weatherby and swarovski

Discussion in 'Long Range Hunting & Shooting' started by Idahohunter3, Mar 30, 2012.

  1. Idahohunter3

    Idahohunter3 Member

    Messages:
    8
    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2012
    well I think i have decided what to do. From what I have heard from the opinions of others is there is no perfect long range big game rifle. Everyone has their own idea of what is good from 338 lupua to 338 edge to 300 ultra mag to short mags 7mm stw but it seems from the ballistic charts i have seen the 338-378 weatherby mag just has a little bit more knock down power at long range than anything else. And when i say long range i mean more than 600 yds. If anyone can convince me other wise I believe I am going to purchase a new weatherby 338-378. I also have decided on the swarovski z6-5-30-50. My next pay day is when i plan to order my new toys. Send feedback please I really want to buy the best gun for elk, moose, grizzly, and African big 5 all big game on earth cause i am a boat captain and travel a lot. I really want this to be the best decision I have ever made. Lets pretend money is no option cause i know the cost of ammo and the scope. all feed back is appriciated but please have facts to back it up. Thank you all happy hunting gun)
     
  2. SavageShtr

    SavageShtr Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    243
    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2009
    There is absolutely nothing wrong with the 338-378 weatherby!! There are other big .338's out there that put it to shame as well. The first that comes to mind would be the .338 Allen Mag based off of the .408 cheytac case. You can achieve muzzle Vel. around 3400 fps with 300gr SMK's and Berger's. There are some that will fall in between the two and are too many for me to list. The only problem with the 338 AM is that you will not be able to get it in a factory rig strictly custom!! That would be the way to go if money wasn't an issue. That's just my $.02 hope I was a little bit of help!!
     

  3. Scot E

    Scot E Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,312
    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2008
    Well that is the big dog on the factory chambering heap! Not saying you are going wrong with your choices but IMO the 338-378 Weatherby is overkill for just out to 600 yards or so. Considering the wallop you are going to take with every shot and the cost of that big daddy I personally wouldn't go that route. Of course I don't know how much you intend to shoot it and that will make a difference. Now if you are really pushing things out to 1000 yards and beyond then I would say you are more in the ball park. I can't remember how much the Weatherby weighs but I hope it is a fair amount so you can manage the recoil and keep your accuracy where it needs to be. A brake is a must!

    Regarding the scope.
    1. Dangerous game of any kind demands a scope with a lower minimum power than 5x IMO. I would personally be looking at a 2.5-3x on the bottom end at most. You can't kill what you can't see running at you are 30 MPH!
    2. Tough as nails reliable is at the top of the list as well. For me that doesn't mean Swaro but NF, S&B, Premier, Zeiss Tactical, and maybe Trijicon, and I would maybe look at the upper end elites and the SS line from SWFA.

    You will get lots of opinions, like you mentioned, but these are my thoughts.

    HTH,

    Scot E.
     
    Last edited: Mar 31, 2012
  4. Idahohunter3

    Idahohunter3 Member

    Messages:
    8
    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2012
    thank you gentleman i do want to shoot past 1000 yds and still have the knock down power to make a one shot one kill shot. I know its all about placement but it doesnt hurt to have a caliber that still packs a very nice punch.
     
  5. angus-5024

    angus-5024 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,132
    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2008
    Good choice! for a one gun man the .338-.378 Wby is about as good as it gets, sepecially if hunting globally. You can kill the small game too dead, right?

    I will say that most places in Africa wont allow the majority of the big 5 to be huntied with anything less than a .375 of some sort. I would still buy the .338-.378, but buy another rifle in .416 or larger for your nig five when you go.

    All scoped out i think that the .338.378 Wby Accumark will come out to around 9.5 lbs. They all come from the factory with a brake.

    Your scope has too much magnifacation on the low end. Ive had some close shots on black bears with my .338 RUM and the 4.5 power on my mark 4 is too much. I can get to 1k yards with a 10x scope, but preffer something between 14x and 20xon the top end. look up March scopes, they have a 10x zoom and are solid scopes (so the scopes are 2.5-25x50 on the hunting model). Im buying a March next. If not March then nightforce.
     
