Savage model 116 338 win mag

Can't speak for 338 in a savage, but 338 makes 7mm mag look like a joke when killing large animals. They both do the job well, but at 200 yds a 338win mag is blasting in then expanding, leaving a devastating wound channel. The 7mm a lot of the time just slaps the critter so hard it is nothing but a mushy bruise on the side you hit. It sucks to lose a lot of elk meat over a few hundred fps

Not saying either cartridge won't penetrate, but 338 just works so nice its unbelievable

The 338's have lost some of their popularity in recent years. Folks are finding the 300's generate less recoil and do the same thing. The .03" greater bullet diameter isn't enough bigger than the 30's to make any difference in terminal performance, but it does require a far heavier bullet to get equal downrange ballistics.

Most people who shoot 338's use 200-225 gr bullets. You can shoot 200-250 gr bullets in any of the 30's. The 338's shoot the same weights slightly faster at the muzzle, and have a little more energy at the muzzle. But at close range a 30-30 will kill anything in North America. The same bullet weights fired from a 30 caliber rifle will be faster and have more energy at around 200 yards and farther because they are far more aerodynamic.

To see any real advantage over a comparable 30 caliber offering you have to go up to 250-275 gr 338 bullets. If you need bullets that heavy many hunters today are just skipping the 338 and going to 375.

I would think the Savage rifle should be a winner but don't know anything about the 338 mag.

...

As far as the 338 Win Mag is concern this article is a great read.

http://www.fieldandstream.com/articles/guns/2007/03/fs-classic

I hunted in Wyoming for years with a Left Handed Savage F116 weather Warrior chambered for 338 win mag topped with an old Leopold 3x9x40.
It worked great on Prairie Poodle, Antelope, Mulies and elk. My favorite hunting cartridge was Hornady 225 heavy Magnums.

Now that I live in Virginia my Weather wears a 300 win mag barrel. The nice thing about Savages it that it is very easy to change barrels.
Buy the gun and if you find you don't need the 338 stopping power you can easily rebarrel it to any of the 458 Win Mag based calibers,
264 win, 7mag, 30-338, ect...

There is no game that a 375H&H can take that a 338 Win mag can't (other than African game laws that require a 375 bore.)

jmr40 said:

The 338's have lost some of their popularity in recent years. Folks are finding the 300's generate less recoil and do the same thing. The .03" greater bullet diameter isn't enough bigger than the 30's to make any difference in terminal performance, but it does require a far heavier bullet to get equal downrange ballistics.

Click to expand...

This is not accurate. I'm not sure where you get your information. Take a look at the ballistic calculator at federalpremium.com. Their heaviest 300 win mag using a 180 gr. Partition bullet makes 3502 ft.lb. at the muzzle and 1292 at 500 yards. Their 250 gr. partition .338 makes 3927 ft.lb. at the muzzle and 1805 at 500 yards. I find that the recoil of a .338 win mag to be not much different from a .300. In any event, I never really notice the recoil in a hunting situation. Shooting from the bench, I use a lead sled, which makes the recoil a non-issue.

My .338 is a Ruger, so I can't comment on the Savage, but one of my most accurate rifles is a Savage .22-250 and it has never caused me any problems. I do like the large claw extractor on a rifle that might be used for shooting potentially dangerous game like bear.

The .03" greater bullet diameter isn't enough bigger than the 30's to make any difference in terminal performance

Click to expand...

I know that doesn't sound like much difference.. but go the other way. Compare .308" to .03" smaller... that would be .278. So basically a .277 or .270. Now there are lots of people that love the .270 Winchester and people have used it on elk. But given a free choice and with recoil ignored... if we are talking elk or bigger, I would take a .30 Magnum of one type or another over a .270. The .338 is the same "step up" from .30.

.338 WM isn't quite Elmer's beloved .334 OKH but that's where it came from. Elmer had a bazillion times more experience shooting elk than I do and it was his choice.

G

I'm not sure which Savage Chambered in .338 you're looking at but I've had a Model 116 SE "Safari Express" since 1995 in .338 and have found it to be a very accurate and reliable rifle. Mine has a 24" barrel equipped with a unique muzzle brake that can be turned "on" or "off" and has "safari-type" iron sights with folding leaves. The front sling swivel is mounted on the barrel. My rifle has a nicely figured walnut stock with cut-checkering and a s/s action and barrel. I have a B&L 3000 Elite, 1.5x4.5 scope mounted on it.

The recoil on my rifle is tolerable (about the same in terms of "perception" as a .300 Magnum imo), even with the brake set in the "off" position. It has a "controlled" feed action (unlike most "push-feed" Savage 110 rifles). I agree with TwoEyedJack's opinion regarding the ballistic performance of the .338 Magnum when compared to various .300 Magnums. And the .338 is every bit as flat as most .300 Magnums in terms of trajectory with equivalent bullet weights and profiles.

Welcome to The High Road, Born Outdoorsman 257!

.338 is probably the most common caliber to come back to a gun store "almost new", often with a box of ammo with 2-4 rounds fired. Not only does it have substantial recoil, but that recoil is subjectively much sharper and more unpleasant that bigger calibers like the .375 H&H.

There are only two animals in North America that make a reasonable case for a caliber above 7mm or .30 - bison and the great bears. Unless you are hunting one of those two, I would not consider a .338 mag, and if you are hunting one of those two there would have to be some very good reason why a .375 H&H, .35 Wheelen, etc. were not suitable. Just my opinion but .338 mag is probably one of the worst rifle cartridges ever created.

