I just pulled up the weight on Sako Finnlight and Tikka T3 rifles and the 300wsm and 300mag both weight the same. I don't think it's right anyone has to defend their caliber choice. I know afew sheep hunters and most use 284 and one uses a 300mag done up by ultra light arms and he just has one more for his grand slam he took his desert two years ago with the 300mag. I met a guy over 30yrs ago he had a little hardware store in San Carlos, Calif and he had two record book grand slams wonder how he did that without an ultra light rifle must of made those guys back in the 40 & 50 tough when he got his.

Chuck, most factory 300 WM's push the 8.5-9lb mark scoped and ready to go. In a custom lightweight I'd probably just as soon have the 300 WM as we both agree the action weight difference is only 2-3 oz's.

The reason I went the WSM route was Kimber made its petite action just for the WSM in a package I really liked... to get to that weight with a custom CRF action (M70... me no like PF's) would take a LOT more cash outlay than an off-the-shelf Kimber.

I LIKE the 300 WM... just n otin a 9lb rifle.

Unfortunately, that Kimber is a right handed proposition only. It's a nice looking rifle. How do you like it, as a reliable accurate using big game rifle?

Chuck

quote:

Originally posted by Chuck Nelson:
... the weight difference in the 70 actions is 2oz.

If that can be confirmed, it destroys the lighter weight argument of the WSM proponents, and particularly Ram Slayer's position.

For a lightweight mountain rifle, I really like the Steyr Scout in .308 Win. It's about 7lbs scoped. Maybe one chambered in .300WSM would rekindle interest in that gun.

quote:

Originally posted by WPN:

quote:

Originally posted by Chuck Nelson:
... the weight difference in the 70 actions is 2oz.

If that can be confirmed, it destroys the lighter weight argument of the WSM proponents, and particularly Ram Slayer's position.

For a lightweight mountain rifle, I really like the Steyr Scout in .308 Win. It's about 7lbs scoped. Maybe one chambered in .300WSM would rekindle interest in that gun.

The Model 70 action, even the short one, is not petite. That is why I like the .300 SAUM - it comes in a Mod 7. That gun is heads and shoulders easier to carry than anything else, adn it is not difficult to shoot accurately.

quote:

The Model 70 action, even the short one, is not petite. That is why I like the .300 SAUM - it comes in a Mod 7. That gun is heads and shoulders easier to carry than anything else, adn it is not difficult to shoot accurately.

As mentioned above a Kimber Montana 8400 in a WSM is quite handy and in fact an ounce or so less than a Remington Titanium.

I could like a SAUM if there were no WSM's. Not so for the Remingtons.

Lawdog, if you believe that winchester marketing hype about the 300 wsm being 10 fps faster than the 300 wm, I got a bridge that I wanna sell ya.My Oehler don't lie, I have 2 300 wm's, 1 300 wsm and 2 270 wsm's, the ONLY benefit is the lighter weight. I would rather shoot my 300 wm any day with 180's as my 300 wsm with the same bullet. The wsm is also a full 250 fps slower in my rifle with the 180's. The recoil on that 300 wsm with the 180's is also unbearable. This from someone who has shot mags their whole life, including a couple weatherby's. I got rid of those because they were wrecking my hearing. Equal wieght gun for equal weight gun, the 300 wsm will have less recoil because it is going SLOWER. I can get 3150 fps easily with my 300 win with the 180's and a full load of rl22, the 300 wsm is a stretch at 2950.

My beef is that they don't come in 375 and up. These are the diameter bullets I am interested in. My 7 # 375 H&H makes a pretty good sheep gun. Not much in the short mag stable comes close on knockdown or legality on big stuff in Africa. 'nuff said.

