300 Win mag, 300 Wby mag or 338 Win mag?

[bluey]

im left eye dominant .
archery is no problem , both eyes open .
same with rifle until l go up in power .
shotgun both eyes open .
and ive never actually fired a handgun ,so I cant know for sure

 

[Red Leg]

Personally I like high power scopes
But I understand that others prefer lower power scopes.
I really don't understand why some people have problems using high power scopes when hunting.
I guess they need to practice with them much more and learn how to use them well.

I have used 5-15, 6-18 and 6-24 scopes for many years and I have no problems to shoot quick and good shots at short distances too.
All without fiddling with parallax and whatever
I have never missed or missed a shot opportunity because of high power on a scope.
It is all about how you shoot with them at shorter distances.

I have been shooting clays with a 3x scope on a shotgun just to prove my point to some people.

When it comes to what cartridge to choose for your scope, it all depends on what you want to use it for.
If you want a proper long range tool, then I highly recommend the .338 Lapua.

I think the 338 win is a great cartridge, but not a really good one for long range use.

Peace brother. Knew they had to have been someone who mastered those monstrosities. I am just begging you not to show up at our clays range with a scope!

I genuinely am curious what use you find for 16 or 24 power on a general purpose hunting scope. And I am not being argumentative - I am truly curious. As I type this, I can think of no shot I have made in the last 50 years that I couldn't have made with a max of 6-power (haven't been to the Stans yet, but have hunted the Rockies and the Alps, not to mention a lot of bean and cornfields). All of our rifle decisions are compromises of weight, recoil, length, etc. A 16 or 24 power variable adds a lot of bulk to a rifle. I still have drilling with a huge objective 6-power Khales scope on a rail mount. The Khales roughly has the dimensions of a modern high power variable. However, that scope was designed to shoot roe and boar from a high seat well after sunset (over snow, we would sit for boar until midnight). It destroys the balance and utility of the drilling for most hunting, but was a reasonable decision based upon the weapon's primary intended use. So, these higher powers must represent a value to you which outweighs their size and bulk. I have no doubt one can with practice adapt to such a high power glass, I am truly curious why one would want to do so.

 

[blackdog001blackdog001]

Little bit larger bullets in 338. 300 has more bullet sizes and styles avaiable. 300 Win avaiable all over Africa. Less so for Weatherby and 338. All 3 will reach further than you need in Africa. I built up a 338 on a Model 700, cerakoted it, Swarovski scope as sort of a 1 gun for just about anything. I have a 300 WSM (300 Win Mag but shorter). Unfortunately its a Fwt and kicks quite a bit, something all 3 calibers have in common.

 

[bassasdaindia]

I use 250g bullets in my 338 WM , it really is a great cartridge , you wont be disappointed with it.

 

[Witold Krzyżanowski]

I think the caliber is an individual matter of every hunter.
Witold

 

[Norwegianwoods]

Peace brother. Knew they had to have been someone who mastered those monstrosities. I am just begging you not to show up at our clays range with a scope!

I genuinely am curious what use you find for 16 or 24 power on a general purpose hunting scope. And I am not being argumentative - I am truly curious. As I type this, I can think of no shot I have made in the last 50 years that I couldn't have made with a max of 6-power (haven't been to the Stans yet, but have hunted the Rockies and the Alps, not to mention a lot of bean and cornfields). All of our rifle decisions are compromises of weight, recoil, length, etc. A 16 or 24 power variable adds a lot of bulk to a rifle. I still have drilling with a huge objective 6-power Khales scope on a rail mount. The Khales roughly has the dimensions of a modern high power variable. However, that scope was designed to shoot roe and boar from a high seat well after sunset (over snow, we would sit for boar until midnight). It destroys the balance and utility of the drilling for most hunting, but was a reasonable decision based upon the weapon's primary intended use. So, these higher powers must represent a value to you which outweighs their size and bulk. I have no doubt one can with practice adapt to such a high power glass, I am truly curious why one would want to do so.

