.338 Lapua round is HUGE!!

[BillyGoatMachine]

Can we have more pictures of girls please? This thread seems to have gone off topic yet again...........

[Bhobbs]

The thing that stands out most is the seating depth of the bullet. Although you have a 250gr in the LM case, and a 300gr in the NM case
both are shown at same (roughly) OAL. Not a huge deal but it allows for more variation in
seating depth for the NM that will still fit into a mag. Unless you intend to single load all your rounds this would be advantage NM. Don't get me wrong, I still own a LM rifle, and it is a great round, but I am looking to do another build in the very near future, and so have been researching the issue by speaking with guys online and at matches, etc. and have decided to go with the Norma mag for my next build. As you noted, the cartridge has about equal performance as the LM, just in an updated, more compact ,
package that allows for greater variability to the long range high accuracy shooter.
There are of course other cartridges with higher performance, but that comes at a price, like the .338/408 or even the .338 magnums necked down to 300 for the heavy bullets like the 240 smk which is only 10 grains off 250, but a lot faster. Guess it all depends what you want out of your rig. End of the day the best
cartridge is the one you shoot.

Those aren't inconsistencies, that is how the round was designed.

[Bhobbs]

See bhobbs, the issue now is that you have trouble understanding the terms.
To eclipse something only need mean to be better than for some reason. The reason or reasons may be minor. I am using inconsistent to mean not consistent with what is presented, ie 250 grain v 300 gr loading, seat depth etc. the original design intent with the lapua was for 250 grainers, the Norma mag with 300 grainers, but you see today it is largely agreed that the 300 grainer is the way to go for long range, but You bhobbs posted the picture, and the picture is of a 250 grainer v a 300 grainer. Why didnt you post a picture of a lapua mag sporting a 300 grain bullet seated out to max
next to a picture of the 300 grainer in the Norma? Would it be because you got the picture off of wikipedia which is likely exactly where you went to do your research after reading my post suggesting the Norma mag "eclipsed" the Lapua mag. You have already stated you do not have the experience with the cartridges, I will take you at your word. The answer to your question "what is it" ... well, You posted it.

You obviously don't know the difference between inconsistent and a different design.

The Norma Mag was designed to seat the 300 grain bullet at mag length without eating case capacity. That is why the picture shows the .338 LM with a 250 and .338 NM with a 300.

[Wicked Pete]

Only on CGN: start with Lapua and end with Alba.

[Bhobbs]

Thank You bhobbs, you have just made the point for me, which is as it should be. As you said the .338 Lapua mag was designed to shoot the 250 grainer, which is old tech, and has been eclipsed by the 300 grain projectiles with better BC. The shorter case and the fact that the Norma mag was designed to for the 300 grain projectile, makes it definitive in my opinion, that the .338 Norma mag, does indeed eclipse the .338 Lapua mag. You said it yourself Bhobbs. Some guys just have to learn the hard way.

The .338 LM and .338 NM push the 300 grain bullets to the same velocity. The .338 LM is an established LR round. The .338 NM has only been out for 2-3 years and has little support. The .338 NM does nothing different than the .338 LM other than seating depth, that's it. The .338 NM was designed to fit in a Remington 700 long action. With its smaller case capacity it will have to operate at greater pressure to equal the .338 Lapua Mag anyways.

It's not better, it's just different.

[Bhobbs]

Bhobbs, You have had nothing of merit to add to the discussion. I try to lay things out, and all you do is try to negate them. In short, you simply react to my presentations of fact which you grudgingly agree to in your own words, post after post. What do you have to add to the conversation? Little it seems. Do you own a Lapua mag? do you load for it?
I do. Do you shoot long range? are you able to make comparisons? do you speak to others on the Long range line about the characteristics which even make a cartridge worthy? Does 338 even matter? Many guys are using 7mm short magnums now to reach out well over 1K. You just simply seem to be unable to accept the facts. Funny thing is, my original post, ya'know the one about .223 being your daughters hunting round, the .308 short bus, and the .338 being eclipsed by more modern stuff was just a
little tweak.... I appreciate all three, though they are accepted by most shooters simply because of what you say, that being that they are "standard military" cartridges. That by itself is a joke, at least it is a joke on the brilliant minds that foist these things on the men who put there lives on the line for country and honor. So there you go, the record is there in black and white, what you and I had to say. Now it is for others to read and draw their own conclusions. Of course real conclusions can only be drawn from experience.
Cheers, B

How do you believe it is a fact the .338 NM has eclipsed the .338 LM as a long range round when there is almost no information about the .338 NM available? It does something the .338 LM does but slightly different. Like I said it may very well be a slight improvement over the .338 LM.

I very well understand that the 7mm Mags are used to shoot 1K+ but what that has to do with the .338s is beyond me.

[bcrich]

OK SHUT UP ALREADY.......more pics of the biatches!

[NYY]

OK SHUT UP ALREADY.......more pics of the biatches!

hahaha