does anyone here think the WSM line will expand into other calibers? Such as the 338 WSM, or even a 375 WSM or 458 WSM?

I am hopeing for a .257 WSM.

Doubtful. If you really want the extra power of the larger bores, there is no reason to refrain from getting a long action.

Bruce - To take your answer a little further - there was no reason for the short mags in the first place. If you really wanted a specific caliber to achieve less velocity, simply put less powder in the case. If you really wanted less magazine capacity, simply fill it with dirt. If you really wanted a rifle that does not feed well, buy a Savage.

Let�s see..... Yep, that will pretty well piss off most everyone.

There is a 450 WSM on the drawing board. Here is the story:

http://www.realguns.com/Commentary/comar60.htm

ZM

With respect to the RealGuns article...

Personally, I see the entire WSM movement as a "smoke & mirrors" illusion, and a waste of time...

AD

Allen - It was not a waste of time. In fact, the marketing departments at both Remington and Winchester won in the short term - they increased sales. Mission accomplished.

We all know by now that they didn�t create anything new nor did they achieve any improvements in what we already have. But they did increase sales and that makes the board of directors at both companies very happy.

Zero, you speak the truth!

AD

I am just interested in seeing which ones are going to die off first

The short magnums are an advance in cartridge design. They commerialize the low aspect ratio of the PPC concept that provides a superior powder burning environment.

Also the short magnums provide a superior headspace for those of us who reload.

We will have the WSSM's soon and I wish them well also.

As to larger calibers in new cases we have the .338 RUM and .375 RUM already. There is not that much demand for hard kickers so the 223 WSSM and 243 WSSM are next.

"Let�s see..... Yep, that will pretty well piss off most everyone."

Zero,
most of us couldn't be pi$$ed whilst ROFLOA'sO!!!

best,
bhtr

bigdogfan2003

I would imagine a 338 WSM is a possible as it would let a shooter have a complete battery based on the WSMs, such as a 270 WSM and 338 WSM.

I think the case is too small for the 375 and 416 bore size. In addition, 416 is extremely limited in appeal and the 375 H&H must be the most entrenched caliber of out entire caliber line up. For example, the 338 RUM will have made a much bigger impact on the 338 market than has the 375 RUM on the 375 market.

I still feel Winchester missed out by not having the WSM case at 30/06 length.

Mike

I wonder if those taking shots at the WSMs felt the same way about the 280 Remington being introduced so long after the 270 Winchester...what purpose did it serve? For that matter we had the 7mm and 300 Weatherby's so why introduce the 7mm RemMag and the 300 WinMag which are slightly weaker "imitations" ...aren't they?

Why the 22/250 when we had the 220 Swift? Let's not even talk about the .223! And while we're at it, we had the 30/06 and the 300 Savage so why the need for the 308 Winchester?

The question about why not make the WSM the length of the 30/06....now you are duplicating the Dakota series but with a rebated head.

I guess I don't understand all the whining and bitching about the short cartridges....after all, it isn't as if someone is making you buy one and I doubt if anyone will quite chambering the originals like the 270 Win, the 7mm RemMag and the 300 WinMag.....or is that what you're afraid of?

Thanks DB Bill

What's the big deal? I bought a 300WSM simply because it is new and flashy. With a 180gr X bullet of Failsafe, it will do anything a 30 cal should do.

My rifle, a MDL 70 Winchester, has a few flaws in it, but it has nothing to do ith the cartridge, only the rifle.

It feeds fine, holds 3 rounds in the nag like any other magnum, and is incredibly accurate for a "off the shelf" rifle. I sat down with factory ammo and a HORRENDOUS trigger and shot a few nice, less than MOA groups.

I always wonder if guys slammed the 300 WM because the 300 H&H already existed, and fed better. I wonder this about alot of cartridges. Use whatever you like. I'd still be using my 7mmRM for EVERYTHING in BC, except it was stolen, so I bought the 300.

