30-378 Weatherby

yobuck said:

This is the answer for the 30x378. Long barrels and slow powder. 40 years ago they were the most sought after among PA long rangers, but good actions prevented them from being so. I used one on a Howard Wolfe custom action for over 25 years.
He wouldn't build one with less than a 36" barrel, and unless you used the powder he recommended.
He did also start building them on lapped Mark Vs.
WW2 surplus H570 was the best powder, with 112 gr showing about 3500 fps with a 200 gr SMK. 118 gr of H870 would do the same, as would WC872.
With that velocity, the 200 gr shoots flatter out to 1500 yds than the heavier ones. But frankly with todays choices of cartridges, I don't see much point to the 30x378.

Click to expand...

Weatherby was far, far ahead of his time and it's taken the rest of the industry 40 plus years to replicate what were standard ballistics for the WBY's with modern cartridges.

His downfall was the proprietary ammo and case design. He thought by marketing to only high end clientele he could keep the company viable and a leading competitor where Ruger, Remington, and Winchester did much better mass marketing lesser rifles and rounds to a much larger group.

Basically until recent years there simply was nothing close to the 30-378 but today there are several that are basically ballistic twins or even exceed it's capabilities.

Personally I'm a huge believer in the law of diminishing returns and when you get to that size case pushing a .30 caliber bullet you've exceeded the threshold where that little bit of extra performance comes at a huge cost in ammo, reloading components, muzzle blast, and recoil.

Most people can't afford to practice enough with those bruisers to be really competent behind them and of course every round down range is pretty punishing to most shooters.

In sensible barrel lengths on a hunting rifle, I'd go RUM instead. mtmuley

mtmuley said:

In sensible barrel lengths on a hunting rifle, I'd go RUM instead. mtmuley

Click to expand...

There's lots of good sense behind this. There's nothing you can do with a .30cal that can't be done with the RUM and very little that can be done with one that isn't done by the wm.

Either is going to be a whole lot more pleasant and economical to shoot and there's plenty of factory ammo around should you get off somewhere and run out or get separated from your ammo which is always a big consideration for me.

WildRose said:

Weatherby was far, far ahead of his time and it's taken the rest of the industry 40 plus years to replicate what were standard ballistics for the WBY's with modern cartridges.

His downfall was the proprietary ammo and case design. He thought by marketing to only high end clientele he could keep the company viable and a leading competitor where Ruger, Remington, and Winchester did much better mass marketing lesser rifles and rounds to a much larger group.

Basically until recent years there simply was nothing close to the 30-378 but today there are several that are basically ballistic twins or even exceed it's capabilities.

Personally I'm a huge believer in the law of diminishing returns and when you get to that size case pushing a .30 caliber bullet you've exceeded the threshold where that little bit of extra performance comes at a huge cost in ammo, reloading components, muzzle blast, and recoil.

Most people can't afford to practice enough with those bruisers to be really competent behind them and of course every round down range is pretty punishing to most shooters.

Click to expand...

Well certainly we owe a lot to both Roy Weatherby and P O Ackley. Actually though the 30x378 was wildcatted off the basic 378 case decades before Weatherby decided to make it a factory offering.
And the fact is that Howard Wolfe was very involved in creating it, which was the reason for his action being produced in the 60s. I had a Hart #4 custom action in the early 70s that I wanted him to rebarrel to a 30x378 but he refused to do it. First off the bolt face wasent big enough anyway in his opinion. But a few years later we met at a hunting location and he asked me if I was still interested in doing it. He rebated the base of the 378 case so it fit the standard mag bolt, and stressed to me the importance of how much powder I should use as max. It was an awesome shooting gun, frankly even better than the later one I had on one of his actions.
But in fact what I actually had was a 300 Ultra years before it was introduced.
He was a Williamsport shooter also and built some of the early record holding guns. He decided that since long barrels were so hard to get, and 30" so easy, he needed a case with less capacity. So he shortened the standard 378 case and put a standard taper on the shoulder. It became pretty popular with the shooters and some l/r hunters as well on the local level. Problem was you had to get Howard to make up the brass, and for that reason used ones didn't sell very well. I found one on a mark 5 that had very few rounds thru it before the owner died and I bought it. I had Howard turn the barrel down to varmit weight, and had his son install a new laminate l/r thumbhole stock. The gun now weighs 18# and has for years now become my favorite gun.
But the topper is that about 5 years ago a friend came to the camp for bear hunting. He had just had a 300 Norma built and he showed me a cartridge.
I said half joking that it looked just like little Wolfey.
So we compared cases, and they looked identicle.
We then weighed them, and again with water. There was only 1 grain difference in capacity. So thanks again to Howard, I have an early version 300 Norma. lol
But back to the 30x378, and especially for a l/r hunter when shooting at extreme distances.
If you havent compared a big 30 cal to a big 338,
then by all means do so before spending your hard earned money.

