New Ruger .338 RCM

Status
Not open for further replies.
So, what advantage does this Ruger have over the .325 WSM? I'm sorta thinkin' it's been done before, even in short magnums. I've not read the article, though, not up on the round even in literature, let alone actual shooting. It's a little more caliber than I'll likely ever need.
 
H&H - You have a suspicious mind, my friend! I hit upon the .338 thread because I've been looking at similar threads on many sites to see how much info I can find about field performance of the round. Again, I have to disagree with some of your characterizations. I would not classify the majority of comments I've viewed as negatively as y ou do -- far from it. The biggest knock on the cartridge, so far, is the fact that Hornaday is only loading the SST bullet. A lot of people would like to see the Interbond bullet in that loading, including me. I suspect that will happen soon, given the demand. There's also the usual griping about Hornady using special powder unavailable to handloaders. That doesn't bother me -- it's how industry innovates, for chrissakes. They don't just give all the new stuff away... Contrary to your assertions, all gun writers are NOT shills for the industry. That's especially true of writers like myself, who are primarily hunting writers versus gun writers. I can write for anyone I want to and owe nothing to anyone. I have my standards and I'm certain you can therefore understand my umbrage at your generalizations re. writers. It's no different than if I asserted that everyone who guides is a crook -- or impugned your profession (whatever that is) in general. I doubt you'd like that very much. That said, and given your clear preference for more powerful cartridges and your African experience, I think you're being unfair to the round -- you are essentially comparing apples to oranges with your hangup on standard-length actions. If the round is still around in 10 years, I'll smile while refraining from saying I Told You So. Again, only time will tell. And if Ruger and Hornady sell lots of .338s, what's wrong with that? I LIKE playing with new stuff, and so do lots of other folks. That's why some of us have to keep buying bigger gun safes -- a burden I'll happily bear. :)
 
The reason Ruger has created these proprietary cartridges, is that it is cheaper than paying royalties to Winchester or Remington. At least that is what I was told by Ruger Reps at the SHOT Show.

That their are small differences in the ballistics and terminal ballistics of all the cartridges is true. But as pointed out they are minor.

I myself have fired the new Ruger Hawkeye Alaskan in 416 RCM, and loved it! (Here is my review.) I am going to get me one. If I had the werewithal, I would get a vintage Army Navy double rifle in 500NE too. They probably kill about the same.

If you don't already own a DGR then the Ruger 77s in these new cartridges might be for you. They are American made, reasonably priced, very efficient, well engineered, and as lethal as the man who is squeezing the trigger.

Good commentaries though! Keep 'em up!

Regards,
Albert A Rasch
The Rasch Outdoor Chronicles
 
You need a long barrel to get all of the performance out of a .325WSM. A .338 Win Mag with hot factory loads will out run a .338 RCM. The whole claim to fame is a short barrel and a short action rifle. I am an advocate of small rifles. I love my Model 7. The .338 is hot enough to get the job done in an intermediate size cartridge. For those of us who appreciate small rifles, the .338 RCM is a welcome addition to the current available ammo selection.
 
Albert - Actually, the story is a bit more complex than that. It all goes back to a certain writer and his patents... current (March) issue of American Hunter lays out the history. It basically involves royalties going to the patent holder on every WCM-chambered rifle and every WCM cartridge manufactured. (He clearly had good lawyers). It doesn't take a lot of guessing or web-searching to know who the writer was... Anyway, Ruger refused to play that game. They worked around the patents and have enough clout in the marketplace, particularly when teaming with Hornady, that I'm betting most of the RCMs will ultimately be successful.
 
When the .338 RCM first came out my initial reaction was, wow this going to be a cool round in a nice short package. But my major problem with it really quite simple it will not do what it is advertised to do. It does not even almost match .338 Win when we start talking about 250 gr bullets. And as was nicely side stepped in the last reply by KW is the fact that 250gr data is not being published and it is not going to be published for a while for a darn good reason. When Joe average shooter sees how anemic this round is with a 250 gr bullet it is going to kill the new cartridge "buzz" on the .338 RCM faster than a road killed rabbit on an Indy track.

http://data.hodgdon.com/cartridge_load.asp

Check it out. Conveniently they "forgot" to include any 250 gr load data here too. Marketing buzz is such a fragile thing.

