The USN has multiple Carrier Air Wings. They stand prepared day and night for war. Even in “peace time”! Why?
Not because of theory but due to reality that was born from war. For example: The current Russian invasion of an independant democratic country that was uncalled for.
I’ve been preaching for some time that hunters need to be fully equipped and prepared for “war”! Especially if they want and intend to survive in any country or territory where “the enemy” has stealth, cunning, craftiness, speed and power that far outclasses any human, Thus he/she needs the right equipment for compensation. But equal force may only result in an eventual truce – but not before losses to both sides in personnel and equipment that not only could they ill afford to lose, but NEVER replace leaving both sides vunerable to lesser powers!
I’ve read accounts, and likely you have also, where both the animal and hunter died. No winners, only losers! So to insure that the hunter returns home healthy and in good spirit, he must go into battle with overwhelming force or power, or however we may want to put it, that ensures he/she is the victor – no ifs, buts or ands! Sure, there have been heroes in war times – but most died in battle! I have no intention to become a “hero” in attempting to kill a dangerous animal while armed with inferior weapons !
< At 1000 miles (1600 km) from home, I had a bull moose tag and also one for black bear. There were fourteen-inch wide bear scat “pies” throughout the area! That’s a .458 Winchester Magnum over my shoulder – too much gun?
I didn’t think so!
Therefore, there’s surely a place for the likes of the Super .338s !
Do they have a niche in the theory of rifle ballistics in modern “warfare” with creatures that are, as described above, more stealthy, cunning, crafty, faster and far more powerful – that outclasses our own natural abilities?
Evidently such a place in rifle ballistics has proven its worth to many or there would be little to no interest by various companies in developing and manufacturing them. And the manufacturers need dealers and the dealers need buyers. And apart from the resurrection of 6.5s, .338-caliber of the “hot” variety is selling like “hot cakes”! Just look at the number and variety of bullets available today in .338″! And they are not specifically made for the .338-06 or .338 Win Mag, but for those with extra power and reach, like the .338 Lapua.
So, my nominations for the “Supers” to be compared are: .33 Nosler, .340 Wby, .338 RUM and .338 Lapua. Yeah… there are some obscure others (the .338 Edge, etc) that don’t appear in typical reloading manuals, but the 4 mentioned will suffice, plus the .338-378 might interest a few as well, so I’ll acknowledge that one too, making a total of 5.
But the first thing is: What can they do that other .338s can’t, and secondly, who has interest in them, and why?
< My .340 Weatherby Magnum at 1600 km from home.
WHAT CAN THEY DO? According to the Nosler 9 manual, all from 26″ barrels, the .340 Wby and .338 Lapua made OVER 2700 fps shooting their two 300gr hunting bullets (AB and ABLR) with very high BCs of .720 (AB) and .735 (ABLR). The .338-.378 made over 2800 fps. The .338 Win Mag will make those same numbers but only from 250s. That’s 20 – 25% more at any range for the “Supers”! At long range of 600 yards the .340 and Lapua would be making 2900 ft-lbs. The .33 Nosler falls behind that to 2540 ft-lbs, the .338 RUM at 2740 ft-lbs, and the .338-.378 at 3150 ft-lbs. What could one do with all that power at 600 yards? Hmmm… Well, for one thing, it would make a great moose load at 600 yds! Where I hunted moose in the far north of our province, the potential was there as I stood in a clear cut where moose had been crossing. I could see for well over 600 yds. 2800 to 3000 ft-lbs at impact isn’t too much for a big bull that might go over 1200 lbs! I ended up shooting a good bull (1100 lbs) at 165 yds with my .340 Wby, but I was fully prepared for a 600 yd shot.
WHO MIGHT BUY THEM?
Those who want and can afford them! No doubt, among that group are those who just want one to “play with” – to see what it will do. That’s legit in my book… I’m also guilty! But my main interest in the .340 was for hunting moose in Northern Ontario. In the meantime I learned a whole bunch about potential .340 ballistics, and using it as a hunting tool in the ecosystem of the Far North. If not for my current age and the challenges of getting there, getting it done and out again, I’d be interested in another on sale at my fave gun emporium – a used Sako in that number with a McMillan 25″ ported barrel. (Likely, there’s somebody reading this that will pick it up as they know my “fave gun emporium” – it’s happened in the past! Looks like a good deal…)
NOW, TO COMPARE THEM
Going by Nosler’s 9, the .340 Wby and .338 Lapua are comparable, depending on which bullet is compared – sometimes the Lapua passes the .340 in a particular matchup, at others it’s reversed by the .340 surpassing the Lapua. The .33 Nosler fell behind the others as the bullets got heavier. Of course, the .338-.378 Wby is always a step in front of the others due to its mammoth case based on the .378 Wby Mag. The .338 RUM is close to both the .340 Wby and Lapua, again depending on powders and bullets in the comparison.
