338 Lapua vs. 300 Magnum

[MMH]

For long range shooting & hunting, what advantage does a .30 Cal magnum (pickone: WinMAg, WSM, RUM) have over the 338 Lapua? Ammo cost for me would be a non issue - for 'light loads I would use a 308 & if you reload, then a Lapua does not cost that much more to shoot than a .30 cal magnum. Either one really requires a muzzle brake. The .30 cal magnums deliver 3000 to 4000 fl-lbs of energy whereas the Lapua delivers 4000 to 5000 ft-lbs. Obviously the Lapua is a bigger jump, but if I can't do it with a 308 then does it matter if I step up a little or allot? Ballistic coefficient favors the Lapua.

What am I missing here?

 

[Tazman]

This has been a debate for many years. Each has it's own merits but I chose to have a 308, 300 RUM, and a HS Precision 338. I can load the 338 light with 250 Grain or go long with 300 Bergers. If you already have a 300 of some sorts then you can load down to the 308 level or up to the 230 Berger and get close to the 338 at some distances.

 

[MMH]

I agree that each has its own merits. I currently only have a 308. The question for me is if I do not have a RUM or Lapua (which I do not), then do I really need a RUM, or will just getting a Lapua suffice? I.e. is there too big a gap between the a 308 & a Lapua?

This has been a debate for many years. Each has it's own merits but I chose to have a 308, 300 RUM, and a HS Precision 338. I can load the 338 light with 250 Grain or go long with 300 Bergers. If you already have a 300 of some sorts then you can load down to the 308 level or up to the 230 Berger and get close to the 338 at some distances.

 

[KPK]

.300wm and 230s

 

[biffj]

My not very scientific view is that if you have a .338 Lapua Mag for the big or long range stuff and a .308 for the little or nearer stuff you're set. No need to have the Lapua and a 300 win mag or equivalent. I shoot a 6.5X47 and a .338 Lapua mag and that pretty well covers everything from nearby to way out.

Just my opinion of course and about all you'll get from the peanut gallery.

frank

 

[MitchAlsup]

My not very scientific view is that if you have a .338 Lapua Mag for the big or long range stuff and a .308 for the little or nearer stuff you're set. No need to have the Lapua and a 300 win mag or equivalent. I shoot a 6.5X47 and a .338 Lapua mag and that pretty well covers everything from nearby to way out.

The only thing I would add to the above is there are rational for higher firepower rifles for inside 300-400 yard work....something like an AR15.

 

[David22255]

I'd look into the 300 Norma shooting the 230's best of both worlds, will do anything a lapua will, but if it's just between these two calibers I'd go with 338

David

 

[Tazman]

If I were only able to have 2 rifles it would be a 308 and 338. The 338 is very versatile and will cover the gap from 308 to almost a 50 Cal. I have a McMillian TAC 50 to but it never gets shot since the 338 with 300 Bergers will do anything I have ever wanted to do. 338 with a good muzzle break and practice, practice, practice to get the most out of it. The reloading cost between 300 and 338 is negligible depending on where you buy your components. I have 338 Lapua brass (300 rounds) but I found 600 rounds of 338 Privi brass as a gun show for $250 so I bought all of it and it seems to be holding up well. I use 3 loads right now to see what works the best. 250 Senar, 285 Hornady, and 300 Berger. In my rifle they all shoot excellent but when we shot out to a mile in WV the 285 seemed to hold a better group with less wind effect. I have stuck with H1000 for all 3 loads.

There are a lot of great shooters on here with a wealth of knowledge but no matter what you end up with, practice and data logging is the only way to get the most out of your combination.