As far as KW's "crystal clear" observations about my preferences in rifles I'm afraid that he is way off base. My simple observation is that in THIS cartridge it would have been a more versatile round if they'd have simply left it at standard length like the .375 Ruger and the .416 Ruger is. I hope Ruger sells the crap out these rifles and remains a strong company. However there isn't room in either one of my gun safes for the RCM.

Albert, is Ruger referring to their .416 and their .375 as RCM's? Or is that your term for them?
 
H&H - You are persistent, I will give you that... but the fact of the matter is that the .338 RCM was never optimized for 250-grain bullets so far as I know, and no one has made any (manufacturer) claims otherwise that I am aware of. The sweet spot for this cartridge is the 200-225 grain range. Your argument assumes that the entire shooting world is only interested in shooting 250-grain bullets in .338 calibers. That's hardly the case. In point of fact, the heaviest factory-loaded bullet in the .338 Fed, for example, is 210 grains. Yet those rifles have been selling like hotcakes -- especially the lighter, handier rifles like the Kimber Montana. Guess people aren't holding their collective breath for those 250-grain loads, now, are they?

The difference between muzzle velocities of the .338 Win Mag and the .338 RCM in the 225-grain factory load are miniscule (2785 vs. 2710 advertised velocities). While actual velocities for factory ammo tend to be a tad lower than claimed velocities, the relative difference between the two rounds remains fairly constant.

So if your remaining big objection is based mainly on the 250 grain bullet, believe me, there's plenty of people who will happily take that 200 and 225 grain bullet performance out of a 20-inch tube! THIS is the whole point of the rifle -- and THAT will not change no matter how much you grind your axe.

And I wouldn't worry about room in the safe for the RCMs. There will be plenty of room in mine. :evil:
 
The difference between muzzle velocities of the .338 Win Mag and the .338 RCM in the 225-grain factory load are miniscule (2785 vs. 2710 advertised velocities).
Click to expand...
Hornady Heavy Magnum load for the .338 Win Mag is 2950fps. Federal pushes a 225 at 2800fps. The 90fps difference gives you 5" less drop at 500yds. If Hornady used a SST round for their Heavy Magnum load, the difference would be much more.
A 1MOA difference at 500 is not Earth shattering, but it does illustrate that they are not quite equal. Either the short barrel is an advantage for someone or it is not.
 
Last edited:
I used to read a LOT of hunting rags growing up. There was always the "newest, latest, greatest". I remember some of the Weatherby rounds when they were new. Reading some of the writers of the day, you'd think the animals would just fall over dead when a certain rifle was in the same county out of fear or respect.

Some guys get all torqued up over case design. IMO, doesn't mean diddly. A 200 grain bullet @ 2,500 fps is pretty much the same regardless of the name on the firearm, name of the inventor, or size of the case.

I'm guessing the critter you whack really won't know and doesn't care. However, there are senior members here who's opinions are well respected as they are based in fact and experience, and not gleaned from the pages of a magazine. I don't think your writers would last long if they told the truth and said "this won't do anything that 50 other calibers before it can't do".

I suspect the most of these newer big game rounds will very quickly follow the short magnums, super short magnums, super-super short and super-long super-fat magnums into the cartridge graveyard of obscurity.

I sell (among other things) industrial cleaning chemicals. We have a product to clean the bilges of ships, and another for cleaning food service areas in schools and hospitals. It's all the same stuff, and all comes out of the same vat. Just different labels. Years ago one of the toothpastes had a "new, revolutionary patented cleaning formula". It is a white silica/clay compound very similar to the oxide on sandpaper. You're using a super fine gritty sand to clean your teeth.

If you really want to get an education on cartridges, get a copy of Cartridges of the World. You can study the rounds that Newton, Mashburn, and the other boys whipped up 75 years ago. You'll find that, as Kipling wrote, "there is nothing new under the sun". They just take the same pig and put different lipstick on it.
 
Last edited:
You need a long barrel to get all of the performance out of a .325WSM. A .338 Win Mag with hot factory loads will out run a .338 RCM. The whole claim to fame is a short barrel and a short action rifle. I am an advocate of small rifles. I love my Model 7. The .338 is hot enough to get the job done in an intermediate size cartridge. For those of us who appreciate small rifles, the .338 RCM is a welcome addition to the current available ammo selection.
Click to expand...

