Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters .300 WSM vs. .300 Win Mag

Whoa!!! Easy Gerry, I am about to file a hurt feelers report...

After shooting a bunch of them and way less than others here I'm pretty sure I could have hunted and taken everything I killed with a 30-06 or a 270 Winchester.

I did have a 300 WSM and did fine with it, but now I've got a 300 Wby and gotta say I like how easy it is to load and get easy 3100 plus with 180's and know I'm not hammering it too awfully hard.

I love when we stick numbers on it, but honestly at the end of the day how tough or awkward is a rifle an inch or two longer or an ounce or 8 lighter. Most of the M4's I've carried were as heavy as any of my hunting rifles when fully outfitted and I know I've carried them miles further and never really thought much about it.

Each to their own on this but at the end of the day shoot what you like and shoot well and enjoy using.

Just my .02c on it.

[/quote]
I hope I've been civil enough.
[/quote]



That's funny.

I like new cartridges. They are fun to try, fun to play with. But why do I have so many '06's???

And how do I end up burning up a couple of barrels a year in different cartridges I sure don't have that many hunting licenses? Maybe using the 300 WSM means no more burned up barrels.

One thing I like about the 300 WSM is that a 300 WSM chamber reamer might open up a 350 Magnum chamber so that it would have more capacity and no belt. But then that is only theoretical for me. I don't mind the belt either.

Still think the 300 WSM is a fad. But this fad may stay. If the factories didn't push hard for their new magic cartridges the sales of new rifles might not be so good.

This thread may go on forever.

Getting 97% of the performance... for only 84% of the charge... dumping 6oz of rifle weight... and reducing recoil by 10%... seems like a lot of small wins adding up to a pretty good reason to run a WSM to me....

Bob,

How is it that some here have access to so many more manuals from this century than the 'King of Handloading' himself.....?

If you're desire to keep as current with potential loadings for such 'newer' cartridges is as necessary as your trying to find fault with others experiences, I would have thought that you would have certainly taken the time to do your homework prior to posting your 'amazing cartridge' comments and the like and save yourself the position you now find yourself. That is.......now having to refute both a very respected members finding (done with that little bit of homework you evidently don't put any stock in) along with several well known and respected manuals and their long established companies that obviously did not check with you first as to your definitive and final finding on the potential of the 300WSM.

I did purchase my 300WSM immediately following it being offered. As you should know and as was very clearly explained to you by another member, there isn't always much information nor components/charges that have been used and assessed to pass on to new owners at that stage. And what is offered oftentimes is a conservative to very conservative #'s. Case in point......the 3-4 manuals who have quite substantially 'upgraded' their printed findings concerning the 300WSM that was very nicely afforded you quite recently. So yes, we new owners of this very new and unique big game hunting cartridge were unintentionally left to much of our own devices to find what it could do. My load was rather easy to find since RL22 (yes, I have been well aware of most all powders characteristics, including RL22's as I do my homework) worked so well even though it was also a newcomer to the powder line-up. The TSX design also intrigued me and due to it's published and advertised ability to exhibit much lower pressures than bullets not so designed, that made sense too.

So there you have it Bob. And no.......as a longtime member here you should know that only the less intelligent and unconcerned members post charges that come up against or exceed even the most liberal publications charge weights. Why would you want that information since you clearly stated that "you will trust your judgment over mine any day of the week".....? Your logic is both confusing and a bit all over the board, so if you don't truly care really, why ask.....?

A good day to either go online or to finally venture out amongst the people into the sunlight and purchase some handloading manuals that don't consist of parched, yellow pages. Had you done so earlier (ie: doing your homework), you could have saved us all this unnecessary back and forth.

As your last post and last sentence allowed me this thought....It's always the guys who believe that they are the most intelligent and knowledgeable that find out eventually that the object in their hand is their hat.

Enjoy your outing.....

You know, you could put an END to this endless bloviating by just putting up your load data instead of acting like an internet lawyer...

quote:

Whoa!!! Easy Gerry, I am about to file a hurt feelers report... grin


You guys crack me up.

You also should know why not doing so is much more safe and prudent than doing so. A prime example as to why people should give little credit to #'s of posts as it has little to do with either common sense or intelligence.

Lawyer.....LOL.

I don't get why guys push a given cartridge to the brink when they can just go up to the next more potent cartridge?

I prefer the 300 Win Mag over the 300 WSM. The Win Short Magnum starts and stops with the 270 version

Pardon me. I'm guessing you don't remove the "do not remove under penalty of law!" labels from pillows. Me, I run with scissors...

