Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 44

Thread: 338 Ruger Compact Magnum

  1. #1

    Default 338 Ruger Compact Magnum

    From what I've read(ATM), the 338 RCM looks to be winner for those of us that are in the market for a short compact 338 cal with punch(especially if you don't handload).

    This IMO is what Winchester should of done some years back. They decided against it as it didn't quite reach 338Win Mag ballistics. Well so what, it would of been pretty darn close.
    The thought pattern of Winchester was it would not sell if it didn't reach or better 338Win Mag ballistics.
    I disagree, as I do feel it would of sold well for the shear reason it was a .338 cal, with performance not that far behind the 338WM.
    And in the real world is one going to notice this out in the field with projectiles 250gn & lower?

    Where the 338WM shines is when one needs bigger projectiles. Other than that I think this new boy is a very welcomed edition to the short-mag family. Welcome!!!


    I hope Ruger introduced a 22-24" version as well. The 20" will fit the bill for certain needs, but so will a 24". So lets have options hey Ruger!

    http://www.hornady.com/story.php?s=761



    340

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Mountains of VA
    Posts
    203

    Default

    Don't see a need for it.

    Don't even see a use for it

    338 Win mag is the 338! It is the take everything in NA cartridge.

    If I want less kick and can settle for less range but want to shoot the same .338 bullet, I would go with the 338 Fed.

    The RCM will sell some guns because there are people out there that just have to have the newest thing on the market.

    Note; I also turned my nose up at all the ultra-magnums and short magnums, with the exception of one of the short mags.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    SwampView AK, Overlooking Mt. Mckinley and Points Beyond.
    Posts
    6,556

    Default

    I have learned to handle the recoil of my 338 WM, really I have, but I have plans to download it for less recoil.

    Iíve been shooting 250 grain Hornadys. Now, Iím gonna use Sierra 215 grain bullets at 2600 to 2700 fps. Maybe, even 2500 fps

    Iím confident that will still be plenty gun, for the ďaverage run of the millĒ bar encounter, and the off chance of a BeegFoote incident.

    Smitty of the North
    Walk Slow, and Drink a Lotta Water.
    Has it ever occurred to you, that Nothing ever occurs to God? Adrien Rodgers.
    You can't out-give God.

  4. #4

    Default 338 Ruger

    Just splintering the market. I still think the time tested classics are the touchstone for performance. 30-06, 338 Win Mag, 375 H&H, 416 Rigby... I'll also toss in the .223, 220 Swift, 270 and 458 Win Mag. Yes, I own a whole bunch more calibers... 7mm STW and the 9.3 mm's, etc... etc..

    Again... hunting locally with all of the non-standards is fun... going outside the local area... hope your ammo makes it or.... go standard.

  5. #5
    New member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Glover , VT
    Posts
    1

    Default

    I own a Ruger 338win mag, and the 250 grains do have some punch. there are 185's that shoot real well with less kick. there are a lot of choices with the 338. though i'm partial to the 200gr ballistic tips. that's a good thing to have though is choices in bullet grain. best rifle i ever bought.

  6. #6
    Member Nukalpiaq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Southwest Alaska
    Posts
    1,007

    Default 338 RCM vs 338-300 WSM Case Dimensions

    Anyone know of a website or have information comparing the case dimensions of the new 338 RCM cartridge to the 338-300 WSM cartridge? Would like to find out exactly what the dimensional differences are between the two cases. Thanks

  7. #7
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    4,418

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nukalpiaq View Post
    Anyone know of a website or have information comparing the case dimensions of the new 338 RCM cartridge to the 338-300 WSM cartridge? Would like to find out exactly what the dimensional differences are between the two cases. Thanks
    I can only speculate here but it is based on the 375 Ruger case shortened to about 2.0". This case has a base diameter of .532". The WSM case is about 2.0" long and is .550" in diameter at the base, it will hold more powder and have a ballistic edge over the 338 Ruger Compact Magnum.

    I will say the 338 RCM will be the ballistic equal of the well established and well proven 338-06. A good place to be in the ballistic spectrum. If necked to 358 it would be the 35 Whelen short. I like the idea of the Ruger case, it's capacity, no belt and standard (2.5") length. I think they should get all the can get from that one first, after they correct the neck length failing of the design. Why do I have to do everything?
    Last edited by Murphy; 09-18-2009 at 16:57.
    Is there nothing so sacred on this earth that you aren't willing to kill or die for?



  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    welfare state of Alaska
    Posts
    4,076

    Default another "new" cartridge

    The use of it to sell some new guns to newbies and wantabees that don't know any better - just another way to reinvent the wheel and part the unknowing consumers from some cash.

    There aren't many shooters that won't benefit from using the $$ they blow on a new gun to instead buy a bunch of ammo and learn to shoot the guns they already own.

    I wonder what the is average or median number of rounds fired is for the average hunter taking his rifle to field?


    Quote Originally Posted by bustedknee View Post
    Don't see a need for it.

