Allan,

First, FN is not an American company. It is
a European company that just closed an
American plant that was not profitable enough
for the parent corporation. I think I have read
that not all Winchester models are made in
America. So much for the "Buy American"
notion regarding Winchester. Regardless
of where Winchesters are made, the money
goes to Belgium, or France, or some stinky
place like that.

I see over on the small bore forum, you state that
a 300 WSM chambered AR-10, is the first
good reason for WSM...Yet in the previous
post here, you state that WSMs don't cycle
well, due to their sharp shoulder. I sure
would be disappointed if my AR-10 300 WSM
didn't cycle By my experience, I have never
had my 300 WSM fail to cycle, and I have
given it a rigorous testing due to the rumors
this cartridge had cycling issues. No cycling
problems in my rifle, and I am pretty sure
the AR-10s cycle those nasty sharp shoulder
WSM cases well, too.

As for my "fat ass" needing excercise, if a
few ounces of rifle makes a difference,
yup I need to work on that, but your
concern about my butt has me worried.
Have you seen "Brokeback Mountain"?
I bet more than once

Just funnin' you, Allan. You go ahead and
keep predicting the death of the WSM line,
and I will keep predicting the WSM line
will out live us both, and in the order
of things, it will matter about as much
as one unburned speck of powder in
our barrels. The market will have the
last word, anyway.

May your groups be small, and your
rifle never fail to fire.

Squeeze

to answer the question without writing a novel no it will not effect on my purchase. I think short mags are pointless not that I will never own one but pointless just the same.

Offering a std size and weight action in 300 WSM doesn't make sense, but in a 7# scoped rig, and pushing "premium" 165-168's @ 3100 fps, I'd say what can't it do for the tasks it would be used for?[/QUOTE] This was exactly my thinking when I bought my Kimber .300 WSM. I am finding 168 gr TSX's are elk killers and pleasant to shoot from a rifle that carries and handles to perfection.

In 3 words,

NOT AT ALL!

Ditto Squeeze and Coltchris.

To the others, why the close minded position on the WSM or WSSM

Allow me to relate a personal observation.
Growing up I was so poor, I couldn't afford to pay attention. Along the way I was exposed to people that owned guns and had money. I swore to myself that If I ever made any money I was going to own a couple of guns.
What Is the mossy oak slogan, Its not a passion, its an obsession. I can relate. Over the past 10 years I've probably bought and sold a hundred different pistols and long guns. I currently own 50 or so rifles, chambered from 17 ackley hornet to 45-70. I think I am reloading for 36 different chamberings at present. In 7mm I load for and shoot 7-08, 7 x 57, 280AI 7 mag, 7stw and 7wsm. In 30 caliber its 308, 30-06, 300 wm, 300 ultra mag, and 300 wsm.
I currently own two Kimber 8400 classics. One in 300 wsm, the other in 7wsm. They were purchased a year apart under different circumstances but both have the most unbelievable wood for a production rifle. Both are sub-moa shooters.
I recently picked up a winchester super grade in 300 wsm. The guy I bought it from was a gunsmith that was in a state of financial embarassment. Along with the rifle I acquired 20 loaded rounds being 150 gr sierra spitzers over 72 gr. h-414, velocity 3320 fps.
Last season, this rifle alone accounted for 4 white tail deer, six hogs and a turkey. All were shot from 120 to 250 yds. Each animal dropped in its tracks where it was shot. I still have 7 rounds left.
I own brownings, cooper,kimber, remington, sako, savage, T/C Weatherby and Winchesters. However, this winchester supergrade in 300 wsm has stole my heart and affections. (I haven't told my other rifles yet)

GWB

PS, I recently purchased a 243 wssm in a heavy barrelled laminate stock win. '70 coyote. The gunshop was blowing this model out at $389. I couldn't pass it up. After break in and a 3.5 lb trigger it shoots 3/4 moa at 100 yds with sierra 100 gr spitzers. After I change out the trigger I'll bet it will do better!

quote:

Originally posted by Rayderluvr:
Yes, I agree that is part of the reason Winchester is having problems, but if the WSM's are so bad, why does CZ, Sako, Howa, and Vanguard all sell rifles chambered for WSM?

