Allen Day,



Your comment to me is rude and uninformed. The problem with headspace in belted chambers is real, documented and can be measured in any rifle. This very fact has been discussed right here and the facts that I have stated have been confirmed.



As far as experiance goes in firing, tuning and aiming guns goes I would state that I have more experiance than you do.



I have also blasted thousands of animals but that has little or nothing to do with rifle facts. In fact it has nothing to do with it.

There was a time no so long ago that a belt was considered a marketing gimmick, but apparently a lot of folks bought them.

The "problem" with belted cases is not the belt itself but sloppily chambered factory rifles and sloppy tolerences for factory belted cases. The belt insures positive ignition , so the factories can get away with the slop and simply follow the (cheapest) path of least resistance.



As far as actual case strength goes , I believe the belt does add a little in that area , though likely superfluous .

But the fact is , a belted case IS stonger than the rebated rim designs like the WSM case........

Hey dj, I didn't realize you were "policing" the Board for us now concerning ad's posts.

Quote:

---

...(ad)I usually enjoy your opinions but thought that you were usually above personal insults.

---

Glad you pointed that out, I thought he had just gone to his strength - flinging insults.

Quote:

---

Just because you have more field experience than most

---

I never really thought of him having all that much "actual" experience from his posts. Seems like a bit of "humility" would have been gained along the way if that was true.

Quote:

---

doesn't necessarily make you the reigning ballistics expert of the world.

---

Surely no one would possibly disagree with that.

Quote:

---

You have a very well respected opinion especially when it comes to hunting rifles

---

Nope, don't see it at all. Any chance you meant to say "braggart reputation" instead of "respected opinion"???

Quote:

---

but others have valid points of view also.

---

Amen! Just because someone(including me) has an opinion about something sure doesn't mean it always applies to everyone else. Even my opinion of ad.

Quote:

---

I know several competitive shooters that have never hunted anything but certainly know a thing or two about ballistics and cartridges. Come to think of it why don't any target rounds have belts?............DJ

---

They used to. The only reasons I can think of why they would not choose Belted cases is because;

1. They want something with a smaller internal volume.

2. They have found some of the larger volume Non-Belted cases to be more weight and or internal volume consistent.



How about asking them and posting what they have to say on the Reloading Board. I'd be interested in their thoughts.



---



By the way, I've followed a lot of Don's "Belt Bashing" posts and have yet to see him post a real problem concerning them. I suspect Don does it just to keep people posting to the threads, because as we all know, there are no known problems with Belted Cases.

All these arguments are fine and good, but I look at like this - there's a pretty good chance that someone is going to buy this rifle "just 'cuz." In my opinion, that's a good thing. There's absolutely nothing wrong with creating something the shooting world doesn't really need and stimulating the firearms industry. Hell, automakers do it every day. How many of us really "need" a stereo or power mirrors or heated seats or GPS in our trucks. In short, none of us need 'em, but I bet a lot of us have 'em.

If you have a trusty .338 already, then you don't need this rifle. If, on the other hand, you're relatively new to the shooting/hunting world (like my wife) and have just a mild "beginner's" cartridge (like my wife's .257 Roberts), then this here cartridge might be something to consider, particularly if said hunter (the wife) is considering something larger than bambi. Hell, I have a .338 (bought mostly on the recommendations of you all here) and I WANT this cartridge. Will I get it? Probably not, but I may get one for the wife...

Well, field experience does matter. Elgin Gates had far more of it than just about anyone. Yet, he used a .300 WBY Mag for almost all of his hunting. so while he was an expert on how well that cartidge did, there were others who had more experience with others. Gates did, but virtue of hunting a lot, get to see other cartridges used by others.

And shooting 100 deer is not the same experience as shooting 10 elk, 10 eland, 10 impala, etc.

But shooting itself is also good. I have yet to meet a competitive shooter who wasn't death in the field, and he normally could do it with just a .308. A guy who shoots a lot understands wind, etc. So pure shooting experience is important as well. And it has been my obseration that those who can afford to go to Africa and other destinations a lot are often not the best shots in the world. I saw a guy miss a hippo once at less than a hundred yards, and it wasn't a brain shot.

But maybe Allen was having a bad day. We all have them. At least he didn't bring up the subject of his age when he made his first million, and at least he can spell.