    Don't even see a use for it

    338 Win mag is the 338! It is the take everything in NA cartridge.

    If I want less kick and can settle for less range but want to shoot the same .338 bullet, I would go with the 338 Fed.

    The RCM will sell some guns because there are people out there that just have to have the newest thing on the market.

    Note; I also turned my nose up at all the ultra-magnums and short magnums, with the exception of one of the short mags.
    Living the urban lifestyle so I can pay my way and for my family's needs, and support my country. And you?
    ".. ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" JFK

  9. #9
    Member Nukalpiaq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Southwest Alaska
    Posts
    1,007

    Default

    Personally I like to see new cartridges come out on the market, keeps the rifle/ammo/hunting world interesting and gives consumers a broader selection of rifles and ammo to choose from.
    Short action rifle with a 20" barrel sounds pretty handy. I also read that Short mags in general were supposed to burn powder more efficently and evenly throughout the powder column.
    Having read a few articles over the years, weren't most hunters disappointed when Winchester didn't come out with a 338 WSM? Seems to me Ruger has filled that niche.
    Read somewhere that short mags have been around since the 1940s. With Weatherby's line of short magnum cartridges, then Remington with the 6.5 and 350 Remington Mag. Weren't there also some short mag cartridges designed by P.O. Ackley? and Lazzeroni has the Patriot. Not to mention Benchrest shooters and their cartridge designs. First BR cartridges that I read about that were designed along these lines were the 22 PPC and the 6mm PPC.
    I guess only time will tell if the RCMs are gonna be accepted by the hunting/shooting community.

  10. #10
    Member Nukalpiaq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Southwest Alaska
    Posts
    1,007

    Default

    Here is a weblink to an article from Rifle Shooter magazine by Wayne von Zwoll regarding the RCM cartridges. I found it an interesting read.

    http://www.rifleshootermag.com/ammun..._01/index.html

  11. #11

    Default

    Still pretty redundant in my book. However neck it up to 416 or 458 and I'll start to get interested. We will get to that short action 460 marlin class of cartridge in a bolt gun eventually!

  12. #12

    Default

    Interesting that the Hornady has the 338 RCM with a 200gr bullet doing 2850fps and the 338Win Mag doing 2830fps.

    Double tap with the 338Win Mag and a 200gr Accubond is doing 3075fps and reloads I am working on now that are not above max are at and just over 3000fps for the 200gr bullet.

    Amazing how the ammo companies when they commit to a new cartridge will bump it over the old or get it real close to the old ones. Like Winchester did with the 300WSM compared to their factory ammo for the 300Win mag.

    My 300WSM using Winchester factory hot ammo loaded to max, could not out run my hand loads in my 300Win mag. I owned both and worked with both a great deal.

    Kind of like politics today, no one is comparing apples with apples or being completely honest as money drives the day.
    A GUN WRITER NEEDS:
    THE MIND OF A SCHOLAR
    THE HEART OF A CHILD
    THE HIDE OF A RHINOCEROS

  13. #13

    Default

    Is there a 303 to 8mm round? I have a SMLE with a trashed throat and would like a decent alternative. 303-323?



    That's what i'm looking for, the .323 bullet based on the .303 case.

















    does it headspace on the rim or throat?

  14. #14
    Premium Member mainer_in_ak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Wolf Lake Airport
    Posts
    3,775

    Default

    The next rifle that I buy is going to be a 338 rcm. If it is accurate enough......it's going to be my mountain rifle. I will sight the rifle in with my long range scope, and a nice fine tuned/long range 180-185 grain bonded ballistic tip (prob. an accubond). I will pull the scope when the goat or sheep is harvested. I will then reload the magazine with a 250 grainer for bear protection....and use those wonderful Ruger open sights that are sighted in for the heavier bullet.

  15. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mainer_in_ak View Post
    The next rifle that I buy is going to be a 338 rcm. If it is accurate enough......it's going to be my mountain rifle. I will sight the rifle in with my long range scope, and a nice fine tuned/long range 180-185 grain bonded ballistic tip (prob. an accubond). I will pull the scope when the goat or sheep is harvested. I will then reload the magazine with a 250 grainer for bear protection....and use those wonderful Ruger open sights that are sighted in for the heavier bullet.
    Actually a very cool plan and very workable one, giving you quite a few options.
    A GUN WRITER NEEDS:
    THE MIND OF A SCHOLAR
    THE HEART OF A CHILD
    THE HIDE OF A RHINOCEROS

  16. #16

    Default

    A friend of mine just bought himself a 338RCM. Loaded & chony'd 210gr TSX's at 2730fps. Which will make a very capable/handy mountain rifle. My 338WM with the same pill is about 200fps more.
    Both are Ruger S/S HE's. Mine weighs 8.8lbs(24" barrel) his 7.9lbs(20" barrel).
    I think the RCM will be a far better 'carry all day' rifle! but I ain't going to sell my pet Win Mag for anything

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    North Pole, AK
    Posts
    245

    Default

    Even with the fact that I've had my shoulders replaced, I think my next gun will be the .338 WM. To me, the old standards are kind of like the original crayon colors - who needs colors named after flowers and food?

