Given that most of the really good Weatherby calibers were out by the 1950, it puzzles me why the WSMs and RUMs are needed or are so popular? Is it just because Winchester and Remington never made rifles in the Weatherby calibers?

quote:

Is it just because Winchester and Remington never made rifles in the Weatherby calibers?

I believe both Winchester and Remington chambered for weatherby cartridges but not immediately. Remington still does from time to time...

As to WSM and RUM.....new is good is the motto of both Winchester and Remington.....assuming that bigger is better and that everyone actually wants a short action magnum.

I think if we could be a mouse in the corner at the conference room table when it's decided to bring out a new cartridge and was privvy to the reasoning......we'd laugh our butts off!

I think the main purpose of bringing out new cartridges is to sell new guns. Look at the 300 WSM - it doesn't do anything better than a 300 Win. Mag. The action is a little shorter - not a big deal to me.

If new cartridges were only introduced to fulfil an as yet vacant necessity, the world of firearms would be a much duller place.
Variety is indeed the spice of life.

Remington wanted a line of cartridges to compete with the fastest magnums. I think the RUM case is the best design out there for magnum capacities because it deleted the belt. It has been a boon for wildcatters and cases are $1 apiece. It is hard to argue with Jeffries design. Yes it has redundant ballistics to other cartridges and limited actions available to work with but I am glad it is an option. I also like the 375 Ruger case and hope more new designs are in the works.

Bottom line is sales plus every manufacturer likes to have their name on a cartridge. We have seen a resurgence in rifle and cartridge design in the last 20 years. If gun sales of late are any indication just wait and see what else comes out over the next decade. I am looking forward to it.

Not everybody likes the thin pencil tapered barrels that you get with a Weatherby. I personally don't enjoy the lighter weight rifles. Most of my rifles are heavy, full length barrels. Got a couple of Sendero's and they are fluted but I enjoy the weight. Had a couple of the MK V in different calibers and they shoot well for 2 or 3 rounds but if I want to pop of 10 shots in fairly rapid sucession they tended to wander all over the place.

quote:

Originally posted by Oddbod:
If new cartridges were only introduced to fulfil an as yet vacant necessity, the world of firearms would be a much duller place.
Variety is indeed the spice of life.

This. Perfect response right there. We don't "need" 98% of the cartridges we have, old or new. People should stop complaining about "answer to unasked questions" and all that BS and look at their own arsenal.

You from the south? All you need is a 243, maybe a 257 Bob. That is it. Flat out, you do not NEED anything more for 150 yard and under shots at 200lbs and smaller deer. You don't, be honest.

Guys who live in the rockies, we could do everything with a 270 or 30-06, or heck lets even date that back a bit farther and say you don't "need" anything that the 7x57 can't do. You don't, plain and simple. If it'll do mice to moose without a hitch, you don't "need" anything else. Or, to have variety, 6.5x55.

Bigger NA game? 45/70, it'll suit everything you'll ever have to do on this side of the earth 125 yards and under. Period.

So, the "need" "un-asked questions" "it doesn't do anything XXX doesn't do so BAH HUMBUG" are all, totally, incomplete, irrelevant bull shit. If you think otherwise, look at your gun vault, and HONESTLY think which ONE of these rifles would kill everything in NA?

Africa is included? Ok cool, 375 H&H. You need nothing else, period. It HAS and KEEPS killing everything it was intended to. Maybe without as much authority, or distance, or nut sack swinging power, but it still is killing like it always had. And you know what? That 375 will do everything here in NA as well.

So there you go for all the "why did they make this? why do we need another? why why why why"....because if someone didn't come out with something new, all of us HERE wouldn't have shit to bitch about, discuss, lust after, and despise.


ON to the topic at hand. Yes Win and Rem both made factory rifles in Weatherby cartridges, I own one. But, they were always in a special run/line of rifles, not just your basic 700's or 70's. Sendero's, XTR's, Custom Shops...so on and so forth.

The WSM's? So what, they're popular. Who really cares that someone doesn't like them because it doesn't do anything the 300 Win Mag didn't? Well hell, your 300 Win doesn't do anything a 300 H&H can't do! Same goes for the 300 Wby, BOTH are OLDER, by many years at that. I've had a WSM and WSSM, I'll have more. Who gives a flying flip if it doesn't slam the 300 Win mag by 500fps??? Really, who cares?? Someone must, because there is always a lot of talk about it. If you don't like it, fine, DON'T BUY IT!!

