buying it in person and having three "dummy rounds" with you to test the action. Because of their extreme shape the WSM's can be problematic to feed from the magazine, especially with three down the magazine. The top round is under sufficient pressure that it usually is the "squirreliest" (tech term) to feed. This seems especially true of CRF rifles. Despite marketing hype the WSM's offer no real (as opposed to "perceived") advantage over standard length belted mags unless a particular rifle you want happens to be so-chambered (like the Kimber's).

I've had four 300 WSM's and currently have a Kimber 300 WSM "Montana." I got it last fall and it WOULD NOT FEED!!! It went back to Kimber for an action job and now feeds properly (just got it back this past Friday). Kimber has tremendous customer service and the quality of this rifle is fantastic. A Leupold 2.5x8 is going into Talley Lightweight's on top. With sling and three rounds total weight is 7lbs 7 oz's... nice! A pure "utility" rifle...

XX


Moderator
Forum Admin



USA
3554 Posts
Posted - 02/14/2005 : 07:38:38
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

XXXX, your experiences and opinions run contrary to what most of us have found. The short mags generally feed fine. Those few that do not are exceptions and should indeed be fixed by the manufacturer under warranty.

Your continued statements to the effect that there is no advantage to the short mag design are getting old. Those advantages are real not perceived. I'm not perceiving that the short mags fit into a short-action, they really do. This gives me the real advantage of a shorter, lighter rifle with the ballistics of a long magnum. Lesser advantages such as using less powder and having a shorter powder column are also quite real. The short mags were/are over-hyped but they do deliver.

Your previous posting about "efficiency" was a waste of space. Now, in this post you propagate two fallacies (poor feeding, no real advantage) that we have spent too much time countering to allow them to be repeated again.

Perhaps you should read this:

http://www.shortmags.org/shortmags/snitzforum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=4264

and pay attention to the last paragraph before you post again.

Addendum: XXXX responded by decrying me as a "cyber expert" and claiming his extensive experience is superior. Whatever. His posting privileges have been suspended.

============================================
The above is as good a cut and paste effort I could make from the Short Mags Forum. It seems that no opinion that does not fit the moderators agenda is banned.

scrooem

Yup!

Yep, he's a piece of work...too bad..he's gonna fool around and kill what WAS a very useful forum...

A web site devoted to shortmags is useful?

Yep, I quit going there about a year ago...when he slammed some guy about 400 yard deer shooting...something to the effect of "such discussion will not be allowed on this forum". I may not have agreed with the 400 yard shots on game, but I hated the attitude more!

DD, any forum/website promoting our sport is useful. Even one dedicated to the hated/loved WSM/SAUM's. We do tend to obsess over our hobbies you know...

99, yep it was me that got "banished" LOL! Heck, being's the "Moderator" is an anal-control-freak with little knowledge of anything except the ability to parrot other's hype and conjecture, I consider it an honor to get "the left foot of fellowship"... never got banned at HA (the Swamp) but would have considered that an honor as well!

Lord...

If you want to have some fun, just post over there how well your WSSM is shooting.

That post will be up about, oh, ten minutes, before he all but calls you a liar and yanks the post.

Idget. JMO, Dutch.

It sounds like this guy is trying to set up his own little banana republic that subscribes to only one doctrine.

If he was so secure in this new religion of his, we wouldn't be trying to hard to squelch dissenting opinion...........

AD

quote:

Yep, I quit going there about a year ago...when he slammed some guy about 400 yard deer shooting...something to the effect of "such discussion will not be allowed on this forum". I may not have agreed with the 400 yard shots on game, but I hated the attitude more!

Man, if he thinks 400 yard shots are bad, What the heck does he need w/ a flat shooting Magnum rifle.

I guess alot of us are just too set in our ways.

Reloader

Note that there are no ads on the Short Mags site.

That's why the discussion must be so narrow.

Somebody is paying for that site to promote the Short Mags.

Savage, maybe so, but tben why the opposition to the SSM's?

Just a guy with a mission, IMO. Dutch.

quote:

Man, if he thinks 400 yard shots are bad, What the heck does he need w/ a flat shooting Magnum rifle.

