I don't know if this has been discussed before. Forgive me if it has.

I have been comparing external factory ballistics between the 300 WSM and the 300 WinMag. In the cases I have found, mostly dealing with 180gr bullets,the 300 WSM beats the 300 WinMag by a few 10s of feet per second.

It seems to me that both rifle and ammo manufacturers have a vested interest in keeping up a high level of interest in new cartridges, so I immediately suspect the specs have been "arranged" to show a slight advantage to the new cartridge. In other words, is the marginal improvement a marketing ploy or is it real?

My question is this. Has anyone conducted a comparison chronograph test between the 300 WSM and the 300 WinMag using factory ammo out of similar guns? If so, would you care to share the results with us?

I think that most of us here are reloaders. If you reload the 300 Win Mag is a good 100fps faster than the 300 WSM.
I'm a big fan of the WSM's but in the 300's the WSM isn't quite as fast as it's taller brother when compared apples to apples. It has other advantages than fps to make me usually prefer it..................DJ

quote:

I have been comparing external factory ballistics between the 300 WSM and the 300 WinMag

I had a 300Wsm in a Ruger. I found the factory listings to be 200FPS high compared to what I saw in my rifle. That is only one data point and one rifle.

I think the more important question is why would you buy a new rifle for 100fps ?????????????????????????????????????????

quote:

Originally posted by Uglystick:
I think the more important question is why would you buy a new rifle for 100fps ?????????????????????????????????????????

Now that's a very good question to start your own discussion with.

Please don't hijack mine!

IMO the WSM factory offerings are loaded to much higher pressures than your standard run of the mill 300WM loads.

During handloading the two, I've been able to best the SM by a bit although only 100 fos or so but I haven't ran them to the max to see exactly how much faster the WM is.

It's real hard to compare them when refering to factory loads because if you've chronoed much factory loads I think you'll find out quite fast that the SD is usually terrible and the published velocities are way off most of the time.

The last 3 rifles I chroned factory ammo in for folks where 300WM, 7RM, and 308W. The 308 wasn't but about 50 fps off the listing but, the 300 and 7 were a full 100-200 fps off of published data w/ some loads and somewhat close w/ others. You just can't even make an accurate guess as to what most of the factory stuff will actual chrono.

They should print on the boxes could shoot from 2800-3000 instead of just 3000

Reloader

Good Luck

In order to be meaningful one would have to chrono the same loads in a large number of rifles chambered in each. A single rifle of any caliber can vary quite a bit from any other shooting the same ammo. This effect can be averaged out by either using very high presion min-spec guns like the ballistics labs use, or by using a large sample size...which is beyond the means of most of us.

In standard loadings there's not enough difference between the 300WSM and the 300WM to matter IMO. High energy loads in the WM, or max handloads in the WM, will better the WSM by a bit every time, though not enough to matter to me. This difference is simple case volume to bore ratio...more powder space means more velocity with optimized loads...the WSM case might reduce this with better efficieny, but not enough to make up the differnece.

FWIW the one box each I tried of factory 180 BST and 180 FS ammo runs about 2950 fps in my M70 stainless 300WSM...everything else has been handloads through that rifle of mine...

I never thought of myself as old enugh to say "I remember when," but
back in the day when the 264 Winchester magnum was introduced, the add said something to the effect of "makes a helluva lotta noise, has a heckava bite, and true to their words it was a hot round. As the years passed the loads became more conservative, and this will happen with the new WSMs too.
One can say the same about Remington's big 7. When it was introduced it was a hot round that broke the 3100f/s mark with 160 grain bullets, but like the 264, today's loads are more conservative.
If we're talking cars I'd tell you there ain't no replacement for displacement, and frankly, the same is true for most cartridges excluding the British nitro rounds intended for the Dark Continent. Given loads that are of the same pressure and bullet weight, let alone the laws of physics, the 300 Winchester will always be faster than its shorter WSM brother.

I recomend you take up hand loading, sell the wsm to pay for it if you must. Making your question moot.
The WSMs were a case of winchester spending millions to build a better mouse trap.
Not that they don't work. They do. But How much did all the R&D, test work, and marketing balony cost ?
As far as I am concerned it was wasted money
and nothing worthwhile came out of it.
You can now buy a short action rifle that works almost as good as the older long action , a little less kick and a few ounces lighter.
was it worth the trouble, not to me...tj3006

quote:

FWIW the one box each I tried of factory 180 BST and 180 FS ammo runs about 2950 fps in my M70 stainless 300WSM...everything else has been handloads through that rifle of mine...

