Well, I have decided to pop for a new rifle, but It wont see any action until next year.



I decided on the rifle it self (Model 70 Classic, Featherweight-Left-Hand) and winchester has helped me choose the caliber by limiting it to 3 .



Im' not intrested in the 300 Wsm. So that leaves the .270wsm or the 7mm wsm.

Wich of these two would you guys suggest. I am leaning toward the .270wsm. (primarily for deer, but black bear & Elk are on the menu occasionally)

I Think the .270WSM with 150gr NP should be more than adaquate for Elk size animals out to 300 yards or so.



Wich of the two is doing better in sales??? Longevity could become and issue. Of coure it would just give me a reason to start reloading.

I dont have any hard sales data to base this on, but I think the 270wsm is getting more internet attention than the 7mmwsm. THat and a couple of dimes will get you coffee at my office. The 270 bore was lacking a "universal" mag offering, the 7mm has a good one already.

Mark, Being that i'm a big 7mm fan, and the fact that i've got dies for it, 7mmWSM all the way, load her up with 154 Interbonds and 64.5grs, or so of H4831sc, and go for it. Jay

I am not a fan of the WSM cartridges, as they do nothing that the original 'short magnums' don't already do.



I also don't think that USRAC delivers on its claim of "Legendary handling, quickness and light weight have made the Featherweight famous among hunters".



The M-70 Featherweight chambered in the WSM cartridges weighs 7lbs., 8oz. and is 44" long (24" barrel); the M-70 Sporter LT, chambered in the same WSM cartridges weighs 7lbs. 4 oz. and 44 1/8" long (24" barrel).



So, the Featherweight is 1/8" shorter, but 4oz. heavier!?!



The WSM-chambered Featherweights don't add up for me:

- no improvement ballistically

- not much difference dimensionally

- $20 more expensive

- schnabel fore-end tip.

- doesn't really provide a platform for rebarreling to 'better' rounds, that I can think of (maybe one of the Lazzeroni cartridges).



YMMV,

George

P.S. If elk are on the list, I'd go with the .300WSM; otherwise, only the .270WSM strikes me as interesting (although I'd rather go with a .270 Ackley, myself).

I think a .270 WSM would be plenty. It seems to be much more popular than the 7mm WSM, and the difference between .277 and .284 isn't that great. .007, to be exact. With a 150gr partition it should be ready for just about anything shy of the big bears. Otherwise, I'd get a .300 WSM and shoot 180gr partitions until the cows came home for pretty much all big game and have just a little more effectiveness against elk and moose.

Mikey B, I think we are on the same page. I just cant justify a 300wsm when 90% of the time I will be deer hunting. But the 270WSM is enought to get the job done on bigger game, but not overly powefull for regular deer hunting. Plus I will be using my deer rifle that I am (will be) very familiar with.

I'm from the "shot placement" school of thought. So that atvantage means a lot to me.

The 270 WSM is definately the more popular of the two, IMHO is certainly an excellent cartridge but if you were sure of using it on Elk I would lean towards the 7 WSM. Federal loads a 160gr Accubond at 3120fps in the 7WSM (it's a little faster than that in my Kimber), and I think that that would be a dynamite load for Elk. At 300yds and beyond the 160 Accubond 7WSM actually has more energy than their 180 Accubond 300 WSM load.
I have Kimber 8400's in all three WSM's and to directly compare the three:
-270WSM is the most accurate with handloads (in my rifles) and to me a perfect deer/antelope round.
-7 WSM is the most ballistically efficient of the lot the 160gr load shoots flat and retains energy the best. The Federal 160gr Accubond load shoots better than any handload I've yet tried and is the best factory load I've shot in the 3 calibers.
-300 WSM is the most all around versatal and far the most popular of the three. It has the most factory loads available. It also kicks the most but not too bad.

.......DJ