A few things worth noting:
- Case volume doesn’t always determine the result of which will be fastest with the same bullet. It was evident that sometimes a faster powder was used for a heavier bullet that gave the best results instead of a slower powder that might have been expected.
- Case shape and the powder used were also major factors in the final results of Nosler’s tests. Case volume was a factor but not a major one, except for the outsized .338-378. And I doubt that Nosler was making any attempt to showcase one cartridge over another since their own .33, on the whole, gave inferior results to the others. From careful analysis, it is certain that the “perfect” powder was often wanting for best results. By that is meant that when top velocity is from a powder that is less than 100% load density, or more than 100%, the ideal powder hasn’t been used or is lacking. Then, of course, there’s no way of knowing what the psi actually was unless it was revealed – which mostly is missing in all manuals because we (the handloader) can’t replicate it for several reasons well known to astute and experienced handloaders.
- There’s no question, from the same seven types of .338″ Nosler bullets used in the production of data for Nosler’s manual 9, that bullets from the 180gr AB to the 300gr RDF (7 types and 16 total in .338-caliber) gave significantly different results from cartridge to cartridge, and not always as might be expected since, for example, the .340 Wby gave best results from a faster powder (75 grs of IMR 4350) under the 300gr at 97% load density, at 2727 fps, only 24 fps less than the .338 Lapua that used 98 grs of RL33, 102% load density at 2751 fps. Obviously, the .340 would produce significantly less recoil for the same down range effect.
- The biggest is not always “the best” as measured by a reality check: The .338-.378 Wby holds 113.1 grs water when the 300gr AB is loaded to a 3.75″ COL. It’s best MV was 2831 fps from 115 grs US869 at 104% load density. In comparison, the .340 Wby -as stated – used 75 grs IMR 4350 for 2727 fps (104 fps less) at 97% load density at 3.7″ COL. It’s capacity is 82.5 grs water with that bullet seated in a Nosler case.
- We must assume that Nosler was aware of SAAMI standards in psi and case dimensions but did not necessarily regard SAAMI in COL. The .340 Wby could act in the stead of both the RUM and Lapua, being somewhat superior to the .33 Nosler, but not in every loading. The .338-.378 is definitely superior in ballistics but not as much as might be expected. When we take into account the amount of powder burned to produce those .338-378 ballistics, and the subsequent recoil, (I know a brake will be used – or should be) that, no doubt, has caused even some of the bravest to have second thoughts! Consider this: Even at nearly 6000 ft-lbs, how much powder has to be burned to make 2935 fps/5738 ft-lbs from a 300gr? In dividing that number by 119 grs we get 48 ft-lbs KE per grain (according to another source). The .340 Wby using 75 grs got 4953 ft-lbs = 66 ft-lbs per grain! That doesn’t matter to some, but it does to me! And, .340 brass can easily be made from .375 H&H brass, at pennies compared to that humongous .338-378! And recoil? 46 ft-lbs vs 70 ft-lbs!
All matters considered, take your pick! Any of them is capable for any game in Alaska-Yukon, and anything in Africa that’s legal at extra-ordinary ranges. Adding reason to the equation, finances and other needs like physical fitness, including the hunt itself in the larger picture – any of these isn’t a poor option to have around if bigger and badder might decide to go to war with us. If I were younger again, of these five, I’d choose the .340 because I’m familiar with it and know that a good condition .338 Win Mag could easily, with little cost, be made into a functional .340 Wby.
< But there are alternatives to the powerful Super .338s that are more versatile. This one replaced my .340 Wby. It’s shorter, handier and lighter, and can do anything a Super-.338 can do to 500 yards. It’s my TIKKA T3 Lite in 9.3 x 62. It will safely fire the 286gr Nosler Partition at up to 2643 fps/ 4435 ft-lbs (average) into sub-moa, and the 320gr Woodleigh Weldcore PP to 2474 fps/ 4348 ft-lbs. After a severe bout of arthritis for a couple of years, I toned down the 286gr load by a couple of grains of RL17 to 2583 fps/ 4236 ft-lbs, and minus one grain to 2436 fps/ 4216 ft-lbs for the 320 because it was more accurate. Yet the 250gr AB flies flatter for anything moose size to 500 yards.
Till the next… The Unique .458 Win Mag compared to the .416s.
Shalom
BOB MITCHELL
Lovin' The Big Bang 