Mike:

quote:

---

I still feel Winchester missed out by not having the WSM case at 30/06 length.

---

DrBill:

quote:

---

The question about why not make the WSM the length of the 30/06....now you are duplicating the Dakota series but with a rebated head.

---

Both of you are on the mark & we would have then have factory ammo for a great series of cartridges that would be available just about anywhere too.

DB Bill

I wonder if those taking shots at the WSMs felt the same way about the 280 Remington being introduced so long after the 270 Winchester...what purpose did it serve?

It served to burn up Remington dollars that might have been better used, given that the 280 Remington is a very limited seller.

For that matter we had the 7mm and 300 Weatherby's so why introduce the 7mm RemMag and the 300 WinMag which are slightly weaker "imitations" ...aren't they?

The 7mm and 300 Wby could be compared to todays Dakota rounds and the 7mm Rem and 300 Win would be the counterpart of putting the Dakota rounds on a solild commercial footing with readily available low price brass and ammo. The 7mm Rem and 300 Win were about upgrading the peformance of the 270 and 30/06.

Why the 22/250 when we had the 220 Swift? Let's not even talk about the .223! And while we're at it, we had the 30/06 and the 300 Savage so why the need for the 308 Winchester?

The Swift was not a success and was and is a feeding nightmare. The 308 as you know was a military idea.

The question about why not make the WSM the length of the 30/06....now you are duplicating the Dakota series but with a rebated head.

This would have been the way to go commercially because shooters would see a ballistic and case capacity gain over the 7mm Rem and 300 Win. Remember that the shooters who have elected to go for 7mm Rem and 300 Win have already decided that more is better otherwise they would have a 270 or 30/06. The 7mm Rem and 300 Win did not become a success because they were smaller than the 270 and 30/06. The 308 is a success but that is because it isa military calibre.

I guess I don't understand all the whining and bitching about the short cartridges....after all, it isn't as if someone is making you buy one and I doubt if anyone will quite chambering the originals like the 270 Win, the 7mm RemMag and the 300 WinMag.....or is that what you're afraid of?

My complaint is not about WSMs Vs 270s etc but rather what we could have had.

If WSMs had of been 30/06 lenghth you would be seeing 300 Winchesters and 7mm Rems being rechambered, just as use to happen with 30/06 to 300 Win. As you know the Ultraas are too long for the standard Rugers in 7mm and 300 Win and also it is not so staright forward to convert M70s in 7mm Rem or 300 Win to the Ultras due to length.

Mike

[ 12-29-2002, 18:35: Message edited by: Mike375 ]

Bill, here's my position:

I've grown to dislike experimenting with new cartridges over the years, in part because I'm just too busy to go through new rifle/new load hyjinks these days, but there's more to it than that.

I've found that most cartridges in the various cartridge classes (the .300's, for example) kill in pretty much the same way, and all of them can provide more than adequate accuracy, etc. - all other factors being equal.

That being my experience, there has to be constructive purpose at the core of cartridge selection before I'm going to junp on any new bandwagon, and I simple don't see any constructive purpose in abandoning a perfectly good .300 Winchester for a .300 WSM, as an example. I don't buy into the alarums against beltless cases, the "greater inherent accuracy" pitch, the "greater efficiency" pitch, nor the virtue of the short action.

Case in point: At this year's Outdoor Life magazine gear test shoot, we tested a Remington Model 7 in Remington's new 7mm SAUM caliber. This turned out to be a delightfully accurate (for a stock factory gun) rifle that produced 1" five-shot groups from the get-go with Remington's 160 gr. factory ammo. The thing was, it felt like any common 7mm Remington Magnum with a 24" barrel that I've fired over the years; the rifle weighed about the same as a standard 7mm Remington Magnum would; it produced about the same level of accuracy (any noise), plus about the same velocity. Those short, fat cases tended to lurch and seize their out of the magazine however, and that rifle didn't feed nearly so well as the 7mm Remington Magnum rifles I've worked with and owned over the last 25 years.

