Long Range Elk Gun, What caliber you would choose?

Nope, 338wm is based off of the .458wm who's parent was the 375 H&H case.


The .300wm was based straight off of the H&H and .264 as well. There is a 6.5-300wm wildcat but it has a little higher case capacity. At the time with the powders available the increased volume could not be utilized without seriously shortening the already short barrel life of the .264wm.
I would just get a 65 300 wby? you'll get a couple hundred foot per second faster
 
I would just get a 65 300 wby? you'll get a couple hundred foot per second faster
As a purpose built Long Range Elk Gun?

You're giving up far too much energy going with the lighter lower BC's of the 6.5's compared to the 7mm's, 30's, and 338's which is really essential to make clean, quick kills at Long Range.

Under 600yd's though I think it would be a great contender.
 
As a purpose built Long Range Elk Gun?

You're giving up far too much energy going with the lighter lower BC's of the 6.5's compared to the 7mm's, 30's, and 338's which is really essential to make clean, quick kills at Long Range.

Under 600yd's though I think it would be a great contender.
I kinda agree but the science doesn't lie I'm getting crazy velocity and energy at long distances. now the question of ethics if I could take the shot and feel comfortable doing is a discussion. But energy it has. 127 grain lrx. at 3538 ft./s.
 

Attachments

  • 1E8895C7-5756-483E-ADC9-3DA45D4F5B01.png
    1E8895C7-5756-483E-ADC9-3DA45D4F5B01.png
    54.6 KB · Views: 82
Nope, 338wm is based off of the .458wm who's parent was the 375 H&H case.


The .300wm was based straight off of the H&H and .264 as well. There is a 6.5-300wm wildcat but it has a little higher case capacity. At the time with the powders available the increased volume could not be utilized without seriously shortening the already short barrel life of the .264wm.

Having the same case head dia., case dia., and belt dia., as the aforementioned.375 H&H is apparent ......however being approximately 1/8" shorter seems a stretch (reverse pun 😉) to suggest that the .375 H&H is the parent case. Their are many cartridge cases that share some characteristics but not considered related! Hence , I disagree with the premise of the NRA Journal author!

I suspected that I may have been incorrect as to the exact chronological order of introduction of the WM cartridges. But, I still suggest that the .375 H&H was not the parent.....or the WM cases would be longer. Now, if we want to consider the 300 Weatherby Mag...... I 'm in complete agreement! memtb
 
Nope, 338wm is based off of the .458wm who's parent was the 375 H&H case.

www.americanrifleman.org

An Official Journal Of The NRA | The .338 Winchester Magnum: History and Performance

In this article, we take a look at the developmental history and performance of the .338 Winchester Magnum cartridge.
www.americanrifleman.org

The .300wm was based straight off of the H&H and .264 as well. There is a 6.5-300wm wildcat but it has a little higher case capacity. At the time with the powders available the increased volume could not be utilized without seriously shortening the already short barrel life of the .264wm.
Ah, yes... I stand corrected, not sure why I throw that in with the .458 Win Mag, perhaps... because my understanding is the .458 Win Mag parent cartridge was also the .375 H&H, whose parent was the .300 H&H, so in the end, near all of came from the .300 H&H which would be more accurate, with the except(s) of a belted magnum, or should I say called magnum, like the case of the belted .224 Wby Magnum cartridge. Oh, I guess I should have included the .240 Wby Mag as well, nothing more than a .30-06 with a belt.

Thank you for the correction, accuracy does matter.

I find that we both agree on the 6.5 WM

Cheers
 
Last edited:
Ah, yes... I stand corrected, not sure why I throw that in with the .458 Win Mag, perhaps... because my understanding is the .458 Win Mag parent cartridge was also the .375 H&H, whose parent was the .300 H&H, so in the end, near all of came from the .300 H&H which would be more accurate, with the except(s) of a belted magnum, or should I say called magnum, like the case of the belted .224 Wby Magnum cartridge. Oh, I guess I should have included the .240 Wby Mag as well, nothing more than a .30-06 with a belt.

Thank you for the correction, accuracy does matter.

I find that we both agree on the 6.5 WM

Cheers
LOL, it's a lot like following a family tree. People get real upset if your grampa is also your father or brother.😁
 
LOL, it's a lot like following a family tree. People get real upset if your grampa is also your father or brother.😁

I kinda relate it to ......there's an ole timer down the road that's 6'3" and I'm only 5'10", we bought have the same size waist and boots, but we ain't related. He's a kindly old black man, and I'm an angry white guy! He ain't my parent! 😂 memtb
 
Purpose built my last elk rifle 11 years ago.Have about 6 guys I know local running the same. Friend,ex guide works at Defiance,and others running 338NM. Most are on a Defiance action,im a block from them.Lot of us have 20-40 elk with our rifles,we also share them with friends etc. So between our group we have many elk down to the 1000 yard mark.The one guys 115 # wife has taken one at 996 if I recall.Hes taken around 40 with his rifle with scenars,im rolling 300 otm,guy at Defiance NAB,s Just flat works.My backup rifle-338NM
 
What ever you are comfortable shooting in a minimum of 7mm, 30 cal. or 338 cal. with 7mm mag. being the lightest load and marginal at 1000 yds. Look at the ballistic data and keep the ft lbs. of energy up where it should be.
 
I agree with many here on the concept of, "bring enough gun" and "shoot what you bring well" energy be the guiding factor in, LR shooting on big-game. Cheers
 
Top