Author Topic: .338 Federal (Read 1754 times)

kyote · « **on:** May 04, 2006, 09:41:48 AM »

Not sure if this is the corr3ect forum.

Does any one have one?sounds like a neat new cartridge.any thoughts on it??

nasem · « **Reply #1 on:** May 04, 2006, 10:28:15 AM »

isn't that a new federal round ? I think thats the one everyones been talking about. A 308 case that spits out .338" bullets, would be interesting to see what people post about it.

Lone Star · « **Reply #2 on:** May 04, 2006, 10:30:27 AM »

Performance not far below the .338-06 (in practical terms) in a short aciton with reduced recoil. A step towards the current high power-short cartridge trend, but fortunately in moderation. It makes a lot of sense - but then so did the .358 WCF.

Cheesehead · « **Reply #3 on:** May 04, 2006, 12:22:14 PM »

338/308. I want one in a super light short action bolt rifle. I would also like to have this rifle in 358. Since the 358 is nearly obsoleate, what chance does the 338 federal have?

Cheese

kyote · « **Reply #4 on:** May 04, 2006, 02:17:25 PM »

I found this info surfing around.It looks like this is an excellent short action cartridge.

With more punch than the 7mm Rem Mag, the 338 Federal promises great performance..There is nothing new under the sun.

There is much truth in the quote above, especially when it comes to centerfire rifle cartridges. Many would have you believe that the most recent rifle-cartridge craze, the short magnums, are all new - though wildcatters have been "playing" with them for years. The cartridges themselves offer performance that's almost as good as long -established commercial cartridges that are both easier to find and easier on the wallet. Meanwhile, such "new" cartridges leave me feeling stodgy and pessimistic, because I find they give me little of interest to read or write - or even think - about.

Then, something comes along like the 338 Federal. Announced only four days ago, this cartridge features a 308 Winchester case necked-up to .338 caliber, and it has me excited.

For one thing, I have always preferred larger-diameter bullets for hunting big game. For another, this cartridge promises to push larger bullets of comparable weight faster than the 308's standard 30-caliber bullet. Reminds me of a 4 Non Blondes CD: Bigger, better, faster, more!
Now, although it is getting me cranked up, the cartridge itself is not new. Wildcatters (those who experiment on their own with cartridges) have been shooting such ammo for years. What is new is that Federal Cartridge Company is making it a commercially viable cartridge, and are working with veteran rifle-maker Sako to bring it to the masses - which means us. A commercial cartridge has many advantages over wildcats, such as the availability of loaded ammo, components, more widely -available (and generally better-tested) loading data, and rifles readily chambered for the cartridge. Federal predicts product in this chambering to be available by spring of 2006.

Federal says the 338 Federal will be "the only modern .338-caliber load that isn't a magnum configuration. It gives big game hunters a larger diameter bullet for more weight and overall energy on targetwithout magnum recoil." For those of us who aren't recoil-shy, the advantage lies in the ability to use a larger, more-effective bullet in a smaller package, at velocities more suitable for hunting whitetail deer. The 338 Winchester Magnum, long the standard by which 338 cartridges are measured, is a great cartridge, but even I must admit it's a bit much for deer hunting. Rifles and ammo for this caliber are longer and heavier, and of course there is the question of recoil for those who are sensitive to it.

Following the current trend toward shorter cartridges, the 338 Federal relies on the case that has long been a mainstay of short-actions for big game hunting, the 308 Winchester. For those who love short actions, the 338 federal will not disappoint.

In the game-getting department, Federal says, "The 338 Federal offers hunters more muzzle energy than a 30-06 Springfield equaling that of a 7mm Rem Mag. It's a non-magnum offering that boasts magnum energy." I like it already. But because I'm not a big fan of energy as a measure of game-taking performance, let's look at some TKO (Taylor KnockOut) numbers.

