Let’s Review some BALLISTICS of the BIG-Bores

Our oldest son, Brent, at a particular time in life had a thing for collecting Capstick videos – it was sometime during his early years in Africa as a missionary. He passed a number of them on to his father. I vivedly recall one of them in which Capstick was holding the heart of a Cape buff he’d just slain in using his .375 H&H. He’d shot it frontally, low in the chest as it faced him from about 30 – 40 yards. It dropped like a rock on the spot. Later, standing to the front end of the buff with the camera running, he was holding its heart in both hands with a hole completely through that looked about 4 inches in diameter. I was very impressed to say the absolute least about it!

< My .375 H&H in a bear blind, with Burris scope and 250gr TTSX’s at 2850 fps.

Now the .375 H&H is not considered a true Big Bore, but a Medium, yet I think Capstick could make a strong argument in its favour, which he sure did in that video. It is still quite vivid in my memory.

Also, I’ve a long-time correspondent and friend who has made at least two safaris to Africa: On the first he took 2 rifles: a .300 Wby and a .458 Win. On the second he’d planned on two again – a .375 H&H and the .458 Win again. But a problem developed with the iron sights on the .458 a short time before he was to leave, so the .375 H&H was used on everything, including Cape buff and elephant. Recently, in a phone conversation, he said if he did it again he’d only take one rifle for everything – the .375 H&H. To me, that was a very strong endorsement from someone I have a high regard for. Of course, many others have enjoyed success on Africa’s Dangerous Six from the use of the powerful and versatile .375 H&H.

Yet, of the recent safari videos I’ve watched, many are still taking two rifles and usually one of them is chambered in .375 H&H. The other is quite often a Big Bore that’s more powerful and reserved for elephant and Cape Buffalo. Still, the .375 H&H has taken thousands of that class without trouble or undue excitement! Some prefer the .375 Wby Mag or have their H&H AI’d, adding 100 – 200 fps to 300-grainers while adding a corresponding amount of recoil that tends to make them less pleasant to shoot!

Above and beyond the popular .375 H&H are the true Big Bores starting at about .40-caliber on up to the rare .50-calibers. Of course, the .50’s are less popular and generally not needed in this part of the world. And also, generally speaking, only the wealthy can afford the rarest of them with the intention of putting them to good use on Africa’s most menacing wild ones – including eles and buffalo.

With an abundance of technical wisdom from many sources, any of the Big Bores are plenty powerful from an array of serviceable components for the handloader – to fine tune suitable ballistics for whatever the challenges may be that confront us. About 5000 ft-lbs of kinetic energy is possible from any of them through handloading.

For instance: Let’s say that the most formidable challenge might be a charge from a bull Cape Buffalo from thick bush at 25 yds. Before the fact, and in making preparations for the trip, what would you choose for a rifle, it’s ammo and sights? To compound matters further, you’re taking only one rifle for which you’ll make handloads. Recall what I’ve rehearsed about the .375 H&H. . . . Would it be your rifle of choice with best handloads knowing the realistic potential for such a confrontation? Of course, you’d have the back-up of the PH.

I’ve watched some charges on videos by lions, Cape Buff and elephant. None were fun!

• I’d only take a rifle that I’m very, very familiar with, loaded with the best possible projectiles for just such a scenario! The only compromise would be in using it on duiker, but I’m certain it would get that job done as well. Notice, no cartridge has been mentioned, but of course it must be legal.

• The projectile I’d choose must be adequate for a worst case scenario of a mature bull Cape Buffalo in full charge from burstIng from the jesse at 25 yds. And it would be only handloaded with that bullet for all creatures large, medium and small.

• The rifle would have a variable power scope. The one that’s on my Ruger No.1H in .458 Win is a Nikon 2 – 7 x 32, and is perfect for that rifle under all conditions. Previously, in was on my Ruger No.1 in .45-70 LT. Altogether, it has absorbed about 700 rounds of punishment and keeps working like it was new. Unfortunately, Nikon no longer makes rifle scopes – but I’d still choose one of like qualities and abilities.
• 

• My choice would be a .458 Winchester Magnum, and if you’re a follower of these blogs you already knew that. The bullet for everything would be the 404gr Stone Hammer at 2500 – 2550 fps at 5700 – 5800 ft-lbs. If an elephant were on the agenda, then a few quality 500gr solids would fit the bill. If my current Ruger No.1H were my .458 then extra ammo would be quickly found as seen in the pic above. The rifle would not need resighting for a 500 solid as the 404 would be zeored for 150 to 200 yds and the slower 500 at 100. Any of the big fourties, forty-fives and fifties are more than adequate for the tasks envisioned. If and when you go, I wish you God speed and above all: A safe and happy experience!