Where did I say that the WSM's were "bad"
I just disagree with the hyperbole about how great they are, they aren't either better or worse, they are just "different" while being the same.

Most of that weight reduction that everyone is touting is NOT because the receiver and bolt have been shortened by half an inch but rather because of the lighter stocks and thinner barrel profiles.

And you can make a 300WinM wih a thin barrel and composite stock.

AD

quote:

Has Winchester closing the doors changed your mind about buying a wsm or wssm?

Nope...not at all......it hasn't changed anything at all about my guns or chamberings or buying habits.

right on allan. my 300 win weighs 8 pounds loaded so what need a short mag "pointless" get it

quote:

Where did I say that the WSM's were "bad"

I re-read your post I took the quote from, and you indeed did NOT say they were bad....I apologize for putting words in your mouth. I am probably just on the defensive because I purchased a .270 WSM and a .223 WSSM recently, and from much of what I have read and seen on ballistics tables, they are impressive. To be honest with you, though, the real reason I purchased the .270 WSM was NOT because it is better than a .270 Win, or any other "standard" caliber. I was looking for a .270 win, 30-06, or even a 7 mag. I have an employee that has a .300 WSM Browning that he traded his .300 WinMag 700 BDL in for because the BDL had something wrong that Remington would not stand behind. That got me looking into the WSM calibers. The reason I bought a .270 WSM is because it is better suited for me and readily available at Walmart for $398.97 including a scope (albeit a cheap scope). With all the good press I had read, I didn't think I could go wrong.
I have not had the opportunity to fire my new rifles yet, so I cannot speak inteligently on how they perform. Maybe I should not have voiced my opinion in here until I had actually fired my rifle, but the vibe I get from most of the "anti-WSM" folks is WSM's are no better than anything we already have available. My thought is you can say that about MANY of the calibers that were developed through the years....there is redundancy everywhere you look.
I am sure many here in AR can pick apart my post and give all kinda of reasons why I am wrong. I may be...I am just an old shotgun hunter from Iowa that moved to a state where you can actually use a rifle.
Thanks for taking the time to read my ramblings.
Allan, you've done your good deed for today!

quote:

Originally posted by Rayderluvr:
I re-read your post I took the quote from, and you indeed did NOT say they were bad....I apologize for putting words in your mouth. I am probably just on the defensive because I purchased a .270 WSM and a .223 WSSM recently, and from much of what I have read and seen on ballistics tables, they are impressive. To be honest with you, though, the real reason I purchased the .270 WSM was NOT because it is better than a .270 Win, or any other "standard" caliber. I was looking for a .270 win, 30-06, or even a 7 mag. I have an employee that has a .300 WSM Browning that he traded his .300 WinMag 700 BDL in for because the BDL had something wrong that Remington would not stand behind. That got me looking into the WSM calibers. The reason I bought a .270 WSM is because it is better suited for me and readily available at Walmart for $398.97 including a scope (albeit a cheap scope). With all the good press I had read, I didn't think I could go wrong.
I have not had the opportunity to fire my new rifles yet, so I cannot speak inteligently on how they perform. Maybe I should not have voiced my opinion in here until I had actually fired my rifle, but the vibe I get from most of the "anti-WSM" folks is WSM's are no better than anything we already have available. My thought is you can say that about MANY of the calibers that were developed through the years....there is redundancy everywhere you look.
I am sure many here in AR can pick apart my post and give all kinda of reasons why I am wrong. I may be...I am just an old shotgun hunter from Iowa that moved to a state where you can actually use a rifle.
Thanks for taking the time to read my ramblings.
Allan, you've done your good deed for today!

Well Now I'll work overtime on making everyone think:

Wanna know my real pet peeve? that the manufacturers wasted their time, energy and money on developing new cartridges that don't actually do anything new when they coulda done something really useful...


Want something NEW?

How about Developing a 10Ga Rem870?

Rhetorical question: Why buy a 12ga 3-1/2"
shotgun when you can buy a 10Ga 3-1/2" shotgun?

