I picked up a Win 70 Stainless last fall as I've been curious about this round ever since rumors about it started leaking out of Alton and New Haven.

Mine is a Win 70 stainless with a Leupold 3x9 compact on top in Low Weaver stainless mounts. I adjusted the trigger to 2.75 lbs and bedded the lug area while free-floating the entire barrel.

With its 24" barrel (23.75" actual length) factory loads went an average of right at 2,980 fps between 20 qty 180 grain Failsafes and 20 qty 180 gr Power Points. Based on what others report I think I may have a slightly "slow" barrel. The more I've shot this rifle and cleaned its bore, the better it keeps shooting... good case for breaking-in a barrel?

Despite what some have reported, my rifle feeds and ejects flawlessly.

I took a smallish muley buck with the 180 failsafes in November... at around 200 yards it actually killed him... shocking!

After the initial mucking-about with factory loads I had Dave Gentry (our top-drawer local smith) shorten the barrel to 22". I know I'll receive a lot of howls about that, but I have my reasons:

If I want to carry a 24" tube, I'd sooner have the 5/8" longer action (LA) as well in a 300 Win Mag or even 300 WBY. The 300 Win Mag can go about 3,100 fps with a 24" tube. The 300 WSM will go at about 3,000 fps with a 24" tube. I like short barreled rifles and won't own one with a tube longer than 22", plain and simple. If a cartridge won't work in a barrel that short I won't own it... one man's personal preference/prejudice.

Anyway, I chrono'd factory rounds after the barrel was shortened... I lost right at 60-65 fps. I don't mind as I still have a rifle who's performance falls right in between the 30-06 and 300 Win Mag... that's good company!

Initial handloads have produced the following in my 22" barrel:

180 gr. Federal Deep-Shoks / H4350 / WLR /2.900" OAL / 2,942 fps... .950" 3-shot group.

180 gr. Barnes XLC / H4350 / WLR / 2.823" OAL / 2,914 fps... .550" 3-shot group.

This particular rifle seems to be a genuine MOA piece... most groups have been below the magic 1 MOA mark. Some well below... it's a keeper!

Summary... there's NO magic in the 300 WSM. Its case-capacity falls right between the 300 Win Mag and 30-06 (basically) as does its performance. It holds approx 10% more powder than the 30-06 and 10-12% less than the 300 Win Mag. Still, its performance is a tad closer to the 300 Win Mag. That MAY mean there is something to these "efficient", sharp-shouldered, squatty rounds. Maybe not.

What I like about it is that it operates VERY well with a 22" tube. Even at that length muzzle blast is mild... to my ears less than, say, a 22" bbl'd 270 or a 22" bbl'd 338 Win Mag. I like my hearing!

Much was made initially about the lighter recoil of the 300 WSM... some even said it was about like a 308 Win. That's nonsense. It's hard for me to say as for the past nine years the 338 Win Mag has been my primary hunting round, but I'd say its recoil is like a stoutly loaded 30-06. Still, less than the 300 Win Mag... duh!

I plan to order a Rimrock stock for this rifle as soon as Mr. Borden gets his SA Model 70 mold fixed. The rifles current weight with a sling and three rounds is 8 lbs. 4 oz's. re-stocked it'll go under 8 lbs.

Good enough and a dandy, portable, nicely accurate general-purpose hunting rig... that's all I really wanted from this round to begin with. I'm not disapointed.

Brad Amundson

Brad-
Sounds like a great rifle to own, I'm envious!

Your rifle is quite close to a 30-06/.308W which is the way to go. Like you I doubt that the short fat case gives anymore velocity with the same pressure but time will tell. If there is any it will be slight.

For an all around rifle for the first time hunter I think the .300 WSM will prove to be a bit much but maybe a 7mm WSM may rise to the top as a popular all around hunting cartridge replacing the 7mm Rem Mag. The recoil will be a little less than the same case in .30 cal and it could be in a handy rifle. Maybe a 23" bbl might be right.

However until some new gunpowder with lighter gases is invented the 30-06 will stay on top. There is just not much difference between the bunch.

It's too bad that Charles Newton and Roy Weatherby were not the same person. We would have saved 50 years in development.

Hi John... coming from an experienced hunter/rifleman like yourself that's high-praise. Thanks!

Don, let's see... 22" bbl'd 300 WSM, 180's at 2,914-2,942 fps... I'd say it definately out-classes a 308 or 30-06 with the same pressures. These cartridges all operate at similar pressures.