We had a stainless Model 70 in .300 WSM on the range at the same time, and it didn't feed all that great either, and felt about like shooting a stock factory .300 Winchester.

Maybe you see something here that's worth latching onto that I don't. I know this: I'm not going to dump perfectly good rifles chambered for perfectly good, widely-available cartridges just for the sake of something new if there's no real and honest net gain to be achieved in the bargain. Trading commodities just for the sake of trading is an automatic loss every time......

AD

One of the things that I find interesting from a marketing perspective is that the WSMs and SAUMs were not compared to the 7-08 and 308.

If they are weighed against the 7-08 and 308 then they take on a different look.

Mike

I really don't care what Ricks says about the belted case: I don't agree with him. The weight of overhelming hunting experience world-wide with belted cartridges since the early 20th century indicates that the belt doesn't really matter one way or the other.

I bought my first belted magnum (a Ruger 77 in 7mm Rem. Mag.) back in 1977 when I just turned twenty years old, and started handloading for it right away. Since then, I've owned scores of rifles in belted magnum chamberings, and I've loaded and/or fired over 20,000 rounds through those rifles. In all those years, through all those rifles, and to this very day I've never experienced a single belt-related problem with any of those rifles. I'd rather live by my own experience, thank you.

I've heard this same claptrap from various gunsmiths before, none of whom have hunted nearly as much as I have, and darned few have fired as many or more rounds downrange. One of the rare ones who has is D'Arcy Echols, and I'll put his credibility on the line against any riflesmith you can dig up. He chambers the vast majority of his custom rifles for belted magnum cartridges, and he doesn't see any meaningful problem with the belted design either. If a gunmaker cuts the chamber properly, and the reloader knows how to size cases properly, the belt becomes a non-issue.

One of the guys in our local safari club chapter is an award-winning hunter of vast, vast experience, hundereds of big game animals to his credit and something like a 5,000 sq.ft. trophy room, which he's largely filled with a .300 Weatherby that's on its fourth barrel. In jest, I asked him one time of that belted Weatherby case ever gave him problems in the field, he kept him somehow from putting yet another trophy animals up on the wall. He knew what I was getting at and laughed. I'd like to see some theorist argue with THAT brand of hunting experience.....

AD

Allen,

I have been talking with Lex Webernick of Rifles Inc. about various rifles and really expected him, as an ultra-light builder, to be wild about the WSM line. I was certainly tending that way. The one remark he made when I brought it up was that the shorter action only saved a couple of ounces and the cartridges fell short of their supposed performance. (Not exactly his words, but close.) On the other hand, He seems to really like the .300 RUM as he has chosen that for his limited run of 100 Signature rifles.

Allen et al.....several things....

(1) I don't think anyone expects those who already own a 7mm RemMag or a 300 WinMag to suddenly get rid of them and rush out and buy one of the new short-action cartridges.

(2) the companies are simply giving the shooting public a choice....how many similar cartridges are the Win Model 70s and Rem 700s offered in?

I continue to be amazed at how some actually seemed threatened in some way by the new "shorties".....I have no intereste is the longer Ultra-Mags as I don't take long range shots ...... or double-rifles as my life doesn't depend on going into tough situations after dangerous game .....or the super-dooper big-bore slammers such as the Mbogo or Nyati as I know that while some can take the recoil, I can't.

None of these interest me except in a general way so all I can say is that those who enjoy them or need them have it......why don't you all feel the same way about the "shorties"?

Finally companies bring out new products all the time...we had the Nosler Partition...did we need the Swift A-Frame....we had Barnes...did we need the Fail-Safe...........we hade dozens of powders so do we need more with similar burn rates?

DB Bill,

For me, it is not a case of disliking the WSMs.

I have two basic issues with them, one being the commercial side as I posted above.