In fact, you don't even NEED high power centerfire rifles!! BP cartridges seemed to have nearly wiped the buffalo and antelope off the face of the earth!

And you know, don't even NEED that!! Black powder muzzle loaders were getting the job done for HUNDREDS of years before the cartridges!!

Oh heck, and lets not forget, the Natives in the country, Africa, and every civilization in the entire world, seemed to have gotten by just with pieces of rock, sinew, and sticks all fashioned into weapons. So even a black powder isn't a need.

And if we really, I mean REALLY want to nit-pick about it, NO one here NEEDS anything to hunt with, because meat is available probably 10 minutes away from 90% of your homes. You don't NEED to kill ANYTHING quite technically.

So frankly, I wish we could all take an honest oath to never, ever, ever talk about "need" on at least this Medium Bores board ever again, because when it comes down to it, ya don't need shit lol. What we have here, is a discussion of CHOICES. I'm all for that!

The RUM's were plain and simple bigger and faster is better. If it wasn't, we wouldn't have even had the 300 H&H, or 300 Wby, or 308 Norma, or 338 Win Mag, or 458 Win, or 416 Rem, or dozens of other cartridges, big and small.

The RUM's seem to still be somewhat popular on here, several guys own them. Ask a question about a load for a 300 or 338 RUM and you'll get several good answers. With the WSM, probably double or triple that.

Doesn't make any of them better then the other, just gives you a choice.

I have to agree 100% on the thin barrels. If I was going hunting in the mountains and had a lot of hicking ahead of me then I would use an ultralight. I prefer a thicker barrel and use the Weatherby Accumarks. They have a heavier fluted barrel and mine just shot a .29" 3 shot group with 185 Berger Match VLD's this weekend. It still heats up after 10-12 shots but I can live with that. I am trying to stay away from the gun shop because they have a used 340 Weatherby Accumark right now.

I did forget to mention that I don't understand the short mag thing but am glad that option is out there for people who do like them. It may not be to far in the future that we will have caseless amunition to shoot. The military is pushing for it because of weight savings. Reloaders and Blackpowder guns will be old school and the next generation will shake their heads at us when that happens. Change is inevitable.

I hunted for years with a .300 winny and was perfectly happy with it. I then wanted a little more heft in Big Bear country and went to a .340 Wby that got me a lot of game larger than Deer all over the world. I then wanted a fast .257 Caliber and went to the .257 Wby and along with grandsons and son have used it extensively for Deer sized game with pleasure. I then wanted to try the .270 WSM out of respect for the old .270 Win that I had never shot personally but had loaded for several buddies. WOW was that a revelation, that sucker, with 130 grainers at 3455 fps and 140 and 150 grainers at astounding speeds, is awesome. My grandsons all wanted to shoot it so I have collected 4 of them and they have become our go to Deer rifles. There is always room for improvement in new chamberings. If we had not kept reaching we would still be shooting the old 25-20 and 30-30, which are very respectable, but certainly not what we needed on the far away plains and mountains of the world. Good shooting.

quote:

Originally posted by chuck375:
Given that most of the really good Weatherby calibers were out by the 1950, it puzzles me why the WSMs and RUMs are needed or are so popular? Is it just because Winchester and Remington never made rifles in the Weatherby calibers?

Both, especially the WSMs are available in way more rifles of various cost ant configuration than the WBY calibers are (at least today). Secondly while many on AR think the lenght and weight savings are insignificant, I think their popularity says that most people find that those features give the WSM's enough of an edge to buy them consistently. Then there's the hype of something new and sexy too.

Almost all the Weatherby mags predate the Win Mags....some decades....does this mean the Win Mags (and the 7mm Rem Mag) were redundant, not needed, and answers to questions no one needed the answer for, let alone...ask? LoL

Almost makes me want to build a whole arsenal of Weatherby chambered guns and talk about how those new fangled Win Fads are just a fart in the wind and do nothing my Weatherby's can't do faster, harder, and farther
*hehehe*

And the whole Rem UltraMag series are virtually clones of the 1914 and later Newton series.

Basically the same cartridges, on interchangeable brass. Now we call them Remingtons...until about the late 1930s, early 1940s we called them Newtons. So what's not to like just because the name has changed to the current producer's monicker?

Even under the Remington name, they are damned fine cartridges.

The thing I find frustrating is that they push the new cartridges as better since they download the older ones.

I do understand there are older rifles out there that are weak and a lot of guns that have been rechambered in things they shouldn't have been but just put a warning on the box. Use only in modern factory chambered rifles or whatever.

IMO it`s all bullshit.The only cartridges that make sense are the 308w,338-06 or the Whelen,338wm,375H&H,458 Lott,500NE.It`s all about accuracy, barrel life and bullet weight and recoil tolerance.

I just bought a 6wt Orvis fly rod....I have two other 6wt fly rods....I'm looking forward to using this one too. I'll tell you which one is better after I've tested some line and leader and made up a few flies.

quote:

Originally posted by chuck375:
Given that most of the really good Weatherby calibers were out by the 1950, it puzzles me why the WSMs and RUMs are needed or are so popular? Is it just because Winchester and Remington never made rifles in the Weatherby calibers?

If you look at what was in factory chambers for 30cal mags till the 300mag hit the markets was only the 300H&H and 300Wby. After the 300mag/308 Norma mag it was 30yrs before another 30cal mag hit the market.

Most of the new one don't have the belt and I think that's a good option and some are on short actions.

I remember the bad articles about the 300mag all the old timers saying what a lousy case etc and it never last. Myself I wished they done the 30-338mag instead and that was almost 50yrs ago. I don't want to be like those old timers living in the past.

Weatherby's are belted round shouldered long throated expensive overbores. They don't do anything you can't do with one of the newer calibers.

The long throat makes it all but impossible to reload to factory velocities and impossible to adjust accuracy by varying seating depth. Factory loads can cost $125.00 a box!!

The real question is; why would anyone buy a Weatherby?

Have 2 700s in .300 WBY and 2 in .300 Win. Also have a Sauer Mk5 in .300 WBY. The WBYs shoot every bit as well as the Wins.

I really don't care about factory ammo prices, but WBY (Norma) brass is superior to Winchester/Rem/Federal brass in terms of longevity. So, perhaps the added cost is at least partly justifiable.

My .300 WBYs are not more picky or more difficult to load than the .300 Wins. Duplicating factory velocities of factory ammo has not been difficult.

Not bashing the newer rounds, BTW, even the short mags. But as long as we're discussing the P.T. Barnum effect consider the short mag alleged ballistic efficiency edge can be entirely explained by the fact that in equal length barrels the bullets have approximately one additional inch of rifled bullet travel vs the WBY/RUM/H&H rounds that start bullets farther up the tube. Gee, magic............not.

Nothing wrong with effectively increasing barrel length by way of compacting powder charge to the rear. But there's nothing magical about it.

Sam

That extra inch is worth maybe 25fps.
I should think the WSM case design has more to do with how it performs.

That 25 fps is 100% of the so-called ballistic advantage when you adjust for case capacity. I have some of the original articles (filed away somewhere) that gave that slight averaged edge to the short mags with pressures measured to keep everyone honest.

Don't get me wrong, it's a neat way to milk horsepower from a rifle barrel of any given length. Moreover, it reduces required action length, so you win on both ends.

But it is not magic, and has zero to do with case shape.

Sam

I never liked or admired the Weatherby rifles or cartridges. I do applaud Weatherby for selling guns and, it seems doing ok.

The Weatherby rifles had those hollywood type inlays, bizare cheek pieces and pistol grips. Some even had overdone carvings. Worst of all is that Weatherby round shoulder case shape and the belts. No thanks.

When the WSMs came out I got a few to put the belted cases aside.

Thw WSM design was based on the 6mmppc and was supposed to be more accurate over the longer original cartridges because of powder burning characteristics.This did not hold water and a host of other issues arose like feeding issues.It is easy to get hold of wsm chambered rifles because they are not keepers.IMO,they also encouraged the introduction of a breed of mega overbore cartridges like the saum`that caused a one round bore life.

