I had a fairly interesting discussion at a rifle club that I belong to. It started when one of the members wanted advice on a new rifle in 30 caliber, he was leaning towards the 300RUM. It seems like most of the veteran shooters advised him to stick with the time proven 30's, 30-06 for non magnum and 300 Win Mag for the mag. The newer guys leaned toward the 300RUM. This openned up a fairly heated debate, basically of the various 300 mags the 300WM was the old time favorites. The older members felt all these new cartridges weren't much of an improvement only the manufacturers way of creating demand for people to buy new rifles. Most felt confident that they would never have a need to replace the rifles they have since most would last several lifetimes if they where taken care of. The newer guys made a poor case of these new cartridges filling a void plus they felt the shooting suppliers would always have the components around for ever so as not to cause the newer designs to become obsolete. After a long debate the final concensus was boiled down to manufacturers should have spent their research and developement money of developing better propellants and improving the bullets to be more effective in their velocity ranges, in effect making the cartridges out there more effective

What do you guys think,

Would you get rid of a 300WM or Weatherby for a 300RUM (or any of the sister cartriges like 7mm, 338 375 and so on).

Would you rather experiment with better propellants with your chosen bullets?

Would you more likely experiment with velocity specific bullets

[This message has been edited by raamw (edited 02-10-2002).]

I wouldn't personally trade my 300Wby for a 300WSM, RUM or anything else in 30cal. It provides me with the ballistics I want, tolerable recoil and barrel life.
In 338cal, I would buy the 338RUM over anything else commercially available. I already have it's wildcat brother, 33 G&A, so have no need to buy it at this time. It too will provide me with th ballistics, etc that I want and find useful for my hunting.
I am happy the major makers are introducing new calibers, it brings new life to the game and might just interest a person to spend some of his money on a new rifle that otherwise wouldn't be spent. They need to sell product to stay in business, regardless of what product it is. Since the major arms companies don't make powder, why should they spend R&D money to pad someone else's pocket?
I don't experiment much with powders these days because nothing revolutionary has been put on the cannister market in years. My current choices deliver the results I'm after so until/unless something comes along that would give me 100+fps more speed with equal pressures and accuracy, I don't see myself experimenting with new powders.
The projectile area is to me the most promising area of further development and one that interests me more than powder or case dimensions.

[This message has been edited by John S (edited 02-10-2002).]

I did get rid of a 300 weatherby but it was because the rifle would not shoot as well as I desired.When I went to replace it I did buy a 300 ultra mag as I thought that I might as well have the extra velocity that it does deliver.I would not buy the 30-378 though due to the extreme cost and availability of brass and the fact that I won't own a weatherby rifle again.

Of the NEW cartridges the only ones that interest me are the efficient ones; the Winchester and Remington short mags. The BIG mags absolutely hold NO interest for me, other than a neat toy to play with if I was to win the lotto some time soon. As hunting rounds I see little use for the big boys, and by few hunters.

My two cents.

FN

300 Wby is not a bad cartridge and is truly great with 180-200grain bullets. The anvantage with the weatherby is that you can get fodder for it at the most places. At the time I think there is not enough cream in the 300 RUM to beat the weatherby by much.

It's true that we need better powder not more. I hope they would manufacture some rocket fuel soon. I hate the short mags because you can't load it with missile looking bullets unless you stick them down in the boiler room if it should fit in a short action. To my mind magnums should be used to launch heavy bullets with good speed.

John tell me about the 33 G&A. Is it difficult to form brass? what is the performance you get from it. Let us know. I have serious thoughts abut getting one. The new 338RUM is interesting but lacks the supply of good brass.

JOHAN

I have no interest in the .300 RUM and it's ilk, and very limited interest in one of the short, beltless magnums such as the .300 WSM.

The arguments against belted cases haven't impressed me much; the ultra-big magnums leave me cold; and the "short & fat" concept doesn't strike me as being very advantageous, either. So my point is, "What's the point?"