Guys...
I think the majority here are agreeing to disagree!
What I'm seeing and hearing is that the 1st time buyers or fellas with just a few rifles (no or little overlap) seem to be opting for the WSM's. Now be that marketing hype or whatever do you think they care? One young guy I talked to the other day told me he wanted to move up to a rifle that offered more options for power and bullet combos from his old .270 in a trimmer pkg so he bought a .300 wsm.
He's as happy as can be with it... factory rifle, factory shells (for now), and under an inch with no problems at all.
I wonder if this kind of argument was going on when the short belted mags like the .300 winmag and 7mm Remag et al were coming out. "They do'nt kill any thing deader than my 06 and I can eat all the way to the bullet hole and they kick a whole lot more"
I can also remember trouble feeding with 2 of 3 belted mags I had early experiences with and my brothers as well back in the late 60's and early 70's! But son of a gun most of them are still around. I kind of think that every so often the juices/$ need to get flowing again so they up and design and mkt a bunch of new cartridges and rifles.
The Golf industry is beset with this affliction and I think you might as well resolve yourself to this kind of mkting in guns&ammo in the near future. I think it just may be the way things are going.

quote:

I know this is a tough pill to swallow for the die hard belted mag fans but thats the bottom line. The short mags win in a lighter rifle platform, not by much but enough to make a difference in certain hunting scenarios.

Ramslayer,

I think you just summarized it well. I built a 300 WSM on a short action but I put a 28 inch barrel on it.
I chose the cartridge because it is adequate for the intended purpose. I equate it roughly to the old
308 Norma Magnum. I chose it because I like the brass and because I could headspace it on the shoulder rather
than on a belt. I tend to find the brass I like, buy a lot of it, measure a lot of it, then have a reamer
made to suit the actual brass dimensions rather than SAAMI dimensions. I mark the rifle as having a non-standard custom chamber. I have nothing against the 300 WM. If I was going to just buy a rifle and not
reload I would buy either a 300 WSM or a 300 WM. I would probably pick the 300 WM just because I can find
ammo for it almost anywhere. The 300 WSM is a bit harder to find in a retail outfit because most retail outlets stock primarily Remington ammo and so far Remington doesn't load the 300 WSM.

If I had been in charge of the current belt-less magnum business I would have preferred to have a version with the same length to the start of the neck as the 300 WM with the 404 Jeffrey body diameter.

As for your packing rifle, I would chose a Remington Model 7 in 300 SAUM. Very close to the 300 WSM in
performance in a very short actioned rifle. But like I said, pick what you like, shoot it alot, and have fun.

As for your inquiry about barrels being faster than another, have you ever looked at a barrel's interior with a good bore scope? It becomes pretty obvious that the tubes we shove bullets trough are far from uniform.
It does not surprise me in the least that one barrel can be faster than another. So many variables involved.

I don't think the discussion between devotees of the various 30 calibers will ever be resolved. In so many cases people are doing an apples to oranges comparison and trying to infer superiority of one or the other.
We are lucky that we have choices. I am glad that I can now pick amoung several 30 caliber "magnums" in a variety of rifles. BUT, I would not hesitate to take my old M70 in 30-06 on any hunt. I just may enjoy getting my next elk with the 300 WSM I built more. Enjoy!

All of the .300 WSM rifles I've worked with so far, including a Sako 75 and Winchester M70 Featherweight, were atrocious rifles. They didn't shoot well, they didn't feed well, and they were not well made. Another short-mag I worked with was an H-S Precision .270 WSM that was also an atrocious rifle, and way, way overpriced for what you were getting.

The very best short-mag rifle I've fired to date was a Remington Model 7 in 7mm RSAUM, and that baby would shoot! Five shots of under a half-inch, even with the barrel running hot, and this with a stock, untuned factory rifle with factory 160 gr. Nosler loads. It was some rifle in terms of fundamental, out-of-box accuracy performance. But it was also a puzzling rifle in that it had a 24" barrel, the same as my factory-original 1963 Remington 700 7mm Rem. Mag., it didn't feed as well as that rifle, it didn't feel like it kicked any less, and it weighed about the same. Accuracy was no better, either. The only difference was a slightly shorter bolt throw and slightly lighter ammunition. Big deal!

I don't buy this concept that somehow the .300 WSM is more inherently accurate as far as hunting-weight rifles are concerned. That's not what I've seen so far. I've owned way too many .300 Win. Mags. in the form of pre and post-64 Model 70s and Remington 700s (plus 7-Mags & .338s) that were out-of-box tackdrivers to ever believe that Madison Avenue hype. They also told us that the .300 WSM provide "more velocity", than the .300 Win., and that malarky has been smoked out for what it is early in the game. The only guys that buy this stuff are guys who don't employ chronographs or don't have any experience with the .300 Win. Mag. -- or the fine 1925 .300 H&H, for that matter.