Bingo...

CDH, I agree with your sentiment but find the concept so narrow as to be worthless. How about a site dedicated to BB Caps, but only in left hand twist rifles? I have one BTW, but I hardly think it needs more discussion that you just read.

quote:

Originally posted by Dutch:
Savage, maybe so, but tben why the opposition to the SSM's?

Just a guy with a mission, IMO. Dutch.

Because Remington and Savage don't chamber them?

My sendero in 300 SAUM works perfect.

... and my toilet flushes just fine though I'm not sure it has any bearing on the topic at hand.

...and my weedcutter works perfect though I would prefer one with more velocity and energy a la 300 WSM

I currently have a 300 WSM and it is great...

He says the purpose of the forum is to spread correct information about the short magnums. But it looks like its real purpose is to decide what's correct. I think the technical term for a place like that is "echo chamber." Okie John

SAVAGE99,

I got turned off over there lately. Some guy had bought a Burris scope for his .300 WSM and the mod jumped in and said it didn't have enough eye relief for a short mag. Since I have that exact scope on my short mag, I jumped in and said that I was getting almost 4" of eye relief. He (mod) replied that was not possible and that I didn't know how to mount a scope for "proper" eye relief. So I looked at the specs and it said
3.1-3.8" eye relief, which I already knew. So I got a little PO'd and stated that 3.8"was pretty close to 4" at least in my book..I stated the fact that I've been mounting scopes since the 70's and do some light gunsmithing in my gun shop and that I would be happy to compare notes with him any day!! You know what?? The post disappeared. Talk about an dictator!! I haven't been back. I guess you can't disagree with him. I only wish ASS_CLOWN and Clark would go over there, they could really get him going with some of there banter!!!!

His name isn't Graybeard is it?

You know, if that moderator was stressing over a 400yd shot, I can imagine what he must think of that guy with the cannon firing over a dozen 1" lead balls out of a cannon at deer!!

quote:

Originally posted by Brad:
... and my toilet flushes just fine though I'm not sure it has any bearing on the topic at hand.

Does the "swirly" go clockwise or counter-clockwise?

quote:

Does the "swirly" go clockwise or counter-clockwise?

LOL, always "clockwise" exept when I take it on vacation to Peru...

All anyone has to do is read the "Why no WSSM" under the FAQ section of the website. This could be the most dilusional, opinionated person in history. He states that since he received 2, that's right two, WSSM's that either wouldn't shoot to his expectations(maybe he's a crappy shot)or didn't feed, and since some of the people on the forum said the same, that they are worthless, and they will not be on the WSM site which under his opinion are inherently superior. I don't have either but the rules and they statements on that site are the funniest things I've ever read. Someone should start a site called www.sshortmag.org and allow no posts for WSM's since WSSM's are superior. That would be great!!!

Brad,
You may research and find that the 300SAUM and the WSM are the same short mag style. Your smart ass comments are not necessary on this board. And you call yourself one of us?

Sounds like swamp is off his prozak medication again..

He ran off all the knowledgable gunsmith people from his web sight.

Hey Dwight... perhaps your reading comprehension isn't as "perfect" as your Sendero... read the friggin topic and original post... how your SAUM works hasn't a damn thing to do with the topic at hand.

Hey all, hard to believe forums like that survive. It's not that hard to believe that some people require constant ego stroking.

Anyway, here's some background on the "forum:"

Domain ID: D89292445-LROR
Domain Name: SHORTMAGS.ORG
Created On: 13-Aug-2002 09:20:32 UTC
Sponsoring Registrar: Go Daddy Software, Inc. (R91-LROR)

Registrant ID:GODA-01380492
Name: Neal Carpenter
Organization:
Street1: 120 Jolee Way
City: Paducah
State/Province: Kentucky
Postal Code: 42001
Phone: +1.2705546672
Email: nsi2@mbsn.com

Admin ID: GODA-21380492
Admin Name: Neal Carpenter

Amazing what's available out there.

I suppose a forum as limited as that might be reasonable. But I will not frequent the place, because, being an old buzzard, I don't consider the short mags to be particularly interesting.......