I don't understand comparing 30-378 to a 338. Is that not everyone would call apples to oranges. If a shooter likes to shoot the big 30 and another prefers the 338, why does one have to be right and the other wrong, or one smart and the other not so much? And aversion to recoil is not a valid argument against the 30-378. I have a Weatherby in 30-378 and another one in 338 Lapua, and the Lapua shooting 300 grain bullets thumps harder than the 30-378 shooting 210's, which is what I primarily feed it.

yobuck said:

Well certainly we owe a lot to both Roy Weatherby and P O Ackley. Actually though the 30x378 was wildcatted off the basic 378 case decades before Weatherby decided to make it a factory offering.
And the fact is that Howard Wolfe was very involved in creating it, which was the reason for his action being produced in the 60s. I had a Hart #4 custom action in the early 70s that I wanted him to rebarrel to a 30x378 but he refused to do it. First off the bolt face wasent big enough anyway in his opinion. But a few years later we met at a hunting location and he asked me if I was still interested in doing it. He rebated the base of the 378 case so it fit the standard mag bolt, and stressed to me the importance of how much powder I should use as max. It was an awesome shooting gun, frankly even better than the later one I had on one of his actions.
But in fact what I actually had was a 300 Ultra years before it was introduced.
He was a Williamsport shooter also and built some of the early record holding guns. He decided that since long barrels were so hard to get, and 30" so easy, he needed a case with less capacity. So he shortened the standard 378 case and put a standard taper on the shoulder. It became pretty popular with the shooters and some l/r hunters as well on the local level. Problem was you had to get Howard to make up the brass, and for that reason used ones didn't sell very well. I found one on a mark 5 that had very few rounds thru it before the owner died and I bought it. I had Howard turn the barrel down to varmit weight, and had his son install a new laminate l/r thumbhole stock. The gun now weighs 18# and has for years now become my favorite gun.
But the topper is that about 5 years ago a friend came to the camp for bear hunting. He had just had a 300 Norma built and he showed me a cartridge.
I said half joking that it looked just like little Wolfey.
So we compared cases, and they looked identicle.
We then weighed them, and again with water. There was only 1 grain difference in capacity. So thanks again to Howard, I have an early version 300 Norma. lol
But back to the 30x378, and especially for a l/r hunter when shooting at extreme distances.
If you havent compared a big 30 cal to a big 338,
then by all means do so before spending your hard earned money.

Click to expand...

Pretty neat story, thanks.

cuznguido said:

I don't understand comparing 30-378 to a 338. Is that not everyone would call apples to oranges. If a shooter likes to shoot the big 30 and another prefers the 338, why does one have to be right and the other wrong, or one smart and the other not so much? And aversion to recoil is not a valid argument against the 30-378. I have a Weatherby in 30-378 and another one in 338 Lapua, and the Lapua shooting 300 grain bullets thumps harder than the 30-378 shooting 210's, which is what I primarily feed it.

Click to expand...

Neither is wrong, it's all about choice and the math says all else being equal you're right.

There's certainly going to be substantially more recoil from the 338 shooting the 300gr bullets.

cuznguido said:

I don't understand comparing 30-378 to a 338. Is that not everyone would call apples to oranges. If a shooter likes to shoot the big 30 and another prefers the 338, why does one have to be right and the other wrong, or one smart and the other not so much? And aversion to recoil is not a valid argument against the 30-378. I have a Weatherby in 30-378 and another one in 338 Lapua, and the Lapua shooting 300 grain bullets thumps harder than the 30-378 shooting 210's, which is what I primarily feed it.

