New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - 338 win mag vs. 375 H&H
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Check GunBroker.com for SWFA's No Reserve and No Minimum bid firearm auctions.

338 win mag vs. 375 H&H

 Post Reply Post Reply   Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options Page  <12
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/14/2008 at 08:17
martin3175 View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: January/19/2005
Location: Maryland
Status: Offline
Points: 3773
Okay Squeezer --have at it >>>>>>>> Stainless compact 375 Ruger ...perfect size, oomph, weight, durability ....oh crap-nevermind--I just did
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/14/2008 at 10:29
Big Squeeze View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar
GOOGLE NINJA

Joined: August/30/2007
Location: Anaheim, Calif.
Status: Offline
Points: 3143
Originally posted by martin3175 martin3175 wrote:

Okay Squeezer --have at it >>>>>>>> Stainless compact 375 Ruger ...perfect size, oomph, weight, durability ....oh crap-nevermind--I just did
..................Mouth%20Taped%20Shut   Mouth%20Taped%20Shut   Mouth%20Taped%20Shut   Mouth%20Taped%20Shut
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/14/2008 at 11:07
Big Squeeze View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar
GOOGLE NINJA

Joined: August/30/2007
Location: Anaheim, Calif.
Status: Offline
Points: 3143
Originally posted by Big Squeeze Big Squeeze wrote:

Originally posted by martin3175 martin3175 wrote:

Okay Squeezer --have at it >>>>>>>> Stainless compact 375 Ruger ...perfect size, oomph, weight, durability ....oh crap-nevermind--I just did
..................Mouth%20Taped%20Shut   Mouth%20Taped%20Shut   Mouth%20Taped%20Shut   Mouth%20Taped%20Shut
.......Timber wants some history with the H&H!!............. Well! Well! That stops me dead in my tracks now don`t it?.....But do you notice that the top rifle (Kodiak) has a tube LESS than 22"?............ HMMM!....Veeeedy interesting there!..............Hey Timber! I like that top one! It`s barrel is only  1.5" away from being a "Squeezer Special" @ 20" or less..............Laugh........
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/14/2008 at 11:09
Big Squeeze View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar
GOOGLE NINJA

Joined: August/30/2007
Location: Anaheim, Calif.
Status: Offline
Points: 3143
OOOOPS!............Its ony 1.25" away @ 21 1/4".................Gettin better!
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/14/2008 at 11:23
Big Squeeze View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar
GOOGLE NINJA

Joined: August/30/2007
Location: Anaheim, Calif.
Status: Offline
Points: 3143
I will say this though!.....If you want a 375, then get one and worry about the recoil later. You`ll adapt to it.....There are Limbsavers you can slip on the stock for bench shooting and then take off during your hunts......The 375 is the best all-round cartridge, from the big game here all the way over to Africa. It gives you great reloading/hunting versatility for longer range plains hunting and closer, more dangerous work as well.......The 338 mag. is going to be a better long range flatter shooter and it will have less recoil, which are the two advantages over the H&H.............No histor-waa with the 338 though!!
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/14/2008 at 12:02
Big Squeeze View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar
GOOGLE NINJA

Joined: August/30/2007
Location: Anaheim, Calif.
Status: Offline
Points: 3143
Originally posted by timber timber wrote:

Okay, the 338 is probably easier to shoot and be accurate with, even under 300 yards, but it's not a big difference.  And the 338 is enough for N. America.  I could always get a 375 later if I needed it.  My brain is telling me to get a 338 but my heart is saying 375.

BTW, would you take walnut to Alaska?
..................If your heart is with an H&H, then do it!......NO! I would not take a walnut stock to Alaska or hardly anywhere else! There are pretty rifles and there are rough it rifles. I prefer the, non scratching, don`t need to be careful, no worry about accidental drops, rough it type rifles...........In far less harsh weather, walnut would be ok though! Real fancy wood is better suited in the home.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/14/2008 at 12:32
Ed Connelly View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
God of no Chihuahua

Joined: December/16/2007
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 24225
Nope....I wouldn't take a walnut stock to ALASKA........I kind of think it would be like....SCUBA DIVING in cold weather with a lot of clothes on..!!!   
 
But, pay no attention to Mr. Big Snort ( I mean----BIG SQUEEZE!!!)  walnut is fine for other stuff.....unless you just wanna have one of those synthetic numbers that you don't need to worry about!!     Evil%20Laugh%20out%20Load
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/14/2008 at 12:39
Big Squeeze View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar
GOOGLE NINJA

Joined: August/30/2007
Location: Anaheim, Calif.
Status: Offline
Points: 3143
Originally posted by Ed Connelly Ed Connelly wrote:

Nope....I wouldn't take a walnut stock to ALASKA........I kind of think it would be like....SCUBA DIVING in cold weather with a lot of clothes on..!!!   
 
But, pay no attention to Mr. Big Snort ( I mean----BIG SQUEEZE!!!)  walnut is fine for other stuff.....unless you just wanna have one of those synthetic numbers that you don't need to worry about!!     Evil%20Laugh%20out%20Load
.......Snort this!!!!..........SqueezerFarterEd (breathe in deep)
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/14/2008 at 12:58
Ed Connelly View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
God of no Chihuahua

Joined: December/16/2007
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 24225
RETORT EDITED BY MODERATOR
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/14/2008 at 13:25
tahqua View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Have You Driven A Ford Lately?

Joined: March/27/2006
Location: Michigan, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 8428
You can take your walnut, I know I would mine. Remove the action and barrel and make sure all wood surfaces are sealed. If the recoil pad is removable, check to see the end of the butt stock is sealed, also. This isn't as weatherproof as laminate or synthetic. Yet, walnut stocked guns have been working in AK for decades.

Edited by tahqua - July/14/2008 at 18:35
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/14/2008 at 17:32
timber View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman


Joined: June/03/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 354
Thanks guys.  Appreciate all the information.  Notwithstanding the 338's lack of 'history' (Big Squeeze - good one!), after rechecking some recoil calculations I decided to go with the it.  The lighter weight guns I'm looking at magnify the differences in recoil between the two more than I would have thought. 

I will get a 375 someday (8shots - appreciate it!) in a good old-fashioned heavy barreled wood 'African'.  Heck, maybe I'll get one even if I never get to go to Africa.

Oh yeah, the 338, it's going to be wood.  Love the scars.  I'm more concerned with the moisture; just have to be sure it's sealed (thanks Tahqua).

I can't tell you how I much I appreciate reading all the good onformation on this forum - and giving my two cents every now and then.


Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/14/2008 at 18:09
Longhunter View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: February/02/2006
Status: Offline
Points: 438
Recoil:  I have shot the .375 H&H and own the .338 Win Mag, both in Remington Model 700's.  The .375 definitely kicks harder, with the shells you are likely to use in each.  Either of them will probably wear out your best shooting before you finish a box of ammunition.  You definitely want a good recoil pad on either of these rifles.  (Think Pachmayr decelerator, for example.)  Both seem to me to "kick" rather than "push". 
 
Suitability:  The .338 is clearly the best choice for U.S. hunting.  It will do a fine job of putting down a trophy-sized brown bear.  I can tell you that from experience.  It also shoots some lighter loads at a higher velocity, which gives you more flexibility than the .375. 
 
Africa:  If you ever plan to go to Africa and hunt dangerous game, the .375 is the better choice.   It is the legal minimum caliber for dangerous game in some countries.  Not that the .338 wouldn't handle most situations.  It's just that you won't have that choice.
 
Walnut Stock:  I would NOT take a walnut stock to Alaska.  Stainless steel and synthetic stocks are definitely the way to go for that weather.  I watched a nicely carved wooden stock on another hunter's rifle turn into a washed-out  fence post after a week in the snow.  Your rifle WILL get wet if you are hunting in snow or rain.  I want my hunting rifles to be able to take the same weather as I do.  And I DON'T want to be stuck with an extra half-hour or so of cleaning every night when I get back to camp worn out after a long day of hunting.
 
"Excessive Meat Damage":  This comment was a bit puzzling to me, since meat damage is both bullet and velocity related.  The .338 250 grain loads go out at pretty much the same velocity as the .375's 270 grain loads.  The .338 225 grain loads aren't a whole lot faster.  I suspect that if you used the same bullets in both calibers, you would experience pretty much the same results.  This could be an example of "not invented here" prejudice.
 
"Heavier. larger magnification scope to add additional weight":  Most good scopes should be able to handle .338 or .375 recoil.  However, heavy recoil tends to shake things loose.  Heavier scopes may be more prone to this than lighter ones.  While a heavy rifle dampens recoil, you don't want the rifle and scope to be so heavy that it affects your shooting ability.
 
Penetration.  This was an interesting comment.  Again, this depends upon both the bullet and its velocity.  You could find an answer favoring either of these calibers, depending upon the bullets you compare.  However, I wouldn't expect a whole lot of difference between the two calibers if comparable bullets are used in both at the same velocities.    I haven't run my own penetration tests, though, so can't settle this one for you.
 
Hope you find this helpful! 


Edited by Longhunter - July/14/2008 at 23:39
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/14/2008 at 20:56
RifleDude View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: October/13/2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 15451
Good post, Longhunter!
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/15/2008 at 06:28
cyborg View Drop Down
Optics God
Optics God
Avatar
God of Wind

Joined: August/24/2007
Location: North Georgia
Status: Offline
Points: 12082
Originally posted by RifleDude RifleDude wrote:

Good post, Longhunter!
Yes LH good observations +2
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/15/2008 at 08:13
Ed Connelly View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
God of no Chihuahua

Joined: December/16/2007
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 24225
Many years ago the gun magazines used to sometimes publish some kind of "recoil measuring system" in foot pounds or something--to give people an idea of what to expect in certain calibers.  Now I know that there are all kinds of mathematical equations to figure all this stuff out just as there are equations to figure out ballistic coefficients and axle ratios for your automobile based on the size tires you're wearing..........
 
I "kinda" remember that the tables used to say ( approximately) that a 270 Win had like an 18 ft-lb. kick---
The 30/06 had like a 22 ft-lb.    The 300 Win Mag had like a 30 ft-lb.   I believe the 338 is in the neighborhood of 45 ft-lbs.     the 375 H&H was like 75 ft-lbs.  ( THE SAME AS A 12 Gauge!)    and the 460 Weatherby had 105 ft-lbs.
 
This is pretty close but it's all from memory, of course.   And NONE of this means anything unless you are familiar with "somebody" in the chart!!  
 
Well, most everybody can understand what a 270 feels like---and a 30/06....I had a 300 Win Mag once so I know what THAT is like----I have never shot a 338 or a 375 but I have shot 12 gauge shotguns.....so imagine a 12 gauge shotgun ---with a scope on it!!    And imagine a 460 Weatherby as-- falling off a tall building!!!   
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/15/2008 at 09:12
cyborg View Drop Down
Optics God
Optics God
Avatar
God of Wind

Joined: August/24/2007
Location: North Georgia
Status: Offline
Points: 12082
Kind of like letting Rocky Balboa hit you in the shoulder pocket......Sleep
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/15/2008 at 09:24
Dogger View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Knight
Optics Jedi Knight
Avatar

Joined: January/02/2007
Location: Ontario, Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 5515
Not worried about the walnut stock except for obvious damage against hard objects.  I have now deer hunted with my wood stocked carbine for 30+ years in some pretty crappy weather, rain,  snow, sleet etc.  Very occasional wipe down with linseed and looks as good as new.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/15/2008 at 23:37
ckk1106 View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: December/14/2007
Location: Arizona
Status: Offline
Points: 1436
I found this recoil table.
http://www.chuckhawks.com/recoil_table.htm
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/16/2008 at 06:12
pyro6999 View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
OT TITAN

Joined: December/22/2006
Location: North Dakota
Status: Offline
Points: 22034
im not in agreement with chucks table, i think he's making some of the rifles a couple of pounds to heavy and some arent heavy enough
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/16/2008 at 20:59
timber View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman


Joined: June/03/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 354
I found a calculator and got these figures using my 30-06 for comparison.  The rifle weights include scopes.  I used a lighter load bullet for the 375 to give it the benefit of the doubt.  The most commonly used round for the 375 is probably the 300 grain bullet.  It was well over 40 ft/lbs.

(30-06) - 8.75# rifle weight, 180 grain bullet @ 2700 fps: about 20 ft/lbs
(338)   - 10# rifle weight, 225 grain bullet @ 2800 fps: about 30 ft/lbs
(375)   - 10# rifle weight, 270 grain bullet @ 2700 fps: about 36 ft/lbs

Added in edit:  I did some research about felt recoil and found this interesting.  I have no idea about the accuracy of these statements but here they are nevertheless.  

* Rifle weight has roughly a 1:1 inverse ratio with felt recoil.  For instance if you increase rifle weight 10% the felt recoil goes down 10%.  A reduction is the opposite.
* Muzzle velocity and bullet weight have 2:1 ratio's.  For instance a 10% increase in bullet weight OR muzzle velocity increases recoil 20%.  And vice versa.

Even if these ratios aren't perfect they do reflect the geometric rate of increased felt recoil from a heaver and/or faster bullet.


Edited by timber - July/16/2008 at 21:13
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/16/2008 at 21:26
timber View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman


Joined: June/03/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 354
I also noticed something very interesting comparing 338 and 300 win mags.  Assuming everything else is the same a 338 and 300 win mag firing 180 grain bullets had virtually identical felt recoil numbers.  If my memory serves me correctly they were around 26.5 ft/lbs.  Of course the smaller diameter 300 bullet has a better b/c and would be flatter shooting.  But the difference under 300 yards isn't large.  Unless my numbers are wrong (correct me if so) you could make a pretty argument for the 338 because of it's ability to use the heavier 225 and 250 when you needed them.  Most of my hunting buddies who hunt with 300's use the 180's exclusively.  So why not just go with the 338 for the versatility of the heavier bullet option?
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/16/2008 at 22:10
pyro6999 View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
OT TITAN

Joined: December/22/2006
Location: North Dakota
Status: Offline
Points: 22034
Originally posted by timber timber wrote:

I also noticed something very interesting comparing 338 and 300 win mags.  Assuming everything else is the same a 338 and 300 win mag firing 180 grain bullets had virtually identical felt recoil numbers.  If my memory serves me correctly they were around 26.5 ft/lbs.  Of course the smaller diameter 300 bullet has a better b/c and would be flatter shooting.  But the difference under 300 yards isn't large.  Unless my numbers are wrong (correct me if so) you could make a pretty argument for the 338 because of it's ability to use the heavier 225 and 250 when you needed them.  Most of my hunting buddies who hunt with 300's use the 180's exclusively.  So why not just go with the 338 for the versatility of the heavier bullet option?
.338 bullet selection isnt as broad as the .308 a lot like the .270 and the .280 as a comparison
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Similar Threads: "338 win mag vs. 375 H&H"
Subject Author Forum Replies Last Post
There are no similar posts.


This page was generated in 0.285 seconds.