I was reading in Boddington's book "The Rifle" or something like that, and a couple times he mentions that he doesn't believe this calibre to be that accurate. Am I missing something? I've always felt that the .300 win mag was one of the more inherently accurate rounds. I've got a model 70 in this calibre, and it's been the most accurate model 70 I've owned (had one in .270 and two in 7mm rem. mag). What gives?

I have no problem with my Remington 700 LSS loaded with Norma Oryx 200 grains. Some of the 3 shot series I take goes within less then half an inch and most of them within an inch(100 meters/109 yards)

[ 11-01-2002, 11:27: Message edited by: cchunter ]

.300 Win Mag inaccurate, maybe. But then, all the .300 Winnies I had, the 2 I still own and all those long range target rifles must be lucky flukes

I believe Boddington may be refering to to the short case neck of the cartridge. As a general rule you want the case neck to be at least the same as the bullet diameter if not more. This is not the case with the 300 Win Mag. While it is an accurate cartridge it could theoretically be more accurate if it had a longer neck.

In a book I finished reading a few months ago by Boddington it chose it as his favorite long range rifle in a Browning A-Bolt II Stainless Stalker with BOSS.

[ 11-01-2002, 20:01: Message edited by: jcsabolt-2 ]

My 300 win mag with 180 gr serria match kings keeps them well under a an in and when I am really shooting well well keep them under.5in.
So much with any rifle and the ammo it shoots depends on the shooter.

Boddington probably should pick up a "Precision Shooting" magazine and see just what calibers are winning 1,000 benchrest competitions around the country. The 300 WinMag is always well represented.

The problem with many writers is that they simply perpetuate old myths. IF Boddington would actually invest some load development time and put effort into testing neck length and accuracy, then I would have more respect for his �work�. Unfortunately, these guys only get paid to write, they don�t get paid to write quality stuff. Word count is all they are concerned about, whether it is factual or not is secondary.

Boddington�s hunting reports are always a good read, however, when he starts sharing his technical expertise is the moment when I turn the page...

This is one of those cases where one should just consider the source of the information. Read Boddington enough and you'll notice a pattern. Must be why I quit reading anything he writes a few years ago.

Quite simply, Craig is out to lunch on this one.

In all truth, the .300 Win. Mag. is one of the most inherently accurate cartridges to ever come out of a major factory. It's the least fussy and most accurate belted magnum that I've ever worked with, and it's been used to win scores and scores of high-power championships, including the prestigious 1000 yd. Wimbleton. It's also used by all branches of the U.S. armed forces.

The old "short neck" alarum is 1960's gun magazine propaganda (that still gets blindly repeated by those who don't know any better to this day), and has no bearing on the functionality or usability of the cartridge whatsoever. I've fired thousands and thousands of rounds of .300 Win. Mag. in practice and I've taken over 100 big game animals with it as well, and all I can say is, if the so-called "short neck" is problematic in any way, those problems have managed to elude me somwhow. As national high-power award winner Glen Pierce told me one time (referring to the short neck), "It's not too short to shoot good!", and Glen knows whereof he speaks. Another acquaintence of mine, Jim Cloward, of Seattle, WA, used the .300 Win. Mag. to win the 1000 yd. Wimbleton in 1976, as but one more example of the proven winners who have relied on it's fine inherent accuracy.

AD

I can't believe Craig said that! For my own experience, it IS the most accurate rifle I have. Pre-64 with my handloads I get consistent 3/8" groups with 180gr Nosler Partitions. Matter of fact all my 300s ( 2 Win I Wby 1 H&H) are all as a whole the most accurate rifles I own. jorge

You all pretty much mirror my views on the subject. Mine was really accurate out of the box, even with several brands of factory ammunition.

The funny thing is I also saw the article where Boddington chose it as his favorite long range cartridge which to me seemed kind of contradictory. I mean in general accuracy is a desired trait in a long range rifle, right???

I suppose he was just going along with a common misconception, and hasn't got around to editing his book yet. Who knows? Thanks for all your input.

I'm searching hard for something good to say here, since I won't speak ill of another Marine (even a Reservist) so I'll agree that MY favorite LR rifle is also the stainless Browning A-Bolt in .300 Win "Long". Howzat for finding a silver lining?

Redial

I have read many articles written by the general in which he says that .300 Mag is not very accurate because it headspaces on the belt and in his opinion the cartridges that headspace on the shoulder rather than the belt or a rim are more accurate.

I wonder why he came up with that theory just after the introduction of Remington Ultra Mags

BB

All the talk of "inherently accurate" cartridges is for the most part irrelevant when discussing hunting rifles. Take for instance the 308 winchester and the 30-06. We often hear how much more accuracy the 308 is capable of than the 30-06, but the proven accuracy advantage is only something like .07 MOA, and this is from heavy barreled test guns. That .07 MOA is way, way below the level that you'd be able to see in any hunting weight rifle. Read any basic book on statistics and you'll see that when the deviation of accuracy between the two is so small and you factor it against the accuracy deviations of even the most accurate hunting rifles that the cartridge's inherent accuracy is meaningless. What it all means if a hunting rifle is chambered for the .308 and it's more accurate than a like rifle chambered for the .30-06 it isn't because of the cartridge, it's because of the rifle. Likewise the reverse is true. However, if you THINK your 308 will outshoot a 30-06 then you'll probably hunt better with it because you have more confidence in it. Just know that this supposed inherent accuracy advantage isn't based in reality. One chambering is just as accurate as the other, the accuracy depends upon the rifle.

It's the exact same thing with the 300 win mag. It's supposed inaccuracy because of it's short neck simply doesn't exist in real life. It's all in the head of some gun writer who supposedly made this amazing discovery. Most likely it was made up by one of these guys who hates anything that ends with the word magnum.

Ronald Reagan once said that an economist is a person who looks at an economic system and says "sure it works great in practice, but how does it work in theory?". It's much the same with this old wives tale.

All cartridges have similar "accuracy" if they are made right. So in a big enough rifle the .300 WM has proven to group well but this does not mean that the majority of hunters make good shots with that mean kicker.

The late Les Bowman concluded that the worst shooting was done by inexperianced hunters with the .300 Magnums. This led to the introduction of the 7mm Remington Mag.

[ 11-02-2002, 18:29: Message edited by: Don Martin29 ]

I personally love the .300 Win Mag. I find it to be a great all-around cartridge for much of the world. I like the fact that I can load to .308/30'06 velocities, or really let the hammer down for bigger stuff. Mine is not picky, like just about every bullet and powder combo I have tried. With controlled expansion or Partitions, the .300 is great for even the biggest bears.

saying the author's name pretty much explained it for me. No big fan of Craig's here! Petersens "Hunting" magazine should be renamed Craig Boddington's "Hunting". Sometimes it seems he is the only person writing material for them anymore.
I have found my .300 win mag to be more accurate than I am.

Strange mind set when it is a fact that the 300 Winchester Magnum cartridge has produced many 1000 yard record groups. Just last year a shooter posted a 1.5" five shot group at 1000 Yards with his 300 Win mag. target rifle.
The 300 Win. Mag. is one of the finest most acurrate shooting cartridges ever developed. I know my 300 mag will do the job on the target and the game animal.

Boddington isn't known for being very accurate either. Talk to some of the PHs that have hunted him.

[ 11-18-2002, 17:34: Message edited by: Mickey1 ]