Opinions please on adding weight to my 338

[aardvaark]

Hi everyone,

I'm not a prolific poster, but I thot I'd share this as the administrator wants me to post something. I mostly shoot a 25-06 Rem in a Tikka and recently bought a Tikka Tactical in 204 Ruger.

I was at the range a few days ago. I took my Sako which is chambered in 338 Imperial Magnum cuz I haven't shot it for quite a while. I'd forgotten what a vicious kick it's got. For those that don't know what this is, it's comparable to a 338 RUM. 88 grains of IMR 4831 pushes a 250 gr at about 2900 FPS. The way I make brass for it is to neck resize 375 RUM brass which has identical specs except for the neck diameter.

I've got a muzzle brake for it, but I don't like using the brake cuz I don't like hunting with it on. I shot it once without ear protection while hunting, and I could hear the ringing for about 48 hrs after that. I then took the brake off at the range, but it impacts totally different with and without the brake. I use a strap-on shoulder pad and the stock has a nice recoil pad on it. But it's a composite stock, really light, and I think it would make a big difference if I put some weight in it.

So for those of you that have used these large-brass 338's more than I have, what would be your preferred way to add weight to this thing? In it's present form, it's really quite light - my 25-06 with a wood stock is noticeably heavier - I'm guessing the Sako weighs around 8 lbs. How much weight should I add? What kind of a difference can I expect?

Thanks in advance for your collective advice. Art

[HARPERC]

You don't mention the scope, maybe improve your system, and add weight with a scope change would be a starting place.

[SidecarFlip]

Weight is everything and changes the recoil from a sharp wack to more of a thud and the thud is more bearable IMO. Weight won't lessen the recoil. It will however change the 'felt' recoil

My Savage is a tank at over 12 pounds and kicks like a kitten because it is a tank. It does the thud thing not the wack thing.

I too would start with an abnormally heavy optic, heavy steel rings and steel rail. You can't go wrong with steel. It's rigid and heavy. Not sure how it would effect gun balance but inside the buttstock would be a good place to add more weight. I suspect being a snotstock, it's hollow inside. Might be an ideal place to 'hide' some weight.

[aardvaark]

Originally Posted by HARPERC

You don't mention the scope, maybe improve your system, and add weight with a scope change would be a starting place.

I'm using a Leupold Rifleman scope, 3-9 x 40. Didn't want to change the scope, am real happy with it.

[bigngreen]

Recoil reducers work well epoxied in the butt stock. I like the Edwards recoil reducer, really takes the edge of and when combined with a brake makes a rifle insanely easy going!!

[aardvaark]

Originally Posted by SidecarFlip

Weight is everything and changes the recoil from a sharp wack to more of a thud and the thud is more bearable IMO. Weight won't lessen the recoil. It will however change the 'felt' recoil

My Savage is a tank at over 12 pounds and kicks like a kitten because it is a tank. It does the thud thing not the wack thing.

I too would start with an abnormally heavy optic, heavy steel rings and steel rail. You can't go wrong with steel. It's rigid and heavy. Not sure how it would effect gun balance but inside the buttstock would be a good place to add more weight. I suspect being a snotstock, it's hollow inside. Might be an ideal place to 'hide' some weight.

Correction: I should have said felt recoil; the part that gives me the sharp whack. A thud would be bearable but I hesitate to shoot this thing much cuz I'm afraid of developing a flinch.

The buttstock is definitely hollow, so I'll figure out how to get the pad off (there's no screw holes so I'm guessing it's glued on) and start adding weight till I get to about 12 pounds. Hopefully that changes it from a whack to a thud.

[SidecarFlip]

I suspect it will (make a marked difference in felt recoil), however, don't mess up the rifle's balance getting it too heavy in the stern in your quest to increase the weight....... A 3-9x40 is a pretty light weight (magnification wise) scope on a 3 series rifle but I can understand it if you shoot offhand.

A Pachymar Decellerator Butt Pad would help as well, or one of those marshmallow types like Savage likes to put on their shoulder breakers.....

I'd be looking at functional weight as well. Your 3-9 is way light. You could easily add a half pound in optics and hang some gee-gaw like a scope level or a shell catcher or an I-Pod (excuse me, carried away) for added weight along the axis of the action.

Lots of people think higher magnification is better and it is, if you shoot from a rest or a bi-pod but offhand, it's hard to beat a 3-9. You have to have nerves of steel and rock steady posture (I don't BTW) to deal with even a 4-16 cranked up.

I have that same scope on my .22 Ruger... and a 308, a trusty Leupy 3-9 Rifleman. In the scheme of things, it's very light in weight. It's also a very good optic IMO.

Even if you develop a flinch, once the rifle is tamed a bit, you'll work through any presumption your mind has after a time.

I heavily anticipated the recoil of my 338 and correspondingly flinched. After my subconcious figured out there was no violent recoil, my body said, 'oh well, pull the trigger'. No more flinch.