  6. Long Time Long Ranger

    Long Time Long Ranger Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,612
    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2002
    For the guy who can afford it the 338-378 wby accumark is as good as it gets. The 338's off the chey-tac case that were mentioned like the allen will beat the 338-378 wby velocity wise but are to heavy to hunt with at 16+ pounds. Since you want a hunting rifle and not trying to brake speed records on long targets the 338-378 wby is the best choice out there. Get a scope with less power and more field of view. The swarovski's are at the top end so no problem there just get a little less power for hunting the dangerous stuff and the close shots on anything.
     
  7. rscott5028

    rscott5028 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,608
    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2010
    notwithstanding the comments made above regarding 375 and up being required for the big 5...

    338 Win Mag will do everything you described.

    338-378 WBY will do it better.

    I just can't imagine myself wanting to practice much with a big cartridge like that without a good muzzle break. Even if your shoulder doesn't hurt, your pocket book might.

    Even my tiny by comparison 300 Win Mag spends more time in the safe than I'd like. Unless I have a specific need, I always reach for one of the 6mm or 6.5's. They're less expensive and more fun to shoot. And, they can reach out as far as most of the 500-1000yd shooting opportunities I have readily available to me will permit.

    If you can only afford one such rifle, you probably need to err on the big side since it's hard to kill a big critter with a small caliber.

    Enjoy!
    -- richard
     
  8. Idahohunter3

    Idahohunter3 Member

    Messages:
    8
    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2012
    i live next to orfino ID and would like to buy local with the nightforce but from what i have seen the swarovski just seems more idiot friendly their new ballistic turret seems amazing and on an already heavy rifle the lighter weight also seems nice what do you guys think
     
  9. Dr. Vette

    Dr. Vette Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,032
    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2009
    FYI, Weatherby only sells this caliber with a muzzle brake.
    Obviously you can build your own without one, but... :rolleyes:
     
  10. Scot E

    Scot E Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,312
    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2008

    Brakes are notoriously hard on scopes as are big magnums guns. I would get the toughest scope available and out of those 2 it would be the NF for me every time.

    NF has a nice ballistic reticle if that is up your alley that would be real nice for a flat shooter like the 338-378. You may want to give that a try.

    Ballistic turrets aren't all bad but you do have to make sure you are shooting in similar conditions to your site in area or you will need multiple turrets.

    Scot E.
     
  11. bruce_ventura

    bruce_ventura Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,106
    Joined:
    May 22, 2011
    I agree with Scott E about ballistic turrets. Plan on buying several, but only after you've selected ammo and measured bullet drop at long range.

    I don't agree with him about Swarovski scopes having mechanical problems. Not that he and his sources are wrong, but that it's a small data set. A much larger data set says that Swarovski scopes are reliable. You need to look at all the data.

    I also believe your mag range is too high. 15X is sufficient for big game out to 1,000 yds. Your application begs for a 6:1 mag ratio. I would drop down to Z6 2.5-15x56 or 3-18x50. Glare performance will be better.

    FYI. I've shot a 340 Wby from a prone position - without a brake. Even with an extra shoulder pad and shooting jacket, I was done after 20 shots.
     
  12. Scot E

    Scot E Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,312
    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2008
    Bruce,

    What you mention is correct. My experience and others is a fairly small group of guys in relation to the shooting world so that needs to be taken into consideration. Having said that we were involved in a very demanding shooting discipline that was extremely tough on scopes on Swaro's were not at the top by a decent margin. There are some legitimate scope reviewers, I am just an end user with a strong opinion :D, that have said some similar things though. I have some articles saved from over the years somewhere. If I can find them I will post them.

    Just curious though, you mention that Swaro's are considered reliable in the larger data set. Do you really think that they are as durable and repeatable as NF or even S&B for that matter. That would surprise me. I just don't know of many military folks, or competition shooters that run them.

    Scot E.
     
  13. gillettehunter

    gillettehunter Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    558
    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2010
    If weight is an issue then use the Swarovski or a March. If weight is NOT an issue then a NF is a great scope. The 3X18 on the Z6 would be a good compromise on the magnification. Bruce
     
  14. bruce_ventura

    bruce_ventura Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,106
    Joined:
    May 22, 2011
    Something tells me you're applying a very high standard to a consumer product. It would not surprise or bother me to learn that under extremely harsh use, a Swaro broke before a NF did.

    NF scopes may survive longer simply because they're heavier. Did your buddies add another pound of weight to their rifles when they tested the Swaros?