I have the opportunity to purchase another 300 win mag. The short version or the belted version. Which one would you get and why???

I've got the 300 WSM. Recoil is like a stout 30-06 and results are like the 300 Win Mag.

I like the short mags. If you reload you will appreciate the superior headspace control of the rimless case.

This recent thread had a good discussion of short mags. www.serveroptions.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=6;t=007729

I've got a regular 300 Win Mag and Ballistically between the two it is for all practical purposes really to close to call. The regular 300 may have a slight edge when it comes to the heavier bullets, but I'm not going to swear to it, don't want to get a war going here.
300 Win Mag is a tried, true, and proven round.
The new 300 Whizzum is coming on strong though.

[ 02-28-2003, 08:57: Message edited by: Marsh Mule ]

Thanks guys for your replies really appreciate it.

I'm sold on the new WSM. I started hunting with a 300 Win Mag in about 1965 or 1966. With a short detour into a 270, I did all of my hunting with the 300 Win Mag. Last year I bought a 300 WSM. I am sold. Last month I sold my 300 Win Mag. I bought a 270 WSM. These 2 will be what I hunt with. The 300 WSM shoots into an inch cold barrel or not, if I do my part. Don't know about the 270 short. Haven't shot it.

What changed my mind was handling the 300 Win then handling the 300 short. I did it with my eyes closed. There is a difference. I am cleaning out all of my casings and dies for the 300 win. I'll make somebody a good deal.

I'd go with the std win mag. If I want a light compact 30 cal bolt gun, it'll be a .308 win. If I want magnum performance, then make it a 300 win mag. You can get win mag ammo just about anywhere in the world big game is sold. The WSM has much less distribution, and that won't change soon.

I would fire one before I bought the less recoil falacy of the WSM. I've shot both side by side in the same type of rifle and can't tell the difference. Belted mag headspace issues don't fly with me eigther. Pick the one that looks best to you but don't expect more from than the WSM than the win mag as writers and others tell you because this simply is not true.

chuck

Thanks for the input. I went with the 300 win mag in the rem. ADL and synthetic stock. Walmart ordered it for me. According to the person in the main warehouse somewhere back east they had 143 of them in stock. Supposed to take 5 days to get here in NM. I already have a Parker-Hale in the 300 win mag and was so impressed with the performance of the 200 grain nosler Partitions on a Buffalo last week that I just had to have another one. The hard part comes when I tell the wife about it.

Now you have two .300 Win mags! And the second one is a Remington!

Why do I even comment on these threads?

I am going to tell your wife. This does it.

To Neal Rea-

Sorry I didn't catch this thread earlier as the simple answer to your question is "both". One cannot have too many .30 Caliber Magnums.

To Roger K-

I would like to hear more about the "handling" characterists between the .300 Win Mag and the .300 WSM and what made the WSM the winner in your opinion. I am looking forward to adding a .300 WSM to the lineup soon.

To Roger K-

I would like to hear more about the "handling" characterists between the .300 Win Mag and the .300 WSM and what made the WSM the winner in your opinion. I am looking forward to adding a .300 WSM to the lineup soon.[/QB][/QUOTE]

30 Mag Fan:

How to explain handling? It's a feeling and feelings are personal and don't translate to somebody else. I have a regular model 70 in 270 Winchester with a regular barrel. I had a 300 Win Super Grade that I sold about a month ago or so. I handled all of them. The WSM seemed lighter, yet felt solid. Not like the old style feather weights with the cut down barrel I owned in the past. They felt flimsy? Is that a good word?

I hunted with a regular 300 Win Mag Super Grade for many years, most of it in Colorado climbing mountains. Last year I took a 300 Short. It was a different experience. The balance and feel of the rifle was a good fit for me. It was easier to carry, shorter and less awkward.

A few things about the new Winchesters. Just yesterday I took out the new 270 and tried a Warne mount I took off a rifle I sold. The rear mount was long enough to hang over the back and block the bolt and keep it from opening. The rear of the action is shorter. I didn't see that until I tried this particular mount. I had a second set of mounts that were shorter and a perfect fit, also Warne.

I have a Feather Weight 300 short and a stainless 270 short. The old style Feather Weight had a slimmed down stock and a thin barrel; the new style has the slimmed stock, but not the slimmed barrel. The 270 short action drops into the feather weight stock with ease. The feather weight with wood stock actually weights a bit more than the stainless with a sythetic stock. Not much, but a little. I am definatly going to switch the sythetic stock for wood. I know all the reasons I should keep the "plastic" stock and I agree with them, but I just can't get past having plastic on my rifle. I've taken the rife out and looked at it and handled it hoping that the stock would grow on me like ugly dogs have in the past (Four legged kind), but that hasn't happened, and it won't. What little resolve I have to keep the synthetic disolves the moment I get out the 300 short to check for rust and remember the times we had the last hunting season. So, as soon as warm weather arrives, I will order a new stock and fit it to the stainless. That will make me happy. Having the new 270 short shoot as well as the 300 short; that is, 3 shot groups into 3/4 of an inch out of a cold barrel, will make me ecstatic.