We are all different
My father is so used to using open sights and low power scopes that he never cranks up my scopes to more than maximum 9x and usually to maximum 6x when he borrows any of my guns.

I totally agree that a big and heavy scope has nothing to do on a drilling as it totally destroys the balance of it.
In fact I prefer to have a very small and light red dot sight on a drilling if I was going to use anything else than open sights on it.

Both my friend and I prefer high power scopes for most of our hunting.
Since much of our hunting is done in low light situations for Roe deer, Red deer, Fallow deer, foxes and more, we also need/want scopes with big objectives on some of our guns.
I feel that I can shoot faster and more accurate shots with a high power scope when I shoot at the neck of a Roe deer at 200-300 meters and also when shooting at Black Grouse and foxes at those distances.
And I don't experience any drawbacks with it for all my other hunting.
And I hunt any legal critter there is in lots of different ways

It might not be needed, but it is what I find that works the best for me

 

[Red Leg]

We are all different
My father is so used to using open sights and low power scopes that he never cranks up my scopes to more than maximum 9x and usually to maximum 6x when he borrows any of my guns.

I totally agree that a big and heavy scope has nothing to do on a drilling as it totally destroys the balance of it.
In fact I prefer to have a very small and light red dot sight on a drilling if I was going to use anything else than open sights on it.

Both my friend and I prefer high power scopes for most of our hunting.
Since much of our hunting is done in low light situations for Roe deer, Red deer, Fallow deer, foxes and more, we also need/want scopes with big objectives on some of our guns.
I feel that I can shoot faster and more accurate shots with a high power scope when I shoot at the neck of a Roe deer at 200-300 meters and also when shooting at Black Grouse and foxes at those distances.
And I don't experience any drawbacks with it for all my other hunting.
And I hunt any legal critter there is in lots of different ways

It might not be needed, but it is what I find that works the best for me

All good my friend. And good hunting.

 

[James.Grage]

Hello All,
I received a Burris Eliminator III 4x16 scope as a gift any opinions on what to put it on.
I want a larger caliber for bigger game and this is a long range scope good to 1000+ yards.
Not that I will be shooting at that distance, but I want the best option for the scope.
I have a 300 win mag and a 300 wby mag, I was thinking 338 win mag?
Any opinions on the Burris Eliminator 111 scope?
Thank you all in advance for your help. TomC

Tom C

I went an performed a internet search on the burris scope on reliability and customer ratings. And i am thinking it is not all you think it is. I did not look up the factory warranty, that you should have received with the scope, i would hold on to it if i were you.

The glass was rated a 7 on a scale of 10. Difficulties seeing early morning and afternoons, having a clear field of view to make the shot. That kind of make it a mid morning to mid afternoon on the usability scale.

While all scopes could be a 1000 yards scope not all of them will be one.

a person need to be realistic in what you are trying to do. Big Game or Varmint

I am thinking you are looking at being a varmint hunter (like prairie dogs, they like to sit out in the sun) with this scope and should look accordingly. 6.5mm or 7mm and design your rifle around your scope...

 

[Big5]

I just could never bring myself to put that much glass on one of mine. So since we are matching a rifle to the scope rather than the other way around, I think you already have the ideal choice - that .300 wby.

While all scopes could be a 1000 yards scope not all of them will be one.

a person need to be realistic in what you are trying to do. Big Game or Varmint

I am thinking you are looking at being a varmint hunter (like prairie dogs, they like to sit out in the sun) with this scope and should look accordingly. 6.5mm or 7mm and design your rifle around your scope...

In many years of being strictly a big game hunter I've never found an occasion where I felt I needed more than 9x magnification, with nearly all my hunting being done at 4 to 6x. I just would never mount a super high power scope with a huge objective lens on one of my hunting rifles when I didn't actually need the higher magnification and extra bulk.

That's not to knock anyone else's choice. Too each his own.

Good hunting to you!

