I've not been paying too much attention to the new shortfats, but they've been out long enough for folks to have put them thru their paces. I don't buy gunrags much any more, for the obvious reasons. But I'd like to hear from ARers who are loading for the 300 WSM.

I guess my curiosity is twofold; what are your overall likes/dislikes, and what 200 grain loads have you developed?

thanx

You might want to look over in the medium bore forum. I started a similar thread over there.

Yeah, I've been reading that thread, that's what prompted me to start one here. I wanted to solicit input from folks actually doing it rather than opinions from folks who aren't.

From your thread its evident that 200 grain bullets do work in the WSM without causing floods, drought, or locusts. But so far not much discussion of COL issues and those sorts of pragmatics.

And I haven't found much discussion over the pros and cons of the WSM from a handloading perspective.

I havent tried 200grainers but i have tried 190gr berger VLDs and they seem to work, need to fine tune the load a bit. aint done many groups with the load but best is a .3" group but yet to see it again. I used VV N-160 and got 2900fps

CT

I reload for a good friend's Kimber 300WSM. I'm still looking for a good load and will shoot some 200 gr Accubonds today if I can dodge the rain.

My impressions on the WSM? You can't neck size cause it gets a crush fit on the first firing. Several of your reloading components don't work like loading blocks, powder funnels and outside chamfers. Just minor irritations.

Don't know whether it is the gun itself or the caliber but it shows pressure pretty quick. It does not come close to my 300 win mag in velocity or accuracy. It does seem to fill the gap between the 30-06 and the 300 win mag and is closer to the 300 win mag.

I'm not gonna run out and buy one but if the right deal came along I would take it.

Woods, agree with everthing you said except velocity and accuracy not being equal to a 300 Win.People who are saying that velocities aren't equal are not comparing apples to apples, comparing handloads is not a fair comparison because most handloaders don't pressure test thier loads and every rifle is a law unto itself. You need to compare factory velocities and with the 180 grain load the 300 WSM is every bit the equal of a 300 Win. As far as accuracy goes you saying that a long actioned 300 Win round that headspaces off a belt is more accurate than a short actioned 300 WSM that headspaces off the shoulder goes against everthing the benchrest crowd has been teaching us over the years. Anyway, my experience is that after actually owning both, the 300 WSM is the more accurate round. YMMV

quote:

As far as accuracy goes you saying that a long actioned 300 Win round that headspaces off a belt is more accurate than a short actioned 300 WSM that headspaces off the shoulder goes against everthing the benchrest crowd has been teaching us over the years. Anyway, my experience is that after actually owning both, the 300 WSM is the more accurate round. YMMV

I would agree with you, up to a point, but I have for rifles chambered to the .300 Win. Mag. Two of them have never been fired by me. (Yet.) The other three are all very accurate with groups ranging from .375" to .80" depending on the rifle.
My ex-son-in-law's Winchester Featherweight style .300 WSM is almost as accurate as one rifle and barely equals the other two. Regarding velocity, we just haven't had a chance to run the handloads over the chronograph yet. Last weekend, it got too windy for the Chrony to stay standing up. We'll try to do it today if he makes it down to Tucson before it gets too hot. I just worked up a test series set of loads to see just what will work in his rifle. Will accuracy improve to the point it outshoots my .300 Win. Mags.? Equal maybe, but better? Who knows. it's irrelevant anyway as any of the rifles mentioned are more that adequate for the type game they'r suited for.
Paul B.

4831SC works great for my 300WSM and 200 grain bullets. I load a long COL, as the M70 allows it with no problems. I can go to around 2.95" (depending on bullet profile) before contacting the lands, and M70 mag length easily feeds that. I could never get enough MagPro into the case to get to max published loads, but those who can live with highly compressed loads show top velocities.

As for the oft repeated mantra (usually from traditionalists who have never tried the WSM cartridges) about 'you can't match the 300Mag,' well they are right. You can get to within 50-100 fps (handloads to handloads) and that far exceeds the 30-06 in similar bullet weights. Funny, but I have never missed that little bit of velocity...but I load for accuracy, not velocity.

Factory ammo seems to be as close to advertised velocity as any other factory velocity claims. When handloaded the 300WM betters factory (standard) 300WM ammo by 100+ fps. Comparing those handloads to 300WSM factory ammo is not being honest...

I do have to partial FL resize cases to get clean chambering. No problem there. My Hornady neck sizer made crooked ammo anyways.