Just curious, but what barrel length do you have on your rifle? My M70 has a 26" barrel and Winchester factory ammo in the cheap 180 gr. Power Point gives 3050 FPS and the more pricey 180 gr. Supreme Power points with the black bullet 3010 FPS. My handload with the 200 gr. Speer Hot-core delives 2930 FPS with extremely good accuracy.
I do believe that "Big W" has downloaded some ammo, especially the 30-06 as when I compared some 180 gr. Silvertips in the .308 vs the 30-06, the .308s were actually faster. Both rifles had 22" barrels. makes one wonder if they did that to make th WSM look a litle better?
Paul B.

I cannot get reloading guide velocities in my 300 WSM by about 100 fps with the 165 grain bullets and about 200 fps using the 180 grainers.

quote:

Originally posted by Paul B:

quote:

FWIW the one box each I tried of factory 180 BST and 180 FS ammo runs about 2950 fps in my M70 stainless 300WSM...everything else has been handloads through that rifle of mine...

Just curious, but what barrel length do you have on your rifle? My M70 has a 26" barrel and Winchester factory ammo in the cheap 180 gr. Power Point gives 3050 FPS and the more pricey 180 gr. Supreme Power points with the black bullet 3010 FPS. My handload with the 200 gr. Speer Hot-core delives 2930 FPS with extremely good accuracy.

24" factory barrel. This was early in the WSM game several years ago (early production ammo...dunno if it's been downloaded, don't care as I handload everything now), and my numbers are from memory...but I'm pretty confident because my most accurate handload is averaging 2955 fps and I recall thinking that it was nearly identical to factory ammo. With better powders (Magpro comes to mind) I could break easily 3000 fps but accuracy went to hell.

I load for accuracy first, then velocity, so I usually end up below max. My WSM goes just over 2800 with 200 grain Sierra Gamekings, 2955 with 180 Nosler BT's, 2950-ish (fuzzy memory, mild accuracy load) with 165 BT's or 168 SMK's, and 3100 with 150 BT's or Partitions. Mine seems to run about 1 grain below Hodgdon data...1 extra grain of powder gets really close to listed velocity give or take a bit as the bullet weights change. For example my favorite hunting load is 65 grains H4350 and a 180 NBT at the aforementioned 2955 fps. Hodgdon lists 64 grains H4350 (max load) at 2950.

The laws of physics don't change just because advertising copy does.

In a given bore diameter at a given pressure and using an appropriate propellant, a larger case will produce more velocity than a smaller case. Of course, as the size of the case increases relative to bore diameter the increase in potential velocity per unit of volume diminshes. This is true no matter the shape or length of the case.

At appropriate pressures the .300 Winchester Magnum will produce velocities higher than the smaller .300 WSM, just as the .300 WSM will produce velocities higher than the smaller .30-06. With a 180 grain bullet at similar "maximum" pressures, each will produce respectively approximately 3050, 2925, and 2800 fps. This is with an optimum speed powder (which varies with each case) and barrels of equivalent lengths of BULLET TRAVEL (which requires a slightly longer barrel in the .300 WM.) Of course these would be averages of typical guns, as any individual gun may vary by more than the difference in calibers simply due to the volume of its chamber, and size and finish of its bore.

As alluded to by other posters, brand new "magnum" cartridges tend to be loaded to maximum, and sometimes excessive, pressures. There were many complaints of early lots of .300WSM ammunition exhibiting excessive pressures. This was apparently due to the manufacturer wanting to justify its advertising hype of providing similar velocities to the larger round, which we always knew was, in the immortal words of George Leonard Herter, "hokum".

Apparently, current WSM ammo has been "cooled off" and 180's will likely produce around 2800-2850 in most rifles. This is probably about 100-200 more than factory .30-06 and 100-200 slower than .300 Win Mag, which is exactly what it ought to be.

What's a WSM?

He, he, he.

LD

quote:

If you reload the 300 Win Mag is a good 100fps faster than the 300 WSM.
I'm a big fan of the WSM's but in the 300's the WSM isn't quite as fast as it's taller brother when compared apples to apples.

This is what I found also.

-----------------------------------------------

quote:

Originally posted by lawndart:
What's a WSM?

He, he, he.

LD

Getting closer to reality everyday.

