Personally, if I am going up into the 200 weight class, I would just as soon grab my .338.
Amen!
FYI, Barnes TTSX start at 160 gr in .338, but the 160 gr is really a flat base stubby little thing.
The 185 gr .338 TTSX is reportedly Barnes Bullet Coni Brook (Randy's wife) favorite load in her .338 Win Mag for "everything under the sun."
For those wanting a little more, but not too much more, Barnes also offers the .338 in 210 gr and 225 gr TTSX. Weatherby loads the 225 gr TTSX for their .340 Wby (a sure sign that this is a great match-up).
In any case - if the number of guns is not an issue 
- stepping up in caliber (i.e. frontal area) further increases the effect of stepping up in weight from a 180 gr .300.
I personally recently converted from the 250 gr. Partition to the .338 TTSX 225 gr in my .340 Wby. The 225 gr .338 TTSX has better sectional density and ballistic coefficient (S.D 0.281 / B.C 0.514) than the 180 gr .300 TTSX (S.D 0.271 / B.C 0.484) and being 10% lighter than the 250 gr .338 it recoils 20% less, making a 10.5 lbs scoped Mark V .340 Wby 225 gr similar to shoot as a 9 lbs scoped Winchester 70 .300 Wby 180 gr (31 ft/lbs of free recoil each).
... I assume a premium 150 would have done much better, but this was a classic example why I much prefer 180's in a fast .300..
I agree that a premium 150 gr (A Frame, TTSX, etc.) would have likely done better reaching the far lung, but no doubt a 180 gr. would do it more, and a .338 225 gr TTSX even more LOL.
Please
@Red Leg, go back to Spain with a box of .300 Win Mag 165 gr TTSX; find this boar's twin brother; and let know how things go