MERRY CHRISTMAS and A HAPPY NEW YEAR!

” You will keep in perfect peace all who trust in you (God), whose thoughts are fixed on you! Trust in the LORD always, for the LORD GOD is the eternal Rock.” – ISAIAH ch 26: 3 – 4

Till the next. . . . .

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

The .416 Rem and .458 Win Compared

They both have their advocates. But shortly after the appearance of the .416 Remington Magnum in 1988, the well respected gun writer, Ross Seyfried, predicted the demise of the .458 Winchester Magnum – which, in its turn was highly regarded by many safari clients as well as a good many PH’s. In addition, the .458 Win was well established in African lore, as well as for guides, clients and citizens of Alaska. And that’s not even to mention the scores of other resident hunters after large and potentially dangerous game throughout North America . . . . . Some just wanting a big-powerful rifle for their own reasons.

<SAKO 85 Black Bear in 9.3 x 62 with a 22″ barrel. Coveted by many including myself – handy, compact and powerful.

So Seyfried’s take was a personal bias, for whatever reasons, against the well established .458 Winchester Magnum. His complaints appeared to be two: 1) It’s recoil, and 2) It didn’t live up to its promises. And he also believed the .416 Rigby was a better choice. Of course, the .416 Rigby predated the .458 Win by forty-five years in 1911, and was made famous by John Taylor in his elephant hunts. The .416 Remington’s factory ballistics were slightly better than the .416 Rigby’s, at 2400 fps for 400gr projectiles vs 2350 fps from the Rigby for a 410gr, but at significantly higher pressure for the Remington at 65,000 psi vs 52,000 psi for the .416 Rigby. The Rigby has a significantly larger case that in a modern rifle (like the M77 Ruger) can safely boost psi so that a 400gr can make ~ 2600 fps from a 24″ barrel. The .416 Remington at 65,000 psi can safely reach 2500 fps from a 24″.

Ross had a strong nostalgic bias in firearms, and he saw the .416 Rem as a promising substitute for the .416 Rigby. As to his complaint over the recoil of the .458 Win, that was disingenuous as he was proud of his accomplishments with the most powerful handguns in competitions. And he was that good! The .416 Rem, or Rigby, is right up there with the .458 Win in recoil, or moreso depending on loads used in each and the weight of individual rifles.

So, the bottom line is: A shooter/hunter doesn’t choose a .416 magnum rifle over the .458 Win due to less recoil.

The main and final argument for Ross, and others who choose a .416 Rem, is that it shoots flatter and hits harder with more energy at greater ranges than a .458 Winchester Magnum.

Apart from the actual rifles themselves, this was Ross’ main push for replacing the excellent .458 Win Mag with the .416 Rem Mag.

Well, how is Seyfried and the .416 Rem fairing against the .458 Win today? Has the .416 Rem replaced it, and has the .458 Win become obsolete?

<Some of the latest factory ammo from Federal: Nickel Plated 400gr TBBC bonded SPs that make 2283 fps avg. from my 24″ Ruger No.1H in .458 Win Mag.

That’s the ultimate question for this blog in: The .416 Rem and the .458 Win Compared.

There’s perhaps little doubt that the sales of .416 magnums have cut into the sales of new .458 Winchester Magnums. Then the .458 Lott has butted heads with the famed .458 Win, with claims of superior ballistics. And all of that came about when poorly made .458 Win Mag ammo wasn’t living up to promises. That was clearly the fault of the ammo manufacturers, not the rifle or SAAMI specs for the rifle. But most of that has long-ago been corrected. It’s rarely mentioned today – only as past history of bungling engineers.

Then the CIP psi standard for the .458 Win has been updated to match the .458 Lott at 62, 500 psi, whereas formally in was 60,000 psi at SAAMI. But that is still short of the .416 Remington at 65,000 psi. Who knows why? No matter, we’ll deal with matters from a handloader’s standpoint and experience.