Hmm, the .325 WSM is chambered in the Browning short action BLR, a rather light, short rifle. I don't know what effect the short barrel has, though, in the numbers, but read a test of it and seems like it was pretty respectable. That test is on the net somewhere.

I do like short, compact, light rifles, though, but my M7 stainless is chambered in .308 Winchester and that's likely all I'll ever need it to be chambered in. I am NOT recoil shy, but your average person on this board is going to flinch at the thought of a 6.5 lb rifle in a .338 magnum anything, ROFL! Where's Shawnee? He's probably had nightmares last night if he read this before going to bed. :D

When I read about that BLR in .338 WSM, I was enthralled, but honestly, what would I use it for? I rarely leave Texas anymore and there's nothing in New Mexico I can't take with the .308, either. If I lived in Alaska, though, that'd sure be a handy, fast little rifle in a mighty powerful caliber. I'm not sure I'd NEED it there, but hell, I could then justify it.

I suspect the most of these newer big game rounds will very quickly follow the short magnums, super short magnums, super-super short and super-long super-fat magnums into the cartridge graveyard of obscurity.
Click to expand...

I suspect you're right. I'd at least like to get a cartridge that I can size and fire form from something else. LOL! But, I did have that thought at the idea of a Ruger .338 that basically matches .338WM ballistics. I mean, it's "where have I heard this one before" and I bet in 10 years, I'll have gone the way of the 5mm Remington rim fire. The saving grace, at least you can reload it.
 
Having said what I did, I just bought a CZ Varminter in Ruger .204 a few weeks ago. Will it do anything that my .22-250 or .223 won't? Well kinda. Less recoil and more MV than either. Plus it's cool and something different.

Since I reload, ammo availability is not a concern. Getting ammo for an oddball caliber with a "proprietary" powder in the middle of Alaska would be.

IIRC, the quickly obsolete Remington SAUM claimed to get identical performance to existing magnums out of a smaller case due to design innovations. Well that, and the fact that they run substantially higher pressures. Ain't no free lunch.
 
I don't think your writers would last long if they told the truth and said "this won't do anything that 50 other calibers before it can't do".
Click to expand...

Redneck,

Bingo we have a winner!!:D

That is my point exactly!

For the record, I am pretty much a .30-06/.308 fan I also LOVE the .358 with iron sights for hog hunting. If I need or want bigger my choice is a .375H&H And for thick skinned DG a 40+ caliber I prefer the .470NE or the .458Lott for close cover hunting in elephant country. The new .416 Ruger is also going to be winner. In fact I've got a VZ 24 action waiting to be .416 Rugerized this spring.

Another group of rounds that left me cold were the RSAUM's boy them buggers sure took off! I'll bet there are at least 20 guys hunting with them in the whole world at any one time! ;) I am also guessing that Rick Jamison isn't going to become a billionaire with his little law suit on these.

Hey this is all in good fun. I've said it before I could care less what anybody out there wants to hunt with or simply play with it's all about enjoying your sport and if the RCM, RSAUM, WSM, WSSM or whatever floats your boat go for it!! But that doesn't mean I have to go out and get one because some gun writer said so.

Like redneck said none of these rounds won't do exactly what 50 others will.You just
have to pay more for brass and loaded ammo with these fancily titled pigs

KW,
I grant you .338 RCM will probably have a small cult following kind of like the .376 Steyr does. But I'll also say right now that the .300RCM already has a grave dug next to the .480 Ruger and is simply waiting for burial.
 
Last edited:
The most ridiculous new caliber that I know about IMHO is the .30 T/C or .308T/C or whatever that new Icon is chambered for. I've read a couple of Zine tests lauding it. A short action capable of .30-06 performance.....hmmm....that sorta rings a bell. Yeah, you might get a hundred FPS more than the .308 out of it, but at what cost in pressure and who the hell cares?????? The .300 Savage was doing a pretty good job, at that, when the .308 came along. There's a huge advantage in load variety and components (ie cheap once fired brass) with the .308, though. Why would I chose something else nearly identical? I think T/C just wanted their name on a new caliber and everthing had already been done thrice or more times.
 
MC,

It is right up there with the .308 Marlin Express! Talk about a redundant no need cartridge.