My only complaint has been listening to all the naysayers...on it's own merits is in a fine cartridge. Why do people have to get so up in arms over it? It is no hide off their butts...

quote:

Originally posted by kalbrecht:
Woods, agree with everthing you said except velocity and accuracy not being equal to a 300 Win.People who are saying that velocities aren't equal are not comparing apples to apples, comparing handloads is not a fair comparison because most handloaders don't pressure test thier loads and every rifle is a law unto itself. You need to compare factory velocities and with the 180 grain load the 300 WSM is every bit the equal of a 300 Win. As far as accuracy goes you saying that a long actioned 300 Win round that headspaces off a belt is more accurate than a short actioned 300 WSM that headspaces off the shoulder goes against everthing the benchrest crowd has been teaching us over the years. Anyway, my experience is that after actually owning both, the 300 WSM is the more accurate round. YMMV

Well I did dodge the rain and shot the 300 WSM with 200 gr Accubonds. It did pretty good. I was only shooting 3 shot groups and it printed a couple of 1" groups, a couple of 1 1/2" groups, a 2" group and a 3" group. The 1" groups were with IMR4831 at 2887 fps and RL22 at 2851 fps. The IMR groups was at book max and the RL22 was 1 gr below, so I'll load the RL22 for effect. It seemed that 2887 was approaching max although there were no obvious pressure signs.

I had 10 shots left from last season with the 300 win mag and 200 gr Accubonds and RL22 and it shot all 10 in 1 1/2" at 2925 fps. That is not close to max in the 300 win mag as I have approached 2975 fps with RL22 and H1000.

I do not headspace the 300 win mag off the belt. I headspace off the shoulder with it just like any other caliber. The reason I could not neck size the 300WSM on once fired cases was not because of a crush fit with the shoulder, it was because of a crush fit with the case body and the chamber. The very minimal taper must have something to do with it.

Maybe it's the Kimber rifle and wimpy barrel but IMO this 300WSM is not as accurate as most of the 300 win mags I do load for (except for a couple of Rugers which the 300 WSM easily surpasses )

quote:

Originally posted by woods:
My impressions on the WSM? You can't neck size cause it gets a crush fit on the first firing.

I'm not understanding you here. New brass is somewhat oversized?

quote:

Don't know whether it is the gun itself or the caliber but it shows pressure pretty quick.

You mean pressure signs go from normal to high with relatively small increases in powder charge?

quote:

It does not come close to my 300 win mag in velocity or accuracy. It does seem to fill the gap between the 30-06 and the 300 win mag and is closer to the 300 win mag.

Praised with faint damns! A 30 caliber cartridge in between the 06 and the Winnie is a pretty good place to be.

quote:

Originally posted by CouchTater:

Praised with faint damns! A 30 caliber cartridge in between the 06 and the Winnie is a pretty good place to be.

My thoughts exactly! I can get 2700-2800 fps with a 180 grain in my 30-06. If I can load the WSM with a 200 grain to 2800-2900 fps (and I don't see why not) and get some good accuracy, I will be in heaven.

I had planned on trying some loads with IMR4831 and possibly RL 22 with a 200 grain accubond, but it may take a while before I have anything to report.

After all, fishing season has started so it may take a little while before I get back to my loading bench.

Hey CT

No, new brass is not undersized. Most calibers like the 300 win mag have more taper in the case body from the shoulder to the case head. Helps release the empty case from the chamber for ejection. The WSM's like the 300WSM have less body taper. I think this is the reason that with the WSM that I reload for that after firing new brass, the once fired cases have a crush fit in the chamber. I have started using a Head & Shoulders Gauge but have not with this gun so I can not verify if it is because of shoulder expansion. I haven't loaded for it in about a year and I just started measuring shoulders in the last year.

Usually I get 3 to 4 firings with normal cases like a 300 win mag before I have to resize the case body and push the shoulder back because of crush fit. Not with this 300WSM.

With the pressure thing I mean that book max is close to max pressure. With other normal calibers the book max is usually a place to start. I think it may be because the WSM's are designed to fit in only modern high pressure actions whereas the other normal calibers have guns around that have been made in all types of actions that may not be up to modern standards. The reloading manuals I have seem to allow for this and publish loads that are closer to reality for the WSM's.

Yes being between the 30-06 and 300 win mag is a fine place to be. Pushing a 200 gr bullet from 2800 fps to 2900 fps, a 180 gr bullet bullet at 3000 + and a 165 gr bullet at 3100 to 3200 fps certainly makes it a very adequate hunting caliber.

Probably if this gun were a Sako or Steyr and had a little more weight, especially in the barrel, I would like the gun more and it would be more accurate. As far as reloading I would say that other than the minor irritations I listed it is OK.

woods, its the kimber and not the cartridge. i know a guy who does load development for a job and has had a hard time getting the majority of kimbers to "shoot". I own a kimber and its as finicky as hell, and i think its the lightweight barrel.

to debur the outside of the necks i used a hornady tool. and i also had the problem with the powder funnel. i just cut the bottom off a 222 case, and stick the 222neck inside the 300wsm neck and the body up to the powder funnel. problem solved!

IMO its the kimber not the WSM. one things for sure i wont buy one again, and the kimbers on its last warning, next trip for it will be to the shop for a trade in!.


oh, the same guy who does the load data got a 300wsm to push 150gr ballistic tips @ 3400FPS, not bad eh!

woods, I wonder now if your Kimber has a tight chamber?