Top custom rifles in .300 Win. (or you name the cartridge) that are carefully put together with good barrels really tell the true story of accuracy potential for ANY cartridge. Fundamentally, most cartridges can be made to shoot very well if the rifle in question is well-made. I wish I could take the time to detail all of the fine custom .300s, .338s, 7mm mags., .375s, etc., I've been around over the years that -- by design and by intent -- shoot like there's no tomorrow. There are very few "inaccurate" or significantly "more accurate" cartridges out there. But I'll flat guarantee you that there are some horribly inaccurate RIFLES, and some incredibly great rifles as well.

Savage, there is a whole lot of stuff I do in my life that you just-plain wouldn't get......

AD

I can understand the bias towards the short mags. I felt biased against the 308 Win when it came out as I grew up with the 30-06. As time went on the 308 took on a critical mass and I ended up owning and hunting with them and I have got over it.

The belted magnums in particular are a grinding effort of development over design. Of course a congnizant smith can fiddle with the conflictions that bottlenecks and belts bring to the table. The posts here in the past by John Ricks told that story.

It's just sailing against the tide however to fool with belts and shoulders. At the moment the path of least resistance, what with all the old guns and current ammo availability is to wait it out and deal with the new guns and not to buy a belt new if you don't have to.



The rifle on the left is a Kimber Montana in 270 WSM. It weighs 7.5 lbs as you see it. The rifle on the right is an old fashioned belted cannon. It goes about nine pounds. Both are accurate and do about the same thing.

I much prefer the lighter rifle.

To each his own.

quote:

Savage, there is a whole lot of stuff I do in my life that you just-plain wouldn't get......

AD

Oh but I do Allen and I forgive you.

Savage99 -- just out of curiosity, how much weight is the synthetic stock worth over the wooden stock of the rifle on the right?

quote:

Originally posted by Con:
Lawdog,
But then Winchester knocked 100fps off its 300WM published velocities in the early 80's, some marketing genius must have seen the 300WSM coming...
Cheers...
Con

Yeah, Right!! Lawdog

quote:

Originally posted by Whitworth:
Savage99 -- just out of curiosity, how much weight is the synthetic stock worth over the wooden stock of the rifle on the right?

I don't have either rifle with me here. While the stock on the Kimber is lighter the various parts just add up. The "A" item may be the blind magazine that the 8400 has. After that it's just a little smaller action, barrel, stock etc. It's just refinement.

If I put a Leu on that Kimber with Talley Alum mounts it might get to seven pounds. That's a really light magnum. What with the straight stock that they have along with the new soft pads the recoil is minimal.

quote:

Originally posted by cliffs2:
Lawdog, if you believe that winchester marketing hype about the 300 wsm being 10 fps faster than the 300 wm, I got a bridge that I wanna sell ya.My Oehler don't lie, I have 2 300 wm's, 1 300 wsm and 2 270 wsm's, the ONLY benefit is the lighter weight. I would rather shoot my 300 wm any day with 180's as my 300 wsm with the same bullet. The wsm is also a full 250 fps slower in my rifle with the 180's. The recoil on that 300 wsm with the 180's is also unbearable. This from someone who has shot mags their whole life, including a couple weatherby's. I got rid of those because they were wrecking my hearing. Equal wieght gun for equal weight gun, the 300 wsm will have less recoil because it is going SLOWER. I can get 3150 fps easily with my 300 win with the 180's and a full load of rl22, the 300 wsm is a stretch at 2950.

If you don't like the figures I quoted then go argue with Winchester. They came right off Winchester's web site which matches their printed data for their factory ammo. If you re-read what I wrote;

quote:

Forget reloads and go by factory data and the .300 WSM beats the .300 Win. Mag. by 10 fps. at the muzzle using the same weight bullet. I don't own either one my brother in-law and his wife own/shoot both. In rifles of equal weight and stock design the perceived/felt recoil is less in the WSM.

I said I didn't own either of the Winchester .300 Magnums. But I have fired both of them many times. And if you don't think the newer WSM and WSSM cartridges don't have anything to offer over the older cartridges then I HAVE some view property for you. It's on the hill side over looking the Sea of Tranquillity. Lawdog

quote:

Forget reloads and go by factory data and the .300 WSM beats the .300 Win. Mag. by 10 fps. at the muzzle using the same weight bullet.

