bigsqueeze I am sure you are a fine fellow and are gifted with some extraordinary ears as you have been able to maintain your ears with good hearing protection over your +45 years of shooting. Most folks are going to fire a rifle in the field without wearing hearing protection, I myself cannot hear the animals come up behind me if I wear muffs but I am investigating the EAR products as soon as some lawyer bills are behind me. It is my belief based on what causes my ears to ring more is that most people will do more damage to their ears and faster if they fire a 16.5 inch barreled rifle in the field than if they fire a 24 inch barreled rifle in the field. I think this is true but maybe I am wrong. At any rate if a fellow wants one of these little scout rifles I think he should buy it, I don't want one the balance has to be awful with such a short barrel, and the ear pain inflicted by firing one more significant than that of a 20 inch 308. Please note I hunted for 10 years with an 18.5 inch 308 so I am not without some knowledge on the subject. Back in the day short barreled rifles seemed very cool to me until I started losing my hearing and also discovered it was easier to make a standing offhand shot with a longer barreled rifle at least for me.
a 16.5 inch 300WSM is an enigma..
.........Jimmyp...........A 16.5" barreled 300 WSM I would agree, would be an enigma for most. I did previously state, that 16.5" tubes are not for most.
For some of the type of hunting I do though, I prefer a very handy, an easy carrying, a highly manuverable, and fast pointing rifle with a shorter OAL, which ballistically betters 26" barreled 30-06s, which my shorty 300 WSM certainly does. I have on more than one occassion been in thick brush where shorter ranged shots have presented themselves, and within just a few minutes, been in far more wide open clearings where some ranges can exceed 400 yards. What the Frontier chambered in a 300 WSM does, is give me an excellent handling shorter OAL brush and timber gun, while at the same time, having the capabilility for some serious long range hunting should that need arise as well. And it has in the past.
But as I`ve stated before, all things come with compromises and tradeoffs. Those short barreled tradeoffs to me, such as having more noise or more blast, is something I can handle comfortably, whereas most cannot or will not.
As to your other point. If two people begin shooting 300 WSM rifles with different barrel lengths, one shorter such as my 16.5" barrel and another being a 24" barrel, eventually and given time, without any hearing protection worn by both, the one shooting the shorter barrel will probably have a higher percentage of hearing loss.
However if on the other hand, both are wearing the same identical and very good hearing protection, neither will suffer any hearing loss imo. Imo, hearing loss comes from not wearing hearing protection, rather than from a shorter barrel length.
When I did my extensive chrony testing experiments comparing my 16.5" 300 WSM velocities to the velocities of two 24" barreled 300 WSMs, I fired several hundred rounds over a period of several weeks. And to be perfectly honest here, there were little noise level differences to my ears between those two 24s and my own 16.5" WITH my muffs on. So the only conclusion I can come to is, that regardless of barrel length, if one chooses NOT to wear hearing protection, there will be hearing loss consequences given enough time and enough rounds fired. And when good muffs or good field hearing protection is worn, whether muffs for range use or good hearing protection for field use such as my "Game Ears", they are very capable to protect ears and offsetting any increased noise levels by the shorter barrel.
As far as rifle balance is concerned, I have no problems in that area with my Frontier nor even from my 375 Ruger Alaskan. Whether I use my conventional scope or the scout scope on my Frontier (as I do both), it is a matter of quickly adapting via a little practicing and getting use to those changes.