Your choice of rifle will have an impact on the performance of the 200s. The short mags I load for have 2.8" mag boxes and limit your seating depth to just shy of that which hinders performance. A 180NAB is a fairly long bullet and the 200 even longer. I have to compress the loads a good bit to get adeqaute velocity with even the 180s so, I lean towards 165-168 class bullets in these rifles. If shooting single shot you can get out to the lands and gain alittle capacity.

Like I said, it really depends on which rifle you choose. These carts were designed to handle 150-180 class bullets best and with those bullets they will near the 300WM in performance but with 200s and 220s the 300WM is the way to go.

With today's bullet construction a 200 offers nothing over a 180 IMO.

Good Luck

Reloader

Depends on what you want in terms of velocities, of course. A 200 grain bullet at 2750-2800 fps probably does all I could ever ask of a medium bore, if and when I buy one I don't expect I'd want any more velocity than that.

Yes the 2.8" COL looks right in my rifle, maybe a bit shorter.

Although, quite a few rifles in 300WM have the same problem of short magazines, requiring the use of the partition protected point or semi-spitzer thus defeating my purpose for wanting to use the 200NAB which is the .588 BC.

Bought the 300WSM because I wanted something a little different and the balance of the rifle in short action with 24" barrel just felt "right".

Hopefully I can get some good performance with the 200NAB. If I can't then I guesss I will have a rifle for sale. A 30 caliber magnum that can only shoot max 180's is of no use to me. I aleady have 2 06's that will do that.

quote:

Originally posted by CouchTater:
Depends on what you want in terms of velocities, of course. A 200 grain bullet at 2750-2800 fps probably does all I could ever ask of a medium bore, if and when I buy one I don't expect I'd want any more velocity than that.

You might be better off with a 30-06 AI.

Yeah, I thought of that, but sticking with a mainstream cartridge provides so much more published data. I haven't seen all that much AI load data out there. I'd be pretty nervous loading to max pressure in a cartridge for which there isn't a broad database of pressure tested loads, and I worry that an older wildcat like the .30-06 AI would have a lot of early data floating around that was developed before pressure testing.

I suppose doing the strain gauge thing would help avoid overpressure loads, but that does seem like a lot of work.

As I'm sure you've concluded as well, the remarkable drag reduction on the 200 NAB allows a fairly mild load to have excellent retained velocity out past 300 yards, so I'm interested in AB loads as well. In fact if the ballistics software and Nosler's published BC are to be believed, a 200 grain AB at .30-06 MV will retain enough velocity out at 350 yards to satisfy most criteria for elk. My concern though is if I get a .30-06 and the barrel doesn't like ABs, then draggier bullets like the Partition or A-Frame will run out of poop at 300 yards. Not a total disaster, but at that point I'd regret not going magnum.

Couchtater,

I'd say that velocity could be expected with max loads depending on the barrel.

IMO a 4350 variant and possibly a 4831 variant will get you in that velocity spectrum. The slower powders work great but tend to compress before you get great velocity.

I'll tell you another powder that would probably give you great velocity is D85. I bought 8 lbs not long ago and it gives good velocity in the SM, I haven't tried the 200s in it and there is no data. D85 is slower than 4350 but faster than 4831 from my results and what I've seen others post. It's a ball as well so you could probably fit a fair amount under the 200s.

Good Luck

Reloader

Well we took the ex-son-in-laws rifle out to do the pressure series and chronograph the loads. Test bullets were the 150 gr. and 165 gr. Nosler ballistic Tips. The 165 gr. loads were loaded by someone else. All I did with those was seat the bullets deeper into the case and chronograph them.
Powder used was IMR-4831 with the load data for the 150 gr. bullet taken from the Nosler #5 loading manual. Winchester brass and WLRM primers used in all my loads. Powder for the 165 gr. load was estimated to be IMR-4831 which was later confirmed when Carlos asked the friend that loaded those rounds.
First shooting was with some Federal brand factory ammo to determine case head expansion data for comparative purposes. Somewhat stiff bolt lift was experienced with these rounds, a fair amount of burnishing on the case heads was noted, but the primers were nice and round. Either this ammo was hotter than hell or those signs are just the nature of that particular beast. The starting load with the above mentioned powder gave the same apparent signs of high pressure, yet case head expansion and velocity indicated low pressure. The was almost no change in case head expansion as we worked up to the maximum load although at the top load bolt lift was slightly stiffer, but only by a very slight amount. Case head expansion was the same as the factory loads. Primers were still nice and round, looking exactly like the primers on the factory test loads.
I am of the thought that the WSM cartridges, due to their very straight body shape just may be more apt to be difficult to extract after firing. I could be wrong as my experience with the short and fat cartridges is extremely short and thin.
Both loads were quite accurate as the 150 gr. bullets averaged .80" and the 165 gr. loads averaged right at one inch. He's happy with those groups.
Paul B.