Just being a raconteur here and offering a subject for discussion on "experience".

Person A has shot 25,372 rounds of ammunition on the range and killed 235 game animals in excess of 100 pounds.

Person B had shot 25,417 rounds of ammunition on the range and killed 241 game animals in excess of 100 pounds.

Person B's opinion is gold and person A's opinion is crap because person B has "more experience" - is this a true statement?



Person A has hunted with the same rifle and ammunition for 25 years, killing several game animals each year. He has one times 25 years of experience.

Person B hunts has hunted with a different rifle and caliber each year and also killed the exact same "several" number of game animals each year. He has 25 times one year of experience.

Persons A and B each have 25 years of experience. Who is more "experienced"?

Think about this when experience is laid down like a trump card.

BTW - The scenarios are as stated above. "Well, IF person B had one times 23 years then he'd only have 23 years of experience so the choice is obvious". "Well, IF person A had fired 40,000 rounds of ammunition..." Anyone can change the rules to win an argument, and this was not offered as an argument, just to get people to think about what actually constitutes experience.

I am not attacking anybody but to be honest this is a kind of secret test - you get to see how people react and whether or not they take things personally and assume that certain comments were directed at them and only them.

A lot of people here have a lot of experience. To me, quality of experience counts, not quantity - an alert person can gain more from his experience in one year than someone wth ten years who isn't paying attention. And even with lots of years of experience, two intelligent people can come to different conclusions. Jack and Elmer each shot trainloads of game but they obviously came to different conclusions about what worked - light and fast or heavy and slow. Which one was wrong? Which one was right? Seems to me they both were right based on their respective experiences.

Mainly I just hate to see people whose opinions I respect get bogged down arguing needlessly over trivial subjects.

And BTW you guys are ALL wrong, belt or beltless indeed. Clueless, more like it! The only true case form worthy of consideration is a case with suspenders!

Remington's entry is the 6.8SP something or other.

Wanna debate which one will sell most? LOL!

Remington couldn't compete it's way out of a wet paper sack these days.... JMO, Dutch.

Meanwhile,

I would think a rem 338 saum would be good competition. See who comes out on top of this "better than a 30cal" scuffle.

bajabill,
You have a good point. From a marketing perspective Remington may be able to exploit Winchester's decision to go with the .325.

Jeff

Savage99 tell us just one thing: What is your experience with belted magum cartridges? How many belted-magnum rounds have you fired through various rifles, and how many big game animals have you taken with same? You post some photos of your trophy room; you post photos of some targets; you post photos of your reloading records, and I'll do the same. We'll see who's done what after it's all over. As far as I'm concerned, you're a phony of very little actual hunting experience, and you amount to very little more than a theoretical bag of wind attached to a mouth.



Prove me wrong................



AD

A while back I posted asking about a nice, mid-sized cartridge/rifle that my rather petite wife could use effectively on bear, up to an including the big nasties up north. I believe the .338 WM to be a bit much for her, and many other options (.338-06, etc.) were semi-wildcats, or too "small" (.358 Win). In a properly stocked rifle, using mild handloads with a good 220 grain bullet (say around 2400 fps), this here Wizzum might be just the ticket for the wife's bear craving. I too would have preferred a .338 WSM, but that's just because I have the Win version and have a bunch of bullets. I'll watch this 8 carefully, but I have a feeling I, er she, may be giving one a try.

The 8mm is and always will be a doomed project..History has proven that more than once. Same with the .358, Americans never have and never will embrace either caliber to any great degree...Must have a new bunch of bean counting idiots at Winchester....

These new bean counters are not gunsmiths, they are not in contact with the average hunter, and they just have no clue....

I see all of the short, fat & beltless cartridges as just another dog & pony show designed above all else to stimulate rifle and ammo sales. They're all pretty much a waste of time in my opinion.........

AD

so what's wrong with something that "stimulates rifle and ammo sales"? I, for one, would like to see a financially healthy gun industry. Whether any of us "need" any new cartridges is a different question.

The WSM's are a commercial success and solve the headspace problem that belted cases have. Thus they are both of value to the manufacturers and us shooters.



The 325 WSM is touted as a dangerous game cartridge. Now some of the sales of the WSM's have been made on perception. It's not certain that the 325 will be considered a DGC. Take brown bear hunting for instance. There is data that the various 300 magnums have about the worst record on such game if requiring the most shots is a measure. I can't see that the 325 will be all that much better for that dangerous game.



