338 vs 300, which is better??

[n_e_w_d_u_d_e]

Ive been using the 338 for all my big game hunting in all maps. I have yet to purchase the 300 and was wondering how does it stack up compared to the 338?? I see in the stats that the 300 is supposed to have better accuracy but how is the penetration of the 300 compared to the 338??? Has anyone field test these 2, and if so what conclusion have you come to??

[WVMTMAN]

338 I think the 300 is bugged right now I'm not getting the pen I used to get with it for some reason.

[jal273]

Take the 300 with the soft point you love it

[cbrrrman]

The .338 was always my go to gun for taking down big game.
And it probably still is.

But I've been using the .300 as of late because it came with the Yukon Reserve...
And it has four shots as opposed to the .338 which only has one.

Granted only the first shot should be required...
And usually integrity is ruined by taking more then one shot per animal.
But it's nice to have more ammo for that occasional G. Bear that doesn't go down immediately or other animals in the area that one wishes to take a shot at.

My longest distance instant kill was attained using the .338 / Argus scope.
463 yards or something near to that. ; )

I utilize poly tip ammo on every rifle that allows that.
Other lesser ammo might allow more then one shot and maintain integrity. Dunno.
I usually only need one well placed shot to bring an animal down.

[n_e_w_d_u_d_e]

okay, am i missing something??? I'm a little ticked off! I saved up the 75,000 and bought the 300 Mag and now I WISH I HADEN"T!! Despite the fact that the stats on the 300 mag say the accuracy is better then the 338 , ITS NOT!! After testing both guns at the firing range at Diff distances the 338's accuracy is better then the 300 Mag. The 338 hit my intended mark every time but the 300 NEVER DID!! I saved up 75,000 in game money and now wish i can get that 75,000 back.. I will be placing the 300 mag back in storage and will NOT be using it!! Could it just be my game?? Has anyone else tried your 300 Mag at the firing range vs the 338?? Did you come up with the same results as mine?? Why do you Develope a gun for a game, give it better stats on accruacy, but have it turned out the opposite Devs?? Now, also understand that as a hunter/player on the this game, I'm the "One Shot Only" type of player. I line up my shot and fire only once. Now, if you don't mind making multiple shot then by all means purchase the 300 mag but i heavily depend on my gun hitting my target dead on while playing this game so the 300 mag gets a big thumbs down!! If anyone out there plays the same as I do then please don't waste your in game money on the 300 Mag, you'll be VERY DISAPOINTED. Was does it seem like that most of the guns, in the weapons packs, released for this game, except for maybe the crossbows, never seem to out match the original guns that were available at realease.

[Bowfin]

I will agree the price tag of 75000 was a little steep but the weapon has preformed fine the times I've used it.
I also really like the 30-06 ,MN1890,King 470B,Grelck Drilling Rifle. I'm not much for the hand guns but they came with the packs.

[BEW ShadowWolf]

Originally posted by n_e_w_d_u_d_e:

okay, am i missing something??? I'm a little ticked off! I saved up the 75,000 and bought the 300 Mag and now I WISH I HADEN"T!! Despite the fact that the stats on the 300 mag say the accuracy is better then the 338 , ITS NOT!! After testing both guns at the firing range at Diff distances the 338's accuracy is better then the 300 Mag. The 338 hit my intended mark every time but the 300 NEVER DID!! I saved up 75,000 in game money and now wish i can get that 75,000 back.. I will be placing the 300 mag back in storage and will NOT be using it!! Could it just be my game?? Has anyone else tried your 300 Mag at the firing range vs the 338?? Did you come up with the same results as mine?? Why do you Develope a gun for a game, give it better stats on accruacy, but have it turned out the opposite Devs?? Now, also understand that as a hunter/player on the this game, I'm the "One Shot Only" type of player. I line up my shot and fire only once. Now, if you don't mind making multiple shot then by all means purchase the 300 mag but i heavily depend on my gun hitting my target dead on while playing this game so the 300 mag gets a big thumbs down!! If anyone out there plays the same as I do then please don't waste your in game money on the 300 Mag, you'll be VERY DISAPOINTED. Was does it seem like that most of the guns, in the weapons packs, released for this game, except for maybe the crossbows, never seem to out match the original guns that were available at realease.