Great round though it is, I still have no need for a 30-06. If I want less power I'll always take the 308, albeit in a carbine. I love the 308 in carbine form as I think it's quite close to the 30-06 except in a lighter, smaller, handier package. I have a 243 Win 70 stainless that will have Bob338's (from AccuratReloading) un-used 308 Win stainelss featherweight barrel screwed on and shortened to 20". I've had six 308's and like it, though I've never seen the need for one except in carbine form.

Brad

Brad it sure sounds like you have done your homework and attained some very accurate rifle loads for your gun of choice. I have heard some very outstanding things from those Barnes XLC bullets. I will try some myself in my 338 later. Say how is the recoil of that rifle since you shortened up the barrel some?

Brad:

Your experience with the WSM is exactly what one would assume it would be, based on the capacity of the case. People have been foolin' with the shape of cases for years trying to find some way to "trick" physics, but despite radiused venturi shoulders, long tapered cases, short square cases, and variations ad infinitum, a cartridge will perform similarly to any other cartridge with the same case displacement no matter what its shape.

The advantage to the WSM is its ability to be chambered in a "medium" length action (but not comfortably in an action as short as the Sako L571 or Remington 700). The big disadvantage to the WSM is reduced magazine capacity. There's always a trade off.

I agree with you that if you are going to have a short actioned gun, it should also have a barrel short enough to be handy. Makes no sense to me to trim a half to three-quarters of an inch off of the action, then hang a 24 to 26 inch barrel on it. Seems self-defeating.

As for me, I think I'll just stick with my Sako .30-06. It's about 100 fps behind your .300 WSM and hold 6 cartridges for those rare occasions when you really need more shots.

Brad,

Where did you get the Federal Deep Shocks for handloading??

BigIron

T-Jazz... Recoil is very subjective based on how dead one has made one's shoulder firing heavy rounds! However, as I said above, even with its 22" bbl. it still feels like a stoutly loaded 30-06.

Stonecreek... no arguments from me. I will say, however, this fat 300 is fun to load and shoot. That big, sharp shoulder really aids in positive headspacing as well as reducing case-stretching. Perhaps there is something to "short and fat" in regards to even powder combustion and accuracy... certainly a lot of the benchrest crowd thinks so. For the most part, I've heard nothing but positive remarks regarding 300 WSM's accuracy in factory rifles. Mine is certainly proving so, el-cheapo factory barrel, et.al.

BigIron... I had a couple boxes of pre-production stuff sent to me by Federal nearly three years ago... I just pulled the bullets and loaded them in the 300 WSM.

I just picked up some Speer 180 FB HotCore's. This time I'll try RL22 as well as H4350.

Brad

[This message has been edited by Brad (edited 03-12-2002).]

I like Brad's attitude about his new rifle. It seems a lot handier than a 300 mag but still potent.

Maybe this case will take off! Comparing it to the SAUM's the Win case has far more appeal.

Brad,
I have a 300 WSM in a M70 FWT with a walnut stock and blued steel. I had some feeding problems out of the box and had to send it back to Winchester and they ended up putting a new receiver on the gun. But it only took em 20 days including shipping and they were very nice about it.
I shot the gun some with only a little trigger work and the addition of a Zeiss Conquest in 3.5-10 and some Leupold dual dovetails. Using 180 Hornady SSTs and a max charge of R22 the gun shot 5 shells right at an inch. I sent ti off and had it free floated and pillar bedded and all the exposed surfaces were Devcon'd. The thing now puts 5 shots under 3/4 inch. It chronos out right around 2887-3104 fps. I'm very happy with the gun. Like you, I feel its recoil lies somewhere between an 06 and a 300 WM. I also like that the gun does it with a short action, 23" barrel and no silly belt! Mine's a keeper.

Out of curiosity I ran a trajectory and energy comparison of a 180 gr partition at 2960 fps and 2870 fps to get a feel for the difference between the 300WSM (2960) and the 30-06 (2870 per nosler#4)

Trajectory:

(250 yd zero)100, 200, 300, 400, 500
300WSM: 2.6, 2.1, -3.5, -15.2, -33.9
30-06: 2.8, 2.3, -3.8, -16.5, -36.9

Energy: 300, 400, 500yards

300WSM: 2273, 1948, 1660
30-06: 2126, 1817, 1545

Interstingly, the 30-06AI pushes the same bullet to 2985 fps. All of these are from 24" barrels.

My point is that the performance increase from 30-06 to 300WSM is measureable but of no practical value. MM

Brad

I enjoyed your post. You have a nice rig and I'm happy for you.

