Originally Posted by Brambles
I have a Stainless M700 300 ultra mag, shoots alright, .75 to 1 MOA, with 200gr Nosler Accubonds at 3200 fps using 95 Gr Retubmo.
It has a Zeiss Conquest, 6.5-20x50 scope on it. With Burris Zee rings offset to approx 15MOA.
Its Bedded into a Bansner Sheep Hunter stock with a factory cheekpiece.
Thinking of going a little further with a LR build, unsure if I should stick to the 300 Ultra mag or ???
I would like it capable of taking Elk and Moose to 1000 yards which Im sure the 300 ultra mag is capable of doing.
I'd like to keep the cost of shooting down and I don't want a 15lb gun, don't mind packing a 12 pound rifle all in at the very most.
In my case is there any advantage to going with a 338 ultra mag or other 338 variant? Looks like cost of shooting goes up with the more exotic LR choices.
I ran the ballistics on a 338 RUM and a 300 RUM and didn't see any advantage to the 338 RUM with the exception of wind drift.
With the Zeiss I"m thinking I might need as flat a gun as possible as they don't have a lot of elevation adjustment.
What would be the recommended barrel length and contour to meed my goals?
What do you think of the scope? Are they up to the task?
Well... the 300 Rum will do what you want and do it economically.
Is a .338 Rum or other super .338 mag going to do it better at a 1,000yds? Sure it will but there's an enormous number of factors that are even more important than bullet weight.
Put a Sendero Taper or slightly less on a 28" barrel, and get an ultra match quality Krieger, Shilen, Brux or other high quality barrel and you'll have the best of all worlds and still be able to shoot more economically.
The scope you have is a good one. It's major limitations compared to the NF or Mark 4's is that it won't give you quite as much time in low light situations and has less adjustability but you've offset that with the 20 MOA rail so it's a wash.
I went to 50mm Obj's and 30 and 35mm tubes on my latest round of scopes but I did just fine with the Conquests for many years.