To cut to the chase, it is generally accepted and proven that a 400gr from the .416 Rem can attain a max MV of 2500 fps from a 24″ barrel – that’s from a best handload: soft or solid.

And from the experience of advanced aficionados of the .458 Win, a 404gr Stone Hammer from 24″ M70s, 2600 fps has been attained. My own experience from a 400gr X-Bullet is 2590 fps from the 24″ Ruger No.1H in .458.

We’ll consider the range, trajectory and effect of those results to 400 yds from each: a 24″ .416 Rem and a 24″ .458 Win. Then appropriate solids from each to 200 yds on a departing elephant or Cape buffalo.

In addition, we’ll have a fair and unbiased view of the recoil of each in ft-lbs, and make some final assessments.

First up: the .416 Remington Magnum .416 Rem cartridge

Bullet: 400gr Nosler Partition

BC = .390

SD = .330

MV = 2500 fps/5550 ft-lbs

50 yds = 2405 fps/5136 ft-lbs/ +1.2″

100yds =2312 fps/4747 ft-lbs/ +2.5″

200yds =2133 fps/4039 ft-lbs/ +0″

300yds =1961 fps/3416 ft-lbs/ -10″

400yds =1799 fps/2873 ft-lbs/ -29.3″

%%%%%%%%%%%

400gr Nosler Solid

BC = .289

SD = .330

MV = 2500 fps/5550 ft-lbs

50 yds =2372 fps/4997 ft-lbs/ +1.3″

100yds =2248 fps/4489 ft-lbs/ +2.67″

200yds =2012 fps/3594 ft-lbs/ +0″

*****************************************

The .458 Winchester Magnum

404gr Stone Hammer

BC = .395

SD = .275

MV = 2600 fps/6063 ft-lbs

50 = 2504 fps/5621 ft-lbs/ +1″

100= 2409 fps/5207 ft-lbs/ +2.2″

200= 2227 fps/4448 ft-lbs/ +0

300= 2053 fps/3779 ft-lbs/ -9.2

400= 1886 fps/3192 ft-lbs/ -27″

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

500gr Nosler Solid

BC = .246

SD = .341

MV = 2300 fps/5872 ft-lbs

50 = 2157 fps/5164 ft-lbs/+1.9″

100=2019 fps/4527 ft-lbs/ +3.5″

200=1761 fps/3443 ft-lbs/ +0

• Of course, KE doesn’t tell the whole story, but is part of it. I use a modified form of the KO theory. But bullet placement and construction are the other parts. My view also takes into account SD and cross-sectional area of the bullet.

• Either of these two will get the job done in good hands. Depending on the bullets used, and their initial MVs and BCs, will determine trajectory, and generally the .416 Rem may have an advantage when a 400gr solid is used against a 500gr solid in the .458. But in regard to KO, or momentum, the 500gr in .458 is well ahead of the 400gr from the .416.

• If all of the above four loads were reduced by 100 fps, they would still be very effective at normal ranges. Plus recoil would be significantly reduced.

RECOIL: Assuming a weight ready for hunting at 10.5 lbs each, at 2500 fps from the .416 Rem, recoil = 55 ft-lbs for soft point and solid.

The .458 Win, firing the 404gr SH at 2600 fps = 61 ft-lbs, and 66 ft-lbs for the 500gr solid.

All the recoil numbers are without muzzle brakes or other means of reducing felt recoil. So it is a fact that using the above results from each rifle that favours the .458 Win Mag is not without an extra “cost” in recoil, assuming other matters as presented. Of course, a 400gr solid could also be used in the .458 Win, and would reduce recoil by about 5 ft-lbs (the same as the 404 SH), but still 11% greated than from the .416 if pushed 100 fps faster. If it were reduced to 2500 fps (same as the 400 solid from the .416 Rem) then recoil would be similar. Being a handloader those are options.

< This CZ 550 in .458 Win was loaded with 81 grs of H4198 under the 350gr TSXs at 2750 fps/5877 ft-lbs, and a recoil of = 53 ft-lbs without a brake and 11 lbs hunting weight.

Solids are rarely used today, as the only 2 animals for which they’re intended these days are elephants and rhinos, and at relatively short ranges.