Forget factory data. Go by a reloading manual data or even better yet, run them through a crono and you'll find the 300wsm is just about halfway between a 30-06 and the 300wm. In other words, somewhere around 200fps slower than the 300wm.

quote:

Originally posted by Old Elk Hunter:
If I had been in charge of the current belt-less magnum business I would have preferred to have a version with the same length to the start of the neck as the 300 WM with the 404 Jeffrey body diameter.

Ahh! Another vote for the .300 DAKOTA !

Seems many people see the benefits of the .300 Dakota, and as soon as costs decrease and availability increases (i.e. More in line with Weatherby), it may just prove to be the best of all .300 mags!

quote:

as soon as costs decrease and availability increases

That may never happen.

Having chronographed a factory win 70 and tikka t3 both in 300wsm I could never get above 3000fps with a 180gr bullets most were above 2950fps and if you go over to shortmag.com find out that is pretty much standard velocity. I heard of claims over ?. There is
a reamer design by Randy Robinett of BIB bullets for the 300wsm headspace set on the shoulders address the primer pocket issue than will be used by some of the 1000yd guys. I'm calling Pacific tomorrow and find out alittle more on it just read something about it last night may solve the pressure problem on the 300wsm. Got to love the BR guys!

quote:

Originally posted by tom holland:
Having chronographed a factory win 70 and tikka t3 both in 300wsm I could never get above 3000fps with a 180gr bullets most were above 2950fps and if you go over to shortmag.com find out that is pretty much standard velocity. I heard of claims over ?. There is
a reamer design by Randy Robinett of BIB bullets for the 300wsm headspace set on the shoulders address the primer pocket issue than will be used by some of the 1000yd guys. I'm calling Pacific tomorrow and find out alittle more on it just read something about it last night may solve the pressure problem on the 300wsm. Got to love the BR guys!

Forget the chronographs and factory data. Assume the .300 SAUM is 200 fps slower than a .300 WM. So what? At long range you need to click to hit anyway (and let's fact it, at 300 yards or less who cares?). So the only thing that matters is wind drift and energy.

How about wind drift? A .300 WM with a 180 gr bullet at 3000 fps drifts 3.5 inches per one mile of wind at 700 yards. That is the same drift you see at 670 yards with a .300 SAUM. I will gladly take that trade off, because I will shoot enough (since barrel wear is so much less) to overcome that anyway (again, if you don't know how to dope wind, no magnum is going to allow you to hit at long range).

In terms of energy, the .300 WM would beat the .300 SAUM by a full 100 yards. But then, that is why when I don't use a .300 SAUM, I use a .300 RUM.

The far more useful comparison, in my opinion, is not how much more velocity one can get with the same bullet. It's being able to shoot a heavier bullet at the same velocity.

The 300 Win Mag can shoot a bullet 10-20 grains heavier at the same velocity as the 300 WSM. In turn the RUM can shoot a bullet another 20-30 grains heavier than the Win Mag at the same velocity.

This won't provide much difference in trajectory, which is what everybody thinks is so important. But it does provide the more important differences--wind drift and terminal performance.

quote:

Originally posted by Jon A:
The far more useful comparison, in my opinion, is not how much more velocity one can get with the same bullet. It's being able to shoot a heavier bullet at the same velocity.

The 300 Win Mag can shoot a bullet 10-20 grains heavier at the same velocity as the 300 WSM. In turn the RUM can shoot a bullet another 20-30 grains heavier than the Win Mag at the same velocity.

This won't provide much difference in trajectory, which is what everybody thinks is so important. But it does provide the more important differences--wind drift and terminal performance.

That is an excellent point.

Since we all seem to be chiming in with our 2 cents...

quote:

all things equal, a WSM is about 150-200 fps slower than a Win Mag

Jorge, sorry, that is just wrong. Pick a bullet weight and with the optimum powder for each round, in rifles otherwise as identical as one can get them, there is 50 (180 grain and under) to maybe 100fps (200-220 grainers) difference. Been there, seen it. Case capacity is too close with the same hole out the front...for example 3050 is achievable (Magpro & RS Hunter for ex.), 300 is easy with 180's, and anyone who pushed a 300WM much over 3100 is overpressure.

In general, anyone who wants to play the comparison game can make ANY cartridge look bad compared to another. Then WSM's standing by themselves are potent and effective. If I were going out today to 'upgrade' my .270 or 30-06, a WSM deserves just as much consideration as any other cartridge out there...

