338 Lapua

[neeltburn]

Does anyone shoot a 338 Lapua? I have been looking at them and starting to get my feet wet researching them. I will reload so ammo cost while still more expensive than .308 will not be what factory ammo cost. I have looked at the following rifles online thus far.

Sako TRG-42
AI AX338
Savage 110BA
Barret MRAD (out due to price)

Im sure there are others out there just interested in what experience others have had.

Thanks.

 

[shadow6492]

I was in the same boat, but even with reloading your own to feed it was still $$$$! For a decent rifle in 338 look at Remington. If you don't have at least 800-1000 yards to play with it I'd go 300wm or stick with 308. My buddy has a savage 110 ba in 338 and its a great rifle! But it's no let's blow a bunch of ammo type gun.

 

[neeltburn]

I was in the same boat, but even with reloading your own to feed it was still $$$$! For a decent rifle in 338 look at Remington. If you don't have at least 800-1000 yards to play with it I'd go 300wm or stick with 308. My buddy has a savage 110 ba in 338 and its a great rifle! But it's no let's blow a bunch of ammo type gun.

Range to shoot it along the lines of 500-1100 should not be an issue. Thinking of doing something this winter but, I wanted to start researching now.

 

[Dave Doehrman]

Im sure there are others out there just interested in what experience others have had. Thanks.

Its up to you, but I started shooting 1,000 yards with an Armalite AR-30 in .338 Lapua. Unless you have a range that goes out beyond 1,000 yards, a .338 Lapua is a waste of money. The muzzle blast alone makes the other shooters look for spots away from your position. The .338 doesn't do much of anything up to 1,000 yards that can't be done with many other more economical calibers (.308, .243, 6mm, 300 Win Mag etc.)

The brass is expensive, it takes twice the powder charge and the bullets alone cost more that one of my .308 reloads.

On the plus side, it shoots flat and the wind doesn't effect the heavier bullets. You can shoot it out to 1,500 to 2,000 yards if you can find somewhere to go that far.

For me, it was a lot more fun to build my own .308 based on a Rem 700 and develop reloads that shoot 1/2 MOA at 1,000 yards. Reading the wind comes into play and makes it more challenging. I can shoot about 3 times as many .308 rounds as the .338 for the same money. In fact, right now I'm looking at building a .243 for 1,000 yards. If you're going to be shooting 800 or less, you can do that with a .223.

 

[42769vette]

I just bought a 338 lapua last week. I wont keep it for long, as I just want to do some recoil testing on scopes. If I had a range long enough to utilize it I would keep it for sure, but my range is 750yds, and at 750yds my other rifles will do just as well, cheaper.

 

[Dave Doehrman]

I just want to do some recoil testing on scopes. /QUOTE]

I can tell you from experience what a .338 Lapua will do to a Leupold MKIV ERT with front focal plane. Mine went back to Leupold 3 times before I mounted it on a .22 Savage MK II. I lost about 1 years worth of shooting just swapping out scopes and re-sighting them in before I gave up on the Leupie.....

 

[42769vette]

Dave

I have no doubt it will be rough on scopes. My problem is I dont recomend anything I havent tried personally. I just dont trust what someone I dont know on the net says will/will not work.

Any Idea how many rds your leupold lasted?

 

[Sean]

I can tell you from experience what a .338 Lapua will do to a Leupold MKIV ERT with front focal plane. Mine went back to Leupold 3 times before I mounted it on a .22 Savage MK II. I lost about 1 years worth of shooting just swapping out scopes and re-sighting them in before I gave up on the Leupie.....

Can you provide more details on the scope? How many rounds before and between failures? What Mark 4 variation was it? Also what type of failures were encountered? What did Leupold have to say?

I have the 8.5x25M1FF and its been great on a 98b

 

[42769vette]

The line of scopes inside the brand for leupold really matters. I know I had a vx3 that was not covered under Leupolds warranty. It had a dark tent to the glass and Leupold just said "it meets our standards" When I talked to somone higher up the totum pole I was told I "should have bought the mk4 series".

 

[Sean]

That "should have bought the mk4" comment would have sent me through the roof

 

[42769vette]

That "should have bought the mk4" comment would have sent me through the roof

You have no clue. I bought the scope when I was about 20. Back then for me to spend 500 dollars on a scope was absolutly crazy money. I was going on a once and a lifetime elk hunt and went to the local gun shop and ask "what is the best". To tell me my I should have bought better than my 500 dollar scope (back then atleast 2 weeks pay) about made me stroke out.

Ive spent the last 5 years badmouthing them as much as I can on every Internet forum Im on. I usto keep a 4.5-14x50 mk4 on my gun show table. It was 1350 dollars and the exact scope they send to the sandbox. I compared it the the 699 dollar PST and the PST won every single time. I quite taking it because I spend so much time arguing with the old diehard leupold men. Back in the 80's and 90's when they shot it was absolutly the correct scope. Today better can be had for cheaper with a much better warranty.

 

[Dave Doehrman]

Can you provide more details on the scope? How many rounds before and between failures? What Mark 4 variation was it? Also what type of failures were encountered? What did Leupold have to say?