All in all, I still favour the .458 Win over the .416 Rem, and the ballistics from handloads confirm that analysis. Plus, there’s little argument in my mind to favour the .416 Rem’s versatility over the .458 Win’s versatility – there’s not much to compare there with the scores of bullet’s available in .458-caliber, and the experience of hundreds of hunters using the .458 in North America as well as in Africa. The .416 of any flavour will never catch up in that regard. It’s wishful thinking to believe otherwise. There has been a revival of the .458 Winchester Magnum in recent years as truth is relentlessly spreading as to its fantastic abilities! And that’s not to pour ice water of the .416 Rem’s abilities. . . . it has proven it’s worth on large and dangerous game at least scores of times in Africa, North America and elsewhere. It’s just not of the same genus as the .458 Winchester Magnum.

< Phil Shoemaker’s famed “Old Ugly” in .458 Winchester Magnum. He’s a famous Alaskan Master guide/outfitter. Here he was recently in Africa and applied a 500gr Hornady DGX to the brain of a Cape buffalo. Apart from his marksmanship, he again proved the effectiveness of the .458 Win and the 500gr Hornady DGXB!

Till the next. . . .

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

Efficient RIFLE Cartridges

Efficient: “producing a desired effect with a minimum of effort, expense or waste”. (New World Dictionary of The American Language – Second College Edition).

I’ve always liked and preferred efficient rifle cartridges, and the best of them are straight-wall cases without the typical “bottle neck”. The second best are those with a minimal bottle neck on a straight-wall cartridge. Simply stated: You get the best bang for your buck!

As evidence, consider the lowly .22 Short and Long Rifles. And on the .22-cal end of matters, the .22 WMR. As far as cartridges go for large and dangerous game is concerned, we need not look beyond the .458 Winchester Magnum when handloaded by savvy advanced laymen, they have come up with +6000 ft-lbs of kinetic smash! From a miserly 78 grains of one of the best propellants, I’ve reached 2590 fps from a Barnes 400gr X-Bullet = 5959 ft-lbs! Let’s see now, that works out to 76.4 ft-lbs per grain of a suitable rifle powder. . . . Still not as good as a .22 LR firing a 40gr at 1280 fps – Efficiency rating: 97 ft-lbs per grain!

The .458 Winchester Magnum is very efficient in bullet weights ranging from 250grs to 600grs. This is far from a complete lineup, but they range from left to right: a 600gr Barnes Original to a 300gr Hornady HP. There are a couple of Barnes’ mono X-bullets, cup-n-cores with varying jacket thicknesses, a bronze-jacket “solid” and a couple of cast bullets. Only six of those are still manufactured today. But many new monos are in production as well as bonded versions:

On the left are Federal 400gr TBBC bonded bullets in .458 Win. On the right are handloads of 300gr TSXs using once fired Federal cases. They are mono bullets with hollow cavities. The Federal factory are making 2280 fps (advertised at 2250 fps), and the 300gr TSX’s are leaving at ~2750 fps.

One of the most efficient “mediums” is the .35 Whelen that delivers about 63 ft-lbs per grain of CFE-223. How does all that compare with “extreme” bottleneck magnums? One of my long-term favorites among those is the .300 Win Mag: It’s efficiency rating is about 50 ft-lbs per grain of an appropriate propellant for a 180 – 200gr.

Modern shooters who rave over the .260 Rem and 7-08 Rem seem oblivious of the fact that both are based on the .308 Winchester. And writers of introductions to those cartridges in recent handloading manuals no longer mention that fact as though they came into being from outer space or miracle by their own means!

Neither of those two cartridges have the efficiency of their parent cartridge, nor it’s ultimate power and usefulness! For deer, coyote, hogs, maybe, but the .308 Winchester is a far more useful tool on large game – in other words it’s more versatile AND efficient!

Anytime a cartridge is “necked down” from its original, it becomes less efficient; and when it’s “necked up” it becomes more efficient. Consider those based on the historic .30-06: The .270 Win is not as efficient, nor does it have the upper end power or usefulness. I’ve owned a win 70 in .25-06, and handloads were made for every available bullet weight: a 120gr Partition maxed-out at 3100 fps from the 22″ barrel = 2560 ft-lbs. Plus, the SD of that bullet was only .260 with a BC of 391. I never shot a game animal with it, not even a ground hog! But it was a nice rifle, accurate and useless to me as an all-purpose rifle. It burnt more powder than a .308 Win but was less powerful and efficient. Etc.