- 7mm Rem Mag..175-grain, TKO 20.3, 3180 ft-lbs, 2860 fps
- 338 Win Mag.......200-grain, TKO 28.5, 3866 ft-lbs, 2950 fps
- 30-06 Spg............180-grain, TKO 21.4, 2915 ft-lbs, 2700 fps
- 30-06 Spg............200-grain, TKO 23.1, 3060 ft-lbs, 2625 fps
- 308 Win................180-grain, TKO 21.7, 2743 ft-lbs, 2620 fps
- 308 Win................200-grain, TKO 21.7, 2690 ft-lbs, 2461 fps
- 338 Federal.........180-grain, TKO 24.6, 3200 ft-lbs, 2830 fps
- 338 Federal.........210-grain, TKO 26.7, 3224 ft-lbs, 2630 fps
(TKO and energy at muzzle)

As seen above, the only cartridge in our example that surpasses the 338 Federal is the extremely good 338 Win Mag. In terms of both TKO and energy, nestled just below that unquestioned leader is the 338 Federal. The smaller-diameter 7mm Rem Mag, even with the heaviest bullet available for it, is at the bottom of the heap as far as TKO - and even if you love bullet energy, the 338 Federal has it beat.
BUT,IT WOULD BE NICE FOR SOME FEED BACK FROM FOLKS OTHER THEN WRITERS.THINGS ON PAPER SOME TIMES DO NOT ADD UP IN THE FIELD.

TNrifleman · « **Reply #5 on:** May 04, 2006, 04:03:23 PM »

The 338 Federal sounds like an excellent round to me. I hope someone besides Sako will chamber it. A Ruger 77 or Remington Model 7 CDL in 338 Federal sounds like a great hunting rig to me.

Lone Star · « **Reply #6 on:** May 05, 2006, 04:25:13 AM »

Quote

The smaller-diameter 7mm Rem Mag, even with the heaviest bullet available for it, is at the bottom of the heap as far as TKO...

...which has nothing to do with killing power or animals we hunt in North America. Apparently no one has ever read what Taylor actually wrote about the sainted TKO formula, instead just parrotting what the pathetic slick writers have fed us for generations.

What he actually said was that the TKO can be used to quantify the ability of heavy rifles to knock down large, dangerous animals like elephant and rhino. He was clear it was not a measure of killing power for any animal. To the chagrin of the heavy-bullet crowd, he actually recommended kinetic energy as a good indicator of killing power. How's them apples?

nasem · « **Reply #7 on:** May 05, 2006, 11:09:57 AM »

Lone Star hit it right on the head, that Taylor KO values is nothing but........ well its litterally nothing lol.

Here is furthur proof:
TKO = (bullet diameter in inches)*(weight in grains)(velocity fps) / 7000

You might wounder what that 7000 number is......Yep you guessed it, its the average weight of the elephant(I thought they were heavier than that !!!) lol. That TKO was designated as a knockdown power for 7000 lbs animals. I belive anything above 35+ is considered "good" TKO for dangerous game. A 375 h&h bullet with 300 gr is close to 40-42 TKOs.

longwalker · « **Reply #8 on:** May 05, 2006, 01:46:06 PM »

Isn't the point of TKO to mathmatically demonstrate that bullet diameter does have an effect on bullet / game interaction.

Regardless of whether or not the constant is 7000 for the average weight of an elephant or 200 for the weight of a deer the calculation takes in to account bullet diameter. In the end, that is what this discussion is about the benefit of larger bullet diameter.

I for one don't see the problem. We all can agree that bullet construction plays a part. So why can't we agree that bullet diameter makes a difference.

longwalker

Lone Star · « **Reply #9 on:** May 05, 2006, 03:38:55 PM »

Longwalker, most experienced hunters will agree that the larger the bullet diameter the better (given equal bullet construction and sectional density) but how much difference does it really make on American game? Not as much as TKO values suggest? More than TKO suggests? No one can answer that, it is pseudo-science.