Here's a link to the exact scope and specs. Leupold Mark 4 Extended Range Tactical M1 Rifle Scope 30mm Tube

I called Leupold before I bought the scope and told them it was going on the AR-30 in .338 Lapua and asked if the scope would hold up. They assured me the scope would be fine. I mounted the scope and got 40 rounds through it before the reticle rotated 45 degrees inside the scope. They had me send it in for repairs. When I got it back, I re-mounted it and immediately noticed that the elevation knob was extremely difficult to turn. I went ahead and started the sight in procedure. After 60 more rounds, the tracking was so bad that the scope was unusable. I could zero the scope 1" high at 100 yards and dial it out to 1,000 yards, but when I came back to my zero settings, the rounds were 6" high. I sent it back in again and when I got it back the knobs were back to normal, but the tracking sucked. I set up a 4' x 4' target at 100 yards and shot a series of box tests to see how the tracking was set. The scope was all over the place. I could zero the scope and shoot excellent groups, but as soon as I started dialing MOA, the scope would never return to zero. I sent it back in for the 3rd time and when it came back I mounted it on my AR-10T in .308.

By this time, I was so disgusted with the Leupold that I bought a NightForce 12-42 X 56 NSX to mount on the .338. I tried the MKIV on the .308 and the tracking had improved somewhat, but never came close to being correct. When I started shooting the AR-10T out to 1,000 yards, I ended up going with the NightForce 8-32 X 56 NSX and moved the Leupold over to my .22 where I didn't have to dial adjustments. I also installed the 8-32 X 56 NSX on my Rem 700 in .308 and I have never had any issues with any of the NightForce scopes. I can dial them up and down all day long and they return to zero just like they should.

Even though I requested to know what was wrong with the Leupold each time I sent it back, I never received an explanation. I swore by Leupold products and that is all I would buy for 40 years and never had a problem until I got the MKIV. Since then, I've run into 3-4 fellows up at Young's Longshot Range who have had similar problems with the current production Leupold scopes. The old Leupies were great, but the current scopes are not up to the same quality.

 

[42769vette]

Since this thread took a optics turn, some of you might find this test im running interesting.

https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/long_guns/283141-interesting_optics_test.html#post4012223

 

[Loc n load]

Nightforce

I also am a big fan of the Night force optics.....I have been using them for several years on the 338 and 50 bmg.....I also was a devotee to the Leupold Mk 4's for years as THE optic for law enforcement precision rifles....I was involved in precision rifle work in LE for 25 years.....and back in the 80's and 90's the "gold standard" was the tactical Leupold's.... After I retired I spent a lot of time out in Arizona & New Mexico and started shooting the 338 and 50's out to and beyond 1000yds....The Night force is pretty much the scope of choice in those circles.. As Dave points out, the tracking is precise...I haven't bought a Leupold for several years, cause I have a bunch of them....it is unfortunate that their quality has diminished.....I will also monitor the vortex / .338 testing....always interested in seeing how various optics measure up on the "big boomers".

 

[42769vette]

I will also monitor the vortex / .338 testing....always interested in seeing how various optics measure up on the "big boomers".

It will be interesting. What Im doing defintally pushes past the limits of what should be done with that scope.

 

[Hohn]

I have no first hand experience with the .338LM, but I am a HUGE fan of the round.

Yes, it's expensive. But we're not talking about a mass-consumption item. This is more like Dalmore Single Malt.

I would choose the Savage.

I would prefer something under <7mm for most work under 1500m, and save the .338 to really reach out and touch something.

I would get the Savage, personally.

 

[neeltburn]

I still have no time frame that this could happen, just something I want to research before I just go by a rifle..

 

[rwhitmore8]

Any big caliber bolt action rifle will have a tremendous amount of felt recoil. Most quality scopes are vibration/shock tested, and rated based on caliber. If you are serious about the .338 lapua, I think you seriously need to do some research and consider the 7mm Mag caliber. They are extremely comparable, but in my opinion the 7mm mag is better overall. Especially when you're looking at buying or reloading ammo.

I own one on a weatherby chassis. Honestly though unless you're planning on taking down trophy caribou at 750+ yard ranges, it will probably spend most of its life being a safe queen. It's just way overkill for anything else.

 

[j706]

Its up to you, but I started shooting 1,000 yards with an Armalite AR-30 in .338 Lapua. Unless you have a range that goes out beyond 1,000 yards, a .338 Lapua is a waste of money. The muzzle blast alone makes the other shooters look for spots away from your position. The .338 doesn't do much of anything up to 1,000 yards that can't be done with many other more economical calibers (.308, .243, 6mm, 300 Win Mag etc.)

The brass is expensive, it takes twice the powder charge and the bullets alone cost more that one of my .308 reloads.

On the plus side, it shoots flat and the wind doesn't effect the heavier bullets. You can shoot it out to 1,500 to 2,000 yards if you can find somewhere to go that far.

For me, it was a lot more fun to build my own .308 based on a Rem 700 and develop reloads that shoot 1/2 MOA at 1,000 yards. Reading the wind comes into play and makes it more challenging. I can shoot about 3 times as many .308 rounds as the .338 for the same money. In fact, right now I'm looking at building a .243 for 1,000 yards. If you're going to be shooting 800 or less, you can do that with a .223.

Curious as to the barrel life on a .338?

 

[Whitsettd8]

I went down this same road about 3 months ago. I thought I wanted a .338 until I realized I would never use it to it's full potential and I couldn't afford to feed it. I ended up with a Rem 700P in .300 win mag. I got a great deal on the rifle through a trade I was able to put a fixed 16XSS optic on it bi-pod and a suppressor for about what it would had cost me for the .338 alone. I think I have about $1800 in it giving my trade a $650 value. I can afford to feed it I can shoot out to the 500 yards I have access to.