The other issue is that the WSMs are misrepresented, especially the 300WSM Vs 300 Winchester.

Many shooters will buy WSMs in the mistaken belief that they have the same velocity potential as the 300 Win. But that is not so because of the case capacity. Even if they do not reload the 300 Win offers the High Energy ammo. Undoubtedly the 300 WSM will at some stage have High Energy ammo and that will not show the same velocity as the 300 Win. I am totally aware that you would need to shoot lots of animals before a real in the field difference would show, however, shooters will buy the 300 WSMs because they think they have 300 in potential, which they do not.

The other mistaken belief will be on accuracy.

I don't know if you have evdr done any bench rest shooting, but if not, I can tell you that a 6mm PPC does not shit all over a 222. You would need lots of rifles before you could demonstrate the difference, especially at 100 yards.

The so called extra velocity afforded by the short and fat case is a myth that has come about very much because of the 22 PPC and 22/250.

The average rifle at a range has shit factory bedding and usually a crappy barrel. In the majority of cases such a rifle setup delivers its peak accuracy at lower pressures. So of course this results in many 22/250s not being much faster and sometimes slower than the smaller capacity 22 PPC. However, stick a 22/250 HV barrel in the bench gun and you will soon see case capacity ruling the day.

Mike

DB - I don't think anyone is �threatened� by them. I believe the point is, there was not much need for them in the first place. The hype surrounding the short mags from both the manufacturers and gun rags was excessive and for the most part ludicrous. The initial performance claims made were well off base when compared to actual performance. Plain and simple, it was an idea to sell more guns.

My beef with the corporate gun makers is they have lost sight of the market and consumers. They should spend more time correcting their manufacturing deficiencies in order to turn out a better product. Today unfortunately, they are in the widget business. They would just as soon be producing pry bars to guns if the profits were better.

Now, am I glad the Short Mag cases are available - you bet. I am completing a new LR target rifle in long throat 270 WSM. You and I traded several E-Mails about going to the Lazzeroni case, however, with the availability of .270 WSM brass and dies, it was easier to go this direction. I am getting 6.5-284 performance with a heavier bullet - perfect for LR work.

I like having more case design options, but I hate what gun manufacturers have become - whores.
.
.
.
Sorry Mike, you were posting as I was composing....

[ 12-29-2002, 22:56: Message edited by: Zero Drift ]

Thanks Mike375, that is exactly correct and a point I would like to make. The 300 WSM can not match 300 win mag performance because it does not have the powder capacity the win mag does. Any idiot can see this by simply browsing a new reloading manual and comparing velocities of these calibers. This difference in performance is negligable in the field but all it is, is false hype. As far as belted magnums and reloading for them is concerned, I do not have the experience Allen does (I was a year old in 1977), but my father has been reloading a 7mm RM since 1972 and has had zero problems with it.

chuck

To all those who are convinced that a 300 WinMag can exceed the performance of my Lazzeroni Patriot, I've got an Oehler chronograph and some dollars in my pocket that are sure your convictions are wrong......my Patriot has a 24" barrel so I would expect challengers to be the same.......bullet weights up to 180 grains.

The question is "what do you consider exceeding the velocity"? AT 3100 fps, a 1% margin is 31fps which I consider statistically insignificant. I would agree that 50 fps would be a victory. Ideally the test would involve several 300 WinMags with 24" barrels to provide a reasonable range of "public" expectations....anyone interested?

Mike....don't shoot benchrest but I have popped a few long range varmints with various calibers but I do know more than a few serious benchrest shooters....trust me on this one, if the 6PPC didn't have more accuracy potential than anything else, they would be using something else. They will spend hours prepping one case....and in benchrest, past a certain velocity, speed is not your friend.

To the others......the short cases do provide similar velocities using less powder...take a look at the 22BR and the 22Dasher...significantly less powder than the 22/250 etc but look at the velocities.