The Big D said:

Just my opinion but .338 mag is probably one of the worst rifle cartridges ever created.

Click to expand...

Elmer Keith was pretty enamored of the .338 win mag. In fact, he also pioneered the .338-378 Weatherby, which is significantly more powerful. Elmer was not a large man, but he was a crack shot with heavy recoiling rifles. Most people can learn, it just takes some practice and discipline. Disparaging a cartridge because it recoils more than some others is just silly.

TwoEyedJack said:

Elmer Keith was pretty enamored of the .338 win mag. In fact, he also pioneered the .338-378 Weatherby, which is significantly more powerful. Elmer was not a large man, but he was a crack shot with heavy recoiling rifles. Most people can learn, it just takes some practice and discipline. Disparaging a cartridge because it recoils more than some others is just silly.

Click to expand...

The problem is not heavy recoil. All big cartridges have heavy recoil. The problem is that it has more unpleasant recoil than .375 H&H while also being less well suited to the only two game species it's suited at all.

And let's face it, there aren't many bison and great bear hunts available. For the other 99.999% of hunting opportunities, a 7mm-08 will let you take every single ethical shot you can take with a .338 win mag, and is totally pleasant to shoot.

The 7mm-08 is a fine deer cartridge. I have one. To opine that it is comparable of the .338 win mag on elk is nonsense. Where I hunt, cross-canyon shots on elk are quite common. At 500 yards, it is 1200 ft.lb. vs. 2000. The extra recoil, that I don't really even notice, is a small price to pay for about 66% more energy on target.

TwoEyedJack said:

The 7mm-08 is a fine deer cartridge. I have one. To opine that it is comparable of the .338 win mag on elk is nonsense. Where I hunt, cross-canyon shots on elk are quite common. At 500 yards, it is 1200 ft.lb. vs. 2000. The extra recoil, that I don't really even notice, is a small price to pay for about 66% more energy on target.

Click to expand...

Well, you know what they say about opinions... that said, there are two facts you might want to consider before making such a comparison:

1) The 175gr partition bullet (arguably the ideal elk bullet) fired out of a 7mm-08 is within it's target velocity window at 500y.

2) At 500y, an unexpected 5mph puff of wind as you shoot will move even that big magnum's POI about 10 inches. From the center of an elk's vital region to the edge is about 6 inches. Ah, now ethics comes into play

Given those facts, I'd say no one should be shooting elk at 500y with any gun, but if you feel compelled to do it a 7mm-08 will be no worse than anything else.

my old 30-30 works just fine for me, 170gr bullets puts them down every time!

The Big D said:

Well, you know what they say about opinions...

Click to expand...

Yes, I do know what they say about opinions. However, I think we can all agree that not all opinions are created equal. For instance, most shooters would put much more credence in the opinion of say, an Elmer Keith, than some anonymous person posting on the internet. Can you cite anyone with credibility who agrees with your opinion that the .338 win mag is one of the worst cartridges ever invented?

So after having it explained to you that you don't know what you're talking about, it's time to fall back on the opinions of others Carry on, I'm sure someone somewhere will be glad to tell you what to think, and in the mean time the facts won't change

Here's a hint as to why modern shooters shouldn't care one whit about the 1940's magnums or anyone's 75 year old opinions about them: we're not shooting cup and core (or cast lead) bullets at big game anymore.

QUOTE: The problem is that it (the .338) has more unpleasant recoil than .375 H&H...

Really? Everything else being equal, basic physics dictate that the .375 delivers much more recoil than the .338. And if what you mean by "more unpleasant recoil" is the overused term "perceived" recoil, "well, you know what they say about opinions..."

SwampWolf said:

QUOTE: The problem is that it (the .338) has more unpleasant recoil than .375 H&H...

Really? Everything else being equal, basic physics dictate that the .375 delivers much more recoil than the .338. And if what you mean by "more unpleasant recoil" is the overused term "perceived" recoil, "well, you know what they say about opinions..."

Click to expand...

Except everything is not equal. The .375 has "more" recoil, but spread out over much more time. It's much more pleasant.

If you've never actually tried the experiment, wrangle up a M70 Alaskan in both .375 and .338 and try it. Sam gun, same weight, same recoil pad, everything. The .375 is perfectly fine, even fired from the bench. The .338 will put a nice purple bruise on your shoulder.

That's the problem with the .338 - it's both less gun and more recoil.

This is not an uncommon phenomenon, by the way. For example, my .45-90 dangerous game guns throwing a 400 or 405gr slug at 2100 "should" produce about 20% more recoil than even a .375 H&H. And don't get me wrong, they have a lot of recoil. But even the lighter one (an 1885 high wall) won't bruise your shoulder, while a .338 M70 Alaskan will.

QUOTE: Except everything is not equal. The .375 has "more" recoil, but spread out over much more time. It's much more pleasant.

No need to put quotation marks around the word "more"-the .375, in fact, delivers more recoil to the shoulder than the .338 does (assuming the same weight gun and all else being equal in terms of stock configuration, etc.). You may find the recoil of the .375 to be "much more pleasant" than the .338 but that's not been my experience. And the idea that the .375's recoil is "spread out over much more time" is a claim I'd love to see the empirical evidence for.