It will however shoot pretty flat and hit pretty hard. The 35 Whelan, 350 RM and 358 Win do not have the reputation as shooting flat. That seems to be a requirement along will maybe reaching 3000 fps with some load or other.



I see it as a more interesting cartridge than the 338 WM as there are bullets available in 8mm that will not kick your head off. Thus one could load it as needed.



Rifles last for generations. There were 318 WR's and other mid bores that faded away. The WSM's are in the sun now.

I bought these dies over a year ago at the standard die price. If they would have made a rifle for them I'd have bought it......





It's hard to imagine that this wouldn't have been a better round to come up with than the 8mm. I think that a 257 full length, a 6.5 and/or a 35 would also have been better choices.
Oh well, I quit buying guns I actually needed a while ago. Now I tend to buy interesting rifles and/or calibers I haven't played with yet and a 325 may fit the bill..........

Allen, I think that you are missing the point on all the new calibers. All of the calibers we really "needed" were invented a long time ago. Probably 99% of all non-dangerous game could be suitable hunted with a 30-06 but frankly I'm bored by using the same thing that everyone else does. I think that you come more from a perspective of someone that is a hunter that shoots rather than a shooter that hunts. A "HtS" usually tends more towards finding a trusted gun or two and sticks with it. A "StH" likes to experiment with different guns to find what works how. I think either is just as valid as the other. But wouldn't it be boring if we all shot 30-06's and drove model T's or 300 Win Mags and Ford Pickups?..............DJ

Many of the responses about the 8mmWSM are comparing it to the 338 Win and how it would not "stack up" to it for large and potentialy dangerous game such as the large bears.



I just went to Federal's web site and checked out the ballistics for the 338 Win. Unless one goes to the HE loadings, the quoted balistics for the 8mmWSM are equal to or slightly better than the 338 Win in comparative bullet weights. Bear in mind (pun intended) that the 8mm bullet when compared to a 338 bullet of similar weight, will have both a higher SD and BC, therefore giving both higher retained velocity @ longer ranges (BC)as well as (theoreticaly) better penetration @ all ranges due to the higher SD.



When one goes to the heavier bullets (250gr) the 338 Win might indeed surpass the 8mmWSM, but maybe not.



I would think that 2600fps would be realistic for a 250gr bullet in the 8mmWSM. That would only be 60fps slower than the Federal 250gr loading in 338 Win.

I thought that a 325 WSM was nuts also. Until I finally had the thought of one in a kimber 8400 Montana. Now that would be sweet.

I'm drooling on my keyboard here. And I'm thinking that I may prefer this to the 338 Win Mag that I currently own. This with a 200gr Accubond would be a great elk caliber! And come in a lighter package than a 338 Win Mag does for lugging around the hills.

Those "headspace problems" you're referring to exist mostly in theory, not in practice. All I know is, I've loaded thousands and thousands of rounds of belted cases for over twenty-seven years and have taken literally over 200 big game animals with same. I've never had a problem with belted cases, and neither has anyone else I know who has followed proper handloading proceedures and has otherwise had his head screwed on properly.

But then along comes some drugstore cowboy like you who really hasn't shot jack with much of anything, shouting Chicken Little alarums about belts, etc., ad nauseum, and we're all supposed to take you seriously. Time for you to get real, at long last.........

AD

Would love to have one! I hav a P.H. Midland in 308 and a tang safety SA Ruger in 308. Any thoughts about rebarreling to this new, wonderful sounding cartridge?

LeRoy

Allen, Just because something is good enough doesn't mean there isn't something better. I usually enjoy your opinions but thought that you were usually above personal insults. Just because you have more field experience than most doesn't necessarily make you the reigning ballistics expert of the world. You have a very well respected opinion especially when it comes to hunting rifles but others have valid points of view also. I know several competitive shooters that have never hunted anything but certainly know a thing or two about ballistics and cartridges. Come to think of it why don't any target rounds have belts?............DJ

Actually the 30-338 (308 norma), 300 win, 300 wby and 30-378 wby are very common 600-1000 yard cartridges. The Secret Service uses the 7 rem mag, and the 300 win gets some military use as well. I personally don't know alot of 1000 yard shooters using 6 PPC. That doesn't mean its inaccurate. If you want a short mag, awesome, thats great, nothing wrong with it, probably will work out great. If there was intellectual honesty we'd hear "it's better than anything else, because I bought one and I think I'm smarter than you." But no, we hear bunk like "its better because the belt is missing or COL or short necks or powder colums....blah.....blah......blah. What a turn off.

Yes, but how many 300 WM LG and/or HG shooters headspace on the belt? Obviously no problems arise from the belt when you effectively remove it from the firing process.

Copied from; www.theoutdoorwire.com
Winchester Expands The Winchester Short Magnum Line


Shooters and hunters who like bigger bore rifles for large game hunting are expecting Winchester and Browning and Winchester Firearms to finally make the move to bigger bullets in the WSM line for 2005. They are right, but they may be surprised.

Winchester recognized the need for a cartridge capable of launching 200 plus grain bullets with high inherent accuracy, energy capable of stopping the largest North American game, and lower perceived recoil. Winchester engineers considered several different calibers during development and determined that the 325 caliber was the best performer in the WSM platform. This new cartridge delivers similar energies as a 338 Win-Mag in a much smaller lightweight package.

The platform of the "Short-Fat" cartridge design has for years consistently produced very accurate cartridges. Since their introduction, the Winchester Short Magnum and the Winchester Super Short Magnum calibers have all produced exceptional accuracy. In addition to delivering excellent ballistics, the 325 WSM also exhibits exceptional accuracy, a real plus in this large caliber cartridge.

Initially, three loads will be available in the 325 WSM. Winchester Ammunition and Nosler, Inc. developed a 200 gr. Accubond� CT� in the Supreme� line and in the Super-X� line, Winchester Ammunition developed a 220 gr. Power-Point� bullet. Both of these loads utilize bullets specifically designed for use in the 325 WSM. Additionally, a 180 gr. Ballistic Silvertip� in the Supreme� line will be available. Additional loads are expected in the future.

The 325 WSM is the ideal package for the serious elk, bear, moose or other large and dangerous game hunter where a lightweight short magnum rifle is desired.


Please see the preliminary ballistics for the 325 WSM below.

325 WSM Preliminary Downrange Ballistics
(Note: These numbers are informational only and have not been finalized.)
Velocity (fps)
Muzzle 100 yards 200 yards 300 yards 400 yards 500 yards
180 BST 3060 2817 2586 2367 2158 1961
200 AB-CT 2950 2736 2532 2338 2151 1974
220 PP 2840 2657 2481 2313 2150 1994
Energy (lb-ft)
Muzzle 100 yards 200 yards 300 yards 400 yards 500 yards
180 BST 3742 3170 2673 2239 1862 1536
200 AB-CT 3864 3324 2848 2426 2055 1730
220 PP 3939 3448 3007 2612 2258 1943
Trajectory
Muzzle 100 yards 200 yards 300 yards 400 yards 500 yards
180 BST -0.9 1.7 0.0 -7.0 -20.1 -40.8
200 AB-CT -0.9 1.9 0.0 -7.3 -21.0 -42.2
220 PP -0.9 2.0 0.0 -7.7 -21.8 -43.6

I guess they're smart enough to not refer to it as an 8mm for the American market...

It would be nice if this would stimulate interest in 8mm bullets, the selection is a tad thin at the moment. How about a 200 grs Barnes Triple Shock, please?
- mike

I think they need to do some drug testing on their marketing department, I just don't see an 8mm becoming popular.

finally, will we be able to use up our stock of .318 bullets??

Well, I've got a 270wsm, a 300wsm and I've been thinking about a 35whelen or a 8mm-06. Hmmmm, want to guess what my next rifle might be.

Sounds like a good platform for a .338wsm. This is doomed from the get go. Why not just make the .338wsm? They must be taking a page from Remington's marketing/design team.

initially, I think the wsm's are better suited for those who roll their own (limited factory choices), and the 8mm bullet selection is not one I would think is prime for the handloader.

And why the 325 name, why not a 323 to eliminate any source of confusion that may have been present in the past 8mm marketing failures, from what I have read.

Maybe Winchester hired all the the guys that Remington fired for screwing up their SAUM rollout.

It seems to me that the perceived advantages of a short case diminish rapidly once the caliber increases beyond 308.