My Patriot, the same length as the 308, will produce....nope I'm not going to say as there maybe a proud 300 WinMag owner out there.

I hunted with an M15STS in 300 WSM this fall
and it was accurate with good velocity however
it was in no way superior to a 300 Winchester
as far as accuracy, reliability or velocity.

If ya don't like em don't buy em. Just because they don't exactly match the belted Mags. velocity
doesn't make them a bad choice. I for one like lots of choices, I like having something different than everyone else, I like to tinker with something new. I own a 7mm Rem Mag and have shot it enough to where barrel erosion is starting to be a factor. In all those rounds I've never had a problem with it, but I'm still having a blast with my Ruger #1 with a new custom barrel in 25 WSM. Why limit yourselves? I hope someday when I have as much shooting and hunting experiance as some of you talk about that I still like something different or something new.

Here are some chronograph results from a selection of .300 Win. Mag. rifles I've owned over the years:

1) Remington 700 KS Mountain Rifle, 24" barrel, Winchester cases, IMR 4831 powder, Federal 215 primers, 180 gr. Hornady Spire Pt. @ 3130 fps.

2) Winchester Model 70 custom, Hart 24" barrel, 180 gr. Nosler Partition, Winchester cases, Reloader 22 powder, Federal 215 primer @ 3100 fps.

Same rifle, Winchester 180 gr. Fail-Safe factory load @ 3050 fps.

Same rifle, Federal High Energy 180 gr. Trophy Bonded load @ 3150 fps.

3) Winchester Model 70 custom, 26" Kreiger barrel, 168 gr. Sierra, Winchester cases, Reloader 22 powder, Federal 215 primers @ 3250 fps.

Same rifle, Federal High Energy Trophy Bonded 180 gr. factory load @ 3150 fps. (same as rifle #2 with Hart 24" barrel)

4) Winchester Model 70 custom, 24" Kreiger barrel (my current rifle in this caliber), 180 gr. Nosler Partition Protected Point, Winchester cases, Federal 215 peimers, Reloader 22 @ 3075 fps.

I've killed over 100 big game animals with these rifles since the mid-1980s, but especially since 1994. I still own rifle #2 & #4, but #2 is retired. The other two have been sold.

In general, I haven't seen any difference in killing power between loads at just over 3000 fps. and those at over 3100 fps. They all work, and they are all noticably more effective than the .30-06. A 100 fps. difference makes a little bit of difference in trajectory, but that difference isn't much.

I don't doubt that Lazarroni's short .300 does exactly what they claim it'll do, but that ammo's expensive and hard to find, especially on the other side of the world, or even in eastern Oregon. I'm not sure that whatever the real or imagined advantages it brings to the table are worthy it.........

AD

Does the patriat not have more powder capacity than the 300 wm?

chuck

Allen Day's constant mention of all the hunting he has done means nothing relevant to this topic. It would not matter one wit if he had ever even shot into a bullet test media or not.

What matters is how fast the bullet comes out of the rifle and what the costs are in terms of the size of the rifle and it's reliablity. Since this forum is called "Accurate Reloading" many cartridges are measured by that criteria.

I would have respect for the opinion of a target shooter or a experimenter and of course a competant gunsmith that has not painted himself into a corner. Hunting is much to variable a pastime to evaluate cartridges. Bullets are another story and that's where hunting experiance is valid.

I've had an M70 chambered for the 300 WSM for a year and a half. I've taken only a mule deer and a cow elk with it, but that's irrelevant since the terminal effect of a 180 gr. 30 cal bullet at 2,900 to 3,100 fps is VERY well documented.