    I am concerned about the shoulder thing though. I know I never feel anything when shooting game, but when punching paper it gets rough!

    I'm still contemplating a .338-06, but am leaning towards the .338 WM and just loading down if I need to.

  18. #18
    Premium Member mainer_in_ak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Wolf Lake Airport
    Posts
    3,775

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 340Wby View Post
    A friend of mine just bought himself a 338RCM. Loaded & chony'd 210gr TSX's at 2730fps. Which will make a very capable/handy mountain rifle. My 338WM with the same pill is about 200fps more.
    Both are Ruger S/S HE's. Mine weighs 8.8lbs(24" barrel) his 7.9lbs(20" barrel).
    I think the RCM will be a far better 'carry all day' rifle! but I ain't going to sell my pet Win Mag for anything
    sounds like his handload didnt reach the potential at which that bullet could be pushed. Hornady lists their 200 grain SST at 2850 fps. and 2710 fps. from a 225 grain. The weight you listed sounds much heavier than what Ruger listed on the specs. If you check out the Ruger website....both the stainless and the blued/wood model list a weight of 6 3/4 lbs, and that sounds like a much more realistic weight having owned quite a few ruger short action 77's over the years. I think the specs you stated are a false representation to the cartridge, and the rifle itself.

  19. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mainer_in_ak View Post
    sounds like his handload didnt reach the potential at which that bullet could be pushed. Hornady lists their 200 grain SST at 2850 fps. and 2710 fps. from a 225 grain. The weight you listed sounds much heavier than what Ruger listed on the specs. If you check out the Ruger website....both the stainless and the blued/wood model list a weight of 6 3/4 lbs, and that sounds like a much more realistic weight having owned quite a few ruger short action 77's over the years. I think the specs you stated are a false representation to the cartridge, and the rifle itself.
    Can't wait to see your handloading work for velocities and accuracy for the 338 RCM. I will be posting in a month my load work on the 338Win Mag and at the moment I am already with a 200gr bullet 200fps over Hornady listed velocities for the 338 RCM. Frankly I don't think you will get the 338 RCM to 2850fps with a 200gr bullet and have accuracy. I am at the moment 170fps faster than the 338 RCM with the 225gr bullet in my 338Win mag and I have not finished with the 225gr yet.

    On top of all of that I carry all the time 9 pounds of rifle (including scope and rounds) for 20yrs now in the mountains and I don't have this need to have to carry a lighter rifle. Infact, after a hard push up a ridge I find my rifle anchoring just find and better than a light Kimber I carried three years ago. You make to much out of the wieght of the rifle and a short action wich is nothing to talk about over a standard length cartridge as is found with the 338Win mag.

    I wish you luck in your velocity and accuracy when you get a 338 RCM. I think you need to load and shoot one before you draw to many conclusions. Good luck with your hunting this year and I hope you get a sheep.
    A GUN WRITER NEEDS:
    THE MIND OF A SCHOLAR
    THE HEART OF A CHILD
    THE HIDE OF A RHINOCEROS

  20. #20

    Default

    Have never bought a Ruger centerfire rifle.
    Ruger does not understand precision riflery and they don't understand cartridge evolution. None of their proprietary rounds have filled any kind of a niche. (How's that .480 Ruger working out?)

    Marketing is about filling "needs" your advertising folks create. Pretty hard for me to see any reason for a .532" diameter case requiring a magnum boltface that doesn't do anything significantly better then the .338-08, or .338-06.

    The one case that IS full of potential would be a necked-up .284winchester. That case, or one with about .515" diameter, would forge new options by enabling more power for those with standard boltface actions. Offer the case with .473" rim and .532" rim and in 2.170" & 2.620 lengths. Normal and magnum owners could ream their barrels from any .308win or .300win based ctg and have better case characteristics for precision and power...

    I am so tired of the "I never met a gun or cartridge from an advertiser I didn't like" sort of gun magazine crap.


    Essential cartridges?
    .223rem (w/1:8 twist barrel so can shoot 77/80gr bullets.)
    .308win
    .338/300 (more versatile than any other .338 and equal to most)
    .45-70 or .450 Marlin
    .45acp
    .454 Casull (more hunting flexibility than any other ctg)
    .22lr

    If Ruger had conceived of a precision rifle to fire a .338 300gr matchking with .778BC at 2400/2500 fps, they could have sold tens of thousands of them. With usable power and longrange accuracy that round could've done it all.

    If Savage had introed such a rifle, they would have had a huge hit. Ruger has no reputation with the accuracy crowd. Too bad. You KNOW the builders of the #1 could easily change the 77 receiver design, use aftermarket barrels and stocks and show Savage, Remington and FN a thing or two. Just not interested in precision riflery...

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •