What sort of accuracy are the Kimber WSM rifles capable of?

They sound interesting!

AD

Kute,

Those guys were my hero's and still are. Whelan had the most influence on me as he was a target shooter as well.

Jorge,

Bowman said that 300 Magnum hunters did what they did. He was there and had to chase the results down. He made a point that sold a lot of guns. Recoil is important to shooters.

djpaintless,

I have just about all of the guns as well. The Decelerator pads have changed the recoil equation for all guns. In theory most of us have a limit as to what recoil we can endure and not flinch. There is not the slightest doubt in my mind that Allen Day is an outstanding shot with his 300 WM's and does not flinch. Also that he is an excellent hunter and uses guides only because he wants to shoot lots of stuff. Sure I do it myself to but to each his own.

Allen,

The Kimbers are indeed interesting and on paper have all the features. However your buying stuff that has been checked and double checked. For most of us the Kimbers are a good place to start for not that much money. With some luck one can get a shooter out of the box.

I simply don't "get" the recoil/more accurate shooting argument. It borders on ridiculous!

No matter how you crunch the numbers, if you compare max loads to max loads (or starting to starting), there is no realistic difference in recoil between the two! ONE foot pound is NOT going to make you shoot any worse or better.

It's a simple calculation -- a lighter bullet, traveling faster is going to come in very close to its counterpart!

Sorry to be so bluntly rude, but shooting one better than the other, for whatever made up reason, is silly.

I have the pair in model 7's in their Remington counterparts (7mm and 300 saum). Both are light rifles and "I" can't tell ANY difference in recoil shooting the two.

If elk or bear are on the agenda, go with the 30 cal version. You WILL get more of a blood trail out of the entrance wound as thick hides and fat will plug smaller holes. Of course, if your shots are always perfect, it's not an issue .

Of course, bullet selection is almost as critical as shot placement! The wrong bullet in the right spot and eventually you'll have problems.

Talk to target shooters about recoil. They want the bare minimum in recoil that will get the bullet to the middle of the target. When we shoot long range or even at moderate range recoil matters a lot.

As to hunters and recoil I suggest reading Bob Hagel. He wrote quite a few pages on it and states that it matters a lot.

That's the word from target shooters and Bob Hagel. If recoil does not bother you then good for you.

Nice try! If you are finding ANY significant difference, you are NOT comparing apples to apples.

BTW, we're not talking target shooting either! If we were, we'd also be talking HEAVY rifles and that <1 footpound delta in recoil would be even less an issue. I'm calling BS.

Muley Stalker,

I added the paragraph about Bob Hagel after you posted.

Your entited to your own opinion and adjectives however you are wrong.

Been following this thread somewhat, kinda amusing! Anyways I was contemplating this very question a month ago. Came to the same conclusion as Muley Stalker after a bit of thought, it won't amount to a rat's ass when it comes down to felt recoil in the field between these two cartridges. I went with the 300WSM but plan on picking up the 7WSM next year! Dang rifle looney in me!

MtnHtr

Using Federal factory ammo as a guide, their 7 WSM 140 Nosler BT @ 3310 fps generates 3405 ft lbs. of energy while the 300 WSM 150 Nosler @ 3200 fps generates 3410 ft lbs. The 7 WSM 160 Nosler Partition @ 3160 fps generates 3545 ft lbs. of energy while the 300 WSM 180 Nosler Partition generates 3540 ft lbs.
They are basically equal in energy. Therefore, recoil will be very close. Assuming a zero of 250 yards, the 300 WSM will drop a little more than 1 inch more than the 7 WSM @ 400 yards with the lighter bullets. The difference at 400 yards in drop with the heavier bullets is still less than 2 inches in favor of the 7 WSM.
I think a fellow needs a 7 Mag and a 300 Mag.

Savage, I could really give a crap about Mr. Hagel. We're talking about hunting rifles here.

BTW, I have a degree in Mathematics and used to teach physics. I understand the entire concept of recoil quite well. If you can distinguish such a slight difference (if at all) in felt recoil then you are already shooting beyond your maximum and that AGAIN would make it a non-issue.

Seriously, we're talking about a difference that is no more than the variance in what you'd find between one bullet and another in the SAME box of off the shelf ammo. Average handloads for that matter.

Once again, BS! -- particularly when you take it in context with the original question posed.

BTW, common courtesy would be to crunch some numbers before you tell somebody they're "wrong." If you had, you'd see how silly your recoil argument is!