Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13
  1. #1
    User
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Jhb
    Posts
    340

    Default Why no 338 win mag for buff but 93x62??

    Chatting to a gent who shot two buffalo so far, both with the farmers 9.3x62 and 300gr A frames. He was not allowed to use his personal 338 win mag?
    Apart from legalities in certain areas, why wouldn’t a farmer be keen on buff and the 338? I understand the 9.3x62 is suitable(eg. Dr Kevin Robertson’s one 9.3 has over 650 buffalo kills). But what’s wrong with a 338 and say 275gr a frames or TSX... Let’s hear.

  2. #2
    User
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    port elizabeth
    Age
    57
    Posts
    2,374

    Default Re: Why no 338 win mag for buff but 93x62??

    The 338 with heavy for caliber,decent bullets at a reasonable speed would work just fine.

    Where is the cut off as far as min. requirements are concerned? The speed limit on national roads is 120kmph..why not 125kmph? Same sort of argument.

    Quite frankly,i do not like any form of authority to tell me what i can and cannot use for hunting any species. If i want to use a 338...so be it.

    Would i want to use a 338..hmmm..i cannot see penetration or terminal ballistics being worse than a 9.3 or .375,which work well on a Buff. Nah...these things that maybe want to kill me...i would reach for the .458.

  3. #3
    User
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    BFN Freestate
    Age
    41
    Posts
    10,885

    Default Re: Why no 338 win mag for buff but 93x62??

    Ask yourself when and why laws are implemented.
    For example bicycles are allowed to use the road the same as cars.
    Cars must have a licence, the driver must have a licence, the driver must wear a seatbelt, the car must be roadworthy, etc.
    While a bike is just that, a bike, yep, nothing more, sharing the roads with cars, marvellous ain’t it.

    Anyways, this discussion have come up before, and to be strictly correct people just didn’t know better back then, they had a quick look at what was popular back then and had to make a decision based on what was available at the time.

    Was expanding monolithics like barnes TSX avail, nope, was flat nose penetrating solids the norm, nope, people used obsolete round nose solids.

    That said, even while I own a 338 I don’t mind the limitation, it could be worse, we could have the current banana republic decide for us, dunno what is worse, ignorance or sheer stupidity.

  4. #4
    User
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Boksburg
    Age
    56
    Posts
    1,421

    Default Re: Why no 338 win mag for buff but 93x62??

    Quote Originally Posted by Messor View Post
    Ask yourself when and why laws are implemented.
    For example bicycles are allowed to use the road the same as cars.
    Cars must have a licence, the driver must have a licence, the driver must wear a seatbelt, the car must be roadworthy, etc.
    While a bike is just that, a bike, yep, nothing more, sharing the roads with cars, marvellous ain’t it.

    Anyways, this discussion have come up before, and to be strictly correct people just didn’t know better back then, they had a quick look at what was popular back then and had to make a decision based on what was available at the time.

    Was expanding monolithics like barnes TSX avail, nope, was flat nose penetrating solids the norm, nope, people used obsolete round nose solids.

    That said, even while I own a 338 I don’t mind the limitation, it could be worse, we could have the current banana republic decide for us, dunno what is worse, ignorance or sheer stupidity.
    Agreed. If 338 win mags were allowed at some stage some one id going to ask why not a 300 mag with the right bullets.
    I know that a lot of buff are shot using 30-06 rifles. In 95% of cases this is sufficient.

  5. #5
    User 414gates's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    26 9' 6" S, 28 13' 44" E
    Age
    55
    Posts
    4,007

    Default Re: Why no 338 win mag for buff but 93x62??

    The guideline of what makes a suitable african buff caliber was based on excluding the calibers most likely to get the hunter killed.

    There was no 338 back then.

  6. #6
    User
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Stellenbosch
    Posts
    2,877

    Default Re: Why no 338 win mag for buff but 93x62??

    Quote Originally Posted by 414gates View Post
    The guideline of what makes a suitable african buff caliber was based on excluding the calibers most likely to get the hunter killed.

    There was no 338 back then.
    This.

    My 338 Win Mag Load: 300gr Steward @ 2316fps. Reckon that will achieve the same as the farmer's 9,3x62 with 300gr A Frames.

    But I used my 416 Rigby for buffalo, since that was its sole purpose. Not interested in the other Big 5.

    Will I be comfortable with my 338 on buffalo? Yes. Here is the thing. If you screw up your shot placement, wether it is a 338, 416 or 500, you're going to be in trouble.

  7. #7
    User
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Pretoria
    Posts
    3,040

    Default Re: Why no 338 win mag for buff but 93x62??

    Interesting thread. The little I read about the 338, it seems more versatile than the 9.3. Can be loaded heavy and slow for bushveld, or lighter with still enough oomph for longer distances.Wonder how a woodleigh round nose 300gr would work for the bush..

  8. #8
    User
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Stellenbosch
    Posts
    2,877

    Default Re: Why no 338 win mag for buff but 93x62??

    Quote Originally Posted by Antlion View Post
    Wonder how a woodleigh round nose 300gr would work for the bush..
    Initially used Woodleigh until I ran out, switched to Steward. Shot many Eland with this exact load. 2300fps perfect for bush.

    Long distance load (although seldom used) 200gr Nosler @ 2841fps.

    Left to right, 300gr Woodleigh, 300gr Steward, 200gr Nosler


  9. #9
    User
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Under the Jackalberry.
    Age
    53
    Posts
    7,718

    Default Re: Why no 338 win mag for buff but 93x62??

    Buffalo have been very sucessfully killed with 6,5mm, 270, 7mm, 30-06, 300Mag and similar small and medium calibres.

    Buffalo hunters have been injured and killed after shooting them with 458's and bigger, even after perfectly placed heart shots.

    So, while it is quite possible to kill a buffalo with a good load from a 338, the smaller the caliber goes the bigger the chance becomes of your life insurance policy paying out.

    Choose wisely!

  10. #10
    User
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    BFN Freestate
    Age
    41
    Posts
    10,885

    Default Re: Why no 338 win mag for buff but 93x62??

    In 338, Rhino makes a 280gr Solid shank, SD of .350
    Claw makes a 300gr, SD of .375
    Swift makes a 275gr A-Frame , SD of .344

    Any of those would make a deadly combo, and dare I say a much better combo than many of the stuff people use to hunt buff with.

    If someone asked me with what I want to hunt a buff, I would probably say a 416, because it would be a sensible choice. However if someone say I must choose between the 338, 93, and 375 for the same purpose, then I would use my 338, the others will not out perform it.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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