What we have on this site are a bunch of hard core hunters who are (justifiably most of the time) set in their ways. No problem, it works for you, go for it. WSM's work well too. Feeding problems, accuracy differneces, etc. are MUCH more a function of the quality of the rifles involed than the cardridge they are chambered for. Many rifles go back for feeding problems, the only ones you hear about are WSM's...speaking of bandwagons.

Marketing hype sucks, I agree, but most of the bad WSM press started when the WSSM's came out, and they DO have some issues, and IMHO the WSM's have suffered by association.

For the record the 2 cartridges I shoot most these days are a .280 REM (Mauser 98) and a early production 300WSM model 70...and nary a hitch (cept a loose scope mount, my fault) with the model 70 for over 3 years now.

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:

quote:

Originally posted by tom holland:
Having chronographed a factory win 70 and tikka t3 both in 300wsm I could never get above 3000fps with a 180gr bullets most were above 2950fps and if you go over to shortmag.com find out that is pretty much standard velocity. I heard of claims over ?. There is
a reamer design by Randy Robinett of BIB bullets for the 300wsm headspace set on the shoulders address the primer pocket issue than will be used by some of the 1000yd guys. I'm calling Pacific tomorrow and find out alittle more on it just read something about it last night may solve the pressure problem on the 300wsm. Got to love the BR guys!

Forget the chronographs and factory data. Assume the .300 SAUM is 200 fps slower than a .300 WM. So what? At long range you need to click to hit anyway (and let's fact it, at 300 yards or less who cares?). So the only thing that matters is wind drift and energy.

How about wind drift? A .300 WM with a 180 gr bullet at 3000 fps drifts 3.5 inches per one mile of wind at 700 yards. That is the same drift you see at 670 yards with a .300 SAUM. I will gladly take that trade off, because I will shoot enough (since barrel wear is so much less) to overcome that anyway (again, if you don't know how to dope wind, no magnum is going to allow you to hit at long range).

In terms of energy, the .300 WM would beat the .300 SAUM by a full 100 yards. But then, that is why when I don't use a .300 SAUM, I use a .300 RUM.

This is for Jon A also. Anyone who has reloaded enought knows that by changing bullet BC you can change range and energy using just one velocity doesn't matter the caliber. What drive all this is velocity by increasing velocity using the same bullet you increase energy and range. So somewhere one needs to check velocity. In the LR game the ES amounts to MOA so again a chronograph is an important tool for the long range shooter. If you look at the 5r or 5c barrel they give somewhat faster velocity than a standard barrel I got the 5c for my 300wsm and that is a fast 300wsm. I normally load for group then check velocity but I do have what I figure a standard velocity that a rifle should give based on caliber. I haven't had a chance to check the 300mags yet but I did on the 30-378wby and well worth the 100grs plus powder used. Most guys who shoot the LR hunting pretty much understand wind doping.

Tom:

I hardly ever chronograph - but I do shoot a lot and I know exactly what my bullets are going to do.

My point is velocity just does not matter that much. I shot my .338 Win Mag tonight - hardly a barn burner in terms of velocity. I shot a 4 shot group at 700 yards that was 8 1/4 inches - only 6 1/4 vertical spread (no idea what my ES is with that load by the way). I changed windage with almost every shot, but even if I had a .300 Sooper Pooper I would have had to click as the wind changed. Oh yea, I fired that group sitting with a sling.

Most people would be better off shooting at field positions that worrying about 100 fps of velocity. And the SAUM lets me shoot without worrying about barrel erosion (as much), it is light to carry, etc. But hey, that is just my opinion.

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:
Tom:

I hardly ever chronograph - but I do shoot a lot and I know exactly what my bullets are going to do.

My point is velocity just does not matter that much. I shot my .338 Win Mag tonight - hardly a barn burner in terms of velocity. I shot a 4 shot group at 700 yards that was 8 1/4 inches - only 6 1/4 vertical spread (no idea what my ES is with that load by the way). I changed windage with almost every shot, but even if I had a .300 Sooper Pooper I would have had to click as the wind changed. Oh yea, I fired that group sitting with a sling.

Most people would be better off shooting at field positions that worrying about 100 fps of velocity. And the SAUM lets me shoot without worrying about barrel erosion (as much), it is light to carry, etc. But hey, that is just my opinion.

We can disagree on alot of points as to velocity and how it effects groups. By the way those are good groups with the 338mag. Most shooter don't own a chronograph and could care less and their velocity is what published either in the relaoding manual or manufactor. The orginal topic here was the short mag prejudice and since I own both my comments were directed at those rifles I own but I got side tracked on the velocity thing with you. I prefer to keep things on topic.

quote:

Originally posted by stubblejumper:

quote:

as soon as costs decrease and availability increases

That may never happen.

stubblejumper, you're right. It may never happen. In fact, it is a virtuous circle, in that it probably takes costs to decrease for it to become more widely available- and as long as costs remain high, demand (thus, availability of ammo etc.) will remain low.

For those who may not care as much about costs or availability, and want something unique yet powerful, the .300 Dakota still remains a top choice in .300 magnum- even though it often gets passed up for more inefficient, overbore cartridges like the 30-378 Wea., 7.82 Warbird, etc.

I have bought two of them. I bought the first, a Remington Model 7 in 300 SAUM because I didn't own anything in 30 cal. If I'd owned a 300 Win mag or similar, I wouldn't have bought one.

My dad liked that rifle so much that he wanted it. I told him to buy me what I wanted and I'd trade even. I've ordered a Savage in 300 WSM because I wanted to try the Savage rifle to see if they really are that much more accurate.

I have a .270 Win, a 7mm Rem Mag, a .243 Win, and a .223 Rem. I won't buy a short to replace any of these, but I like the shorts I have experience with.

IMHO, who cares? Suit yourself. If you have the cash and rifles are your interests, buy two of each!

quote:

Originally posted by Lawdog_Gary:

quote:

Originally posted by cliffs2:
Lawdog, if you believe that winchester marketing hype about the 300 wsm being 10 fps faster than the 300 wm, I got a bridge that I wanna sell ya.My Oehler don't lie, I have 2 300 wm's, 1 300 wsm and 2 270 wsm's, the ONLY benefit is the lighter weight. I would rather shoot my 300 wm any day with 180's as my 300 wsm with the same bullet. The wsm is also a full 250 fps slower in my rifle with the 180's. The recoil on that 300 wsm with the 180's is also unbearable. This from someone who has shot mags their whole life, including a couple weatherby's. I got rid of those because they were wrecking my hearing. Equal wieght gun for equal weight gun, the 300 wsm will have less recoil because it is going SLOWER. I can get 3150 fps easily with my 300 win with the 180's and a full load of rl22, the 300 wsm is a stretch at 2950.

If you don't like the figures I quoted then go argue with Winchester. They came right off Winchester's web site which matches their printed data for their factory ammo. If you re-read what I wrote;

quote:

Forget reloads and go by factory data and the .300 WSM beats the .300 Win. Mag. by 10 fps. at the muzzle using the same weight bullet. I don't own either one my brother in-law and his wife own/shoot both. In rifles of equal weight and stock design the perceived/felt recoil is less in the WSM.

I said I didn't own either of the Winchester .300 Magnums. But I have fired both of them many times. And if you don't think the newer WSM and WSSM cartridges don't have anything to offer over the older cartridges then I HAVE some view property for you. It's on the hill side over looking the Sea of Tranquillity. Lawdog

You done been sucked into the Winchester hype machine, and looks like they got you hook, line, and sinker. Fact of the matter is, I use my 300 wsm for a lot of my hunting because I can get just the velocity I want with the bullet I want without having to overload my '06. I actually load it down for the best groups with the recoil that I want, and I can do it with a lighter rifle. I like to shoot 165 Hornadys at just under 3000 fps, not attainable with an 06, but easily with the wsm. But to say that it is the equal of my 300 win is just plain not right. When I want to shoot big bullets with authority, then the 300 win mag is what I reach for.

I never saw a need for the short mags. But I saw a Kimber .300 wsm Montana this weekend at the gunstore that needed a home. I put a scope on and took it to my range. Damn that thing shoots good. My prejudice is fading fast. Did I need it? Hell no. Since when has need had anything to do with trying a new caliber.

M16... you re-made my main point. For me it wasn't so much the cartridge, it was the rifle it came wrapped in!

quote:

Forget factory data. Go by a reloading manual data or even better yet, run them through a crono and you'll find the 300wsm is just about halfway between a 30-06 and the 300wm. In other words, somewhere around 200fps slower than the 300wm.

