I was a little disappointed to hear that Winshester is making the 25 in the super short mag. I was kind of hoping for the "full size" short mag. Any opinions of the new 25 WSSM?

I guess i like being differnt or something, cause none of my fellow shooters have any time for the 25 cal. I do realize that there are better thing out there but i was really hoping for something like the 25 SAUM that Jon Sundra is working on. Be something really flat shooting i would think.
Be a barrel burner for sure, but thats not something i worry about on a hunting rifle.

Anybody heard what winchester is planning for the 6.5 if anything. 6.5 WSM or 6.5 WSSM??? Any opinions there? Personally i hope they do a 6.5 WSM. Maybe thats too close to the 270 WSM?

Any opinions welcome.
thanks for reading.

They're short and they're new.

That's about it.

A good product but an advertising program by browning and winchester that contains nothing but lies and deception.

My 7saum is great. I have not been dissapointed.

What case would you like to see the 6.5 on? It's going to be interesting to see actually what case will be here in 10 yrs. I started reloading in 1965 after I got of the sevice and have seen alot of changes. I see nothing wrong with the short mag case or Rem short mag and what kind of gets me is why are so many guys complaing about how lousy the short mag round is and it has no place and I think most haven't even fired one of those rounds just read something on the case. I remember all those camplains about the 284 (rebated) and the 300 win mag (short neck). They been trying to kill off the 284 case ever since it came out but it just cann't get it done. As soon as the 300wsm case came out guys were doing a 6.5 on that case. Just my 02. Tom

The profits of doom and the naysayers are lining up to bray their negative comments about the newest offerings from winchester browning. Reminds me of 2 years ago when the 300 WSM first came out!

Stubblejumper, lies and deception??? To what are you referring? The WSM's do what they claim and are accurate to boot. I can post scanned pics of two groups I shot with my browning 300 WSM, along with chronograph readings, that confirm their claims.

Seafire, "funny looking"? What in tarnation does that have to do with how a cartridge performs? Again they said that same thing about the WSM. I happen to like how it looks, not that it has anything to do with how it shoots. In my WSM, instead of the brass getting longer with each firing, it actually gets shorter.

I happen to live within 12 miles of the Oshkosh DU outdoor festival. I volunteer each year, this year I worked with the guys from browning. They brought 4 rifles, 2 in .223 and 2 in .243 WSSM. Along with plenty of ammo. The comments from the public that shot these were quite positive! The short action has been shortened by a full half inch. This makes the whole rifle shorter and stiffer.

As for the barrel burning aspect; Browning listened to the internet negative comments that barrels would not last, they stopped, backed up and redesigned the barrels to be chrome lined. Not that they were seeing ANY evedence that it was happening. Test rifles had been shot up to 5,000 rounds, bore scope examination showed very little erosion!

Ok here is my 2 cents worth. My view of the short mag concept from day one was that it was a good idea. Whatever the cartridge, 300 short "roughly" equals 300 Winchester (within 50 fps), 270 short mag equivalant of 270 winchester plus a little, and so on, we all know that. The second thing i liked was the short action, most people agree that a short action is "on average" more accurate than a long action. Now this isnt saything that long actions are not accurate, i have seen many that are tack drivers, but when odds are looked at, a short will generally be better than a long.

So my opinion is based on production rifles. Personally i think all production rifles are expensive. While i would love to own some tweaked out custom rigs, i cant afford it, i am in college. So i am trying to look at things that in a factory rifle will give me better odds of getting an accurate rifle with similar performance. If i am going to spend $600+ dollars on the firearm alone, i think i am entitled to some kind of performance. I personally dont belive one should have to spend thousands to get a half minute gun, maybe i am full of crap!

I love the 6.5-284. shot a friends once and fell in love immediately. Extremely good ballistics and extreme accuracy. Problem is i dont know of any production guns that are chambered for it. Other 6.5s i can think of are the 260 Rem, 264 Win Mag, 6.5 Swede. All of these are good rounds, but a 270 WSM will provide similar ballistics to a 264 Win mag. Wouldnt the 270 WSM be a better choice? Both are barrel burners, maybe the 6.5 have better bullet selection.

My conclusion is this. Long vs. short. If there was a short mag roughly equivalant to a long action round made in todays production rifles, wouldnt it be a wiser choice to go with a short mag? Chances of accuracy is better, with equal performance. Odds are short mag will burn barrels slightly faster that long action, but what does that really matter in a hunting rifle. Most hunting rifles are not shot enough to reach max barrel life anyways. Thats my opinion. Maybe i am totally off the wall here, but to me the logic involved makes good sense.

[ 12-05-2003, 20:18: Message edited by: sharps-shooter ]