Advantages of a 30-338RUM ?

Discussion in 'Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics' started by CanadianLefty, Feb 9, 2005.

  1. CanadianLefty

    CanadianLefty Well-Known Member

    Mar 2, 2004
    I read somewhere that the 30-338RUM has slightly less powder space than the 300RUM; thus, recoils less. What is the powder space (or water vol.) difference?

    Also, I read that the case is a little shorter and it has a longer neck- does this really help improve bullet seating over the regular 300RUM to be worth the difference?

    Finally, how difficult is it to slightly shorten the case on the 30-338RUM to reduce capacity a bit more but have the case fit in a standard-length action or finish at about 3.60 OAL (with 200gr. bullets)

    Thanks !
  2. Fiftydriver

    Fiftydriver Official LRH Sponsor

    Jun 12, 2004
    The 30-338 RUM would have about 8 grains less capacity then the full length 300 RUM. In a case that has a 100 gr case capacity, your talking 8% difference, not much at all.

    While actual recoil would technically less, being able to tell the difference in felt recoil would be nearly impossible to the shooter.

    The 30-338 RUM would have exactly the same neck length as teh 300 RUM. The only difference between the two is the body length which is about 0.090" shorter then the full length 300 RUM.

    If you want to go shorter then the 30-338 RUM, I would highly recommend the 300 Dakota, this is the same case design except with a 2.550" case length compared to 2.760 for the 30-338 RUM and 2.850" for the 300 RUM.

    To fit in most true standard length receivers, you will need an OAL of around 3.400" to work in say Ruger M77 or Win M70 Standard length action.

    Good Shooting!!

    Kirby Allen(50)
  3. CanadianLefty

    CanadianLefty Well-Known Member

    Mar 2, 2004

    Thanks for the answer. I was considering the 300 Dakota very seriously.

    I spoke with another gunsmith to build me a rifle and he had a preference for the 300 Win. Mag.

    He said: [ QUOTE ]
    I personally have a fairly low opinion of the Dakota cartridges although, on the surface, they seem fairly practical. I feel the cartridges could benefit from having slightly more body taper. I have seen rifles in these chamberings which exhibited extraction problems related to this lack of taper in combination with thehigh pressures necessary to achieve performance in line with claims. Most actions simply lack sufficient primary extraction to allow the case to release. Many will argue this point but there it is.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Would you 'politely' share your thoughts with me on your experience or preference on the 300 Dakota in view of the above comments?

    Should you wish you, please PM me confidentially. I want a rifle built on a Model 70 SS action, D'arcy Echols Legends lightweight McMillan Stock or the Hunter's Edge (McM), 25 or 26" SS barrel #2, light flutes- some action milling and accurizing etc.

    I like the idea of the 300 Dakota, but want to make an informed decision on building a custom rifle.

    Further, is it possible to get a mag that holds 4 down with this cartridge?

    Big Thanks!