 

[Bullthrower338]

I'm obviously a fan of the 338, although I prefer the RUM. The win mag is a fine cartridge and I have hunted elk extensively with it with great performance. I had a buddy give me an older version of the eliminator and was not impressed with it one bit. Aside from the design of the thing. I found the glass to be sub standard, I never could get the reticle to contrast properly for me. I have not yet been pissed off at my hunting buddies enough to trade them that scope for anything. Lol
Hopefully they have improved in their 3rd generation.
The range finder did seem to work fairly well.
Good luck on your quest

 

[lcq]

I would avoid the Eliminator and just get a calibrated reticle or know the number of clicks. Any piece of electronic gadgetry is tempting fate on a heavy kicker. If you do use it bring a backup scope.

my $0.02

 

[Mr. 16 gauge]

My vote would be for the .338.....but only because I LIKE the .338, and I don't have anything against the .3oo Win. mag or the .300 Weatherby mag; I have a friend who has one of each, and I've shot both. For PG, I don't think you could go "wrong" with any of the choices, provided you used a good quality bullet.
....as for the glass issue: I think a lot of the high magnification glass has to do with all the hype about "long range" shooting/sniping. We now have a movie coming out about a sniper in Afghanistan, as well as all the books about sniping/snipers that have been published in the last decade or two. There is some type of awe/mystique being able to hit a target at far, far away.....it's like the bad guys can't get away. I've enjoyed reading the books and watching the films and semi documentaries on the discovery channel. And I wish I had a nickel for every joker I've met who has done military service and claimed they were a "sniper"......I could finally afford that sable hunt I've always dreamed about!! And, for the record, I've yet to meet ANYONE who claimed to be a cook, clerk, mechanic, or other individual who performed a more mundane (yet necessary) task in the military other than a "sniper".
....but military snipers/long range target shooters have little in common with hunting (or at least in my opinion). A snipers job is to inflict casualties: if his hit only wounds, he has still accomplished something....maybe more, as resources will now be needed to remove that casualty from the battlefield. If a hunter gut shoots an animal because he has taken a shot from too far away, what has he accomplished? NOTHING!!! He has wasted a precious resource, for nothing more than the sake of ego.
I was taught by my mentors to "get close", because the closer you were, the more likely you were to put meat on the table......if you got busted while trying to do so, they only thing that happened was an empty game bag and maybe a bruised ego.....both of which I can live with.
Unfortunately, I think that the whole thing re: high powered glass is hype designed to relieve a hunter of the contents of his wallet. I've been trying to find a reasonably priced fixed 4x scope for my Marlin 336.....seems like in the not to distant future, the idea of a "fixed power" scope will be an anachronism.!
Just MHO, FWIW.....................

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

I genuinely am curious what use you find for 16 or 24 power on a general purpose hunting scope. And I am not being argumentative - I am truly curious.

Come to Arizona or go to Mexico for a Coues deer hunt. If Kudu are the grey ghosts of Africa, Coues deer are the grey ghosts of the southwest with a big buck just crossing the 100lb mark. A 200 yard shot is very much on the short side, 400 yard shots not uncommon with 300 yards being about the average at these small deer. High mag scopes with good clarity at the upper end greatly aid the hunter in being able to distinguish their grey bodies from their grey surroundings.

I personally don't advocate shooting longer range unless a person has really put their practice in and knows the ballistics of his rifle/load combination. But most people don't have the time to really know where their bullet is going at 600 yards under varying weather conditions. My longest shot to date was just over 400 yards. The bullet took the deer through the neck and dropped him in his tracks, but I assure you that's not where I was aiming. There really wasn't anyway to get closer. Faced with the same situation again, I think I will not pull the trigger.

 

[Big5]

Come to Arizona or go to Mexico for a Coues deer hunt. If Kudu are the grey ghosts of Africa, Coues deer are the grey ghosts of the southwest . . .

