300 Weatherby or 340 Weatherby

Discussion in 'Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics' started by jb1000br, Dec 3, 2004.

  1. jb1000br

    jb1000br Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,307
    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2003
    no brake!!--300, no doubt!

    JB
     
  2. Paul Wyatt

    Paul Wyatt Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    81
    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2004
    dakor
    I shot a 300 mag for years at both deer and elk and love the rifle and the caliber, so no argument there. For the last 8 years, I have used a 338 caliber and IMO it does everything that the 300 does only better. Some of these rifles kill on one end and maime on the other and at times it's difficult to tell which end your on! As jb1000br has eluded the 340 Weatherby is notorious for recoil, but 11 pounds is a heavy rifle and will go a long way in taming the punishment. If I were going to be shooting the rifle a lot as in target and or varmits, I would have a brake mounted on either caliber because they will wear you out in a days shooting.
     

  3. rost495

    rost495 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    222
    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2003
    I'm not recoil shy. But to be frankly honest, I"ve shot 308s in M1As for a number of years. Shoot one with 168s and 180s for 2 weeks+ at Camp Perry and even the 308 gets on my nerves.

    Its why I use a brake when I can. No need in getting hit harder than you have to. Plus that retinal connection in your only 2 issued eyes is pretty valuable to me. I'd rather use the sissy brake and shoot more and rest a bit easier.

    End answer-- you put in Elk, and out to long yardage. 340 no question.
     
  4. dakor

    dakor Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    654
    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2004
    If you had to pick between the two for shooting deer (Mostly Deer) and Elk out to 700 yards. Which one would you pick and why? The rifle would not have a muzzle break and would weigh 11 LBS scoped. I almost forgot some paper punching at 1000k would be done as well.

    [ 12-03-2004: Message edited by: dakor ]
     
  5. fredj338

    fredj338 Member

    Messages:
    24
    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2002
    I would go w/ the .340 if much elk hunting were the order. As far as recoil & retinal damage; as your eyes get older you are suseptible to a detachment, even from a sneeze! Just have a retinal exam every (2) years & the doc can check for any small tears which can turn into a detachment. Happened to me a few years age & I'm only 48. That event caused me to sell my .458Lott & seek something a bit more tame for DG hunting. [​IMG]
     
  6. Fiftydriver

    Fiftydriver <strong>Official LRH Sponsor</strong>

    Messages:
    6,848
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2004
    If you will be hunting deer mainly and elk once in awhile, I would go with the 300 version with a bullet such as the 200 gr Accubond for longer range stuff if you did not want to use a match bullet.

    For elk I would recommend the 200 gr Accubond simply from an on game performance stand point.

    That said, it never does any harm to be over gunned if you can shoot the things accurately.

    To be honest, either are fully capable of covering all the hunting you want to do. Landing the bullet inthe right location is a far more important factor.

    Are yougoing with a custom rifle or factory?

    Kirby Allen(50)
     
  7. dakor

    dakor Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    654
    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2004
    Fifty I was thinking the same thing about the 200gr accubond. That is one of the reasons I was considering the 300. With the 340 you really dont have a lot of bullets to choose from like a 30 cal. As for Elk I would be shooting probably 700 yards max so I would think the STW could handle it or the 375 H&H I am shooting 260 Accubonds out of that at 2895 fps. I know the bc on them is only 473 but I think out to 700 yards they would work. I dont have a 30 cal either maybe I should just go with the 300 Weatherby since I have a 375 and it shoots 260's as fast as the 340 shoots 250's. What do you guys think?

    [ 12-04-2004: Message edited by: dakor ]
     
  8. dakor

    dakor Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    654
    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2004
    I didnt know recoil was hard on your eyes? Is that true? I shoot a 375 H&H off the bench that weighs 9lbs scoped. I am used to it and I have shot up to 30 + rounds in one sitting without it really bothering me. How would this compare to a 340 Weatherby that would weigh 11 lbs? Now I have another question I have a 7mm STW how would that work on Elk out to 800 yards with a 160gr or 175gr bullets if I do my part? That rifle shoots very well and I am really used to it. The reason I asked about the 300 or 340 is a friend of mine wants to build a 300 Weatherby and wants me to build one also. I really dont know if I need a 300 because of my STW but I was thinking a 340 Might be nice to fill the gap between the STW and the 375 H&H.

    [ 12-04-2004: Message edited by: dakor ]
     
  9. Guest

    Guest Guest

    .300 Weatherby or .340 Weatherby? Well, first off, the .340 will deliver as much as 400 fps more than the .300, but who cares. I would think that you would want to shoot for accuracy, not necessarily velocity. Based on that alone, I would choose the .300 WITH A BREAK; preferably one that does not dig a hole in the ground and Badger Ordnance manufactures a good one. The .338 Lapua was designed by the US Navy to be their SWS Caliber of choice and yes, it does do everything the .300 Win Mag. does, only better.
     
  10. rost495

    rost495 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    222
    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2003
    I shoot a lot. And am around lots of other competitive shooters. Age helps out the retina detach easier. But the constant pounding of rifles helps it also.

    I used to shoot a 375 in a Ruger #1. That was ok but gave me good headaches behind my eyes.

    Just be very careful. Regardless of age, constant pounding, especially from a large caliber gun is not good on the eyes.

    Jeff
     
  11. Pahunter

    Pahunter Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    136
    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2004
    Get the .300. Out to 700 yards it has

    plenty of energy for elk. In an 11 pound

    rifle recoil would be minimal so you dont

    a break.
     
  12. dreal

    dreal Member

    Messages:
    10
    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2004
    300 Wby - with a brake if you want to shoot much from the bench. I am shooting 180gr TSX's and 190 SMK's right around 3150 fps, the SMK a little slower. Both shot sub-moa to 500 meters with plenty of energy for elk out to 700 yards.

    Check out Muzzlebrake.com, High Performance Gunsmithing. I have their brakes on several rifles. Perfect taper and finish match as well as a perfectly matched cap if you want to hunt without the brake. I can shoot my 300 all day long with HPG's brake.
     
  13. budlight

    budlight Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    836
    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2004
    I've never heard of rifle induced retina detachment. It might be just me, but I don't even feel my head whip shooting my 458.

    I do know from years of road racing my corvette that telemtry boxes have exceeded 50 "G's" when somebody slams into a guard rail at over 100 mph and stops in 12 inches.

    I'm also into drag racing and I never though much about pulling the chute that slams you into the harnesses at 4+ "G's" Lot's of older guys are out there wrecking and pulling the chutes every day and I've not heard of any retina detachment there either.

    I used to get head aches and blood shot eyes from Negative "G's" is a acrobatic sport plane.

    I do believe that prior damage could become effected by small things.

    Very new to me. My gun in planning is a .338 Lapua with a 32 inch barrel for hunting and paper. Probably a near 20 lbs gun. I vote for the 340 class gun.
     
  14. rost495

    rost495 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    222
    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2003
    budlight

    You probably just have a good connection like most folks.

    Either that or the M.Ds I've talked about it are all wet. They all advise against heavy guns for lots of shooting. Especially the older you get.

    IIRC John Wooters had a shooting induced detachment a number of years ago as a gun writer also. FWIW. I could be wrong on the cause though. I know it caused him to shoot a lighter kicking gun and switch shoulders too.

    I also suspect that it depends on how you absorb recoil. Those of us that stick with the gun totally may get more or less effect than those that let the gun roll around more.

    Jeff