i respect your opinion, however i have to disagree about most of the guns in the weapons packs not performing as well or better then the originals. the MN 1890 performs better then the .243 and the 30-30. the .45 air rifle works as well as the .243 and the bows for close range at its class. the 30.06 works better then the 7 MM IMO and replaces the 45-70. i do agree that the crossbow outperforms bows in reguards to a quick kill, however if you are slightly off on your shot, you cant make a follow up shot as quick with it. as for your test with hitting a target at the firing range. for me they both hit the target where i was aiming at. for me the .300 was a very good buy, has very good stopping power, and is lighter weight then the .338, which allows me, with out the pack mule (?) perk or a backpack i can bring the .45 air rifle, the 30.06, the .300 and the 22lr pistol.

[n_e_w_d_u_d_e]

Originally posted by BEW ShadowWolf:

Originally posted by n_e_w_d_u_d_e:

okay, am i missing something??? I'm a little ticked off! I saved up the 75,000 and bought the 300 Mag and now I WISH I HADEN"T!! Despite the fact that the stats on the 300 mag say the accuracy is better then the 338 , ITS NOT!! After testing both guns at the firing range at Diff distances the 338's accuracy is better then the 300 Mag. The 338 hit my intended mark every time but the 300 NEVER DID!! I saved up 75,000 in game money and now wish i can get that 75,000 back.. I will be placing the 300 mag back in storage and will NOT be using it!! Could it just be my game?? Has anyone else tried your 300 Mag at the firing range vs the 338?? Did you come up with the same results as mine?? Why do you Develope a gun for a game, give it better stats on accruacy, but have it turned out the opposite Devs?? Now, also understand that as a hunter/player on the this game, I'm the "One Shot Only" type of player. I line up my shot and fire only once. Now, if you don't mind making multiple shot then by all means purchase the 300 mag but i heavily depend on my gun hitting my target dead on while playing this game so the 300 mag gets a big thumbs down!! If anyone out there plays the same as I do then please don't waste your in game money on the 300 Mag, you'll be VERY DISAPOINTED. Was does it seem like that most of the guns, in the weapons packs, released for this game, except for maybe the crossbows, never seem to out match the original guns that were available at realease.

i respect your opinion, however i have to disagree about most of the guns in the weapons packs not performing as well or better then the originals. the MN 1890 performs better then the .243 and the 30-30. the .45 air rifle works as well as the .243 and the bows for close range at its class. the 30.06 works better then the 7 MM IMO and replaces the 45-70. i do agree that the crossbow outperforms bows in reguards to a quick kill, however if you are slightly off on your shot, you cant make a follow up shot as quick with it. as for your test with hitting a target at the firing range. for me they both hit the target where i was aiming at. for me the .300 was a very good buy, has very good stopping power, and is lighter weight then the .338, which allows me, with out the pack mule (?) perk or a backpack i can bring the .45 air rifle, the 30.06, the .300 and the 22lr pistol.

Now, I would agree on the weapon 2 being a good buy on account of the MN 1890. I like that it is a class 2 gun that works better then 243 on fellow deer. With fellow Deer the 243 had hard time penatrating double lung. The 30-30 worked better then the 243, yes, but you had to be a lot closer to the animal to make good use of the 30-30 which could be hard to do sometimes.
I never understood why the 270 never gave you full integrity on Fellow deer when it's a class 2 gun and fellow deer are class 2 animals🙄. Explain that one somebody.
Now, concerning the 30-06, from what I've read on the forums I was under the impression that the 30-06 was not as good as the 7mm when came to penetration. Yes. It gave you a 2 clip shot but that doesnt matter to me since I rarely have to shoot a second time. I want a gun that has the best penetration to make my one shot be the most productive.