OR

How many here would have to be the first person on their block to ABSOLUTELY GOTTA HAVE a stainless steel Rem870?
One that WAS NOT set up like a typical shark gun, but instead was intended to get wet in your Goose/Duck blind without getting rusty?
(Basically what I want is an "Alaska Wilderness"
version of a Remington 870, I.E. stainless steel with a black teflon coating 28" RemChoke barrel, vent rib etc...)

Or something that'd be really useful, like putting the safety lever on a Rem700 where you don't have to take your thumb off of the pistol grip to release the safety.

This change would get me to trade in my Remingtons on new ones faster than any "new"
chambering...

These kind of things would be infinitely more useful than the two redundant lines of cartridges that Remchester has spat forth...


AllanD

Allan,

Now we're talkin'. I am with you on this topic.
There are a bunch of missed opportunities,
out there, that the gun companies just aren't
dedicating engineering resources to. I have
often wondered why we can have all weather
stainless steel rifles, but we can't have stainless
steel shotguns, unless we buy stubby "marine"
shotguns. I will say that my Browning Gold 10
gauge, has a bunch of stainless components,
like the bolt assembly, and the magazine tube,
but why not the receiver, and the barrel. This
gun is over 10 lbs, with a steel receiver, and I
thank Browning it is, when I turn my home made
2 oz HeviShot turkey loads loose, so give me a
choice for stainless. I will deal with the weight.

And I am a huge fan of 10 gauges, versus the
pathetically long shot strings of the 12 ga
3 1/2". Talk about marketing ploys, the long
12 gauge, is really a step back in shotguns,
versus the WSM, which arguably, may have
been a step sideways. I know I will hear
back on this from Benelli SBE lovers. I have
spend many hours in shotgun load dvelopment,
with everything for 28 guages, to 10 gauges,
and the 12ga. 3 1/2" is an even bigger joke,
than the 3" 20 ga. The joke is the consumer
believes they are getting a shotgun that puts
more pellets, on target, and in most cases with
the long for bore chambers, on moving targets,
this just isn't true. One would be much better off
with a properly choked 12 ga 3", shooting good
quality ammo, with good choices in pellet size,
and velocity. But that wouldn't sell more
shotguns. Grampa's old 3" duck gun still
is the best 12 guage, except with a new barrel,
proofed for hard non-toxic shot, and a screw-in
choke to dial in the best performance for a given
load. I guess the same management team
that came up with the 3 1/2" 12 gauge,
moved over to Winchester, or FN, or OLIN,
and gave us the WSM

Rant Off

Squeeze

I was wondering about the wsms and wssm because it was Winchester who brought them out in the first place.Winchester had reduced its standard older cartridges to a few models and chambered the wsm cartridges in every one of their model 70s almost.I think Browning and winchester were the only ones to chamber the wssm cartridges .I dont think I have not seen any other guns in them.I didnt see why a gun such as the 300 wsm that is so close to the 300 wsm made such a stir.I do think that all the articles written about the wsms got alot of shooters to buy them.I liked the 204 Ruger idea alot better than the wssms which were almost the same as the older cartridges.The 480 Ruger was a dud but it was a shorter version of the 475 but it could be chambered in alot more guns than the 475.The Ultra mags were almost too much of a good thing for most folks.Do we really need 28 7mm cartridges or 30 something .308 cartridges.Its a cluttered market with those calibers already.I think the 270 wsm will be more popular than the 300 wsm in the long run.It was between the 270 win and the 270 Weatherby.The Weatherby cartridges were way ahead of their time .Some like the 300 weatherby became very popular but some like the 7mm weatherby didnt go very far.It will be something to see how many of these new cartridges survive in 10 years.I wish that gun and ammo makers would come out with bullets that do not foul your bore or if they are over bore ones that dont leave so much powder fouling.I think an old cartridge such as the 264 win mag with the new bullets and new powders of today would be a hole another ball game.

