The short fat magnums don't have as much velocity as their big brothers, but thats not the point. Short fat columns of powder burn more effeciently and require shorter and therefore stronger actions which lead to more inherent accuracy.
Posts: 593 | Location: My computer. | Registered: 28 November 2001
GSF1200... I am not sure what you are getting at, the new short mags are just new cartridges. Many people seem to be excited about them... and promotion of any shooting interest is a good thing as far as I am concerned. Everyone is different. Talk about hype... Alot of people believe that buying the next fastest cartridge is buying them skill that they dont need to worry about.
Posts: 2045 | Location: West most midwestern town. | Registered: 13 June 2001
Of course they are there to sell rifles that what gun makers do. If you are looking for a shorter action . a little lighter that's the hole they fill if not don't buy one. When you read about a new cal. in the gun rags take 80% with salt.
Posts: 19394 | Location: wis | Registered: 21 April 2001
I don't get to wrapped around the term "magnum". Every cartridge brings a different level of performance. If you like what a cartridge can do, go with it.
Does a .22 "magnum" outperform a .223 or .22-250??? Does a 357 magnum outdo a 35 remington?? a 44 magnum out do a 44 marlin? Just some examples to illustrate that the term magnum is not synonamous with highest performance for caliber.
The 300 WSM may not bring heretofore unseen performance to the world of 30 caliber hunting rifles.
I expect that the 300 WSM will really shine as a 1000 yard benchrest cartridge. the design of the cartridge smacks of a 6mm PPC on steroids. I'll bet it will sail 175-190 gr matchkings well over 3000 fps with exceptional accuracy from a properly built rifle.
Picture yourself as a marketing manager of a firearms company. Of course planned obsolecence is the way to keep the volume up.
I think the .300 WSM will catch on. Of course there is so much overlap that it's almost funny. I like to tease some here with the idea of the .30 Newton. A cartridge from WW1 which is far superior in design to the .300 Weatherby for example with it's headspace on the shoulder and lack of freebore.
But all of these changes are very tiny incremental ones. The shape of the cartridge is not a big deal. Far more important is the bullet.
Rifles last for generations if cared for at all so the belted magnums will hang around forever. But they are obsolete in function in a small manner. Better are the 300 WSM for a short action, 30 Newton for a standard action and the 300 RUM for I don't know what.
Having had experience with a couple of 300 Win Mags, a 300 Weatherby, several 30-06's and a 30 Gibbs, the 300 WSM is the one I like best. Plenty of power in an easily carried package. And it is as accurate as any of them. So if you like the 30-50 BMG then that's ok with me. To each his own. Oh yeah, my barrel will last longer than yours! Good Hunting,
------------------ Andy Cooper
Posts: 6711 | Location: Oklahoma, USA | Registered: 14 March 2001
The short mags may shoot great, and are in a short action gun, but why buy one if you already have the respective caliber in the long action. I am not saying that they are a bad gun to have, but why , in my opinion, downgrade to a slower load of basically the same thing. If I was rich enough, sure I'd buy one just to have it, but are the short mags really that much better?
I think the key point here is that they aren't "better", they are differant. Differant enough to buy or build another gun? Sure, why not? I don't understand all this justification in both directions on these calibers. It's just something new to play with. "They aren't any better than the old standard magnums". Think about that for a minute. I would say that's a pretty good standard to live up to. FWIW - Dan
Posts: 5284 | Location: Alberta | Registered: 05 October 2001
Most folks miss the point (besides selling rifles), the propper comparison is NOT to the full sized magnums. The true comparison is to the .308. Then you are comparing the same GUN (ie. short action). The others are all long action. The 300WSM is not a 300 Win Mag but it beats the heck out of a 308.
I don't have a .300 WSM, but they sure look like an interesting idea. I have yet to find an animal in North America or Africa who could tell the difference between 3000 and 3200 fps. I doubt it will do anything my 7mm Rem Mag won't do, but that doesn't mean I won't get one eventually, although I might hold out for a .375 WSM or something like that...never know when the gun bug will bite..
I admit, the .300 WSM is redundant, but it is selling guns and ammunition, and that is why they are in the business..
Any time the big guys offer us folks a new case to play with I'm all for it. Doug
------------------ NRA Life member
Posts: 8345 | Location: Jennings Louisiana, Arkansas by way of Alabama by way of South Carloina by way of County Antrim Irland by way of Lanarkshire Scotland. | Registered: 02 November 2001
I think this cartridge makes more sense than the ultra mag. It doesn't try to compete in the high velocity race like the ultra, it's designed with more thought for the rifle itself. I like the idea of the lighter weight. It should be a great carrying mountain rifle. I'd sacrifice the few fps for less pounds in this case for sure. I am all for it. Remington made a good decision, but I already have my "old" 300, otherwise I'd get one.
Posts: 672 | Location: St. Paul MN | Registered: 21 April 2001
I've been thinking about this and I believe I'm going to build a light weight 7mm version of the short magnums. As mentioned before, it should make a great mountain rifle, maybe good enough to replace my light weight 284 Win. Yes, it's niche marketing, but it's a niche I like. We'll see how it turns out. Time to start rounding up parts. (Oh great, another project) - Dan
Posts: 5284 | Location: Alberta | Registered: 05 October 2001
One of the projects on the list is a 270 or 7mm short for my wife. The long action 280 she shoots now is not quite balancing right, for her short arms. Getting that balance back to where it needs to be, and keeping all the punch of the 280 with heavy bullets for elk, that's pretty good stuff. JMO, Dutch.
Posts: 4564 | Location: Idaho Falls, ID, USA | Registered: 21 September 2000
I am with Dan Belisle and Dutch and thinking of a 7mm short magnum. I would just buy a Winchester or maybe a Ruger. I don't have anything under .30 for game any longer. Just something to play with.