[naspa]

Depends pretty much how you hunt, what you hunt, what other weapons you take and where you are.
I am nowadays more in the .300 because of the extra shots, and it does a pretty good job.
If you are a steady sniper who like to take long distance shots, I would say the 338 is way better.

[BEW ShadowWolf]

Originally posted by n_e_w_d_u_d_e:

Originally posted by BEW ShadowWolf:

i respect your opinion, however i have to disagree about most of the guns in the weapons packs not performing as well or better then the originals. the MN 1890 performs better then the .243 and the 30-30. the .45 air rifle works as well as the .243 and the bows for close range at its class. the 30.06 works better then the 7 MM IMO and replaces the 45-70. i do agree that the crossbow outperforms bows in reguards to a quick kill, however if you are slightly off on your shot, you cant make a follow up shot as quick with it. as for your test with hitting a target at the firing range. for me they both hit the target where i was aiming at. for me the .300 was a very good buy, has very good stopping power, and is lighter weight then the .338, which allows me, with out the pack mule (?) perk or a backpack i can bring the .45 air rifle, the 30.06, the .300 and the 22lr pistol.

Now, I would agree on the weapon 2 being a good buy on account of the MN 1890. I like that it is a class 2 gun that works better then 243 on fellow deer. With fellow Deer the 243 had hard time penatrating double lung. The 30-30 worked better then the 243, yes, but you had to be a lot closer to the animal to make good use of the 30-30 which could be hard to do sometimes.
I never understood why the 270 never gave you full integrity on Fellow deer when it's a class 2 gun and fellow deer are class 2 animals🙄. Explain that one somebody.
Now, concerning the 30-06, from what I've read on the forums I was under the impression that the 30-06 was not as good as the 7mm when came to penetration. Yes. It gave you a 2 clip shot but that doesnt matter to me since I rarely have to shoot a second time. I want a gun that has the best penetration to make my one shot be the most productive.

the .270 is a class 2b or 2.5 if you will, the fallow is a class 2a, which both the .45 air rifle and MN 1890 are good at taking down. where the .270 can be used to take down elk and red deer, along with black bear, the black bear in the codex is listed as a class 2 animal, and both the elk and red deer are class 3. the 30.06 has a 4 clip mag. and can be used on all class 3 animals with fine peneitration, and can be used on black bear. i found that out by accident when i shot one with the 30.06 when i meant to switch to the mn 1890. it gives full integrity on them. i prefer the 30.06 to the 7 MM when hunting wolves, since every time i have shot a wolf with the 30.06 it has dropped on the spot. for me the 7 MM rarely does that.

[cbrrrman]

Originally posted by n_e_w_d_u_d_e:

If anyone out there plays the same as I do then please don't waste your in game money on the 300 Mag, you'll be VERY DISAPOINTED.

I am not disappointed with the .300 at all.

I normally take a single shot as well.
The .300 has never let me down... even at a distance.
I use the zeroing perk most every shot.

I don't seem to have this supposedly bugged .300 that I see.
In fact on the Yukon Reserve it is my go to gun currently (for the large game)
Tho' that's only really G Bear and Moose if one hopes to net integrity.

[saphire jinn]

the .338 poly ammo has a tad more penetration and expansion so to me that settles the argument. But i do like the follow up shots on the .300 though, so that;s a big plus.
either way i guess but i will stick to my trusty .338

[n_e_w_d_u_d_e]

Originally posted by BEW ShadowWolf:

Originally posted by n_e_w_d_u_d_e:

Now, I would agree on the weapon 2 being a good buy on account of the MN 1890. I like that it is a class 2 gun that works better then 243 on fellow deer. With fellow Deer the 243 had hard time penatrating double lung. The 30-30 worked better then the 243, yes, but you had to be a lot closer to the animal to make good use of the 30-30 which could be hard to do sometimes.
I never understood why the 270 never gave you full integrity on Fellow deer when it's a class 2 gun and fellow deer are class 2 animals🙄. Explain that one somebody.
Now, concerning the 30-06, from what I've read on the forums I was under the impression that the 30-06 was not as good as the 7mm when came to penetration. Yes. It gave you a 2 clip shot but that doesnt matter to me since I rarely have to shoot a second time. I want a gun that has the best penetration to make my one shot be the most productive.