TKO is a made-up number promoted by a single guy and used later by big-bullet proponents only because it fits their own pet theories. It has no science behind it - kinetic energy is a real number which describes real energy; TKO is made-up for a specific purpose. From the author:

"I do not pretend that they [TKOs] represent "killing power"; but they do give an excellent basis from which any two rifles may be compared from the point of view of the actual knock-down blow, or punch, inflicted by the bullet on massive, heavy-boned animals such as elephant, rhino and buffalo". (African Rifles and Cartridges, pg. xii)

Taylor believed that kinetic energy was as good an indicator of killing power as any other. And this from the pen of a hunter ( poacher actually ) with far more experience than most of us will ever have. Do we believe him when he says kinetic energy is the best indicator of killing power? Do we accept that his TKO formula only applies to head-shots on very large animals with non-expanding bullets, or do we continue to miss-quote him and insist that the TKO quantifies killing power on deer and elk?

PS- I've owned a .338-06 for decades and shot a .338 Mag for years too, I love that bore size and think the Federal newcommer is a great idea. But it ain't magic.

Lone Star · « **Reply #10 on:** May 05, 2006, 03:42:18 PM »

Quote

You might wounder what that 7000 number is......Yep you guessed it, its the average weight of the elephant....

Not even close, sorry. 7000 is the conversion factor for grains to pounds - there are 7000 grains in one pound. It is used in formulas for kinetic energy and momentum when dealing with bullets weighed in grains. It has absolutely nothing to do with the weight of an elephant. :wink:

longwalker · « **Reply #11 on:** May 06, 2006, 02:56:28 PM »

Ok, I'll buy that. May I continue to load my 338-06 unitl I can't hunt anymore.

longwalker

nomosendero · « **Reply #12 on:** May 06, 2006, 03:24:57 PM »

longwalker

Yes, you may!

nomosendero · « **Reply #13 on:** May 06, 2006, 03:40:06 PM »

I saw that same propaganda saying that it has more punch than a 7mm Mag. Did anyone notice that they did not specify the yardage. What if we have a stout 7mm Mag. load with a 160 Gr. Accubond versus the 338 Fed.
& the distance is 300 yards or further. No, they would not want to show you those numbers.

It makes more sense to look at the cartridge for what it is & it is a medium
bore round designed to perform at short & out to medium ranges. Out to
250 yards it should be fine for Black Bear, Elk, Moose & other Big Game,
possibly a little further with some smaller Big Game & it should be compared with other rounds for that function.

Actually, I hope that this round does not come out in the BLR, as that would tempt me for some of my woods hunting. It does not bother me that it is not a long range round, we have alot of good choices there allready.

257 roberts · « **Reply #14 on:** May 06, 2006, 04:54:56 PM »

I've had several 358 Wins and I want a 338 Federal BUT I won't be selling my 7 mag to get one :wink:

gunnut69 · « **Reply #15 on:** May 06, 2006, 07:22:07 PM »

Did anyone notice the 308 and 30-06 numbers? With the same weight bullets and higher velocities in the 30-06 the 308 produced higher TKO values. A miscalculation?? I am really interested in the 338Fed.. Not because it's better than anything else but because its different and may really work better at some things. I would likely class it as a 358 LongRange.. (long at least for the 358!). It would produce really good fast kills with blood trails on whitetails.. As to short action/long action that's rubish!! How much difference do you think a 1/4 inch makes in a rifle. In rifles like the M700 there is literally NO difference in the actual action length.. The 338 is a nice low expansion ratio medium bore that will work well on whitetails and do so with a minimum of velocity loss from a short barrel. I'm thinking a M98 wearing a 20 inch tube and a full length stock.. Long reach like the old mauser sporters.. and moderately light.. A little weight helps with the recoil and lets the rifle 'hang' a little better. Walnut of course and a nice rust blue..oiled and waxed.. maybe even a cartridge trap!! Starting to look like a new project!!

nomosendero · « **Reply #16 on:** May 07, 2006, 05:38:32 AM »

gunnut69
Sounds like a good project to me & it would be a nice rifle. I agree with you about the short action thing when it comes to bolt actions, just not that
big a deal to me.