There are only a couple of real reasons to choose a 300 WSM over the 300 WM... the 300 WSM will weigh 1/4 lb less than the 300 WM. It works well with a 22-23" bbl. (which will further reduce its weight and make the rifle a trifle handier). The average 300 WSM in a FACTORY rifle (not custom) shooting FACTORY rounds (not handloads) will generally be more accurate than a Factory 300 WM with FACTORY rounds. This is an observation based on talking to a lot of guys shooting both as well as my own experience. In a proper custom rifle either will deliver more accuracy than most of us can take advantage of in the field. The 300 WSM does recoil SLIGHTLY less than a 300 WM and therefore lends itself to a lighter rifle.

I'm planning on rebarreling my 300 WSM with a fine custom tube (23") and stocking it in fiberglass for an "all up" weight of 8 lbs. My current 300 WSM has a "slow" barrel... most 23" 300 WSM's will do 3,000 fps with 180's... the 300 WSM runs 50 to 100 fps behind the 300 WM.

Feeding IS more "critical" with the 300 WSM... so much for the belted magnum's having a congenital defect! My M70 took a while to get feeding "slick." It now feeds perfectly 100% of the time.

If I had a perfectly good 300 WM I'd never get a 300 WSM... however, if I wanted to build a light 300, I'd do the WSM.

Brad

DB Bill,

Is not the Patriot based on the 416 Rigby size case and bigger than the 300 WSM.

I did not say the 222 was more accurate than the 6mm PPC or 22 PPC. Rather, I said you need to test lots of rifles before you see the difference.

I also did not say that velocity was the benchresters friend.

Mike

Brad,

I think what Savage 99 is saying is that within the context of this thread animals hunted does not mean too much.

Someone who sat down with 10 rifles in 300 WSM and 300 Win mag and a chronograph etc but who had never shot many animals would have lots more information on the 300 WSM Vs 300 Win Mag, especially since the effects of 180 grain 30 calibre between 2700 and 3150 is well known.

In the case of feeding under field condtions, you meed to to talk to us Ausralians as 100 animals might only be one day

Mike

The reason the 300 WSM will out-shoot the 300 WM (Factory rifles/Factory ammo) is because most belted mag's have sloppy chambers in factroy rifles and headspace on the belt. The 300 WSM has very precise headspacing on its ample shoulder and a very short throat. I doubt it has little to do with the "PPC Effect." A properly constructed 300 WM will shoot beyond anyone's ability to utilize all its accuracy under field condition's... IMO!

Mike, I don't put culling roos in the same category as hunting a variety of big game under different conditions around the world

Brad,

If you wanted a report on rifle feeding I bet someone who shot 500 roos in a week and also from moving vehicle would have a more accurate report.

On the other hand that is not quite true and serves to illustate that hunting experience will not always be relevant.

There are two reasons why the shooting of the roos or goats might not be as valid as the 100 classy animals shot over a period of many years.

Firstly, because of the sheer numbers each individual animal has no significance and you would not even remember if the rifle jammed up 2 or 3 times.

Secondly, very extensive use of the rifle usually means someone overcomes its short falls or problem areas.

Of course all these different situations are why we have so many different opinions.

The Allen Day type hunting situation tends to produce opinions that are formed from expereince that is broad but not deep. The people like me have experience that is very deep but also very narrow.

Thus the Allen Day type experience will be more applicable to a wider section of people.

Mike

[ 12-30-2002, 06:32: Message edited by: Mike375 ]

Brad,

Have you read on 24hourcampfire the article by Barnsess where he says that the WSM's have no throat!

I have shot thousands and thousands of animals. When I made a hole in a vital spot they died right away. I can't see how this has anything at all to do with the suitablity of a 300 WSM vrs a 300 Win Mag.

To add that it seems a little early to say that the 300 WSM is more accurate than other 30's. In hunting size rifles the .300 Win Mag is very accurate and so are others that are made right.

Do you have some current data? And why are you rebarreling your .300 WSM if it's so accurate?

The fact that Brad had feeding problems does or the fact that poster after poster here blows the heads off of reloaded belted cases does.

Shooting game has nothing to do with it at all.

[ 12-30-2002, 06:59: Message edited by: Savage 99 ]