Eric Alexander
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2015
- Messages
- 114
Maybe one of you has done this. If so, great. Please share the experience: the work and the outcome.
The notion I'm working with is that shorter, wider columns of powder seem to burn more efficiently, yielding a bit better performance for powder used.
Though the bolt face will be large, the brass should measure out to 2.50 inches, and now fitting the once longer 338-378 into an -06 length action.... but with 30% more volume than .338 Win Mag and close to 10% over 340 Weatherby.
So, in the instant case, a bit more volume than the 340 but, more importantly, perhaps more efficiently packaged to burn. .. perhaps nearly matching the long guy's performance with 15% less powder. That would proof the concept of shorter/wider.
If somebody has wandered down this path before, please advise. Or if some important element needs addressing in the concept, likewise.
thanks
The notion I'm working with is that shorter, wider columns of powder seem to burn more efficiently, yielding a bit better performance for powder used.
Though the bolt face will be large, the brass should measure out to 2.50 inches, and now fitting the once longer 338-378 into an -06 length action.... but with 30% more volume than .338 Win Mag and close to 10% over 340 Weatherby.
So, in the instant case, a bit more volume than the 340 but, more importantly, perhaps more efficiently packaged to burn. .. perhaps nearly matching the long guy's performance with 15% less powder. That would proof the concept of shorter/wider.
If somebody has wandered down this path before, please advise. Or if some important element needs addressing in the concept, likewise.
thanks