325. WSM

[AKHunter]

Your question was answered though, yes ?

[Phil Lozano]

OK no debating the 325 and the 338.

Observations - The 325 is a viable NA and African plains game cartridge, provided you use heavy for caliber bullets, otherwise, not a good choice. The selection of 8mm bullets is limited

The 338 Win. Mag. is better choice/cartridge in every category than the 325.


Best,

[.280Rem]

Originally Posted by Phil Lozano

I agreed with most of what you say above.

However, the heavier the bullet the larger the expansion (mushroom) vs lighter bullets of the same caliber.

338's are too small for Buffalo. They will kill Buffalo, but this is what will happen. You will shoot him in the chest at 40 yards, and he will run straight at you and be there before you have a chance to get another shot in. Now this does not always happen, but it only has to happen once, then you're dead.

The 338 is a very good cartridge and suitable for all NA game as well as all of Africa's plains game.

However, if I were hunting the big bears here often and the largest plains game in Africa, I would have a strong look at the 358 Norma.

But, for NA and most every place the 338 is quite a nice cartridge.

Best,

I agree...the .338 wouldn't be an ideal choice for Buffs, at least as far as I know.

[338RemUltraMag]

.338 hands down I love mine and see no need for the .325 other than a marketing ploy but if i didn't have a .338 I might be tempted to go with a .325 WSM or the .338 Federal but there is no need with the .338 ultra mag in my cabnet

[turner]

I'd certainly see a .325WSM as more than a marketing ploy. Nothing wrong with a .338RUM, a fine caliber and rifle, as long as you want a 26" barreled Remington model 700(only rifle chambered in it). Some prefer more of a choice; perhaps a Kimber (2 models in .325) or maybe a Left Hand bolt (Browning A-Bolt). It comes in 4 or 5 other A-bolt models as well, including one with BOSS. Of course if you're wanting a lever action magnum...... Yup, there's five different models available in .325. One is even a SS/Lam in takedown for travel. So although one caliber may seem to reign supreme on paper, there's lots more to hunting and shooting than ballistic tables and one type rifle. Well, in my opinion, anyway. I'd say any caliber that can pretty much match up with the great .338WM's loading of 210gr with it's own 220gr in both trajectory and FPE is no slouch. Again, simply my opinion.

[vikingpreacher]

Originally Posted by Phil Lozano

OK no debating the 325 and the 338.

Observations - The 325 is a viable NA and African plains game cartridge, provided you use heavy for caliber bullets, otherwise, not a good choice. The selection of 8mm bullets is limited

The 338 Win. Mag. is better choice/cartridge in every category than the 325.


Best,

That is lame! They both have advantages. The 338 offers a little more power and is more popular, the 325 has less recoil, is close in power, and is a short action cartridge, which is isn't needed but it is nice.

[Magnumsrule]

OK guys.... I have drawn my conclusion about the cartridge. #25 is a good option for NA game as it is near 338 win mag performance with less recoil and being in a short action rifle. However the 338 is a better option as more bullets, and more choices in rifles. So if you have a 338 there is obviosly no reason to get a 325, just as if you had a 300 win mag there would be no reason to get a 300wsm. However the wsm's do have a place in the hunting world and will continue to grow in populartity. (At least that is what i predict). Hoever i have also been looking at the 338 rum and am impressedd by it. However you are limited by everything. Guns, ammo, and brass at least where i am. I would like to buy a remington and slap a muzzle break on it. But money money money lol.

[Phil Lozano]

Originally Posted by vikingpreacher

That is lame!

What was lame about my observations ?

Originally Posted by Phil Lozano

OK no debating the 325 and the 338.

Observations - The 325 is a viable NA and African plains game cartridge, provided you use heavy for caliber bullets, otherwise, not a good choice. The selection of 8mm bullets is limited

The 338 Win. Mag. is better choice/cartridge in every category than the 325.

Best,

[AKHunter]

Ok, twice at least I have seen it stated that the .325wsm has less recoil than the .338wm yet the article concluded this:

There is an "Expanded Rifle Recoil Table" on the Tables, Charts and Lists Page, so let's take a look at the recoil figures in typical scoped rifles of each caliber. An average .338 Win. Mag. rifle probably weighs about 8.5 pounds with a scope. A Browning A-Bolt II Hunter in .325 WSM weighs about 7.5 pounds with a scope. So, those are the rifle weights we will use in the following recoil comparison. Recoil is measured in foot pounds of kinetic energy.

• .325 WSM, 180 grain @ 3060 fps - 33.1 ft. lbs.
• .325 WSM, 200 grain @ 2950 fps - 35.3 ft. lbs.
• .325 WSM, 220 grain @ 2840 fps - 37.5 ft. lbs.
• .338 Mag., 200 grain @ 2950 fps - 32.8 ft. lbs.
• .338 Mag., 225 grain @ 2800 fps - 34.6 ft. lbs.
• .338 Mag., 250 grain @ 2650 - 37.0 ft. lbs.

Lo and behold, load for load the .338 Mag. actually kicks slightly less than the .325 WSM. The extra pound of rifle weight completely cancelled out the lower power cartridge's advantage. Since the difference is only about 1/2 ft. lb., I doubt that most shooters are going to be able to tell the difference, but the Browning advertising claim appears to have been based on hype rather than scientific fact. Certainly anyone who can shoot a light Browning .325 rifle could shoot a standard weight .338 Magnum rifle.
Note that both of these cartridges kick far harder than most shooters can stand for any extended length of time. If the preferred recoil limit for the average shooter's comfort is 15 ft. lbs., these babies kick well over twice as hard as most shooters are comfortable with! All the power in the world is wasted if the shooter flinches and misses the target.