Seeing as I just finished loading my first XLC's for my 375 an hour ago, I'm also glad to hear how well they shot in your 300 WSM. Maybe they'll do well in my 375. Which also has a 22" barrel...hey, a guy can hope, right!

Montana Marine:

Shame on you for going potty on Brad's campfire! Drop and give me 50 bends and thrusts! Begin!

Tim

Tarbe, it's quite alright. MM is taking his figures from loading manuals with 24" barrels. VERY FEW 30-06's will do 2,870 fps. I've never heard of one with a 22" brrel that will do that. Most are at 2,700 - 2,800 fps max (again, from a 22" tube). The 300 WSM, when in a 22" barrel, is prbably very similar to the 30-06 AI in the same barrel length... but it's not a wildcat.

Tarbe... I was "singing praises" when I saw how the XLC's shot in my rifle... it's more than I could hope for. 180's at 2,914! My particular barrel fouls very little too, and clean-up after the XLC's was no different (maybe a little less) than "ordinary" bullets. I'm curious to hear how the XLC's shoot in your 375... I have a classic stainless M70 in that cartridge as well... of course I had the barrel shortened to 22" too!

Brad

Hi Brad, good to hear the WSM is working out so well for you. Regarding waiting for a Rimrock stock, I can recommend from experience that you will NOT be disappointed with a Bansner High-Tech. That's what I used on my custom M70 short-action 284 that we've talked about in the past. Significantly cheaper, and I can't find a single thing to fault about it. Light, yet just as sturdy as a McMillan. The stock shape fits me perfectly as well. Regards, Rick

With respect to the .30/06AI.....you could have knocked me to the floor with a feather when I saw the load info for this cartridge in the Nosler manual and I still find it very hard to believe that the velocities listed are representative even with a 24" barrel. It absolutely goes against everthing else I've read about this conversion as well as chronograph results from the rifles of several friends who had their '06's converted expecting big improvements....the results were increase of about 75-80 fps with the 180 grain Nosler. Hardly worth the effort.
The old rule-of-thumb is that you can realize about 25% of the powder increase as velocity. That is, if the powder capactity is increased 10% you will get about 2.5% increase in velocity.

I'm not pissing on parades. I was surprised myself. But then RL-22 powder and 180 gr bullets combined with the '06 case capacity seems to be one of those combinations that yield performance not generally expected. The same powder pushes 165gr projectiles to 3000 fps in the '06.

And yes it is representative of what the 06 can do with modern components. the Federal HE loads push 180s to 2880 and 165s to 3140.

Again, I'm not taking anything away from the 300WSM. It puts a lot of performance in a short action 30 cal. I am just not mislead into thinking it has any practical performance advantage over a modern 30-06 load.

I've got a long action M70 winchester with a 26" varmint weight .308 Win barrel (1-10 twist)that I've been thinking would be pretty cool rechambered to 300 WSM. with a long magazine I could load up to 220gr matchkings seated so the juncture of the boat tail meets the bottom of the neck. I'm guessing in that configuration with the 26" pipe it could reach MV vicinity of 2700-2750 FPS, with very high potential for excellent accuracy. Hmmmmm...

MM

MM... I still doubt the figures you're quoting are typical... even for a 24" barrel. If you scroll down to page two (I believe) on Big Game Hunting, I did an informal survey of actual (chronographed) 30-06 velocities. Nothing hit the upper 2800's with a 22" barrel, even the Federal/Hornady HE stuff. Also, I DO tire (nothing personal) of hearing the High Energy mantra... if they won't SHOOT in your rifle there's no point in them, they're still expensive (most of us are handloaders) and the velocities typically can't be duplicated in SAFE handloads. I'm pushing 2,950 fps with a 22" barrel... that's without trying more than one powder. You've got to compare apples and apples... 22" to 22" barrels. I've no doubt I could go over 3,000 fps with the original 24" barrel on my rifle.

All fun and games.

Brad

Heya Rick.

Rimrock just LOWERED their prices... can you believe it in this day and age?

Brad

Brad, this thread of yours is a very good one. Excellent observations. No, there is no magic cartridge, no matter how much wishful thinking we indulge in.

Case capacity still counts for something. There's no magic to the old '06 due to any sort of powder or ammunition breakthroughs. The High-Energy loads are also available for the .300 Winchester and the .300 Weatherby as well, and (the last time I checked at least) Reloader 22 still produces excellent results in those cartridges to boot. All of this being so, the performance gap between the .30-06 and the "officially-magnum" .300s remains the same.