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
Thw WSM design was based on the 6mmppc and was supposed to be more accurate over the longer original cartridges because of powder burning characteristics.This did not hold water and a host of other issues arose like feeding issues.It is easy to get hold of wsm chambered rifles because they are not keepers.IMO,they also encouraged the introduction of a breed of mega overbore cartridges like the saum`that caused a one round bore life.

Um...eh?

Did you mean the RUM, by "mega overbore cartridges"...because the RSAUM is actually smaller then the WSM and was less overbore then the WSM or Win Mags. And if you did mean the RUM series...1999. WSM, 2001.

Never once had a feeding issue in WSM's I owned, but I stuck to Winchesters and Brownings. Feeding problems were primarily from other manufacturers, and mostly internet myth.

quote:

Originally posted by Samuel_Hoggson:
That 25 fps is 100% of the so-called ballistic advantage when you adjust for case capacity. I have some of the original articles (filed away somewhere) that gave that slight averaged edge to the short mags with pressures measured to keep everyone honest.

Don't get me wrong, it's a neat way to milk horsepower from a rifle barrel of any given length. Moreover, it reduces required action length, so you win on both ends.

But it is not magic, and has zero to do with case shape.

Sam

Looking at the available data seems to suggest otherwise, with the WSM producing similar velocities to the WM using less powder.

quote:

Originally posted by Oddbod:
Looking at the available data seems to suggest otherwise, with the WSM producing similar velocities to the WM using less powder.

You're missing the point. There's nothing like an extra inch of rifled barrel length to make the lower capacity case seem to be the equal of the larger capacity case....as if by magic.

And if the WSM case capacity were equal to the WM it would produce slightly higher velocity - and again, the real reason would be the extra approx. 3/4 inch of bullet travel.

Barrel length is measured from bolt face to muzzle. Make up dummy .300 Win and .300 WSM loads for rifles chambering those rounds. Rifles must have the same barrel lengths and, ideally, be from the same maker. Use identical projos for the dummy rounds. Seat projos such that they just touch the rifling of each rifle. Chamber the dummy rounds. Now insert a dowel from the muzzle and measure length to bullet contact on each rifle. You will notice the lengths are not identical. The WSM's distance to muzzle is greater. If you still do not understand what's really behind the so-called "short mag ballistic advantage"........well, I give up.

Sam

Ok...but when the WSM's first came out, most of them were in 22 and 23" barrels...so how does that play into your extra inch of barrel? 24" is 24", it doesn't matter how the long the action is. Put a M70 300 Win Mag 24" next to a M70 300wsm 24" and you'll see the barrels are identical, but the overall rifle length is a bit shorter

Example

Barnes #4
180gr TSX
both rifles have 24" barrel

Win Mag - 69gr of IMR 4350 = 2978
WSM - 65.5gr of IMR 4350 = 3003

I get your idea...but I just really don't believe the manufacturers are "sneaking in" extra barrel length. As I posted above, to identical model guns, one on a short action and one on a long action, are going to have identical length barrels, and the overall length WILL be shorter on the WSM.

What I cannot seem to get across is that the shorter case places the bullet closer to the bolt face, ie., farther from the exit point, when chambered. All else equal, as we have specified, the bullet that travels through a longer section of rifled barrel before exit will emerge at higher velocity. It cannot be otherwise.

Not case shape voodoo, just chemistry and physics.

Sam

quote:

Originally posted by MileHighShooter:

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
Thw WSM design was based on the 6mmppc and was supposed to be more accurate over the longer original cartridges because of powder burning characteristics.This did not hold water and a host of other issues arose like feeding issues.It is easy to get hold of wsm chambered rifles because they are not keepers.IMO,they also encouraged the introduction of a breed of mega overbore cartridges like the saum`that caused a one round bore life.

Um...eh?

Did you mean the RUM, by "mega overbore cartridges"...because the RSAUM is actually smaller then the WSM and was less overbore then the WSM or Win Mags. And if you did mean the RUM series...1999. WSM, 2001.

Never once had a feeding issue in WSM's I owned, but I stuck to Winchesters and Brownings. Feeding problems were primarily from other manufacturers, and mostly internet myth.