If we want to consider one of the Weatherby Mags, like the .460, the ratio is about 1:67. Not as good as the .458, but better than a lot of other BIG-BORES because of bore size compared to chamber size. But you don’t get 8000 ft-lbs from your everyday rifle either!

Let’s look at a few more common cartridges used in everyday hunting for the likes of whitetails:

270 Win: 22″ barrel/150gr/2800 fps/2611 ft-lbs/55 grs powder = 47.5 ft-lbs per grain.

.30-06: 22″ barrel/ 180gr/2700 fps/2913 ft-lbs/60 grs powder = 48.5 ft-lbs per grain.

308 Win: 22″ barrel/165gr/2700 fps/2670 ft-lbs/42 grs powder = 63.5 ft-lbs per grain (very efficient).

6.5 Creedmoor: 22″ barrel/142gr/2700 fps/2298 ft-lbs/44 grs powder = 52 ft-lbs per grain.

• Those are average results from 22″ barrels.

• Some improvements are assumed from 24″ barrels – perhaps up to 50 fps.

• These results are based on NOSLER 9 which used a 24″ barrel for each. I reduced each by 50 fps.

• These don’t have a fudge factor, but perhaps many handloaders would complain over these results due to their “fudge factors”.

Perhaps each one could be slightly improved in efficiency, but that’s about average.

Of the rifles left in my locker, that I am still making handloads for, could be a bit more efficient through downloading them. And that’s generally true for any centerfire rifle. But I’ve always worked for best performance, not the least or minimal. Though some downloads have been used in my .458 as full power isn’t needed for both where and what I hunt. Though I’ve also wanted to know it’s limits, and I’ve found that out: About 6000 ft-lbs from a 400gr X-Bullet, a 500gr Hornady RN and a 350gr TSX. There were no undue stresses on the rifle. . . but that cannot be said about my body!

From the .458 about 5000 ft-lbs is plenty for any wild/dangerous creature from an excellent premium 300, 350, 400, 450 or 500gr in the right place!

Of course, those results are at the muzzles of each rifle. Downrange results will depend not only on the construction of the bullet and it’s placement, but also the bullets efficiency, or its BC. The question then is: will the impact velocity be sufficient for adequate bullet expansion? And, at what range?< A 250gr Nos. Part. launched from my 22-inch .35 Whelen. If Nosler’s .446 BC is nearly correct then at 500 yds 1834 fps/1867 ft-lbs should result at -42″. That’s better than the 225 AB at 2840 fps MV. An impact speed of 1834 fps should be adequate for full expansion, and 1867 ft-lbs should be adequate for a mature bull moose with good placement. Efficiency rating = 63 from 65 grs of CFE-223.

< From the 250gr TTSX in my 22″ .375 H&H. That’s over 100 fps faster than the 250 NP from my .35 Whelen, and with a similar .424 BC, it maintains velocity about as well, resulting in a slightly better trajectory and higher impact speed of 1881 fps and 1965 ft-lbs, at -39″. Efficiency rating = 57 from 77 grains of CFE-223. Using 77 grains of RL-17 under a 300gr the efficiency rate is 63 at 2700 fps.

The lighter the bullet is for most cartridges, the faster it will generally leave the muzzle – but there are some exceptions depending on IF there’s a suitable faster powder in burn rate to maximize MV for the chosen lightweight bullet in the chosen caliber. For example, in .458 Win the 300gr TSX or TTSX are worthy contenders for hogs to bull moose, or even Brown bear. But they have a relatively poor BC that means range is limited – especially the 300 TSX. And it’s tougher than its sibling 300gr TTSX with a larger cavity and poly tip. So for moose and grizzly, overall the 404gr Stone Hammer is the better/best choice. The 300 TSX/TTSX, 350 TSX and 404 SH should give adequate expansion at 400 yds when pushed to max velocities: about 2600 fps from the 404gr, 2800 fps from the 350 TSX and 2950 fps from the 300gr TSX/TTSX. But how many grizzlies will be shot at 400 yds? Or bull moose for that matter.