Hard to argue that line of reasoning in most cases.

Let's say that we all consider the 300WM the next standardized cartridge in the next level up in 'potency' over the 300WSM. In play then becomes one's desire to then reconsider a chamber in long action, the belt inherit in the design and, albeit minimal, the additional weight in similarly designed rifles.

There are among us a large and growing % of hunters/shooters that personally desire to put together the lightest rifle possible. Few companies offer heavier models in hopes of gaining a larger market share of firearms, be it in long guns or handguns. Their reasons for 'going light' are their own as it should be. The 'belt, no belt' argument comes down also to a personal choice and is of no consequence to anyone but the owner.

So you're right in most instances except that the very distinct and unique designs of the both of these two particular cartridges not only help most of us to make that decision somewhat easily as there's not much middle ground between the two in regards to personal taste and opinion, we also need to consider just as importantly the rifle for which our choice will eventually be chambered. Do you prefer a longer action over a shorter action and do you want a belted .30 over a non-belted one...? Again...the weight difference is minimal in like offerings, but a few ounces can be a deal breaker for those who are trying to put together the lightest rifle or rifle/scope combination possible.

Those are just a few of the possible reasons that came to mind for reconsidering a 'move up'.

No problem, we all suffer from lack of good judgment at times, especially when we feel the urgent need to satisfy a more personally demanding itch.

That you run with scissors, well, strike 2 in the good judgment category, but I'll defer to your years in experience in doing so.

Why wouldn't I.......?

Appreciate the same considerations........

You lack any meaningful experience.


Mag NUMB is a good name for you. LOL!

I love this place.

Tell me again....how many 300 magnums? ONE!?

What was the powder charge?

Hilarious.

That's what I was getting at, for you it seems meaningful, me it doesn't make a hill of beans difference. Being that I'm 77" tall an inch longer or shorter barrel or a couple of ounces doesn't feel like much.

I'd be the last to say the WBY, RUM or Win Mag will kill any better than a WSM. Had them all and shot a bunch with all of them. Right now I'm running a 26" 300 Weatherby. I don't feel like it'll slow me down anymore than my other shorter barreled rifles.

Not directing this at you DS, just that a % just doesn't add up to me or other shooters most of the time. We shoot what we shoot because we like what they do for us, not an extra lb of powder saved throughout the year.

Everyone has likes and dislikes. Shaving ounces for me is pretty close to meaningless. But then I don't do sheep hunting. I'm 77" tall and old and 285 lb, last I checked.

To me smooth feeding is more important than lesser ounces or short rifles. Grab a 98 Mauser with a 7.92x57 or a Springfield 06. Feed the shells into the chamber. After shooting until the magazine is empty feed 5 more rounds into the magazine.

Now do that very same thing with a short action and a stubby fat cartridge in a minimum size magazine.

Then down the road, after the throat gets worn move the bullets out to get closer to the lands. Or maybe not.

I have both - short actions with stubby fat cartridges and long actions with magazines long enough for moving the bullets out.

I'll pick up the long action virtually every time I go hunting.

It's my experience that short stubby cartridges in short action rifles are my less desirable rifles.

Plus a shorter rifle. Agree.

But then I'm only 76" tall <g>...

This thread isn't about "using what you like"... it's about the WSM vs. Win. Mag. The numbers are what they are... you be the judge of how important they are.

My preference is the WSM... it does pert'near everything the Winny does... but weighs less, kicks less, and is more efficient.... the numbers all back that up.

The Winny wins in the raw speed, brass availability, factory fodder commonality, COAL latitude, and rifle availability arenas. To many... those are more important than the wins in recoil, weight, and efficiency that the WSM has.

I'd take a stainless/synthetic .300 Winny over a blued/wood WSM in a heartbeat... because my preferences in rifle systems are more important than my preference of cartridges.

Either way... a .30 cal 180 at 3k will f'n clobber about 99.5% of the furry stuff any of us will ever have the opportunity to shoot at.

Winchester and the industry tried to thread the ballistic needle with a "tweener".
They have had reasonable success. Ask yourself - what would the 300WSM owner have bought, if at all, if the shortmag didn't come into the marketplace? Would they have been satisfied with their 30-06 or moved up to the 300WM?

Same question with the 280AI owner (280Rem. v. 7mm RM)? There are more similar comparisons too.

Overall there is no appreciable difference between the two in question. Some are attracted to the latest and greatest, while others sit back and relax.

Well, one does have a belt and the other doesn't. Short 'n fat was a hot trend too. I think that's how 'Flave likes 'em