Click to expand...

Well try to look at it differently than apples and oranges, and simply as comparing cartridges for extreme distance shooting.
Because to my mind at least there is no other reason for owning a big 30 cal or a 338, since an 06 can certainly handle anything walking around here in this country.
So it's sorta like comparing pickup trucks, some are nice to ride to work in or haul a small camper or boat, and others are meant for more serious work, in this case long range shooting work.
And yes the serious work model rides harder, so the guy using it to commute certainly wont like it as well, but they are in fact both pickup trucks, same as all guns are guns, and all wrenches are wrenches, just intended for different use.
There is no free lunch when it comes down to performance, your gonna pay for it one way or another.
And with cartridges it will be less performance unless your willing to pay the entire price.
Again, extreme distance, meaning say 1500 and further.
Pick a nice location on a sidehill looking across a wide valley at another sidehill.
Have all the big 30 cals starting with a 300 Win mag up to the 30x378, and have a very good shooter do the shooting as you watch thru very good and very large binnoculars.
There will be no doubt in your mind as to the outcome, it will be very plain to see just by watching.
The same thing will be true if you compare the 338s starting with the Lapua.
Powder = performance, and thats constant.
The difference is that an average shooter will be a better shooter at extreme distance as for (consistency,) with a big 30 cal as compared to a smaller one, or with a smaller cartridge, and also with a big 338 using 300 gr bullets than he will be with a big 30 cal.
But these wont be guns you can just walk into a store and buy and then carry around looking for something to shoot.
Which relates back to the free lunch.

I do not presume to speak for everyone, but I doubt that the type of folks that spend the time and effort and money to buy and use big magnums of any caliber, are the type to expect a "free lunch", but I see your point.

Got back out to test some more loads with the 30-378. Tested 6 with 93.5gr of H1000 w/ Berger 230 Hybrids, and 6 with 94gr of H1000 w/ Berger 230gr Hybrids. 93.5gr of H1000 had 1"to 1.5" group with SD of 14 to 8.1 at 100 yards. 94gr of H1000 had a 1/4" to 1/2" group at 100 yards with SD of 10 to 7. Was looking at trying this out on a bull this yr but punched my elk ticket opening day Saturday with my 300 Weatherby. Have not tried the 215gr Hybrids yet. Oh average fps was 2880 with the 230gr Berger Hybrids.

Elkheart said:

Got back out to test some more loads with the 30-378. Tested 6 with 93.5gr of H1000 w/ Berger 230 Hybrids, and 6 with 94gr of H1000 w/ Berger 230gr Hybrids. 93.5gr of H1000 had 1"to 1.5" group with SD of 14 to 8.1 at 100 yards. 94gr of H1000 had a 1/4" to 1/2" group at 100 yards with SD of 10 to 7. Was looking at trying this out on a bull this yr but punched my elk ticket opening day Saturday with my 300 Weatherby. Have not tried the 215gr Hybrids yet. Oh average fps was 2880 with the 230gr Berger Hybrids.

Click to expand...

Thats very good across the board on the velocity, it shouldn't take much to fine tune it from there.

Are any of the loads showing even tighter groupings?

WildRose said:

Thats very good across the board on the velocity, it shouldn't take much to fine tune it from there.

Are any of the loads showing even tighter groupings?

Click to expand...

These are the only loads I have got to send down the range so far. I want to try the new IMR 8133 powder in it. My 300 Weatherby likes IMR 7828.

Wolf76 said:

Never really understand the 30-378. If I need more hp than the other 300 mags, I'm moving to a larger caliber. The whole diminishing returns shows here. BUT I hope you have a great time with it.

Click to expand...

Look at the down range ballistics on this caliber. The retained energy of the smaller bullet at long ranges smokes larger calibers.

Stephen

BUT that doesn't account for energy transfer. Larger frontal areas transfer energy far better. 45 vs 9mm with the same kinetic energy at impact. Which one hits harder?
BC tables are 1 part of the equation, not the whole story.