However, when it comes to the BLR, that is another matter entirely, as the
short action comes with a 20" barrel & the overall package is compact & handles nice, but the long action rifle overall is much bulkier.

papajohn428 · « **Reply #17 on:** May 07, 2006, 10:53:06 AM »

Federal is not known for sticking their name on just anything, and I'm sure they spent a lot of time, effort and money before they decided this was good enough to bring out. But all I see it as is another 358 Winchester, with a slightly better BC. And probably better powder, for a little more velocity, which would do the same for the all-but-obsolete 358.

The last time Federal put their name on a cartridge was the 9mm Federal, a rimmed 9mm round for revolvers. I bet you'd have a hard time finding a box of that anywhere other than a cartridge collector's shelf! This one seems a little better thought out, but there's still not much new under the sun!

Papajohn

Coyote Hunter · « **Reply #18 on:** May 07, 2006, 05:47:36 PM »

Quote from: nasem

...Here is furthur proof:
TKO = (bullet diameter in inches)*(weight in grains)(velocity fps) / 7000

You might wounder what that 7000 number is......Yep you guessed it, its the average weight of the elephant(dangerous game.

Actually, a 7,000 pound elephant would hardly be average - it would be on the smallish side. They can get over 13,000 pounds. (I assume we're not talking about TKO for shooting the babies?)

7,000 is the number of grains in a pound.

Coyote Hunter · « **Reply #19 on:** May 07, 2006, 05:56:51 PM »

Sure, I have a few thoughts on the .338 Federal.

As I get older I find I like big, fat, heavy bullets - they seem to work better. At moderate velocities they still work and without all the recoil of the fast movers.

My newest acquisitions are all .30's - a .30-30, .300 Win Mag and a .308 Win, in that order. All three will perform beautifully if applied properly, meaning I don't intend to use the .30-30 at extended ranges and the .308 Win, while adequate for most shots, won't be taking elk at 500 yards. I suspect the .338 Federal will do the same. Should be a great cartridge for moderate ranges.

jmckinley · « **Reply #20 on:** May 09, 2006, 03:30:21 AM »

Thought I'd throw my 2 pennies in just to stir things up a mite.
Bullet weight Rifle WT. Recoil Energy Recoil Velocity
180gr@2830 8.0 23.0 13.0
185gr@2750 8.0 22.0 13.0
210gr@2630 8.0 24.0 14.0
This would appear to be a stout 06/300win recoil. It's not a light kicker but much better than 30# plus of recoil energy. This cartridge isn't for a person who doesn't like or can't handle a 06 or 300. Still in all should make an interesting Large Game round. I have a stout 308 that may find it's way to be rebored to this round. I hope Remington, Ruger or Howa will come out with this round most of us poor folk can't afford the lofty price of a Sako. Hope this help's a little. Jess :shock:

Slamfire · « **Reply #21 on:** May 09, 2006, 06:13:35 PM »

Ken Waters found it to be a useful cartridge when it was a wildcat, evidently Federal was readin' the article. It has, however, the same trouble that the .308 and .358 had before it. If you want good velocity you have to get a light bullet. If you want good penetration you have to give up good velocity. Life has enough compromises as it is. I'll pass on this one. :roll:

Casull · « **Reply #22 on:** May 09, 2006, 08:33:25 PM »

Bravo Gunnut. I've been waiting for someone to shoot down all this talk about a "lighter, shorter, handier, etc., etc." gun with the short cartridges. Look at the lengths and weights of the various makes of rifles, and I would guarantee that unless someone put one on a scale, they would never know the difference. Especially when we're talking .308 vs. 30'06 length actions. Also, when you compare factory ammo, the .308 based cartridges are loaded hotter than the '06 based cartridges, due to older, more fragile military firearms. But compare handloads in similar modern guns, and the greater case capacity of the '06 based cartridges will shine.

tuck2 · « **Reply #23 on:** May 10, 2006, 02:14:10 AM »

For woods hunting big game the 338 Federal my be ok ,but for elk hunting I`ll use my 340 W rifle . The 338 Federal round in the Remington pump could be handy but the 35-06 pump rifle is what I would carry for woodland hunting.

