|
|
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 19
New Member
|
OP
New Member
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 19 |
Here is a copy of a response from Hornady from a while back that many of you may have already seen regarding the WSM that someone else received when asking if Hornady would produce any ammo for the 300 WSM...
"Thank you for your inquiry. Sorry we don't and won't. A royalty is required. You might note WSM's are being chambered by fewer gun company's because of inherent feeding problems, increased manufacturing costs, and royalty.
Thank you again for your inquiry."
Pair this with their spiteful description of the 300 WSM in the 9th edition manual and the apparent (to me anyway) lack of widespread interest in their RCM offerings and you have what I see as a child's reaction to losing. It laughable considering the RCM and RSAUM would at least as likely (maybe even more so) to have feeding issues based on the criteria that are commonly used to explain any possible feeding issues with the WSM.
I have a 270 WSM and 300 WSM and neither has a problem feeding. The 270 WSM is in an X-bolt and the 300 WSM is in a new M70. The M70 needed some slight surface polishing to make it feed a little more smoothly, but no more so than any other caliber I've had in that model.
I'm not anti-Hornady or RCM... I shoot their bullets, use their dies and even bought a 6.5 Creedmoor recently. I just felt a need to vent a little about their childish behavior. I don't expect anyone else to agree, just my opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 47,948
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 47,948 |
That's their prerogative I guess. I got rid of all of my wsm's. Hopefully no one crys about that.. 
I try to stick with the basics, they do so well. Nothing fancy mind you, just plain jane will get it done with style. You want to see an animal drop right now? Shoot him in the ear hole. BSA MAGA
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 17,927
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 17,927 |
Never realized they had to pay a royalty to make ammo.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 19
New Member
|
|
OP
New Member
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 19 |
I had actually considered dumping the WSMs myself because of brass cost/availability, but I just really like them and have enough brass to last me for a couple years at least. I have a 300 Win Mag and regular 270 Winchester as well, so I have all my bases covered. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 504
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 504 |
That's interesting. I've owned a .300 WSM Mdl 70 EW for a few years. Never had a feeding problem with it and I've shot it a lot. It's one of my favorite cartridges. I handload, so don't care if Hornady doesn't want to produce ammo for it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 4,064
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 4,064 |
Here is a copy of a response from Hornady from a while back that many of you may have already seen regarding the WSM that someone else received when asking if Hornady would produce any ammo for the 300 WSM...
"Thank you for your inquiry. Sorry we don't and won't. A royalty is required. You might note WSM's are being chambered by fewer gun company's because of inherent feeding problems, increased manufacturing costs, and royalty.
Thank you again for your inquiry."
Pair this with their spiteful description of the 300 WSM in the 9th edition manual and the apparent (to me anyway) lack of widespread interest in their RCM offerings and you have what I see as a child's reaction to losing. It laughable considering the RCM and RSAUM would at least as likely (maybe even more so) to have feeding issues based on the criteria that are commonly used to explain any possible feeding issues with the WSM.
I have a 270 WSM and 300 WSM and neither has a problem feeding. The 270 WSM is in an X-bolt and the 300 WSM is in a new M70. The M70 needed some slight surface polishing to make it feed a little more smoothly, but no more so than any other caliber I've had in that model.
I'm not anti-Hornady or RCM... I shoot their bullets, use their dies and even bought a 6.5 Creedmoor recently. I just felt a need to vent a little about their childish behavior. I don't expect anyone else to agree, just my opinion. You like the cartridge and they don't. It happens. I am not a fan, so I guess I would be in Hornady's camp, but for different reasons. The 300 and 270 WSM will probably have choices in ammo for awhile, but everything else is dead. I always liked the 6mm Remington over the 243, but the 243 is king. Oh well. Roll you own ammo and enjoy it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 22,884
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 22,884 |
They once sent me a similar response to an inquiry about the 260Rem. They claimed that no American in their right mind wanted a 6.5, the popularity was dwindling, and it offered no inherent advantages over more popular cartridges.
Then they issued the Creedmoor about 2 years later.
They like to blow smoke.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 5,749
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 5,749 |
Never realized they had to pay a royalty to make ammo. It is not for making the ammo...the originator of the cartridge design is in question. I remember reading this shortly after the WSM came out. There was an issue with the WSM (short and fat) and a proprietary line of custom cartridge design. Seems like the WSM was too close to that design. Seems there was a legal challenge. Winchester might have lost, and settlement was made in the form of royalties to the proprietary cartridge designer. My memory may not be completely accurate. However, I remember going to the website and seeing the short and fat cartridges before Winchester announced the WSM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 5,749
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 5,749 |
They once sent me a similar response to an inquiry about the 260Rem. They claimed that no American in their right mind wanted a 6.5, the popularity was dwindling, and it offered no inherent advantages over more popular cartridges.
Then they issued the Creedmoor about 2 years later.