As far as shotguns go I wish they would come out with a nontoxic shot that was better or as good as lead and as cheap as lead.They keep seeming to change to something different every year lately.I would like to see some 20 ga goose loads that would work out to 40 yards in older guns.I am glad that the double barrel shotguns are making a comeback I never stopped hunting with them.Its funny to see someone who has never shot a good balanced double say its a fine shooting shotgun their first time shooting it.I would also like to see a recoil system that works better than a muzzle break but is not as loud.

Is it true that CZ discontinued there line of WSM???

Roland

quote:

Originally posted by dgr416:I wish that gun and ammo makers would come out with bullets that do not foul your bore or if they are over bore ones that dont leave so much powder fouling.I think an old cartridge such as the 264 win mag with the new bullets and new powders of today would be a hole another ball game.

Propellant fouling of rifle bores will always be with us, so just suck it up.

Projectile fouling?

I hear an awful lot of people endlessly whine about the copper fouling from the Barnes bullets
and the only thing I'll bother to say to those people is that PURE COPPER fouling is one hell of a lot easier to get out of a bore than conventional Guilding metal fouling is.

As for the 264Winchester Mag?
There is only one thing wrong with the 264Win.... that is that someone invented the 7mmRemMag.
the 7mm Rem pretty much drove a wooden stake through the heart of the 264Win.

If you already HAVE a 264 Win I see no point in running out and buying a 7mmMag and Vice-Versa,
but if you have neither I'd have to recommend the 7mm as the better cartridge.
The 264 is another "missed opportunity" It's a cartridge that demonstrates that Winchester should have stuck with something that was sucessful... How you ask? They should have made it a .277 caliber, they wouldn't have neede any marketing hype, it would have sold itself.
And all the marketing hype in the world didn't help the 264Win...

If they'd done that in 1958 and introduced
"the 270Winchester Magnum" instead of introducing the 264, then Remington's 1962 introduction of the 7mmMag would now be only a long forgotten footnote in cartridge history.

Hindsight may be 20-20 but you gotta actually LOOK to see anything at all...

And What I see is TWO seperate groups of people
(Remington and Winchester)
demonstrating that they neither studied their own history or learned a damned thing from it.
Demonstrated by the WSM and SAUM.

I say again, the cartridges have nothign wrong with them, the issue is WHY and HOW they were introduced and marketed.

My thought on the 20ga is that there is only one thing a 20ga does better than a 12ga...
And that is to throw 1oz or lighter shot charges. it sometimes seems that everyone in the gun industry wants to turn the 20ga into a 12Ga.

BTW, if Remington is actually listening and actually thinks about making a stainless steel 870 shotgun, don't polish the hell out of it.
Leave it a dull sandblasted finish.
like an 870Express. and it should costNO MORE THAN $100 more than a current production 870Express.


AllanD

Allan, dang it, now I suppose some one will come out with a "270 Winchester Magnum" and I'll have to have one of those too! I shoot the long dead and obsolete .264WM (along with a lot of others on these forums), as well as the 7mmRM that killed the .264, a 7mmWSM, a 7mmSTW, and have a 270WSM waiting in the wings. (Oh, I'm even eyeballing a 270Win Classic M70). A lot of overlap here I would say! But what the hay, I'm having fun. Uh, to address the original question, no it hasn't changed my mind about buying a WSM in the least, I already have two, with one more coming in. I never had any intention of getting into the WSSM's and haven't changed my mind.

I am very glad that I bought the two Ruger 264 win mag stainless Model 77s when I did.I think I will hold on to them for a very long time.I always wanted one and they are even better than I thought they would be.I just didnt see all that much gain by the wsm line except maybe the 270wsm.I have friends who saiod you have to get a 325 wsm that is wat better than those 338 win mags you use Not!I dont think the 325 wsm will be that popular being a 8mm.I just turned down a 8 mm rem mag in a 700 Remington Classic for $425.The 8 mm rem mag was supose to replace both the 300 maGS and the 338 win mag but it never had any popularity.I think the 338 wsm might have done fairly well but I dont think we really needed it.I think the Rick Jamison lawsuit will hurt the wsm line bad enough that what is out now is a done deal with no more new wsms.That lawsuit really sucks it hits everyone who has chambered a wsm.I was kinda suprised that the 270 win mag didnt come out but the 270 weatherby that is still above the 270wsm went hardly anywhere either.

dgr,

Thanks for reminding me, I need a 270 Weatherby too!