So efficiency can be manipulated to a certain extent for most big game cartridges, especially if you are a handloader. And efficiency is not intended to necessarily mean “more cheaply”. Read again the dictionary definition. Implied is the “best results” without unnecessary costs or labour. Efficient cartridges is normally expressed as energy per grain of gun powder, and we’ve presented some examples. Straight-wall cases and those nearly so are by far the most efficient, which also means the use of less powder for higher energy at less recoil, assuming other things are equal; i.e: barrel lengths, energy at the muzzle and PSI.

AND, btw, large, powerful magnums are among the most efficient: A 26″ .340 WBY is near the top in that regard: 2727 fps from a 300gr Nosler ABLR from 75 grs of IMR4350 =4953 ft-lbs =66 efficiency rating! That’s right up there with the .460 WBY, and much more than your typical deer rifle!!

Hummmm . . . . If only I were 50 again!

Till the next . . . . .

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

The advantages of a .340 Weatherby Magnum

A Wby Accumark in .340 WBY MAG

First off, let’s get something out of the way that’s annoying! It’s the opinion of a few hunters/shooters that there’s not enough difference between the bores of a .308-cal (.300 mag) and a .338-cal (.338/.340 mags) to matter. Someone of reputation has stated that the gap is only the thickness of your fingernail! Well, yes, that may be. . . . BUT that’s all the way around the bullet that amounts to 0.08969 sq-in. vs 0.074 sq-in, or 21% greater in cross-sectional area for a .338 vs .308! That’s not nothing, but something! In addition, bullet weights can be much heavier in a .338″ : 300 grs vs 220 grs, and SDs of .375 vs .341 on the high end. And that’s not all! In the Win Mag only series of magnums, a 220gr/.308 vs their .338 mag, 250gr, have about the same MV, meaning: the .338 develops about 500 ft-lbs more at the muzzle and 11% more in momentum! And while the .300 is usually limited to 220 grs, the .338’s heavy is a 300gr! So the notion that a .338 bore is “only” a fingernail thickness greater than a .308 bore, there’s much more to it than fingernails. A .338″ bore is also more efficient than a .308″ of the same case capacity – it’s called “ballistic efficiency”, or “expansion ratio”. That’s why Roy Weatherby offered the .340 Weatherby (.338″) even though his .300 Weatherby was already famous. The .340 is simply the .300 (.308″) necked-up to .340 (.338″) with an increase of 500 ft-lbs at the muzzle while burning the same amount of powder! That’s in addition to all the other advantages.

And that’s why I chose a .340 Wby for my moose rifle in Northern Ontario. From my 26″ I was getting a 10 year average from those 250gr Nosler Partitions of 2997 fps/4986 ft-lbs. And the 80 once-fired .375 H&H cases lasted a full decade, and I never discarded a single one! At 1000 rounds of that ammo, each case was reloaded an average of 12.5 times at max PSI !

<My .340 Wby was a Browning A-Bolt SS in LH, converted from a .338 Win Mag by my gunsmith using a .340 reamer. It had a 26″ barrel. The load on this occasion was a 250gr NP at ~ 3000 fps. Powder was RL-22.

Some hunters/shooters claim they could do the same thing with a .30-06. At 600 yards? Up in the Far North of Ontario, some clear-cuts could easily extend to +1 kilometer . . . . 1 K = .6214 mile, or nearly 1100 yds, and adult moose were crossing those places! A 600 yd shot was possible but not beyond that for me, personally. And not likely for my .300 Win backup.

Another way of looking at such matters: There are places, and other good enough reasons, for Roy to have introduced the .340 back in 1962. It would add 160 fps to a 250gr over the 1958 Winchester .338 at 2700 fps. And it has only improved with time and better ballistics from newer powders and bullets with higher BC’s.

If we compare the .340 Wby with the much newer .338 RUM or Lapua, they really have nothing to offer over the veteran .340 Wby.

The .340 WBY in a left-hand 60* bolt lift that was extremely smooth in operation. The rifle is a Browning A-Bolt SS rechambered from a .338 Win to .340 Wby.

I’ve mentioned some results from mine: a 250 NP at ~3000 fps/ ~5000 ft-lbs at the muzzle. At that time Weatherby was offering the same 250 NP from their .340 at 2860 fps as a factory load = 4540 ft-lbs. Yet sometime later than my adventure to the “Far North” on a moose hunt, they upgraded their 250gr NP load by 90 fps to 2950 fps/4830 ft-lbs. There’s little doubt that they previously knew the .340’s potential but since they had no competition at 2860 fps, there was no reason to increase its performance. But by then my own results were publically known by correspondents, plus other .338s were coming on line, so they boosted theirs by 90 fps for their best load of that 250gr Partition.