I'll be very much interested in what sort of new ammo options become available over time for the new WSM cartridges, especially the .300. High-Energy loads in that cartridge would make for a very interesting proposition. Likewise, I think it'll take a little bit of time before all of the "handloading codes" are cracked for the .300 WSM as well.

It's a good cartridge with a great future, I think. It should pass the test of time long after some of the other new short & fat magnums become footnotes. That's my guess, anyway........

AD

Brad...No, didn't know that about Rimrock lowering their prices. To be honest, the more open grip on the Browns and Bansner fits me much better than the BDL type grip on the Rimrocks, so I have never seriously considered buying one. Sounds like a good way to go, if you can get one for a price you like! Thanks, Rick

Allen, not only is Winchester loading the 300 WSM, but Federal and Norma... Ruger and Savage are chambering it as well as Browning and USRAC. I think it's a winner and here to stay... hard to say about its off-spring.

Rick, funny how stocks ar so different in different hands... I dislike the Winchester factory stock, but really like the Remington Mtn. Rifle stock with its tiight radius grip... the Rimrock is very similar to that stock.

Brad

Brad

Had the 375 out today to try the 235 XLC in a very limited way. My Mark V gave mixed results as it has with all Barnes. Loaded in WW cases with 69gr IMR 4895 and Fed 215. Bullets were seated as far out as the action would allow at 3.74", 0.015 off the lands. This is the load I use for deer/hogs and it has worked well with the Speer, so I thought I'd start there.

First three went into 1.1". Decided to shoot another 3-shot and the first two of the second group were almost touching, but the 3rd (now the 6th shot overall) went out over an inch and opened the group to 1.7".

I decided to CR-10 the bore and there was quite a bit of copper fouling already.

After a cleaning, I shot a five-shot group, with the first 4 going into .91" and the fifth out by an inch again, opening the 5-shot group to 1.9". I cleaned the bore with CR-10 again (lots of copper on the patches) and fired another 3-shot group of 1.1". By now it was starting to drizzle so I quit for the day. I'm willing to bet by shot 5 it would have opened up again!

Now four groups can only tell you so much, but it is interesting that the 5th or 6th shot seemed to open things up. Cleaning would restore accuracy. And the XLC's were still fouling way more than I'd like. I think this rifle is just not going to shoot these "soft" Barnes bullets...maybe the bore is too rough. The XLC's were an improvement over the uncoated though. At least the XLC's want to shoot into an inch, until the barrel fouls up!

Tim

Tarbe, interesting! My barrel reacts the exact opposite. I thoroughly cleaned my barrel before shooting the XLC's (as Barnes reccomends). My bullets were seated .025" off the lands. I shot one "fouler", then shot three, three-shot groups increasing the powder charge .5 grain for each group. As the velocity increased, and more XLC's went through the barrel, the groups got smaller! Clean-up afterwards was no different than any other bullet.

We've proved once again every barrels is a mystery that requires a lot of handloading to unlock its secrets... though some are pretty disapointing once their secrets are revealed!

Brad

A valid criticism of the 300 magnums is that they are heavy and long rifles. The length of the bolt throw does not matter that much to me but taking up barrel length with a long chamber does not help a cartridges performance.

The WSM and SAUM series make a shorter, lighter rifle practical. Just like the .300 Savage and .308W did.

Note that the barrel lengths in the Ruger rifles are 22"!

Don, Olin designed the 300 WSM to work in barrels between 22 and 24". My personal experience bears-out it works well in either length. I DO know for a fact that Winchester (USRAC) was initially going to offer the stainless version in a 22" barrel... they decided on the 24" as most guys will fret over the last few fps, and, as it's easier to cut-off two inches than grow it on, I think it was a wise move!

The "standard" Ruger contour (for the 30-06) narrows down pretty quickly to .560" @ 22". The Winchester is .620" at 22". Though the barrel shank is beefier on the Ruger, I prefer the Winchester for this round... a bit stiffer for the higher velocity, heavy bullets. I also think the Model 70 is a better rifle, though I'm sure Ruger will sell a ton of 300 WSM's. The Ruger SA will handle this cartridge very well as it can accept cartridges out to 2.880"... that's plenty long enough for most bullets for the standard WSM throat.

I can't see any reason for the 300 SAUM, and doubt it will last.

