This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Firearms Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Firearms, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of firearms on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FirearmsWikipedia:WikiProject FirearmsTemplate:WikiProject FirearmsFirearms articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article has been marked as needing immediate attention. United States Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article has been marked as needing immediate attention. This article lacks sufficient references and adequate inline citations. Once the references are added, please remove the |unref= parameter from this template.

Most of the content I've added, such as muzzle enegies, velocities, and the intention of this round can be sourced from the book "Cartridges of the World" but for the life of me I cannot seem to remember the Wikipedia format for citing from a written work instead of another website. Klauth 18:23, 14 June 2007 (UTC) reply

I'm not sure what version of COTW you have, and I'm not sure if this is exactly right, but this is what I use. Cartridges of the World 11th Edition, Book by Frank C. Barnes, Edited by Stan Skinner, Gun Digest Books, 2006, ISBN  0-89689-297-2. Arthurrh 18:57, 1 August 2007 (UTC) reply

There were a lot of comparisons in the article that seemed to be quotes from Weatherby marketing material. I added charts for reference to evaluate these claims. Arthurrh 21:26, 1 August 2007 (UTC) reply

In fact, the article still sounds to me like more marketing material than fact. (It "outclasses"...??) Please continue with your efforts to 'neutralize' it, if at all possible.

Due to this cartridge very large case capacity in relation to its bore size a 26 in (660.4 mm) long barrel as used in the “info box - ballistic performance” section gives not the most realistic examples of the .30-378 Weatherby Magnum or its ballistic twins ballistic potential, though the stated performance figures in this article are very credible. Barrels that are too short in relation to the employed cartridge will produce sub standard muzzle velocities, unnecessary recoil and lots of muzzle flash, smoke and report. The main cause for these effects is unburned propellant. Custom made rifles for these kind of super magnum cartridges generally sport 762 mm (30 in) or longer barrels to take advantage of the ballistic potential of these overbore cartridges. Francis Flinch 13:03, 3 September 2007 (UTC) reply

Weatherby created the cartridge, and Weatherby recommends and uses 26" barrels. Even though longer barrels can be used and would provide higher velocity, the 26" is a more realistic number since that is what you'd get if you bought a rifle from Weatherby. Arthurrh 17:51, 7 September 2007 (UTC) reply

I returned the original comparison statement of the capabilities of the .30-378 vs. .458 Win Mag and .338 Lapua. The figures and testing are taken from "Cartridges of the World" and expert Dick Metcalf via "National Rifleman" I would add the citations myself but being a bit of a wiki amature I do not know for sure how I need to do that. If someone would leave me a note here telling me how to list said references I will be glad to do so.

Klauth 00:49, 9 November 2007 (UTC) reply

Please attach some pictures to this article. Also need some one to copy edit this. DeusImperator ( talk) 02:34, 24 November 2013 (UTC) reply

Also .30-378 is capable of exceeding the .458 Win Mag by a high degree however this requires bullets in a weight over 220 grains which are hard to come by factory loaded, and I am not positive if Weatherby still offers them. I will double check and see because if this is something only handloaders can do now, I will change the edit to reflect that.

Apart from being cartridges, what does the .30-378 Wby have to do with the .458 Win Mag? A table comparing the two becomes meaningless when there is nothing to relate to in the comparison. The .30-378 is a big game and long range target shooting rifle. The .458 Win Mag is a dangerous game rifle cartridge. Far more germane would be a comparison of say 1000 yard bench rest cartridges or perhaps a comparison of other .30 caliber rifle cartridges or perhaps even a comparison of "sniper rifle" cartridges. DeusImperator ( talk) 02:16, 24 November 2013 (UTC) reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on .30-378 Weatherby Magnum. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/5TO9dFZMR?url=http://data.hodgdon.com/cartridge_load.asp to http://data.hodgdon.com/cartridge_load.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{ source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:30, 13 June 2017 (UTC) reply