the .270 is a class 2b or 2.5 if you will, the fallow is a class 2a, which both the .45 air rifle and MN 1890 are good at taking down. where the .270 can be used to take down elk and red deer, along with black bear, the black bear in the codex is listed as a class 2 animal, and both the elk and red deer are class 3. the 30.06 has a 4 clip mag. and can be used on all class 3 animals with fine peneitration, and can be used on black bear. i found that out by accident when i shot one with the 30.06 when i meant to switch to the mn 1890. it gives full integrity on them. i prefer the 30.06 to the 7 MM when hunting wolves, since every time i have shot a wolf with the 30.06 it has dropped on the spot. for me the 7 MM rarely does that.

Is the 30-06 as accurate as the 7mm?? Have compared them up against one another at the firing range?? If the 30-06 is as accurate as the 7mm and close to about the same penetration as the 7mm then I would consider purchasing the weapon pack that has it.

[BEW ShadowWolf]

Originally posted by n_e_w_d_u_d_e:

Originally posted by BEW ShadowWolf:

the .270 is a class 2b or 2.5 if you will, the fallow is a class 2a, which both the .45 air rifle and MN 1890 are good at taking down. where the .270 can be used to take down elk and red deer, along with black bear, the black bear in the codex is listed as a class 2 animal, and both the elk and red deer are class 3. the 30.06 has a 4 clip mag. and can be used on all class 3 animals with fine peneitration, and can be used on black bear. i found that out by accident when i shot one with the 30.06 when i meant to switch to the mn 1890. it gives full integrity on them. i prefer the 30.06 to the 7 MM when hunting wolves, since every time i have shot a wolf with the 30.06 it has dropped on the spot. for me the 7 MM rarely does that.

Is the 30-06 as accurate as the 7mm?? Have compared them up against one another at the firing range?? If the 30-06 is as accurate as the 7mm and close to about the same penetration as the 7mm then I would consider purchasing the weapon pack that has it.

i have fired them both at the range, and they are pretty even at the range, while hunting the 30.06, for me at least, has better accuracy when trying to hit a moving target around 165 yards. the 7mm doesnt seem to do well in that area.

[CaptainNebulous]

That 30-06 is spectacular especially against Elk or Red Deer or anything of similar size. Instant double lung or at least high bleed single lung every time with broadside shots.... and easy heart shots from up front. I love it.

Honestly I haven't noticed anything disappointing about the 300. When comparing it to the 338, in my opinion, they are about equal overall but with a few trade offs depending on which one you use. I do notice the accuracy difference at the range but it's very small from what I've seen, and unnoticeable when applied to an actual hunt because of the increased damage a 300 shell does.

The weapon packs were never intended to be "pay to win" items and I think they've done a pretty good job balancing them with the default weapons. Around half of the weapon pack weapons are better than their default counterparts and the other half are pretty much just alternatives. I wouldn't say any of them have been noticeably less effective overall but I have my style like anyone else so there are weapons I like and weapons I don't.... but not necessarily because they lack potential.

Having the Solokhin right off the bat at the beginning of the game pretty much does double your progression when you start a new profile though. I didn't notice it until I decided to do my yearly profile reset and was astounded by just how much easier starting out is when you're not stuck with 243 softs lol or even 243 polys for that matter. I haven't found any reason to use the 243 since getting WP2.

[Hidden Gunman]

Originally posted by naspa:

Depends pretty much how you hunt, what you hunt, what other weapons you take and where you are.
I am nowadays more in the .300 because of the extra shots, and it does a pretty good job.
If you are a steady sniper who like to take long distance shots, I would say the 338 is way better.

Same same. At the close ranges I prefer, penetration and accuracy are all good...I've never been let down by either the .300 or the .30-06.

Thinking about it, I think the point you make about hunting style is really the decider.