Brad

I agree that the SAUM probably will not last and I have my reservations about the WSM's also. Cartridges designed for short actions seem to have a high atrition rate history shows this with few exceptions. The 300 win mag will be with us much longer and in my opinion the short mag concept is defeating the purpose of magnums. There is nothing wrong with standard length actions or 26 inch barrels when putting a high performance rifle to the test. The truth is the 300 Weatherby and winchester belted mags do all that is needed and if less is satisfactory then get a 30-06.

I think that the .300 WSM will catch on. It's been decades since the last .300 mag's came out and the WSM allows shorter rifles.

We all know that there is not that much improvement over the 300 win mag but when you look at the rifles in a rack at the store and then pick them up the WSM is easier to handle.

I had a 7mm Rem Mag in a Ruger #1 with a 22" bbl for about 25 years and it was a good rifle. I could get the 160 bullet up to 3000 fps out of that short bbl and it was handy enough to be a woods rifle.

I understand that when your in the Rockies and looking from one mountain to another that even a .300 Weatherby is not enough or so it seems but the law of diminishing returns (the fact that the more powder you add the less you get back as a percentage) means that the big magnums really don't shoot much further. Ackley called it "overbore".

It's not that big a deal and we use what we want but a 22" or 23" bbl on a short action is not hard to live with.

I really don't see any reason for the .300 Win mag any longer. It headspaces on the wrong place, is longer and not really better in any way by much.

Headspaces in the wrong place? Not after the first firing. My 300 win mag shoots very well with factory loads and extremely well with my reloads. With the WSM you have a cartridge with a bastard magazine width dimension, An inability to push heavy bullets anywhere near as fast as the win mag, a tendency to hamstring it with short barrels and most of all one that will never be seen on sale at Walmart. Sounds just like the 6.5 Rem, 350 Rem, 284 win, 358 win, 260 Rem, 708 Rem etc. A short action magnum? What for? What specific niche did it fill? Where can this cartridge be considered outstanding?

Here's a universal tip that is applicable to all:

If you don't like it, than don't f'in buy one.

If you don't like Howard Stern, don't listen. If you don't like Rosie O'Donell, then don't watch her.

What is purpose of the .300 Winchester Magnum? Let's make the .300 Weatherby the standard, and make the Winchester obsolete. Both handloaded to the maximum, the Win cannot compare witht the Wby. How about not making any technological advances in the firearms industry and we all use a 256 Newton? Brad was just trying to put out some info on his new rifle and the achieved velocities for the cartridge in a shortened barrel.

The .300 Win Mag is not really "outstanding" over the .300 H&H. I have both and with a nice action the bolt goes back a tiny bit further, that's all.

The bullets come out of the bbl at about the same speed and the rifle is just handier. That's all.

This is the point of the WSM/SAUM series. It's a incremental improvement.

Brad,

Very interesting thread. You and those short barrels though! LOL

One of my local hunters bought one as soon as they came out. He likes to jump on the wagon of anything "new and improved". I was surprised he bought one, as his last rifle purchase was a .30-.378 WBY he bought a few years ago.
He ended up really liking the .300 WSM as it was handy, accurate and as he found out......really all you need. I have my old .300 H&H and a 180 at 3000 fps is potent medicine on about anything we have here in Gods Country.

We just got about a foot of snow since last night. Currently 6 degrees. It will be nice to have a green Spring though. How are you guys doing in Bozeman? BTW.....is the Weapons that Won the West exhibit at the Museum of the Rockies worth seeing??

Frank N.

I think the best thing that the wsm and remington short cartridges have going for them is savage and ruger are chambering for them. The remington offerings at least allow you to use 404 jeffrey brass in the advent that remington drops the factory cases. Remingtons full length ultras aren't hurting in sales.

Hiya Frank... yeah, but if I was "too tall" like you (and looked like G. Gordon to boot) I wouldn't mind carrying longer tubes!

It's COLD here and blowing, but the bulk of the snow went your way... I think we're in for a wet (and green!) spring... finally.

I never made the Museum of the Rockies show... I may go this weekend with my kids... Since I built this house on top of my 50-hour-per-week job, I sort of sit around in it with a "thousand yard stare."

If I get to it, I'll drop you a line.

Brad

I guess Nosler and Barnes are both getting non typical results from their 30-06 testing. These velocities from Barnes using 180 gr XLCs list no less than eight powders that drive their bullet at over 2900 fps. Two above 2950. Not sure what barrel length. As I said, the WSM is a potent round, but no practical advantage over the 96 year old round for reloaders.

When the '06 is handloaded with modern components, the new magnum bests it by only 50 fps or so.
http://www.barnesbullets.com/mancorr.html#spr30

MM