The .376 Steyr was another round that should have been way better than it was. The problem once again is that it got caught up in the we need to make it shorter mentality. It under performs the .375H&H enough that it simply didn't ever catch on even though it was short action and built to be used out of a 19" tube. If they would have made it standard length they would have been able to match or slightly beat a .375H&H just like Ruger did with the ultra successful .375 Ruger. I keep seeing this mistake made over and over.
 
WOW,

You fellows really do write a lot! And it's all great information. I for one really appreciate the conversation and repartee.

KW, thank you for the intell, I'm glad to learn that bit of information.

H&H, unless I am mistaken I am certain that the Ruger rep said: "... and it is in our new 416 Ruger Compact Magnum..." I could very well be wrong. And after looking at the Ruger web site, they don't either. I'll correct that on my site!

If anyone is curious, I have the fired shell casing on my desk. The headstamp is: "Hornady 416 Ruger"

Regards,
Albert A Rasch
The Rasch Outdoor Chronicles
 
Albert,

No biggie I had just never heard it referred to as an '"RCM" I was under the impression that the RCM's were all .308 length and the .375 and the .416 Ruger are 06 length.
 
H&H - You grant that it will have a following, albeit small and cult? Egads, lightning strikes! Gawd I love caliber debates because figures lie, and liars figure, and we can all argue round the campfire all night with valid observations in just about any direction we choose. One thing I will continue to take issue with is the prediction that the short magnums are going "into the graveyard of obscurity." Don't count on it. I believe the thirst for big performance out of short, light rifles with short actions is here to stay. That genie is out of the bottle.

Redneck - Do you seriously think the .300 WSM is going away? Puh-leeze... time for a reality check.

H&H - So you're an 06/308 guy? That explains a lot! LOL For the record, if I were tortured into confessing, my favorite caliber on the entire planet is... drum roll here... the .257 Wby Mag. Betcha didn't see that coming.
 
KW,

There are those who hunt and there are those who collect the newest and greatest rifles and cartridges. The two don't generally seem to go together. Hunters find what works for them and they tend to stick with it.

I am a hunter I have basically three basic rifles that I've used to kill hundreds of head of game. Sorry if that doesn't fit into your plans. But at this point this conversation has become nothing more than he said she said. I am not going to change your opinion and your not going to change mine so lets just agree to disagree.

Have a good hunt, who are you using as a guide out on the Island?

PS

I used to be a big .257 Weatherby guy I like them too, for certain applications they are pretty hard to beat. I am still interested in a .270 Weatherby built on a light weight Mauser action. Why don't you get Ruger to start working on that for me?;)
 
I think we agreed to disagree from the beginning on this one. Shoot me an e/m addy or something and I'll shoot you info on the guy I'm hunting with. Don't really want that out in a public forum just yet, as I'm still working on some video/TV possibilities and there are some associated sensitivities. At least we can agree on the .257 Wby. I consciously used it a lot the last couple of years and shot a pile of game with it, from whitetails in Kentucky and South Texas, to pronghorns and mule deer in Wyoming, to javelina and some very large wild hogs. To date, everything I've shot with it has positively blown up in flames (I'm particularly fond of the 120-grain Nosler partition). I'm not really a big 30-06/308 guy, although one of my most recent acquisitons was a Kimber Montana in .308. Damn thing was finicky. Thought I'd lost at Kimber Roulette until I finally found a round it actually liked. Took some doing. Re. my lack of overall enthusiasm for 06 (have owned a couple) what do you expect from a guy who was practically weaned on a .270? I've shot far more game with .270 rifles than any other caliber in my collection. Re. that lightweight .270 Wby, you might have better luck talking Ed into making a new lightweight rifle -- or not. It's an intriguing idea...
 
Had my first range session today with the 338 RCM and 225-grain SSTs. Groups at 100 averaged only 1.6 in., but that was due more to the scope I'm using than anything else. For the time being, the rifle is wearing a Trijicon AccuPoint 1.25-4X24, with post/illuminated triangle reticle. It's not meant for fine aiming, really, but is built for speed. I can confirm that the scope is very fast... just the ticket for shooting big hairy critters at modest range. Best group with that scope, by the way, was 1.1 in., which leads me to believe the rifle will perform significantly better, accuracy-wise, with a more traditional scope. Recoil wasn't bad at all. This will be one very fast-handling package.
 
I can guarantee that the .338 RCM will kill a hog...:D...

P3031446.jpg

I've been shooting mine since January, and took it to Texas for pigs. Three pigs later, one each with a 185 TSX, 210 TSX and 200 gr Hornady Spire Point, I am convinced that bullets running from 2650 fps to 2850 fps will penetrate and kill. Most anything, actually.

I'm going to load some 250 gr bullets, mostly for grits and shins. I'm anticipating that I can get over 2500 fps -- kinda like a .338-06, since the RCM has 2 gr more capacity. If I can shoot a good 250 gr bullet between 2500 and 2600 fps...it will be plenty.

I find the near or actual venom some bring to the introduction of new cartridges to be pretty funny. It's not like cartridge ownership or use is a competitive sport, or that me having one I like that is different from someone else's favorite chosen cartridge somehow diminishes it. Ruger brought out the .338 RCM; I have tried it and I like it; end of story. I have enough brass to hanadload it forever, so it's just not an issue.

Good luck, KW...which island are you hunting on?

Dennis
 
Thanks. I completely agree re. new cartridges.

I'll be hunting Vancouver Island. Camp will be about an hour and half drive north from Campbell River.

I dumped the Trijicon. Just not my style. Will go instead with a Burris Euro Diamond 1.5-6X40 with 3P#4 E-Dot reticle. Back to the range this weekend to re-sight in and see how that performs. I'm admittedly a tad picky at times, but I never stop screwing with a rifle/scope/ammo combo until I'm absolutely, completely satisfied -- then I leave it the hell alone and feed each rifle only what it likes.

I tested nine different factory loads in my Kimber Montana 308, for example, before I found one that will consistently shoot sub-MOA. As you can imagine, that's now the only ammo that rifle ever sees. (oddly enough, it shot Federal Fusion more accurately than anything... at least it's a cheap date).

Makes for happy rifles -- and a happy hunter. :D
 
I have a Leupold FX II 4X with German #1 reticle presently on mine, but that scope I bought for my .375 Ruger. This spring I'll acquire an FX II 6X for the .338 RCM, with a post and duplex reticle. I have become pretty satisfied with fixed scopes in the 3X, 4X and 6X flavors. (As a side note, feel free to join my importuning of Leupold to come out with an FX II 3X, for its immense value in certain applications :D.)

I've never hunted Vancouver Island, but am given to understand they have some largish black bears there, kind of like our further-north islands. Should be a grand time.

Dennis
 
Leupolds are normally my scopes of choice, but there are some important ties between Leupold and Burris, marketing-wise,hence my choice this time around. I've been using several of the VX-III scopes lately and am very pleased with them. I also have a couple of other Burris scopes, including one on my 300 WSM, and they've performed fiine so far.
 
338 RCM Success!

OK folks, I'm just back from my Vancouver Island bear hunt and can report on the .338 RCM performance with Hornady 225 grain SST. Hunt was tougher than anticipated due to unusually severe winter that had bears emerging from dens late and not moving as much as I'd hoped. I passed a good 6-5 bear the first day and regretted it for the following 4 days -- at least until I found a monster bear on the last hour of the last day. Had to rush a shot at 180 yards. Solid wallop on impact. The bear whirled and leaped over an embankment, but was dead on his feet. He literally tumbled 30 yards downhill before coming to a terminal stop. There was certainly no issue with the SST's performance. It was a double-lung hit, through and through. Bear squared out at just a tad under 7 feet. :)

Would post a photo, but haven't figured out how to do that in this forum yet.

Rifle, by the way, initially grouped a little loose for my usual standards, but it seems to be "shooting in" nicely now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

T
  • Locked
New Ruger .338 RCM
Replies
1
Views
421
Kentucky Windage
K
D
  • Locked
.338 Rcm
Replies
3
Views
483
Kentucky Windage
K
S
  • Locked
338 RCM...what's the story??
Replies
3
Views
1K
jmr40
jmr40
H&Hhunter
  • Locked
2013 Ruger line up....RCM's R.I.P.
2
Replies
27
Views
4K
bannockburn
bannockburn
JeeperCreeper
  • Locked
Moose hunting... 338 RCM ain't dead to me yet
Replies
20
Views
1K
CraigC
CraigC
Back
Top