The WSM cartridges are a demonstration of "re-inventing the wheel"

Is there anythign the 300WSM will do that the 300WinMag will not? only one thing, fit in a "short" (308length) action.

Is there any point in chambering it in a short action?
Yeah, to save weight.

How much weight is saved? Approx 3.5ounces.

Wanna argue this? how much does 10mm thick slice of rifle through the mag well weigh?

Is there something that the 300winchester will do that the 300WSM won't?
Yes, there is, the 300winMag will usually fir one more round
in the magazine.

Ok so loaded weight of the WSM rifle is 3.5oz lighter than the 300WinMag by 3.5ounces PLUS the weight of one round of ONE ROUND of 300WinMag ammo....

Can you say: "Big F'ing Deal!" Sure you can....

If most shooters didn't think through the exact chain of thought I just led everyone through Winchester MIGHT still be open for buisness.... and be waiting for the next opportunity to screw-up and put themselves out of buisness.

AllanD

Allan

You hit the nail on the head there. I don't think that 3.5 oz saving or even it would be 2 pounds is going to help you pack that Elk out of the woods. If that little weight makes that big a difference it's time you pack in your hunting. Like you say that's the F'ing deal.

quote:

Originally posted by Allan DeGroot:
If most shooters didn't think through the exact chain of thought I just led everyone through Winchester MIGHT still be open for buisness.... and be waiting for the next opportunity to screw-up and put themselves out of buisness.

AllanD

Sorry but your post show how ignorant you are of things such as sales figures etc.. The WSM's sold extremely well for Winchester and probably kept them alive for a good bit longer than they would have had they not come out with them. The WSM's were a major success for Winchester, just because you don't like them doesn't change the fact. The WSSM's were a different story.
I also wonder if you've ever shot a WSM or taken one hunting. Last time I was at the range I had a 300 WSM and 300 Win mag on the gun rack side by side. Another shooter asked me what the difference was in them. It took 2 seconds after he picked both up to realize.
Most 300 Win mags hold 3 rounds in the magazine, so do most 300 WSM's, though my Sako 300 WSM Finnlite holds 4 in the magazine. Your point about the extra round in the magazine isn't true in a lot of cases. Why don't you actually go out and try both side by side and maybe you'll be able to make more informed comments..................DJ

a WSM beats the winmag with the lighter weight bullets, to get a decent advantage with the winmag u need to have a 26" barrel atleast, and with the wsm you only need 24". plus you use 10 grains or so less in a 300wsm to get a similar speed + WSMs seem to be a tad more accurate.

With my 300 Win Mag I had to replace the barrel
and it now has a 25" barrel. With the 180 gr bullets it gets 3600 FPS so I down loaded it and now it gets 3300 FPS. My 300 RUM gets 3250 FPS. All this is with the 180gr bullet.

jro45 ----- You say you got 3600 fps with a .300 Win mag with a 180 grain bullet. What was your load and what did you use to get the speed of the bullet. Good shooting.

quote:

Originally posted by jro45:
With my 300 Win Mag I had to replace the barrel
and it now has a 25" barrel. With the 180 gr bullets it gets 3600 FPS so I down loaded it and now it gets 3300 FPS. My 300 RUM gets 3250 FPS. All this is with the 180gr bullet.

That is amistake. With my 300 Win Mag I get with a 25" barrel 3030 FPS was getting 3060 til I down loaded it to get 3030. About my RUM goes.

quote:

quote:
If you reload the 300 Win Mag is a good 100fps faster than the 300 WSM.
I'm a big fan of the WSM's but in the 300's the WSM isn't quite as fast as it's taller brother when compared apples to apples.


This is what I found also.

Same here.

The 300 win mag is the ticket.

Period.

End of story.

Screwing with case length and taper is no joy. Just an attempt to sell new rounds, when the old one been there and done that.

stonecreek is right on the money. I too have a 300win. in a Kimber Of Oregon Supergrade and was so tempted to trade it away for a Kimber 8400 in 300 WSM but am now glad I did'nt succumb to all of the whoopla. I get 3140fps with the 180gr Hornady using 83gr. of H1000 in a 24"bbl. I really don't think the 300WSM can duplicate this.

I bought a 300 WSM in a Tikka Lite just to use as a mountain rifle. It is almost 2# lighter than my 9.3 and at my age that makes a difference at 9000 ft.

jro45 ----- Thanks very much for the clarification. Good shooting.