Are you saying that a 300WSM feeds as well as a 300WM in the same model Winchester rifle? I can't remember the exact abreviation but I wanted to say Winchester Short Magnum Ultra Mag-a big joke if you asked me.

I have a MK-5 WBY. in .270WBY with a 26" BBL. that on a good day shoots 1" groups at 3020fps. with selected 150gr. handloads. It is heavy and somewhat awkward.
I also have a Kimber 8400 in 270WSM with a 24" BBL that ALWAYS shoots 1/2 inch to 3/4 all day, everyday at 3130 with selected 150gr. handloads. it is light and agile.
They both are "lookers", but I prefer the .270WSM.
Why?
1. Brass is cheaper
2. Don't need (hard to find) Fed. 215 primers to get decent velocity E.S. CCI, Rem. and Win. L.R. primers get really close velocities and decent E.S. with consistant accuracy with the same powder load.
3. The Kimber .270WSM is shorter and lighter.
4. NO BELT!! For Years, the "Gun Gurus" have bitched adout the belt!! Eventhough I have no problem with "belted Ctgs.", somehow, over the years. been dissed by their belt negative "ramblings" I really like the .270WSM and for me feel it is a better choice.

They are all outstanding and have accomplished the goal of the gunmaker - we have all tried the new chambered rifles of one design or another. MHS hit the nail on the head. If you don't like it don't buy it. If enough people don't buy they go away i.e. the WSSMs. Personally I like the 25wssm and was truely impressed with the 223wssm. Personally I also love the Weatherby cases especially the 240, 257, 270, and 300. I have and have had all of these in Winchester, Remington and Weatherby rifles and all have performed very well with most bullets I have wanted to use. I like the WSMs as well and really like the 325. I would have missed out on alot of excitement of new guns, new loads, and range time had they not come along. In the end do I notice a real diffrence in the field with a well placed shot from any of them - no. Was it alot of fun getting to that point - yes. I say pick one and enjoy, then pick another and compare, and enjoy, and pick another, and so on.

The WSM is a great idea to put a stout load in a short action. I have one and love it!

No feed issues and accuracy is great in my Browning A-Bolt .270 WSM

I have the old tried and true .270 Win and love it with 130's....so what does the WSM do that the old gal doesn't?

Just like all magnums.....they push heavier bullets just a bit faster than it's non-magnum sisters

quote:

Originally posted by Samuel_Hoggson:

quote:

Originally posted by Oddbod:
Looking at the available data seems to suggest otherwise, with the WSM producing similar velocities to the WM using less powder.

You're missing the point. There's nothing like an extra inch of rifled barrel length to make the lower capacity case seem to be the equal of the larger capacity case....as if by magic.

And if the WSM case capacity were equal to the WM it would produce slightly higher velocity - and again, the real reason would be the extra approx. 3/4 inch of bullet travel.

Barrel length is measured from bolt face to muzzle. Make up dummy .300 Win and .300 WSM loads for rifles chambering those rounds. Rifles must have the same barrel lengths and, ideally, be from the same maker. Use identical projos for the dummy rounds. Seat projos such that they just touch the rifling of each rifle. Chamber the dummy rounds. Now insert a dowel from the muzzle and measure length to bullet contact on each rifle. You will notice the lengths are not identical. The WSM's distance to muzzle is greater. If you still do not understand what's really behind the so-called "short mag ballistic advantage"........well, I give up.

Sam

I'm quite aware of the difference in barrel internal length, which is .520" between the WSM & WM & .725" shorter than the Weatherby Magnum. You however refuse to accept that the shape of the cartridge plays any part in imparting greater velocity to the bullet.
The WSM needs considerably less powder to produce similar velocities & that certainly doesn't come from an extra .520" of bore.

We will agree to disagree, then. The difference (remembering the initial exhaustive data sets shortly after WSM intro) was just about 15 fps, when case capacity was corrected. That is small enough to be fully accounted for the extra rifled length.

And again, not bashing the WSMs. They make sense to me - just not enough edge to buy another rifle.

Sam

From Lyman's:
300WSM 180gr bullet, 22" barrel, 67gr RL22: 2978fps
300WM, 180gr bullet, 24" barrel, 77gr RL22: 3017fps.
Hardly worth the extra 10gr of powder.