I went ahead and bought a 300 WSM a while back just for kicks. It has definitely surprised me especially when Chronoing the loads.

W/ 165s over 71 grains of R19 it chronos 3275-3300 fps 15' from the muzzle. W/ 180s & 66.5 grns of R22 it chronos 2950 fps 15' from muzzle (w/ just alittle more R22 it's easily over 3000). I've never seen a 300 winnie that would even come close to those velocities w/ those charges, more like 75-80 grains to get those velocites from a 24" tube.

I don't think the Short Mags are any better than the belted mags by any means but, they are definitely more efficient. The efficency and light weight of the WSMs is about the only two pluses I can find w/ the little devils.

What surprises me is that no one has been speaking of the high recoil from these new short action, light weight short mags. Simply put, this 300WSM kicks harder than any 300 mag I've ever owned or shot period. It only weighs a little over 6# and it will flat out rattle your jaws. I installed a Sims pad and the scope (Elite) still touches my shooting glasses everytime I fire. The heavier 300 Win Mags are certainly more pleasant to shoot. If owning a light weight shoulder stomper is your cup of tea, I would definitely recommend a Short Mag.


Good Day

Reloader

Which is why I load them down to around 3000 fps. I like the gun, I don't like the big kick from full loads. With the 180's full up, the gun is almost unshootable on the bench for more than 1 or 2 shots.

quote:

You done been sucked into the Winchester hype machine, and looks like they got you hook, line, and sinker. Fact of the matter is, I use my 300 wsm for a lot of my hunting because I can get just the velocity I want with the bullet I want without having to overload my '06. I actually load it down for the best groups with the recoil that I want, and I can do it with a lighter rifle. I like to shoot 165 Hornadys at just under 3000 fps, not attainable with an 06, but easily with the wsm. But to say that it is the equal of my 300 win is just plain not right. When I want to shoot big bullets with authority, then the 300 win mag is what I reach for.

There is no hype to it. I have a .223 WSSM and it will better the .22-250 and .220 Swift by at 200 fps.(reloads or factory loads) thus making it the new KING of the factory .22 centerfires. It is more accurate than any .22-250 or .220 Swift I have ever owned. It is no hype that a shorter column of powder burns more efficiently than a taller column of powder of equal weight. Don’t take my work for it ask the Crown Prince’s of accuracy seekers - the benchrest crowd. You may not like the new offerings but they do exactly what they advertise them to do. Lawdog

If you like them use them...Its the American way.

I still like the 300 H&H, 338 Win, 30-06,375 H&H etc. and I use them, they certainly work, and thats all that counts on either side of the fence....

I will never own a WSM, they serve no purpose IMO, a short bolt throw means zilch to me, they are no better than the old calibers, but they may be just as good,...Rifle accuracy has little bearing here, some rifles shoot and others don't...Don't keep the ones that don't.

What will the .300 WSM/SAUM do that a plain jane .30-06 will not? Not a thing.

quote:

Originally posted by D Hunter:
My beef is that they don't come in 375 and up. These are the diameter bullets I am interested in. My 7 # 375 H&H makes a pretty good sheep gun. Not much in the short mag stable comes close on knockdown or legality on big stuff in Africa. 'nuff said.

When they DO get around to a 375 and a 416 WSM...both of these are offered by Lazzeroni...the short mag concept will come into its own. We will be jumpimg down from a 3.60 COL to a 2.8 incher without loosing any magazine capacity. With CRF and a 60 degree bolt throw there would be a fairly big advantage over the 375 h&H and 416 Rem. The samller shoulder to neck dimensions of these rounds would also cure the "feeding" problems claimed by purists.

With an oversized bolt handle, a short action can be fired accurately in the field by learning to use the middle finger for the trigger while holding the bolt handle between the thumb and forefinger. This is nearly as fast as a pump action and a heck of a lot of fun...

I think if you want a light weight gun, then you want a short barrel. 2 oz here, 2 oz there... = a lighter gun. It is my understanding that magnums need longer barrels to see their potential. That said my ideal lightwieght mountain rifle is something based on an 06 case (270), or better yet short action (and another 2 oz) 308 case (7mm-08)