I could have gotten a golden eagle 270 weatherby once for around $400 in the early 80s.I passed at the time because shells were about $30 at the time and 30-06 were around $7 a box.I am suprised that the 270 weatherby never went any where.I am buying that 264 Win Mag in the Remington Sendero with a 26" barrel.I really like those Ruger 77s I have just wish they had 26" barrels .I think the sendero in 264 will be awesome.

dgr416 ----- The .270 Wby did go somewhere, it is Weatherbys number two seller after the .300. Roy Weatherby said it was the only one he produced that he wasn't sure about, then it turned into one of his hits. It is just a smidgeon above the WSM. Good shooting.

dgr,

Yeah, that .264 Sendero has to be awesome! I am also planning on getting one of those! This business with Winchester has got me temporarily sidetracked. I want to get a few more Classic Model 70's while I still can. I've got a stainless Camo Ultimate Shadow 7mmWSM coming in a few days. I also know of several other Model 70's I might oughta have! Like a stainless Classic Featherweight .243 that my grandson ought to have (he's only five, but I plan ahead!). As well as the stainless Classic 270 Win mentioned before. It never ends!

quote:

Originally posted by mudstud:
dgr,

Yeah, that .264 Sendero has to be awesome! I am also planning on getting one of those! This business with Winchester has got me temporarily sidetracked. I want to get a few more Classic Model 70's while I still can. I've got a stainless Camo Ultimate Shadow 7mmWSM coming in a few days. I also know of several other Model 70's I might oughta have! Like a stainless Classic Featherweight .243 that my grandson ought to have (he's only five, but I plan ahead!). As well as the stainless Classic 270 Win mentioned before. It never ends!

Friends don't let friends buy their children 243Winchesters as their first deer rifle.

There are better "first rifle" chamberings.

AllanD

I was seriously looking at both the 300 WSM and the 25 WSSM but have temporarily called it off. The Win. closing in my mind is not nearly as important as the R. Jaimison suit. I'll wait to see if that kills the short mags first.

Allan,

Yeah, I absolutely agree with you! Actually I think that rifle would make a good donor action for a real nice .257Bob! What with the M70 short action having a long magazine box, and I could put a short stock on it if needed for awhile, and then put the Featherweight stock back on later. Actually I already have a new M70 Classic SS .243 that I got cheap, and bought just for the action for some future project like this (since I don't shoot the .243). But the latest M70 Classics have better gas handling in case of a gas leak, and since I have only one grandson so far, thought I would go with the updated action.

Phil,

Well, I've been quietly and secretively ratholing brass for my WSM's. Although I don't think there will be any problem in the short range. I just figure it never hurts a thing to have a lot of brass anyhow!

I have had a few of those rifles in both M70 and M94. None in short mag, but a Super Grade that wasn't, and a 338 classic, both were absolute crap.

Same as anything else that plant has turned out since 1963.

I owned a 1895 405 that Miroku made and it was a good rifle, as well as a few other Miroku and FN made Winchester Stamped guns. All were solid rifles.

I guess the executives at FN should have fired the idiots running the New Haven plant a long time ago and ran it like the FN and Miroku plants.

Crap in, crap out!

No. I owned one "Winchester" rifle. It was '06Spr Model 777. Very nice PF rifle from Kodensha Co., Ltd of Tochigi, Japan. I replaced that classic-looking 'Goden Eagle' with .375 'Etoscha'. Different rifle, but the same scope Nickel 'Supra'.

I have never owned a Win70 in anything. For that matter I haven't ever had a rem700 either. I did have a ruger 77 but sold it. The only factory high powered rifle I own is a browning A-bolt .270 cuz my wife shoots it. The rest are Custom mauser 98, markx, p_14/17 and 03A3s. So I doubt anything winchester does will affect my buying. However, if one fell in my lap........