and dont care about the meat the 338 will drop any thing up to a buffalo in its tracks if shot placement is rite on.