Posted on 10/13/2008 2:36:46 PM PDT by Dawnsblood
Only thing I liked about the movie was some of Berengers' charcter was "LOOSELY" based on Carlos Hathcock
A most humane practice, I would say. A bg is probably easier to reason with after having a 50-caliber hole shot in his canteen... or something...
I thought the military used 300 win mags for sniper training.
Oh, that one. It was even worse.
Berenger is looking through binoculars and he tells somone he can’t make a shot because “THEY WERE TOO FAR AWAY”.
While he was looking through binoculars???????
I get all squishy just thinking about it..... makes me long for a B52 strike on the horizon. Although the folks in Lampasas might not be too thrilled.
It can be stout. I use a Vais muzzle brake on mine. I guess the best comparison to give for a .338 without a brake would be comparable to lighting off both barrels of a double barrel 12 ga. shotgun loaded with 1/2 oz. 3 inch mag slugs.
We nicknamed the .338 as the snot gun. If you aren’t ready, it’ll clear your sinuses... literally.
Mike
LOL... well, share the wealth!!!
Mike
“Can be stout” — ;-)
You have a gift for understatement.
Sounds like I’ll give it a miss. My .338 WM is enough abuse already. I like the ballistics of the .338 quite a bit and always wondered what a Lapua would be like...
Yep, the idea was superior ballistics to keep the round supersonic out to a mile. Major stability and accuracy loss as a bullet goes from super to subsonic.
Don't think any commercial rounds can do that, hence the 408.
And when the integrate the computer, environment measurement devices and range finder into the scope, they will have invented my idea.
Point, click.
I’ve been wondering when they would start bringing out the .40 caliber rifles.
It really isn’t that bad. If you can handle the .338 WM you can handle the Lapua. Put a brake on the end of the barrel and the recoil is gentle as a kitten. We’ve run the .338’s out past 1500 and they are hitting HARD.
The key is setting the rifle up right and don’t cut corners. I love shooting the .338 Lapua. The bad part is the cost of ammo. I load my own using 90 grains of N170 behind a 300 grain bullet. This is hotter than what you’ll find in most reloading books and I only recommend this load in a Viper Actions TAC 338 with a Mike Rock barrel on it.
Mike
That’s why I was asking about the brake vs. no brake — I’m getting tired of brakes. I think I’d rather have a heavier rifle than a brake any more.
I really like the ballistics of the 300gr match/vld pills for the .338. The Winchester doesn’t launch 300’s all that fast; from what I’m seeing, a Lapua could launch the 300’s at nominal (2400-2500fps) velocity, whereas the winchester can’t really be pushed beyond about 2150 to 2200fps with 300gr pills. With the high BC’s, that’s worth the effort, IMO. If that were a BC down in the .300 to .400 range, I wouldn’t bother...
As for hunting - I really like the 210gr Partitions and the 250gr Partitions. If I do my job, the .338 does an excellent job of one-shot kills on anything I’ve come across so far in the west.
It certainly isn’t a rifle for plinking at beer cans, tho...
Along that same vein, I assert that the last honest gun writer was Col. Townsend Whelan, USA (ret).
I still love the way he started out his article on the .280, entitled “Just a Little Better”: “If you already have a .270 or .30-06 with which you can shoot well, you need read no further...”
Today, a gun rag editor would hit the ceiling if he saw one of his writers write that. Their job now is to sell guns! And if he has a writer telling guys to stick with what they have.... cripes, can’t have that!
That said, I am now a fan of the Colonel’s thinking on the “one rifle that could do everything” — there is a wide enough choice of projectiles in 7mm/.284 that if one has what is now called a Remington .280 (.30-06 necked down to a .284 bullet, shoulder blown forward to prevent cramming it into a .270 Win), you should be able to do most anything you want in the lower 48 of the US, and quite possibly most of Alaska as well. There’s little need for this “golf club bag of rifles” — we go back to the days when a rifleman had one rifle, he knew how it shot in all conditions because he had shot it in all conditions, because it was the only rifle he had.
The older I get, the more sage I find that thinking. That said, I agree with Col. Whelen that the .280 is “just a little better” than the -06. The BC’s are just a little higher, the round is a little flatter, there’s just a little more choice of bullets. The European military rifle makers figured this 6.5 to 7mm issue out decades ago, as you point out - look at how many WWI and WWII military rifles are chambered in something between 6.5 to 7mm.... a whole lot of them. That’s because the ballisticians of those days saw what we’re now “rediscovering” — that you can create bullets with high sectional densities and BC’s in the 6.5 to 7mm range that are light enough to not shake your molars loose, but heavy enough to have excellent energy carrying potential.
Going to the other side, I think one of the most efficient cartridges out there for bigger game is the .35 Whelen. Again, based on the ‘06 case. No need for belted magnum cases; sure, it doesn’t launch the pill downrange at blistering velocities, but it does get the job done, and from what I’ve seen, it is an excellent hunting round.
I use a .338 WM because it is (IMO) the first justifiable step upwards in energy and ballistics over a .30-06, .280 or similar cartridges. Going to a .300 WM was not a big enough improvement in my estimation. And I’ve never been a fan of this “drive a teeny-weenie pill at light speed velocities” — I’d sooner shoot a .45-70 before I shoot one of these .50BMG’s necked down to a knitting needle jobs.
All that said, if someone had a .30-06 in a bolt gun (eg springfield ‘03), he’d have everything he’ll ever need: accuracy, power, range, you name it. It really is remarkable to think just how good those rifles are for the pre-CNC, yet mass produced era.
If you’re ever in Cody, WY, go to the Buffalo Bill Museum. In there, they have a COMPLETE set of the tooling to make a 1903 Springfield. It isn’t operational, but it is complete — down to the stock lathes.
I’m getting about 2800 fps out of my 300 grain loads. Using a Mike Rock barrel seems to give me about a 150 fps advantage...
Brakes don’t bother me much, I prefer a sound suppressor though. It’s much more efficient and considerate for the neighbors.
I avoid the light bullets as they tend to kill barrels at the higher velocities.
Mike
So, uh, how large is a can that would hush a .338 Lapua? About as big as your forearm?
And what happens to recoil with a brake vs. a can?
http://www.awcsystech.com/thundertrap.html
Best rifle suppressor on the market. Check the size... you’ll be surprised.
A suppressor has three major advantages. 1. It eliminates most of the muzzle blast. (the obvious one) 2. The recoil is reduced about 60% or more. We’ve found that the more powerful the round, the more significant the felt recoil reduction is. This is huge compared to the effectiveness of a brake. 3. It dampens barrel vibration (whip) and assists in consistancy. You can turn a 1 moa gun into a 1/2 moa gun with a suppressor.
That’s about it in a nutshell.
Mike
I agree that one does not need a "rolex" to tell time. ;-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.