I am not a long range shooter, but I have hunted Coues deer and Muleys in Sonora Mexico more than once over the years. As you say Coues deer are small animals and I agree that shots will usually be longer than I normally want to take. However, using a Zeiss scope (3-9 variable with duplex reticle) I had absolutely no difficulty obtaining a clear sight picture of them in heavy surrounding brush at ranges of 300-400 yards.

Another exception was when a buddy and I had finished filling our bag a few days early on a Botswana Kalahari hunt. We were to be the last hunters of the year in camp so the PH asked if we'd like to go out and cull a string of Springbok for the local village winter subsistence. No way we were going to turn down a freebie hunting offer.

In any event, as you know Springbok are also small animals similar in size to Coues deer and the Kalahari can present its share of long shots. My point is that while culling for the village I took the longest shot I have ever taken in a hunting situation. Across a pan we spotted a lone Springbok ram that was Leica ranged at a tick over 550 yards. Again using a Zeiss scope (3-9 variable with duplex reticle) I had no difficulty at all seeing the ram and dropping him. Now, make no mistake, I feel lucky that I pulled the shot off because I guessed at the elevation and the amount of 'sky' I needed to see between his back and the horizontal reticle. So let's go ahead and call it a lucky shot, my point is that I could very clearly and distinctly obtain a sight picture at 550 yards with 9x.

Culling for the village was a rare exception where I took a long shot and I have no intention of doing it again. Most shots on that hunt were less than 250 yards and we were successful in dropping 15 Springbok for the village without any wounding of game.

I like to hunt and to me a part of the hunting challenge is to get close. Most shots I have taken over many years of hunting are under 200 yards. I also like to keep my variable scopes at 4x when in the field as that is all the magnification I've found necessary and I prefer a wide field of view.

I am not trying to be argumentative I'm just expressing my view that I've personally not found a need for a high magnification scope with a huge objective lens when in the field hunting. Surely there may be a few exceptions but I've become too old and too ugly to seek out those exceptions.

As always; to each his own and good hunting to all. (BTW, the Coues deer I've hunted has been with a .270 WBY with Weatherby factory 130 gr Spire points and the Kalahari hunt was with a .300 WBY and Weatherby factory 180 gr Noslers).

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

Don't doubt that it can be done @Big5. My first Coues was with I a max 9x scope at 285yds, then I switched to one that topped out at 20x. I'll take the latter. Necessary? No, just makes it a bit easier to do particularly when they're hiding in the live oaks.

I think the biggest bell I've got on any of my scopes, is 42 or 44mm. I don't care for the 50's either.

 

[Big5]

'Phoenix Phil', not disagreeing by any stretch, just again saying that most of my hunting is done at 4x and 9x has easily picked up anything I've spotted even at distances well beyond my shooting comfort zone.

Good hunting to you and good luck in whacking those elusive and sneaky little Coues bastards. LOL

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

'Phoenix Phil', not disagreeing by any stretch, just again saying that most of my hunting is done at 4x and 9x has easily picked up anything I've spotted even at distances well beyond my shooting comfort zone.

Good hunting to you and good luck in whacking those elusive and sneaky little Coues bastards. LOL

It's all good, no argument perceived on my part, just fun discussion.

 

[35bore]

I would opt for putting the thing on the 300 win, ONLY reason is, is that if your rifle is accurate you may (in the future) like to hone your shooting skills out to 1000 yards. If you are a handloader you can dial the bugger in with your choice of bullets. I do not handload, so that's why I gave you my opinion on the 300 win, you can buy match grade ammo for it..... I know of a couple of long range shooters that use the 300 win, most of the fellows I shoot with though still use that 308 thing.

 

[enysse]

I own both the 300 Win Mag and 338 Win Mag. They are both very good long range guns. If I had to chose one it would be the 300 Win Mag just because bullet and ammo are easier and cheaper to find. I used one on 2 trips to Africa and it killed everything with ease....I was not hunting elephant, hippo or cape buffalo.

 

[Big5]

. . . second paragraph above should be "another example" rather than 'exception'. Boy, I sure do love the auto correct feature.