What, if any, are the relative merits of the 'new' short magnums?

I am thinking here of the WSM & Ruger Compact Magnums as it appears, to me, the Remington offerings are falling by the wayside & Lazzeroni do not have the 'big machine' behind them like Winchester / Winchester, Browning& Kimber and Hornady / Ruger.

It looks to me, the Hornady / Ruger cartridges are about 0.10 inch longer than the WSM and do not 'suffer' from the renated rim issue of the WSM.

Apart from that, they seem to be much of a muchness - about equal except the .338 RCM can use .338 bullet heads and duplicates fast .338-06 loads if handloaded / no access to proprietry powders.

The .325 WSM is similar -- handloaders cannot obtain the same velocities as the ammunition manufacturers.

Additionally, the .325 WSM appears to be more of a straight walled cartridge whereas some drawings I have seen of the .338 RCM, the latter appears to have a slight case taper and, with the non rebated rim, might mean it will feed more reliably than the similar .325 WSM cartridge.

I am wondering if this is more of a theoretical adavantage as any rifle set up / chambered for the WSM rounds will have had the feed worked on accordingly.

I think the primary advantage for the manufacturers is to sell more rifles.

Choices. Its all about choices and preferences, everyone should stop trying to justify for or against ANY cartridge that has come out since WWI. Seriously. The 7x57, 30-06, 9.3x62 and 375 H&H have done it all, and will keep doing it all. And before that, big round lead balls from muzzle loaders did it all. And before that, sharp pointy sticks, and before that clubs and rocks and such.

Everything else, is your choice. Be glad we have hundreds of choices. There is no distinct advantage over anything made even after the 1940's and even then, stuff only really got faster.

MileHighShooter: couldn't have said it better myself.

The short mags "almost" do what their full-length counterparts, but can be had in an action 1/2" shorter. For that you may sacrifice feeding reliability. The 300 H&H, 7x57, and the 30-06 are shaped like they are for a reason.

I picked up a 7mm WSM cheap to play with and agree that it doesn't do anything more than conventional cartridges. Not quite a 7mm Mag but more than a 7x57 or 280...and the differences are really academic in real life.

Here are the advantages I can think of offhand:

1. More expensive and less available ammunition than most other rounds.

2. Less magazine capacity than conventional rounds.

3. Factory load pressure often high enough to cause sticky bolt lift.

4. Less velocity than conventional belted magnums at the same pressures.

5. Soon to be obsolete, thus if you have one it will be kinda cool sometime in the future.

Oh my, those don't actually seem to be advantages, do they?

quote:

Originally posted by Blacktailer:
I think the primary advantage for the manufacturers is to sell more rifles.

quote:

Originally posted by Blacktailer:
I think the primary advantage for the manufacturers is to sell more rifles.

Can't disagree with that either. I'm all for gun manufacturers selling more rifles though. Without a strong firearms industry, I doubt we could keep up the fight against the Brady Bunch and the rest of the gun grabbers.

I bought a 300 WSM because I didn't have anything comparable. I found a good price on a Tikka and since I had two others I bought it. If I had a 300 mag I probably wouldn't have bought it but needed a 300.

Don't get me wrong, I AM a fan of the WSM's. I've owned a few, and wish I still had them, and will own more in the future. If you want the power, in a more compact rifle, its the ticket. You can't just say its 1/2" shorter and go from there. If the manufacturer actually set the short mag rifles up, they are more compact in every way, width, length, weight, everything. Go put a Browning A-bolt 338 Win Mag next to a Browning Midas Hunter in 325WSM. Power, and velocity are close enough that NONE of us will tell the difference, regardless of what the arm chair quarterbacks and magazines say. But you look at those two rifles, they are MILES apart in handling and carrying ability.

As to the cost, BS. Pure and utter BS. Go to a store and compare WSM ammo, Win mag, RUM and Weatherby. All comparable, if anything the WSM's are in the bottom end of premium. I saw 30-06 ammo for 40-50$ a box for premium bullets. You cannot compare a 15$ box of Core-lokt to a 50$ of TTSX. That is apples and watermelons. If you get the cheap stuff in ANY magnum, or even a slightly obscure "standard" you are going to pay 18-30$ a box, period. You want premium bullets, you're going to pay, whether its .243 ammo for 35$ a box, 300 Wby for 40$ a box, or 375 H&H (which I think is pretty damn "standard") at 80$ a box.

Thank you gentlemen.

Sales are important.especially the mark up anything new tends to be better than the tried and true.

As you may have guessed, I ahve some time on my hands at the moment and was 'doing some research', in a light hearted fashion.

My take on the WSM & Ruger Compact Magnum cartridges are you can get some thing like 85-90% of the conventional .300 Win Mag & .338 Win Mag performance with less powder, so theoretically reducing the (felt) recoil due to powder burn efficiencies etc.

You also have the benefit of a shorter, more compact & lighter rifle for mountain hunting. But reduce the weight too much, adding a shorter barrel and you will loose the reduced recoil benefit and also get more muzzle blast.

I am guessing the WSM cartridges have the advantage of being supported by a large organisation that makes both rifles and cartridges, whereas with the RCM cartridges, it is a joint enterprise between Ruger and Hornady, both of which are smaller organisations than Winchester.

I am not sure how much of a disadvantage the rebated WSM rims are. If the rifles are properly built / adjusted for these cartridges -feed etc, then I think they should be ok. At the back of my mind, I do not like the idea of 20inch RCM barrels. I prefer 24 inch barrels.

You get to believe in magic, that you have somehow overcome thermodynamic laws........

Bbl length is measured from muzzle to bolt face. So the short COL brings the throat closer to the bolt face. This effectively lengthens the rifled portion of a barrel......about one inch.

So when you get velocities that are (in honest unbiased comparisons with matched pressures) exactly what you'd expect for an extra 1" of bullet travel you, instead, credit case shape, taper, or primer-bullet base distance.

To be fair, it's a neat trick.

Better yet, you can cheat and load the short rounds to higher pressures for even bigger magical gains.

Sam

I'm not a fan in general, but I think the 270 WSM has a lot of fans. The only other magnum available in .277 is the Weatherby Magnum (I just bought a very used Mark V in 270 Weatherby). From what I've heard people really like the 270 WSM and are getting 200 fps over the 270 Win (which is my favorite caliber).

I'm a .270 fan and have killed a lot of deer through the years with one....

As soon as I found a Browning A-Bolt in .270 WSM back in 2002 I had to have it....

I don't regret it either, no problems with anything

Gentlemen the .270 WSM is going to be around for a long time. When you can get 3450 fps out of a 130 grain bullet and 3150 fps out of a 160 grain bullet it is very servicable for a good reloader and shooter. Accuracy is the strong point of the short mags if the user works at it. Shooting them enough is the key to their strength. I have 4 .270 WSM's a .243 WSSM and a .25 WSSM and have paid no more than $700 for for them and two for less than $500. Good shooting.

I absolutely love the Winchester Short Mags! Greatest thing that ever come down from the Firearms Industry!

Take any of the Winchester M70 WSM Control Feed Classics, rip the barrel off of it, throw it in the trash, and put a B&M Barrel on it, make it a 416-458-475- and 50 B&M.

I love the Short Mags!


Michael

I'm loving my 70 FWT-SS 270WSM (at least, after I got the bedding adjusted to eliminate the flyer). Just thinking someday I'll need to trade in for a super grade (c'mon Winchester.. a 70 Supergrade stainless.. nudge nudge wink wink).

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:
I absolutely love the Winchester Short Mags! Greatest thing that ever come down from the Firearms Industry!

Take any of the Winchester M70 WSM Control Feed Classics, rip the barrel off of it, throw it in the trash, and put a B&M Barrel on it, make it a 416-458-475- and 50 B&M.

I love the Short Mags!


Michael

What are you doing over in the mouse gun section Michael? Killing some time? haha

Hey Milehigh

Yep, killing a few minutes! I sneak down here once and awhile to see what you chaps are kicking around! LOL..................

Saw this little thread, and I could not contain myself! LOL

I love the WSMs--they make damn good real rifles! Once you snatch that skinny rat shooting barrel off and toss it in the trash!



Michael

I got in one of the push feed Shadow Mod. 70s in 270 WSM pretty cheap, just to see what it could do. When I first took it to the range I settled into the stock and began my squeeze . . . more, then . . . more, then . . . more, then . . . I thought it was broken! It finally went off, but it was the hardest trigger pull by a factor of 3 that I have ever felt, at least 12 pounds. Even with that ghastly trigger, it shot 3-shot groups with the 140 BT-IL Hornady over Accurate Mag-Pro into .65" at 100 yds. Hello!

I took it home, pulled the action and went to work on the trigger pull. The nuts had a big glob of hardened resin/glue on them, so I had to clean them off with a knife before even adjusting, but finally got her to about 3-1/2 pounds and clean. I now have a 1/2 minute rifle with 3-9x scope and only $400 invested. The deer around here are definitely in BIG trouble.

quote:

Originally posted by Blacktailer:
I think the primary advantage for the manufacturers is to sell more rifles.

I'm going to 2nd, 3rd or whatever number we are up to on what Blacktailer said!

The shortmags never called to me - Matter of fact I've never owned a rifle or pistol chambered for anything introduced since 1956!

I do, however, see/read they are calling to you. So go for one and see how you like it. If you do, how about that 338 RCM?

I bought my first short mag about a year ago. I bought the "original" short action magnum.

quote:

Originally posted by phurley5:
Gentlemen the .270 WSM is going to be around for a long time. When you can get 3450 fps out of a 130 grain bullet and 3150 fps out of a 160 grain bullet it is very servicable for a good reloader and shooter. Accuracy is the strong point of the short mags if the user works at it. Shooting them enough is the key to their strength. I have 4 .270 WSM's a .243 WSSM and a .25 WSSM and have paid no more than $700 for for them and two for less than $500. Good shooting.

Those are the same speeds I hope to get out of my 270 Weatherby with a 26" barrel. Matrix has some sweet 165g bullets with a BC of .709 too!

There is an advantage if you belive the short action accuracy and short stroking Magnum length actions myths.
I would suppose some of you read Handloader magazine ? A while back they did a test with one barrel. The chambered it for 300 H&H, shot it with some loads, then whacked it off and redid it in 300 WSM with the same loads. There was no difference except that the feeding of the 300 H&H was far more reliable (as are all classic cartridges than any short mags.) The WSSMs are dead, the SAUM are dead, the 7mm WSM (probably the best) is on life support. The Rugers just duplicate several existing cartridges. They'll all be hanging on the wall while the 22RF, 22 Hornet, 223, 22-250, 243, 6.5x55, 270 WCF, 7mm Remmag, 308, 30-06, 300 H&H, 300 WRA mag, 338 WRA mag, 9.3x62, 375 H&H, 416 Rigby and 458 WRA are still killing anything they are correct for.
Buy or build whatever you want but don't fall for the marketing hype that new is always better.

quote:

I think the primary advantage for the manufacturers is to sell more rifles.

Exactly. Manufactors use advitizers to promote "NEW!, IMPROVED! MODERN!, BE THE FIRST ON YOUR BLOCK TO OWN ONE!" for everything from soap to laxitives to cartridges because it works on a certain percentage of the population even when the buyers KNOW it's just hype and BS. But the desire to be on the 'cutting edge' and fear of missing out with the cool crowd is too great to be overlooked so many of us buy whatever is proclaimed to be new. Most of it is a very slight and virtually irrelivant change from previous versions but anything new will certainly get a rush when it first comes available.

There are no practical advantages to short cartridges or short action rifles but sheep follow their magazine shepherds and go where ever the expert of the month club leads them.
That's cool to me, it leads to a healthy gun and ammo industry and adds a lot of used guns to pawn shop shelves.

The best thing with the short magnums is that they don't have the stupid "magnum belt".

I have a Ruger Alaskan in 375 Ruger and I love it.
I clearly prefer that to all the 375 H&H guns I have tried in a gun shop or/and at the range.

Thank you gentlemen for your comments.

Repeating the little I know, I have read of the theoretical benefits of the Winchester Short Magnums:

Greater powder efficiency from a shorter, broad base powder charge - so, the cartridges produce 'less kick' for similar veolocities using lighter charges

Rifles actions are shorter, hence stiffer, which promotes accuracy.

Rifles are a bit shorter in overall length, weigh (a bit) less, which makes them a bit easier to carry up mountains.

Against the short magnum cartridges:

The WSM short magnums have a rebated rim, which does not make for smooth feeding (The .425 WR was plagued with feeding problems).

How much this is a real World problem I do not know. If the rifle was originally built, or set up, for short magnum cartridges I would have thought feed issues would have been addressed. Theoretically, the Ruger Compact Magnums, which do not suffer from this problem, may feed more reliably.

I have not read of feeding problems with the Winchester Mod 70 or Kimber WSM rifles. I note, however, that Dakota no longer appears to be chambering its Model 76 rifles for WSM cartridges. It used to chamber for .300WSM for sure. Contrarily, I have seen advertised on guns International etc Dakota rifles chambered for .300 & .338 Ruger Compact Magnums.

Looking at the various WSM cartridges, the .325 & .300 WSM suffer the least from the pronounced 'step' at the cartridge body / neck due to the step down in diameter from say, the .270 head compared with the .323 or .308 head.

I am thinking here of the analogy between the .243 Win and .308 Win cartridges and getting these to feed reliably. The .308 Win feeds more smoothly and it takes more work by the rifle maker to get the .243 Win to feed reliably.

I have two 'logistical' type problems. first I am left handed, which limits my choice of rifles to some extent. If Kimber did a left handed WSM, I would get one.

Secondly, I live in the UK. It is just not possible to go out and purchase a hunting rifle that takes your fancy. You have to justify each and every rifle you wish to posses or currently own. So, with all the difficulties, I might as well get as good / expensive rifle as I am able to.

Robthom ----- One of my grandsons is also left handed and has shot all my right handed rifles since he was able to hold a gun. When he was 14 he got his first Elk with a .338 Lapua and has shot many Deer with .257 Wby, 7mm STW, 30-30, .300 Win, .243 WSSM and 25 WSSM. I told him I would get what he settled on to shoot the rest of his life in a left handed rifle. He shot one of my .270 WSM's and the search was over. I found him a Model 70 Winchester New Haven production and now he is in seventh heaven, and will shoot nothing else. I put a 3.5 X 10 Ziess Conquest scope on it and he has been really hard on the Whitetail population in Kentucky and Tennessee. The rifle was around $600 on Gunsamerica and shoots better than a buddies Kimber, hands down, with no smithy work. Good luck and good shooting.

quote:

Here are the advantages I can think of offhand:

1. More expensive and less available ammunition than most other rounds.

Ammo is available at Academy, Wal-mart, Natchez, Midsouth, etc. at comparable prices to any other magnum ammo.

2. Less magazine capacity than conventional rounds.

No less than any other magnum round in most rifles.

3. Factory load pressure often high enough to cause sticky bolt lift.

I have only shot one box of factory loaded ammo in my 270 WSM but I do not remember any pressure issues in my M-70.

4. Less velocity than conventional belted magnums at the same pressures.

This is probably quite true but they (the WSMs) do deliver more velocity than their non-magnum counterparts and in a shorter action.

5. Soon to be obsolete, thus if you have one it will be kinda cool sometime in the future.

If you are referring to the Remington short magnums, yes this is quite true. However if you are referring to the 270 WSM and 300 WSMs, not hardly. As of this day they are offered in the Winchester M-70, Browning bolt actions, Remington M-700 CDL SF, Tikka T3 and Sako M-85 just to name a few. I think we will see the Rem. Ultra Mags. die off long before the 270, 300 and quite possibly the 325 WSMs.

Oh my, those don't actually seem to be advantages, do they?

Just depends on how one looks at it. I like my short mags. and I have decided to build a 9.3 WSM based on a 300 WSM case as well. It should out perform a 9.3X62 relatively easily and in a short action to boot.

quote:

Just depends on how one looks at it. I like my short mags. and I have decided to build a 9.3 WSM based on a 300 WSM case as well. It should out perform a 9.3X62 relatively easily and in a short action to boot.

http://www.b-mriflesandcartridges.com/9-3-B-M.html

Just FYI.
Michael

Thanks Micheal.
505G posted the same link for me on the Wildcat forum.
But why RUM brass instead of WSM brass?
Seems like it would be nicer to start with something alot closer to the dimensions I would end up with. Maybe even 325 WSM?

Hi Rae

The reason for the RUM brass is because that is what that series is based off of. The 50 B&M is the parent for 475, 458, 416, 375 and 9.3. It is slightly longer, at 2.24, little more case capacity. I have 1000s of basic brass, 50 B&M. It's much easier to go down in caliber than it is to go up in caliber. WSM brass was not long enough to give me the case capacity and overall length I wanted for the larger calibers. A WSM 9.3 will be close, but cannot equal the 9.3 B&M. 100 fps or slightly more less than.

Load data pressure tested, and lots of it for the 9.3 B&M, already in place.
Just FYI is all, either way is fine.

Michael

There is something I might be able to add to this conversation, because of my experience with the B&Ms, and basically short Big Bore Cartridges.

When I started with the 50 B&M, .500 caliber, they had and still maintain 18 inch barrels. It was more about the rifle, than the cartridge. What I learned was how real the efficiency factor actually was in this caliber. Adding a 20 inch barrel later on gained NOTHING, ZERO. A fellow has a 22 inch 50 B&M and he gained exactly 12 fps per inch overall, basically not being worth the extra length and weight of 4 inches of barrel.

As I dropped DOWN in caliber, every step of the way this "efficiency" starts to dissipate. When we get to 416 caliber we start loosing some substantial velocity as we drop from standard 20 inch barrels to 18 inch barrels, with some bullet weights and loads. Dropping to 9.3 caliber that loss is noticed even more so per inch of barrel. Standard barrel lengths on the 9.3 and 375 B&M are 20 inches, where they are at their best with all factors, overall length, weight, and handling.

So in my opinion as you continue to drop caliber down into the "Rat" calibers, then that efficiency dissipates even more rapidly. There is no doubt about it, the short fat cartridges are in fact more efficient than the same longer case capacity. However, as you drop down in caliber, that becomes something that is negligible. Think inside the barrel, and the cubic inches you have to burn a certain amount of powder. Now, if that column is shorter, but equal to a longer equal powder column, then it will burn more efficiently, but you have to have the "cubic inches" inside the barrel to do this with, to show any real return value for it. As caliber increases, then you have more cubic inches of barrel to work with. Personally I don't think you are going to see much real world noticeable increases from a 300 WSM to a 300 Winchester. Does not mean the WSMs are not good, as I love them, I love to make big bores of them! LOL........ Flip a coin however, between those two for real world in the field work.

Michael

Excellant information Micheal. Thanks!
To add to what you stated with regards to efficiency as the caliber increases, my latest Hornady roading manual states something similiar on the 325 WSM. They say the .325 WSM is quote "A VERY EFFICIENT" cartridge. They claim in their testing they found it to produce equal velocities compared to the 8mm Rem. Mag. But obviously with much less powder.
They make no such statements with the lesser WSMs.
Point being the same as you stated.
Thanks again.

It's really funny how folks complain about the rebated rim of the RSAUM and WSM cartridges, much as was originally done with the 284 Winchester...

Now 30 years later the 6.5-284 wildcat is a factory loaded used for long range hunting and target work and the 284 Winchester cartridge is resurging as a long range target round. And no one complains about the rebated rim design of the case...

Myself, I own two M77 Ruger SA SS synthetic stocked rifles in 300 RSAUM... Today it would have been cheaper to have picked up the same rifles in 300 WSM due to the price difference in ammunition - but, either cartridge with a factory 22" barrel will match the performance of the much beloved 30/338 WinMag with a 26" barrel with bullets below 180gr weight. All from a rifle that is shorter than my son's M70 30-06 rifle with a 22" barrel. What's not to like...

The one good thing about the naysayers regarding the short magnum rounds is that it helps keep used rifles down in price... Keep up the good work guys!

quote:

Originally posted by capoward:
The one good thing about the naysayers regarding the short magnum rounds is that it helps keep used rifles down in price... Keep up the good work guys!

Cuts both ways. I really appreciate the way the short mag fanboys dump rifles chambered for perfect older rounds on the used market.

Don't think the effect will last forever, though.

Sam

The 270 and 300 WSM will/may be the only to survive as long as the 30-06, 300 H&H, 375 H&H etc.
They offer no real advantages and all the BS about short actions only applies to really high end target shooting, with custom blue printed actions.
I know my 300 H&H and 300 WinMag will shoot any bullet as fast (heavy ones faster) and just as accuratly and at lower pressure. (Handloader proved it !)
If you really believe any animal dies faster when shot with a 300 WSM than a modern super bullet from a 30-06, you're kidding yourself.

When all is said and done the only one that made sense was the 300 SAUM as you could buy a DPMS LR AR10 chambered for it. That gave you 200 yards over the 308 model and accuracy was 1 MOA or better. I owned one with a 4-16 S&B on it and it was a bit heavy to hunt with (13 pounds) but as a dedicated sniper rifle it was a deadly machine.
DPMS never did get a high cap magazine to work and that was its limitation. It's now gone to join the 5mm Remington in cartridge heaven.

A 9.3 wildcat ? Just what the world needs. If you can't get it done with a 9.3x62 or 64, a short action won't help a bit.

quote:

Originally posted by 45-70 shooter:


A 9.3 wildcat ? Just what the world needs. If you can't get it done with a 9.3x62 or 64, a short action won't help a bit.

I am planning on a 9.3 WSM barrel to switch out with my 300 WSM on a M-70 Coyote rifle.
I believe it will do anything the above 2 will do under any circumstances and not have the expense of another rifle.
By the way they all were wildcats at some point. Some just stay that way.

Anything you can do (short of the big 5 or very large bears) with a .366 bullet, you can do with a .308 bullet. The problem with all the short magnums is that is difficult to load heavy for caliber bullets (250 .308, 286 .366) and still have any room left for powder.
And no, "they were not all wildcats at some point"
There are generally accepted breakdowns of cartridges into military, commercial, proprietary and wildcats. (8x57, 270 WCF, 300 Dakota and 27/300 Savage). A model 70 swith barrel a'int gonns be cheap for sure and given that it's just a factory rifle, I'm sure you could buy two, get one rebored to 9.3/300WSM and have spent no more money. Or you just just buy a 338 RUM and have all your needs covered.