They like to blow smoke. Remington must believe it. What has Remington done to promote the 260 Remington...the 280 Remington... If a manufacture will not promote or limit the clambering of cartridges of their own design, why fault ammo manufactures for not making the ammo. Remington could produce all the ammo and components (minus powder) to meet the need...if there was one.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,127
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,127 |
I don't think you'd be able to talk GM in to building you a hemi either just the way it is. But yeah their excuses are pretty effin lame. So on the wsm thing this is how messed up I am I'm finally going to get one after all this time that they've been out. Got a 7wsm on order guess I've got a thing for orphans or some deal I dunno... 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 28,364
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 28,364 |
I'm wondering if you could quote that part of Hornady's description that is "spiteful"? I just read it and it seems pretty straight forward. The only line I can see that might come close to even disparaging the round is saying that "the Winchester cartridge can hold more powder than the Remington (300 SAUM), but the Remington makes up for this in efficiency, turning in top velocities that are usually less than 100 fps slower with the same bullet weight." Was that the spiteful remark? Earlier in the description they mention that the 300 WSM "has a bit more case capacity and can produce slightly higher velocities", which is true. I've seen very similar remarks comparing the 6mm Remington against a .243, a .30-06 vs. the .308 or various other rounds of slightly different case capacities.
I don't see loading for the WSM's as being any more of a chore than someone loading for a .250 Savage, .350 Remington Magnum, 6mm Remington or any of a number of other chamberings. Cases are available, dies are available, bullets are certainly available and current production rifles are still being made.
Gunnery, gunnery, gunnery.
Hit the target, all else is twaddle!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 5,749
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 5,749 |
Prolly just a little slow to act. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 80
Campfire Greenhorn
|
|
Campfire Greenhorn
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 80 |
I don't think they load .250 Savage ammo, either. I'm a huge fan of the .250 Savage. I shoot a BUNCH of .250 Savage cartridges out of my old c.1985 Ruger M77RL Ultralight. But I don't need Hornady to load the cartridges for me and probably wouldn't use them if they did make them. I've got along fine for three decades without fretting over the existence or lack thereof of .250 Savage factory ammo. I handload everything centerfire that I shoot, anyhow, whether common or not. I just buy every bag of .250 Savage brass I come across, whether I think I need it or not. You never know... It might be scarce, someday... I'd feel sorry for the OP, but I suspect he's got an easier time finding brass for his .300WSM than I have finding 7mm Bench Rest Remington brass for the XP-100 pistol in my gun room..,. Maybe I should start a letter-writing campaign to see if I can get someone to crank up production on 7mm BR brass...... I'd probably get about as far as the OP got with convincing Hornady to load .300WSM ammo. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 86
Campfire Greenhorn
|
|
Campfire Greenhorn
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 86 |
My two cents, I never liked the WSM/RCM rounds.
They just did not get my attention...kind of like women.
I don't like the 'short and fat' ones.
I stick with the classic 'tried & true' rounds, just my opinion.
Have Gun Will Travel,, The more dust on the trail- the thicker the soup.
Life Member: NRA, VFW, Six Napoleons
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,586
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,586 |
I don't care for Hornady ammo or bullets so it doesn't matter to me what they do or do not make.
Seems they wasted a lot of time and effort with developing the Ruger compact cartridges that never were popular.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,336
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,336 |
The issue has nothing to do with how they feed...Hornady doesn't make rifles.
The real issue is the royalty load on WSMs...it cuts into their profit margin. Why make something knowing you're going to be running at a lower profit out of the starting gate when you can make something else for more. It's not a smart business decision.
Not just that, but they resent the legal blackmail feeling about the whole issue. That's why many manufacturers dropped them, and why Ruger came out with the RCMs. Every WSM sold on the market has a $50 premium or thereabouts attached to it. That's not a big deal for a serious buyer, but it does affect market share, and tends to lower sales numbers...as we have seen.
Winchester is hanging in there because their name is on them, which is why they "adopted" the design in the first place, never realizing that someone had a patent.
It ain't all burritos and strippers my friends...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,315
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,315 |
The cartridge case is a gas seal. There has likely been billions of dollars spent changing the size,shape,capacity and headstamp on these things since the beginning. It keeps the industry moving and I love it. In reality, it's only purpose is to seal the chamber while the payload is burnt. There are some I favor over others. I have favorites. Some I don't give a second look. The objective is to launch a given bullet at a desired velocity. Hopefully without too much trouble. Either to take game,or punch some paper in general. What in the world would we do if it all stopped? I'd sure have a lot more free time,lol. Cartridges come and cartridges go. Trends and the times mold them into something we can transition to. To keep the industry alive,and to give me a reason to live within it. It also gives us a reason to reflect on the ones that have stood the test of time and appreciate the "Old days". Gotta love it don't ya?
"Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 6,766
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 6,766 |
I don't blame Hornady for not wanting so support a parasite via royalties.
Guns don't kill people, drivers with cell phones kill people.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,601
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,601 |
I don't blame Hornady for not wanting so support a parasite via royalties.
Well said. Most seem to think that Winchester and Remington started the 'short magnum' thing. They did not. Anybody remember the Lazzeroni line of 'short mags'? As said above, a patent infringement, and royalties awarded as the result of a lawsuit, is the reason behind Hornady's response. Matters not to me anyway. Never was a fan of short mags for a number of reasons.
Nut
Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.
Thomas Jefferson
|
|
|
|
|
99 members (14idaho, 6mmCreedmoor, Akpilot, 300_savage, 1_deuce, 13 invisible),
1,608
guests, and
814
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,190,599
Posts18,454,517
Members73,908
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