I'd rather invest the money I'll NOT spend on one of these rifles (and brass, and dies, and a scope, and mounts, and..., and... , and...) on another hunting trip in which I'll be able to put to use one of the rifles I currently own that isn't exactly worn out yet and in need of replacement. The tinkers, benchshooters, dreamers, and equipment collectors need all of these hot little numbers though, I sure, and I always find it amusing that this group never seems to have enough money to go hunting. Well I wonder why? Remchester loves em, though!

I'm sticking with the .300 Winchester Magnum for general hunting purposes, and when the day comes that I find it's design or performance to be lacking, then maybe I'll look to some spin-off .300 of some kind, but I'm not exactly holding my breath over that eventuality.

AD

[This message has been edited by allen day (edited 02-11-2002).]

1. I think the short magnums are a stupid idea. A magnum is only needed for long shots, and rifle length and weight are not as important when you have time to get ready for a long shot.

2. I think that the extra edge in velocity of a 300 RUM over a 300 winchester mag is probably just puffery in the ballistics tables. I would want to see it on a chronograph before I am convinced that there is a discernible difference.

3. If a person really needs the flattest trajectory, the 300 RUM doesn't cut it. I suggest the 30-378 instead.

Therefore I conclude that the 300 RUM is a stupid idea.

I hope that was clear enough that readers can understand where I stand on this issue.

:-)

What was said here about needed improvements in our components is true. But it probably ain't gonna happen. Not too much anyway. Like the box of soap powder with "new and improved" on the outside, what sells is "new". A certain percentage of folks have got the have the latest toy. Look at the car industry. The same car with a few, new cosmetic bends in the sheet metal is the latest model: "new and improved". How many folks would even understand if the car ads told about displacement and overhead cams? Instead they show a girl with bigguns having an orgasm as the "new and improved" car rolls by. I view these "new and improved" cartridges in the same light. Any improvements are certainly nebulous. Had they been first on the scene, ahead of the belted magnums, I would probably be speaking against the belted cases now because either way you go, its the same old soap powder in a "new and improved" box.

There is nothing new about the "new" cartridges. Weatherby and others started the trend years ago. Rifles still have the same bolt designs, and even the M98 is going strong. The only new designs I can think of are the little locking mechanism in the bolt of some guns, and also Remington's electronic firing circuit. There have been metallurgy related improvements, and the incorporation of plastic, fiberglass, and other materials into firearms. However, the original principle has not changed much.

What we have now is more choices in relation to firearm selection for the type of hunting we do. A large portion of the public want "new toys" to play with, and those �toys� are available for purchase nowadays.

For my type of hunting in Alaska any rifle from a .30-30 to a .416 is fine, but since I couldn�t afford buying all of these I chose a .338 Winchester Magnum. During my selection process I analyzed factors such as ballistics, game size, the average range shots are taken on game, then I picked a rifle that would serve as a �tool� to bring meat to the table. For my type of hunting the rifle has to be reliable, rugged, and one that can me place at least two or three bullets near each other within 100 yards without much effort. A 250-grain .33 bullet launched from 2,600 to 2,800 fps is plenty for my type of hunting.

To attain proficiency with any firearm takes time and a great deal of effort, so what I do is get the most from the rifle I now have. Yes, I know that I am in the minority, but I can tell you that since I am a �big chicken� when it comes to bears, I try to learn as much as I can about my rifle and its use. I am also frugal about it, so all I have and use is one rifle. The most popular cartridges in Alaska-not necessarily in this order-are: The .30-06, .300 Winchester Magnum, and the .338 Winchester Magnum, and it is possible that the reason these are so popular is because �they work.�

The best reason for new cartrigdes isn't that they preform that much better then the older ones. It is so we have a reason to buy more rifles and play with are reloading equipment some more. The truth is how many rilfes of one caliber do you need. It is not a matter of needing it is a matter of what is and can be fun. I am all for new guns and calibers the more the merrier.

I think the 300Ultra would be a better cartridge,if shortened to 2.500" case length. That would allow adequate capacity to propell any bullet one may be interested in. Further,it would allow many new options in throating/bullet seating arrangements.

The 338Ultra is magnificent,if a guy has use for one. It offers superb accuracy,amazing energies and flat trajectories. It is stellar,on all levels. I believe it to be the most useful of all designs and very well rounded,for those inclined to field one. Mine will shoot the 210gr XLC at 3400fps. That combo will handily cover most any scenario you could throw at it,here or abroad. Very,very,very impressive.

I had a 30-378Wby. It requires more barrel than the issued 26" length,to eek the advantages of it's cavernous capacity. Speeds didn't impress me,I sold it.

It is hard to cuss the 300Wby,it melds many traits into a convenient package. I prefer the 30-8mmRemmag,but that is hair splitting,the Wby is superb and a definate step above the '06 and 300Winnie. I've shot them all side by side and for a single rifle that will do most anything,it is very hard to fault a Big 30cal.

I believe the 7mmRum to suffer the same as the 30-378. It is of too much capacity,to work effectively in a 26" tube. Poke 30" barrels on both and you'll really have something,but then they become specialized niche rifles,with little flexibility.

The short mags very much appeal to me. They introduce new capacity levels to,to the most useful of all rifles. The short action.

The 257WSM,very much calls me. The 7mmWSM another. Coupled with 24" barrels,they offer amazing performance,in a tidy package. As a bonus they utilize the shorter more rigid actions,incorporate the short/fat case design. Those things aid raw accuracy potential and has been demonstrated in competetive venues,continuously. If you don't like a handy,short,extremely accurate,flat shooting rifles,look past them.

I very much look forward to advancements in propellant technology. That will make what is available,even better.

This is the Golden Age of thhe rifle...........

I agree, there is nothing new out there..most of that was done by the British and Germans about 1920 to 1924, then again by Ackley and a bunch of his gang...

the newbies by Remington will have the same woes as the ill fated 284..The magazines will be too short for heavy bullets and a 220 Gr. will near rest on the primer...All hype and shout!!

I still like the 300 H&H with the loooong neck where I can seat 200 and 220 gr. bullets and fill the case with slow burning powder and get real velocity...besides it is designed to feed slick as snot, a function mostly overlooked by todays techs.....

------------------
Ray Atkinson

ray@atkinsonhunting.com
atkinsonhunting.com

Johan-
The 33G&A is essentially the same as the 338RUM. It differs from the RUM by way of a longer length, which for it is 2.830", 35* shoulder and std. 404 head size. It isn't worth the trouble now that the 338RUM is available, IMO. It requires a full set of case forming dies, which are expensive, plus fireforming unless you start with 404 cylinders.
Performance is much the same as the RUM, I get 3100fps with 230gr Fail Safes and 3050fps with 250gr Noslers, all with very reasonable pressures.

500grs-
The advantages of a 300RUM are quite real I assure you. I developed a 30G&A long before the RUM appeared and with a 26" barrel it was child's play to attain 3350fps with 180gr bullets. When I went to a 28" barrel I averaged 3415fps with 180s. Please show me a 300Winnie that will do that or a 30-378 that will leave those numbers in the dust. I've had one of those too.

[This message has been edited by John S (edited 02-11-2002).]

[This message has been edited by John S (edited 02-11-2002).]

I like the idea of the short magnums, and I intend to build myself either a 7MM WSM or 300 WSM. A compact short action magnum will make a great mountain rifle.

------------------
JD

Now that I have a DGR covered Im going to lay off of new hunting rifles for awhile, at least a month or two, and save my money for hunting.

Then again were going to go to Montana this year for 'lope and deer, and I really want that .257 WBY for that hunt...........Hmmmm, I still want that ultra-light mntn rifle in 300 WSM.........I could use a few more mil-surps.......I need a new inline muzzleloader........and of course theres that .475 Linbaugh revolver...............I need a new .22 revolver for my son to have in 12 years..........

......OK I take back the first paragraph!

Forgeddaboutit...........10

Seems to me all of these new cartriges are nothin more than sales gimicks. All anyone needs for most hunting in North America is the old reliable 30-06. Sounds boring, but true for most.

My brother just replaced his old and well worn Remington 760, 30-06 last week. Guess what he bought... a new Remington pump (whatever the model designation is now), caliber? 30-06 of course...

DP

It's not about what a person needs but rather what he wants.We could all get by with a 30-30 if we had too but in some situations I prefer to have one of the really flat shooting magnums.Since I can have one I do.It's the same with automobiles.I could get by with a 1960's pickup with a carburator and points ignition and drum brakes,but I prefer the added smoothness and mileage of fuel injection and electronic ignition and the quicker stops of four wheel discs.

The only real reason that I can think of for "new" cartridges is to get top end pressures into a cartridge that is not going to be put into Grandpa's aged rifle and in doing so imbed parts and pieces of said rifle in the trigger puller. Hope that made sense. Most all of you are not that shooter anyway, so all the "new" cartridges are just for us to play with and experiment with at our leasure and for our enjoyment. There are pro's and con's that can be argued till the cows come home, but bottom line is that a deer does't care if it was a 30-30 or a 300 Way To Hot Magnum, proper placement and proper bullet will get the job done period. In my life I have been accused of getting that new fangled 7MM Mg, and of supporting that decrepate old 308. I don't think that the deer/elk/moose/bear ever knew the difference.
A case in point re: above example would be the venerable 45-70. Loads are available that no one here would put thru a turn of the century arm, but someone not knowledgable might inadvertantly try it not realizing what they had. Like I said, not likley with the folks here. Plus, the gun mfgs get to sell more guns, and that can't be all bad, right? And what would all the writers of gun mag articles do if no new carts were released? I'm just kidding on the last two.

------------------
Good Shooting!

I think these new rounds are a waste of time. instead I wish more quality went into the rifles themselves. This is often left out of the equation. Many of these fifles need 26" barrels to be effective and not create pirates out of the shooter. They therefore have the handling of broken fenceposts and snag on every bit of brush in the country. I believe that these new calibers are so specialised we will not hunt with them enough to get used to the handling. Some of the best hunters I know use a medium gun/cartridge, know the country and their rifle.

BR

I agree with most of the above. "New" and "Free" are the strongest words in marketing.

Just a dig at the WSM and SAUM's. I am waiting for the facts on how more velocity can be had from less volume. My guess is that the pressure is higher. If that is true then the current ads are a lie (which is nothing new) as they infer it's "short" that does it.

Since really new propellants are not here today how about higher pressure? I mean a lot higher. Not long ago there were ads for cartridge cases with steel bases and brass bodies. Present actions can be made stronger without much new technology.

Also bullets with less friction. Why do we have to use bullets with a long bearing length of .308" in bores that are .300" to .308" Is there not a way to seal better? What about sabot's? If we put a .308 bullet in a .375 what would we get? Where is Parker Ackley anyway?

Lot's of time gets spent discussing the 30-06 vrs the .270W (insert 7-08) and we are still using techology from 1885 (8mm Lebel).

[This message has been edited by Don Martin29 (edited 02-12-2002).]

Like Frank, only the "efficient" WSM's and SAUM's interest me. I view the rest as too much of a good thing. I agree with Stick as well... the RUM's should have been 2.5". I've said that since they first came out.

Personal predjudice aside, this is indeed the golden age of the metalic cartridge... whatever your wants, needs, taste, style, conditions, ego, etc. demand, you can find a cartridge to suit you.

Do we "need" these new cartridges? I doubt it! Beyond the few "meat and potatoes" rounds out there, most of our conversations here center around the mental girations we rifle loonies all go through trying to conceive the ultimate rifle/cartridge combo for a given hunt and geography.

I like what one guy said regarding elk cartridges... "the best elk cartridge is whatever the BEST ELK HUNTER has in his hands."

Brad