gunnut69 · « **Reply #24 on:** May 10, 2006, 07:19:01 PM »

People never cease to amaze. The other day in the local gun shop a young man came in wanting a new rifle for antelope. It had to be light and chambered for the most flat shooting round in the world, the 300RUM!! I asked if he'd ever actually fired one and he responded no. I told him he's in for a terrible surprise.. A few generations ago we were shooting elk with 30-40 Krags, 300 Savages and even the 250-3000 and 30-30. Now we have to have a 340 or we're undergunned.. In a reasonable rifle the 338 Federal would make a nice little deer rifle and with good bullets it would easily take and elk.. Light rifles are not evil but they are'nt right for every purpose either.. As for compromises. well blazes! all life is a compromise!

Zachary · « **Reply #25 on:** May 11, 2006, 02:48:22 PM »

The .338F is going to generate some buzz of course since it's new, but I really don't see is as a catridge that is going to become a classic. The .300RUM craze is over, and the 7mmRUM is all but dead. Of the short mags, only the .300WSM and .270WSM have any merit for their continued existence.

I'm sure that the .338F could be a nice little round for most game within reasonable distances, but I really don't see it as a top choice for whitetail, mule deer, hogs, caribou, or elk (and that's pretty much 99% of most hunting in North America).

Zachary

Harold50 · « **Reply #26 on:** May 22, 2006, 12:39:15 PM »

I think the 338 Federal would be a lot of fun if I needed it.

I have the ol' Springfield, and the 99 Savage in .308, and the frequent use of a G33-40 mauser in 8x57 (.323) all of which I handload.

Can anyone compare the 8x57 to the 338 Federal? Assume both in a Mauser action for our purposes.

Regarding WS(S)Ms being w/o a purpose, my little Super Shadow in 25 Wizm weighs 6lbs before scope and shoots 120s like the .270 shoots 130s, and is a full pound lighter to carry.

Best wishes,

Harold

CyberSniper · « **Reply #27 on:** May 25, 2006, 07:54:06 PM »

I've been thinking about this deal for a few days now.
Actually, it's rather complicated..
The way I see it, the .338 Federal is no doubt a decent cartridge.
But then, so are many others that have not been what's considered
to be a commercial success.

I feel that rounds like the .338 Federal, .358 Winchester, etc. are
simply not understood by what I'd call the general shooting public.
Otherwise known maybe as casual hunters / shooters.
For many of these, the .243,.270, .308 or the .30-06 are all they know, and
and they get by with those fine. Anything bigger than a .30 caliber is
a "cannon" as far as they see it.
( After all, their .270 blows big holes in deer they shoot under 100
yards, so that huge .338 bullet HAS to be bad news, right ? )
And a .45-70 ? Show them one of those, their eyes bug out,
and they tell you you're insane. "That thing is gonna blow a
deer in half for sure !"

Then, there's the recoil issue some have already mentioned.
Short action, less weight, heavier bullet, more recoil.
BUT....not 4,000 feet per second, shoots flat to 400 yards perfomance.
Now, some people would buy the .338 Federal if it had those ballisitics, since
they like the "faster is better" school of thought.
So, that rules out more potential market for the .338 Fed, and others
of similar performance, since it does not fit into the magnum class.
( As far as high speed and super flat trajectory goes. )
Or maybe I should say it does not fit what many people
percieve that a magnum should be.
They might tolerate the recoil, if only it was a .338 Win Mag.
But....it does not say "magnum" in the name.

Thus, the main market for the .338 Federal, (or anything like it) are
those people that grasp terminal ballistcs to an extent above
and beyond the casual hunter types. People that understand, and
can apply the ballisitc characteristics of the cartridge in question
to real world situations. People like this do not comprise a large
enough share of the market to make the .338 Federal a very
commonly used cartridge, any more than the .35 Whelen, .358 Win,
or other similar rounds are concerned.
Rounds like these are used by people that frequent forums
like this.