I really applaud the effort to introduce all these "short magmun" catridges. I'll probably just keep shooting my 300H&H and 300 Win Mag but I don't see anything wrong with the new offerings. One thing for sure is that shooters will vote with their pocketbooks. Then again there is that 270WSM now there is a significant improvement Hmmm...
Posts: 400 | Location: Murfreesboro,TN,USA | Registered: 16 January 2002
I would never gotten a 300 WSM, but I understand that many others do. It's always good with new toys. I like long cartridges. If I should get a beltess cartridge that would be one from the Dakota line.
A 338 G&A is also playing with my mind? This time it's Ross Seyfried's damn fault, again.
By the way what happend to the short RUM's that Remington had? Did they live for a summer or two just like the 260 rem?
/ JOHAN
[This message has been edited by JOHAN (edited 04-10-2002).]
quote:Originally posted by abnrigger: Think of all the great wildcats that will spring up from this new line of short mags. Anyone up for a 25-300 WSM or 6.5-300 WSM??
quote:Originally posted by abnrigger: Think of all the great wildcats that will spring up from this new line of short mags. Anyone up for a 25-300 WSM or 6.5-300 WSM??
JUST FINISHED AND SHOT MY 6.5-300WSM.I THINK I'M GOING TO LIKE IT
I have a friend that has a new 300 WSM and loves it! I shot it at the range and it shot very well, and I hope Winchester sells a million of them. However, when I bought a new rifle this year it was a Win Model 70 Classic Super Grade with the new stock design in .300 Win Mag. I don't like little fat catridges but that is just me. The new short and fats will probably be at least modestly successful in the marketplace and may well become best sellers.
Posts: 400 | Location: Murfreesboro,TN,USA | Registered: 16 January 2002
QUOTE]JUST FINISHED AND SHOT MY 6.5-300WSM.I THINK I'M GOING TO LIKE IT[/QB][/QUOTE] Give us the details! A 6.5 is what I have been thinking since I first heard of the Short Mag. best, bhtr
I bought the Browning 300 WSM about a year ago. Love it. First new rifle I bought in twenty years. I don't think it's hype. There are a lot of new 30s out there including Ultra Mags. I don't think they will catch on. They are hype. The WSM is the real deal.
Posts: 13781 | Location: Texas | Registered: 10 May 2002
I think the 300WSM is great. No belt, short actions, more effient, consistent burning. I shoot some of my friends and loads are very easy to build up with good results. If the companies only offered the same old traditional cartridges, that would kinda boring. I mean if speed is your game, get the 30-378 weatherby. If thats your true test of a "magnum". I can't wait to build a 300WSM myself. My game is getting clover leafs at a decent velocity so my range is effectively 300 yards without making scope elevation changes. But thats my thing.
The major gun makers are all about new retail sales, and they have to be, to stay in business.
If you want Winchester to be available to make your M70 Featherweight (or Remington your M700 Mountain Rifle) in .270 or .280 when you decide you want one, don't criticize their creating new cartridges (with attendant hype) that sell the rifles that will keep them in business!!!
If the .389 Eargeschplittenloudenboomen or the .240 Triple Neck Terror sells rifles, more power to 'em!
I recently finished a 6.5/300 WSM for my father and did some pressure testing(peak strain). Looks like you can use the 264 Win mag loads right out of Nosler and get very similar results. He has a real problem with cases sticking even at moderate pressures. Looks like he needs to full length size every time. We think its because the case is too fat for the action. Of interest my peak strain software(Oehler)predicts case sticking at 58000psi the worst of all the cartridges I've seen. I think this is a potential problem for necking down this case. What is your experience?
The Federal High Energy loading in .30-06, 180 grs NP will give 2950 fps. Why should somebody in his right mind buy a WSM???
The 300 Winnie might theoretically be not the most accurate cartridge ( short neck and belt ), but its use as a sniper cartridge seems to indicate its not so bad.
Whenever I have a choice I would rather buy an older chambering, than one of those newfangled ...
Hermann
Posts: 828 | Location: Europe | Registered: 13 June 2001
Lets see, Federal High energy load. One is that the optimum for accuracy in most guns? I might get a 30-06 to shoot that fast but accuracy would be horrible and I bet ya I will get it stuck in the chamber. Speed if measured is more like 2800 fps. And again, introduction of new calibers and such is great.
seems to me that the charts I've seen have the WSM at an edge over all 30s except for the Weatherby,could be wronge but is what I remember seeing , I have just got a 300WSM barrel for my Encore 14 1/4 inch barrel,no brake , cant wait to give it a try Trckr
GSF, the interesting part, which is not posted on your initial post, is barrel length. the 300 winnie was, at least, 24", and an action an inch longer. BTW, i've chronoed the 300 wsm, myself, and it's just at 2980 , +- ~12fps. I reload my 300 winnie to 3050, with 180s, in a 23.5" barrel.
The rounds are just as good as the shooter, you make the call as to what you want to shoot. Is there some measureable difference in 284, 280, 7rem mag, and 7wsm? not that the game would know, shooting to 250 yards.
Someone once said that every important cartridge has already been invented. The new WSM rounds aren't really bringing anything new to the table except less magazine capacity. If they seem to be more accurate then other rounds, I would chalk it up to the rifle, shooter, and the quality of the ammo. Not anything inherent in the design of the round. I hope the round succeeds enough to get a few more folks interested in hunting and/or the shooting sports. But to add yet another "Magnum" to an already crowded list of magnums just generates more yawns. Please bring on a .350 WSM or better yet a 9.3 WSM and re-design the rifle to properly fit those big fat rounds.
![[Cool]](images/icons/cool.gif){kind=icon}