[vikingpreacher]

Originally Posted by AKHunter

Ok, twice at least I have seen it stated that the .325wsm has less recoil than the .338wm yet the article concluded this:

Did you not notice that he mentioned the 338 weighed 1 pound more? And it was only 1/2 ft. lb.?

Originally Posted by Phil Lozano

What was lame about my observations ?





Best,

That you tried to say,"Your right, this isn't a debate but my cartridge is better than yours from every angle."

[Phil Lozano]

Originally Posted by vikingpreacher

That you tried to say,"Your right, this isn't a debate but my cartridge is better than yours from every angle."

I don't even own a 338. However I have seen a ton of them shot at game.

When given the "eye ball " test, the 338 is very, very good.

Ft. lbs. of energy is not the only factor involved when considering how effective a given cartridge performs.

It is the one that factories quote, because it is in favor of velocity. The ol' E=Mc2 has not been duplicated nor proven (however, it is considered correct, so one must assume the formula when considering velocity).

If you look at the other formulas I posted, all those things come into play when estimating how effective a cartridge will be. Although most people only consider velocity, e.g. kinetic energy, foot pounds, it is not the only thing to calculate.

So in the end IF you were to "run the numbers", you could see which cartridges are better than others.

Best,

[AKHunter]

Did you not notice that he mentioned the 338 weighed 1 pound more? And it was only 1/2 ft. lb.?

Yes I did notice, and those rifles I think it safe to say, would be typical examples respective to their calibers. I am sure you are aware that the weight of a given firearm has a direct effect on the recoil of that firearm. The examples were 1lb difference in rifle weight between the two and difference as stated was 1/2 lb in recoil. Now lets make the .325wsm 8.5lbs also , we would get the reverse; 1/2lb greater recoil in the .338wm. Is that something you can distinguish when you pull the trigger, do you think ? I doubt I would be able to discern the difference, or care for that matter.

However you view it, the comments stating the .325wsm had less recoil than the .338wm was incorrect based on the article posted in the thread. That is my point.

[Brother Bob]

The .338 is going to put a bigger hole in the animal due to its larger frontal area. Right?

[turner]

Originally Posted by Brother Bob

The .338 is going to put a bigger hole in the animal due to its larger frontal area. Right?

This is true Brother Bob, but we'd find a .358 Norma Mag and even .35Whelen would make a larger hole than a .338, and it would be comparatively larger than the .325(.323) vs .338. With .358 vs .338.
The idea that the .325 is not "truly" a medium bore may mean something to purists, and rightly so. But as good as both the .338WM and .338RUM are, I think there is still a place for the .325 even though I'd be the first to admit that that place likely ends where hunting large grizzlies begins, due to the lack of good big bullets available. For deer, elk, moose and similar I do feel it could be driven by rifle type or preference, rather than which of the 3 is better on paper. They have all proven excellent for CXP3 game.

Just for grins, how's this for a grizzly load for a .35 Whelen:

osCommerce

[Brother Bob]

Wow! That would definitely put the "hurtin" on bruin! I'd still want something bigger for the coastal brown bears. My .375 H&H for instance. LOL!

[vikingpreacher]

Originally Posted by Brother Bob

The .338 is going to put a bigger hole in the animal due to its larger frontal area. Right?

If you use the right bullet, .015 in. isn't going to make a big difference.

Originally Posted by AKHunter

.

However you view it, the comments stating the .325wsm had less recoil than the .338wm was incorrect based on the article posted in the thread. That is my point.

But all things equal then, it still kicks less. Chuckhawks to me, as far as his opinions go, is the Crazy Uncle of the gun writer family. I often use his site as a reference for loads and the such, but I never agree with him.

[turner]

Originally Posted by Brother Bob

Wow! That would definitely put the "hurtin" on bruin! I'd still want something bigger for the coastal brown bears. My .375 H&H for instance. LOL!

That is a very fine and well proven caliber. I'm watching to see if Ruger and Hornady try something logical for their new .375 Ruger (30/06 length and equal power to the H&H) as Remington was wise to do for their .300RUM. That is... provide one or two additional lower powered loadings making this stout load more manageable for more types of hunting. I'd love to see a .375 Ruger loading in 255gr @2400- 2500 FPS for deer. And another .270 gr at 2500-2600 FPS or so for elk and moose. If companies want their calibers and rifles to be head and shoulders above the competition, these are things they should try. I commend Remington for their attempt to turn the .300RUM into lessor of a fire breather for situations when full power is not needed. I thought the Styer .376 was a good try, but apparently I must have been about the only one!

[Lng Rng]

Time for my input. If you are talking about shooting a .338, or .325, recoil should not be much of an issue. If you can't handel a .338, you probably can't shoot a .325, either. If I am shooting at something big enough to warrant the use of a caliber such as a .338, recoil is not on my mind.

What I see the .325 being good for is a elk, black bear and moose cartridge. It can be put in a slightly lighter gun, which would be nice for packing around the mountains, and it has adaquete power to stop any of those animals.

Right now, a .340 sits in the safe, and if I had to replace it, it would be with the .338. The .338 shoots cheaper than what I have, but for as much as I shoot it, I can pay for the difference. I don't consider the .340 to be too punishing, so long as you dont put 2 boxes of ammo down range.

[Magnumsrule]

Just for a refrence how much does a 300 win mag recoil?

[Brother Bob]

Originally Posted by Magnumsrule

Just for a refrence how much does a 300 win mag recoil?

More than a .30-06. Not as much as a .338 Winmag.