Here’s a recent select printout from Nosler’s No.9 of results from more newly introduced .338-cal rifles firing their 265gr and 300gr ABLRs in comparison with the older .340 Wby Mag:

33 Nosler: 265gr = 2850 fps/4779 ft-lbs (max); 300gr = 2566 fps/4386 ft-lbs (max) 26″ barrel.

.338 RUM: 265gr = 2869 fps/4843 ft-lbs (max); 300gr =2655 fps/4695 ft-lbs (max) 24″ barrel.

.338 Lapua: 265gr =2923 fps/5027 ft-lbs (max); 300gr =2751 fps/5041 ft-lbs (max) 24″ barrel.

.340 Wby Mag: 265gr =2907 fps/4972 ft-lbs (max); 300gr = 2727 fps/4953 ft-lbs (max) 26″ barrel.

• As I see it, those 4 all fit into the same class of ballistics. None have really added anything in ballistics over and above the old warhorse – the .340 Wby Mag. The Lapua beats it by a smidgeon, especially from a 24″ but at the added costs in $$$ and recoil.

• The .340 gets 2727 fps from the 300gr ABLR from a meager 75 grs of IMR 4350 – an old standby! The .338 Lapua takes 89 grs of RL 33 to attain 24 fps more. Difference in recoil if rifles have same weight at 9 lbs ready without a brake: 55.6 ft-lbs for the .338 LAPUA; and 48.7 ft-lbs for the .340 WBY.

I’ve read somewhere recently that the .340 WBY is hardly mentioned anymore online or in print. If that’s true, then someone needs to wake up, give their head a shake and start a .340 revival, because it’s too good to lay dormant . . . . . It’s as good as the others, and better than many!

I see one or two for sale at EPPS from time to time, but pricing is a bit on the high side – perhaps to be expected. In fact, a number of years ago somebody who’d bought mine placed it there for sale. It was gone rather quickly as it wasn’t a Weatherby product.

If you have a taste for a powerful rifle in .338-bore, they don’t come better than a .340 Weatherby Magnum (except for the humongous .338-378 Wby). Mine only digested handloads made from once fired .375 H&H brass – they lasted for the duration of that rifle under my ownership and care for 10 years. They cost me $ 0.0 dollars, granted to me from a fellow going to Africa on safari. . . . 4 boxes of 20.

Those 80 once fired Remington .375 H&H cases were reloaded an average of 12.5 times at max PSI, and not even one was discarded.

< .375 H&H on right; .340 brass case fireformed in my .340 from .375 H&H brass on left.

Hagel said he liked the .340 better than a .375 H&H for North American hunting of large moose and bear. He liked the flatter trajectory of the 250gr/.338″ at 2900 to a 300gr/.375″ at 2500 – 2600 fps. Would that matter today? His hunts were mostly in the West with wide-open spaces. . . mine have been mostly eastern where a long shot would be significantly shorter, except for the “Far North”. Yet I do agree with him on the principle of being equipped and ready for any unexpected and less than normal conditions, regardless of location or game.

A Hill Country .340 Wby -26.5″ barrel with brake- at EPPs for ~$4500.

I think Hagel would be even more impressed with the .340’s results today: from Nosler 9

Conditions are normal for my area in late fall:

300gr ABLR – BC = .785

MV = 2727 fps/4952 ft-lbs

100 = 2614 fps/4549 ft-lbs

200 = 2503 fps/4173 ft-lbs

300 = 2395 fps/3821 ft-lbs

400 = 2290 fps/3493 ft-lbs

500 = 2187 fps/3186 ft-lbs

600 = 2087 fps/2902 ft-lbs

700 = 1990 fps/2637 ft-lbs

Unfortunately, there’s no .375-cal bullet that comes close in BC (Ballistic Coefficient). Currently, the best in .375-cal is .480 – .485 BC for the 300gr Sierra and 300gr Nosler AB respectively. When and if started at the same MV (2727 fps) they just can’t keep up with the 300gr ABLR in .338-cal.

Till the next . . . .

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL