.338-06 vs .30-06 for a Bush Gun.

[StrawHat]

?.. I hadn’t heard of these misfire issues with the .35W which would kind of remove it from the running for a rugged reliable bush gun…

The controlled feed action should be holding the cartridge in place. Fred Zeglin used to build rifles chambered for the 40 Brown Whalen and had no problems with misfires.

…but for reasons I can’t explain I love the idea of having a “custom” gun and cartridge for that one day I make it on the bush plane haha…

Life is too short to hunt with a common rifle! Not counting my muzzleloaders, I have built or have had built for me 6 custom rifles. All were/are used and all performed to my expectations. Cartridges range from the 22 Long Rifle to the 50/70 Government.

Determine what you want and go for it!

Kevin

 

[Chuck R.]

That’s kinda what I figured. That the .338-06 literally has less of a bottleneck to constrict the gasses. And the affect would be I could possibly fire 185gr .338 from a 20in barrel at the same velocity as I could fire a 180gr .30 from a 22 inch barrel. And if not the same velocity then at a lower pressure.

Most likely more.

From a .350RM with 225 Nosler and 20" tube I exceed the velocity of a 30-06 with a 180 grn and a 22" barrel with a slightly higher charge. Apples to apples a 180 out of a 350RM gets about 3000 while it gets slightly over 2700 in a 30-06.

I ran the numbers for my 350RM with 225 NP and took a Rem 180 grn NP load. Not surprisingly about every 30-06 180 commercial load I could find ran about 2700FPS. Hodgdons does list a 30-06 load with a 180 at 2710, but from a 24" barrel. I did load development for a friends 06 with the 180NP this past summer and we topped out at 2697 from his 22".

My trajectory with the 225NP is actually slightly flatter than the 06 with the 180 out to 400yds and it carries about 300lbs more energy at that distance. I'd expect the .338-06 to be about the same or better with a 200 or 210.

The 350RM is for all intent and purposes equivalent to the 35W, which is close to the .338-06.

 

[Ugly Sauce]

Just remember, if you start with a 22", you can always take two inches off later. With a 20", you can't add any. ! If you mount the front sight 2.25" back from the muzzle, you would not even have to re-mount the front sight if you decided to whack it off. (the barrel)

Yeah, I suppose some would say it would look "funny" with the front sight set back that far from the muzzle. I think it would look cool. However, I know your heart is set on a 20", so the point is probably moot. Or perhaps the point is beside the point. ?

 

[Ugly Sauce]

The 350RM is for all intent and purposes equivalent to the 35W, which is close to the .338-06.

The .350RM shines in a short action, you can have a rifle about the same overall length as a rifle with a 20" barrel, but with a 22". ("about") Another thing I like about the 350 is that out to 300 yards (or more, haven't compared trajectories lately) it will shoot about as flat as a .30-06, certainly "not enough difference to make a difference". I know many think that being a .358" it has a pronounced trajectory. It doesn't. (yeah it might at ranges I would never consider taking a shot)

I could be wrong, but I think the .350 and the .35 Whelen are ballistic twins, especially if both are chambered in a long action. In the short actions the bullet has to be seated kind of deep, which reduces powder capacity a bit.

Again, this point is beside the point, and I like the idea of the .338-06, but if I was going to Alaska and flying around in bush-planes and wanted to build a short rifle, and thought I might meet Mr.Grizz, I'd choose the .350RM in a short action, not try to be Quigley Down Under, and limit my shots to 350 yards or less.

Disclaimer: Yes it's irritating when one specifies what caliber one is interested in, and then people chime it with "this or that would be better". Sorry about that!!!

 

[Chuck R.]

The .350RM shines in a short action, you can have a rifle about the same overall length as a rifle with a 20" barrel, but with a 22". ("about") Another thing I like about the 350 is that out to 300 yards (or more, haven't compared trajectories lately) it will shoot about as flat as a .30-06, certainly "not enough difference to make a difference". I know many think that being a .358" it has a pronounced trajectory. It doesn't. (yeah it might at ranges I would never consider taking a shot)

I could be wrong, but I think the .350 and the .35 Whelen are ballistic twins, especially if both are chambered in a long action. In the short actions the bullet has to be seated kind of deep, which reduces powder capacity a bit.

Again, this point is beside the point, and I like the idea of the .338-06, but if I was going to Alaska and flying around in bush-planes and wanted to build a short rifle, and thought I might meet Mr.Grizz, I'd choose the .350RM in a short action, not try to be Quigley Down Under, and limit my shots to 350 yards or less.

Disclaimer: Yes it's irritating when one specifies what caliber one is interested in, and then people chime it with "this or that would be better". Sorry about that!!!

Agree with all, we think alike!

With the same barrel length, the .350RM has a slight MV advantage over the .35W due to a little, and I mean a little, more powder capacity. With the 250s it's negated due to having to seat them deeper. In all intent and purpose they're twins and no animal on the planet will notice the difference. I think also IAW SAAMI Specs the .350RM is loaded hotter. The maximum allowable pressure for .35 Whelen is 50,000 CUP, while the .350RM is 53,000 CUP, probably due to a lot of older actions being used for .35W.

My normal load is either the Nosler 225NP or the Sierra 225 BT, both are surprisingly flat shooting out to 400, and more importantly have enough velocity left to expand and energy to leave a mark. The .350RM with 20" barrel will be about 3" shorter than a 22" long action rifle due to the M7's action being 1" shorter than a long action.

It's shorter, lighter, and nobody else in my neighborhood has one.

 

[Ugly Sauce]

My .350 is the short action, and with the 20" barrel is truly a "stubster". Stubby little thing for sure. The Short Snorter I call her. And it sure is light, and laser accurate. Again, I wish it was 22", but I'm not too worried about it, (not going to replace a laser accurate ER Shaw barrel) and it's one of my hiking/trekking/woods-roaming in grizz country rifles, don't hunt with it anymore, so I don't have to worry about trajectory or down range velocity. I load it, as mentioned before, with the old Barnes copper tube jacketed 300 grain bullets. I believe those will leave a mark. And yeah, no one I know has one.

 

[KansasTrapper77]

What actions did you gentlemen start with on your 350 RMs? Or were they factory 350RMs?

 

[Chuck R.]

What actions did you gentlemen start with on your 350 RMs? Or were they factory 350RMs?

Mine's a factory, although custom shop, M7 MS:

 

[DM~]

You guys bragging how fast you can push those light bullets in a 35, problem is, not enough penetration for the bigger big game.

A 350 with heavier bullets needs a long action, just to get the bullet seated out of the case enough.... been there done that and moved on!

I would NEVER shoot at a big bear at 350 yards, if I couldn't get well under 200, I'm moving on to the next one!....and I did!

DM

 

[Chuck R.]

You guys bragging how fast you can push those light bullets in a 35, problem is, not enough penetration for the bigger big game.

A 350 with heavier bullets needs a long action, just to get the bullet seated out of the case enough.... been there done that and moved on!

I would NEVER shoot at a big bear at 350 yards, if I couldn't get well under 200, I'm moving on to the next one!....and I did!

DM

Ya know, I can't recall even mentioning bears, little or big. Maybe you're reading something in to it. I consider elk to be big game and at least for those the 225s sufficed. I believe the initial gist of the thread was for moose, with the possibility of running into a bear.

Will a .358 either 225 or 250 NP bounce off a moose at reasonable distances? Aren't moose considered "big game"?

Or am I missing something?

 

[KansasTrapper77]

You guys bragging how fast you can push those light bullets in a 35, problem is, not enough penetration for the bigger big game.

A 350 with heavier bullets needs a long action, just to get the bullet seated out of the case enough.... been there done that and moved on!

I would NEVER shoot at a big bear at 350 yards, if I couldn't get well under 200, I'm moving on to the next one!....and I did!

DM

Remember the purpose of this hypothetical rifle is not for hunting bears but for large ungulate out to 400 yards-ish with the capability to take bear at bad breath range. Which when the original options were .30-06 vs .338-06 is kinda silly to question to ask you fellas as the state of Alaska thinks the venerable .30-06 is one of the best cartridges to bring to the state and the .338 can only be bigger.

 

[Hesa Hard1]

This is a theoretical rifle I’d like to build.

Find a Bubba’ed M1903 or preferably an M1917 cut the Barrel to 20”. Install a simple but rugged set of iron sights, and mount a Low to Medium power scope and call it good. A detachable box mag would be slick but I haven’t heard of one yet for either of those rifles.

My question to you fella’s is which caliber would you go with? .338-06 or .30-06. Ranging from whitetails to very slim possibility of meeting Mr. Grizz.

The reason I even consider the .338 is a little heavier bullet and the possibility of getting a little better powder burn in the 20” barrel than the .30 cal. I would consider 35 Whelen over .338 but I just think the bullet choices for .338 are more plentiful. .30-06 gets alot of pros for bullet choice, factory availability, and not having to rebarrel.

This is more of a hypothetical question about the larger calibers burning powder more efficiently in the 20” or shorter barrel.Thanks for discussion.

My choice that fits that bill is my semi-custom Remmy 600 carbine in .350 Remington Magnum.



Granted, the ammo is hard to source unless you’re a dedicated reloader, or maybe someone who’s got the time and income to scrounge the auction sites, but at 6.4lbs with 18.5" barrel, it fits the bill.

Plus the .350 RM cartridge will drop the big stuff right now. A short-action duplicate of the .35 Whelen. The result is a short range, easy-to-carry, hard-hitting blaster. Same hunting context in which you’d use a big bore lever gun. Good to 100yds+ with the iron sights.

 

[DM~]

Remember the purpose of this hypothetical rifle is not for hunting bears but for large ungulate out to 400 yards-ish with the capability to take bear at bad breath range. Which when the original options were .30-06 vs .338-06 is kinda silly to question to ask you fellas as the state of Alaska thinks the venerable .30-06 is one of the best cartridges to bring to the state and the .338 can only be bigger.

AND those light bullets at "bad breath range" make them an even poor-er choice!

Experience has taught me, choose the proper bullet for the heaviest animal you may meet up with, and make sure the bullet will also work on the smaller stuff too. That's how you make sure you have clean kills on everything you meet up with.

I had one of those Remington 600's in 350M, it got sent down the road!

BTW, I don't care what rifle/cartridge you bring to the state, it still has to be properly loaded!

DM

 

[Hesa Hard1]

I had one of those Remington 600's in 350M, it got sent down the road!

The 600s and 660s in .350RM were a very misunderstood combination of a true brush carbine chambered for the world’s first short-action magnum. Plus, a lot dudes got a bad case of the flinches. They were decades ahead of their time.

BTW, I don't care what rifle/cartridge you bring to the state, it still has to be properly loaded!

For Alaska, my 600 would be loaded with the .358/250grn slugs. For lower 48 critters, which for me is mostly deer and hogs, the .358/200grn bullets are more than enough.

 

[mavracer]

Bullet technology has firmly IMHO made this a toss up to me, I'd prolly just go 30-06 since I already have dies for my unbubba'd 1917 and 03A3.
But I already have a near perfect bush gun a Browning 71 carbine in 348 Win.

 

[KansasTrapper77]

AND those light bullets at "bad breath range" make them an even poor-er choice!

And one of the largest recorded bears taken in Alaska was shot with a .22 caliber rimfire.

I personally think shot placement holds more water than anything.

Yes I understand the importance of quality bullets of proper weight but that really wasn’t the question.

 

[js8588]

9.3x62 has been mentioned a few times, but here's one other option. 9.3x64. Every bit the equal of 375 H&H

 

[KansasTrapper77]

9.3x62 has been mentioned a few times, but here's one other option. 9.3x64. Every bit the equal of 375 H&H

I think the 9.3s are pretty cool but that’s just simply getting bigger than I’ll probably ever need. Unless I make it to Africa. I need to make it to Alaska first.

 

[DM~]

And one of the largest recorded bears taken in Alaska was shot with a .22 caliber rimfire.

I personally think shot placement holds more water than anything.

Yes I understand the importance of quality bullets of proper weight but that really wasn’t the question.

SO, I guess all YOU need is a 22! lol How many big bears have you faced with ANY rifle in your hands, let alone a 22!

IF you need to break a bear down, you need a bullet that will do it, and something for a lung shot isn't it!

I've been there done that, how about you??

DM

 

[DM~]

I think the 9.3s are pretty cool but that’s just simply getting bigger than I’ll probably ever need. Unless I make it to Africa. I need to make it to Alaska first.

9.3's are neat, here's one of mine loaded with 286NP's,



DM

 

[Flight01]

I have a 338 RCM. Shorter action but ballistic twin of the 338-06. It’s got a 20” tube. Great handling. Love my Ruger with Mauser claw for controlled feed.
225 interbond for big bone animals.
If I was going short range bush gun I’d probably go 358 win actually.
Buy here’s my week long trip in October 2020 with 2 kills from the 338.

While no experience with the 30/06 any well constructed bullet of 180 grains or better would be plenty good as my 308 Mohawk proved well

 

[KansasTrapper77]

I've been there done that, how about you??

Yes, yes, yes I get it you’re the biggest and the baddest. Has seen it all and slayed it all with whatever cartridge is the best with the bestest bullet. Funny thing is we don’t know what any of them are as you have yet to constructively contribute to this thread with any cartridge, bullet, rifle, or action suggestions. The only thing you’ve done so far is scorn others suggestions who were willing to have a conversation about a hypothetical rifle.

Then as I type this up you post your sweet double rifle. And it is sweet, but it doesn’t really follow the thread……

 

[KansasTrapper77]

I have a 338 RCM. Shorter action but ballistic twin of the 338-06. It’s got a 20” tube. Great handling. Love my Ruger with Mauser claw for controlled feed.
225 interbond for big bone animals.
If I was going short range bush gun I’d probably go 358 win actually.

Congrats on the success! And this is why I like this forum. I’ve never even heard of the .338 RCM I had to look it up.

And yes I love the Ruger rifles. The only reason I’d consider this gun built on a surplus military action over a Ruger is to tinker and tell myself it’s cheaper than a new Ruger.

I honestly don’t need another 100 yards or less rifle. This hypothetical rifle is definitely a 100 yards plus intended rifle. While still being wieldy in the brush.

 

[DM~]

Yes, yes, yes I get it you’re the biggest and the baddest. Has seen it all and slayed it all with whatever cartridge is the best with the bestest bullet. Funny thing is we don’t know what any of them are as you have yet to constructively contribute to this thread with any cartridge, bullet, rifle, or action suggestions. The only thing you’ve done so far is scorn others suggestions who were willing to have a conversation about a hypothetical rifle.

Then as I type this up you post your sweet double rifle. And it is sweet, but it doesn’t really follow the thread……

REALLY? I've answered every question directly, perhaps you need to go back and this time READ what I wrote.

But, I'll tell you what, if the experiences I've had bother you so much, I'll bow out right now, and you dreamers can conger up what ever dreams you want. I won't bother spending another minute of my time, trying to help you out anymore.

Have fun,

DM

 

[Flight01]

Congrats on the success! And this is why I like this forum. I’ve never even heard of the .338 RCM I had to look it up.

And yes I love the Ruger rifles. The only reason I’d consider this gun built on a surplus military action over a Ruger is to tinker and tell myself it’s cheaper than a new Ruger.

I honestly don’t need another 100 yards or less rifle. This hypothetical rifle is definitely a 100 yards plus intended rifle. While still being wieldy in the brush.

Thanks!
30/06 is a trusty stand by. I’d say 350-400yard max on moose for me. Others might go further. But if you think maybe your going to see 400+ yard shots then the 338-06 and 210 nosler partitions or 200 accubonds or even 225 accubonds/ interbonds sounds like a great choice.
Sorry always reference bullet performance on moose. Out of habit. But on deer size game both rifles could stretch out the yardage.