Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Advantages of a WSM?

none...jorge

+1, the more you walk, the better the WSM looks.

BMT

Lighter guns = more punishment. I don't want a lightweight magnum. I have a Ruger 300 Win mag which was rebarreled with a #2 profile and it is brutal. Nice and light, but you pay at the range.

To me, he advantages are much better on paper than they are when they hit steel. The shorter action / lighter gun thing is more of a disadvantage to me, because I�m not all that interested in ultra-light .300 magnums�I equate that with an unpleasant sensation.

However, there are those who are willing to tolerate the increased recoil for the kind of hunting they do.

The shorter action does mean it�s stiffer, but on paper, with a sporter weight rifle, the difference is essentially invisible.

Losing the worthless belt is a real step in the right direction. I�ve always thought the belt was a silly idea for American Magnums.

Factory ammunition is much more costly and much less available with less variety. On the reloading side, cases are more costly.

Now, it�s no secret that I�m not a big fan of the magnums, but that�s because I�m not much of a long range Elk killer. For most game shooting, I don�t understand the need for anything beyond a .270, and I tend to lean toward the light side of that as well (7-08, .260 etc). When I feel those cartridges are incapable of the job, I don�t reach for more velocity, I go for more bullet, so I�m much more apt to use a .35 Whelen, .338 Magnum etc, than a .300 Magnum.

I think that pretty well sums it up! I'll add, the only WSM that amounts to a "magnum" is the .270WSM. The 300WSM is a really neat little package from which to launch 165s-168s at 3000fps+. That will pretty well do anything needed on this continent.

[/quote]

The 300WSM is a really neat little package from which to launch 165s-168s at 3000fps+. That will pretty well do anything needed on this continent. [/quote]

Absolutely!

I can't make up my mind, I have both and will probably keep it that way. Sometimes light is good. I can get 200 fps more from the 300 winnie, but the animal can't tell the difference.

That is the whole point of a WSM. You can have your cake and eat it too. I have a short action M700 with factory barrel and their R3 (LimbSaver) pad and it has a lot less recoil than I anticipated. Really not too bad, I honestly believe most women could probably shoot it well with some practice.

I also have a 300 Winny with a 25" #5 barrel for stationary hunting over long pipe line cuts etc. It kicks a little more than my lighter WSM gun, but it has a Decelerator pad so that may be the difference I'm feeling?

It all comes down to the rifle said 300 WSM is chambered in. For me the Kimber 8400 package makes it a no brainer. I can get nearly 3,000 fps with a 180 in an all-up package under 7.25 lbs. Very accurate and because of intelligent stock design, highly shootable.

Were I unconcerned about weight and a rifle's OAL I'd sooner do the 300 Winny. It's a solid 100+ fps faster, is available everywhere and doesn't have the problems often created by the chunky, sharp-shouldered, minimally tapered 300 WSM.

I find the Kimber Montana 300WSM very very soft shooting,stoked with 165/8's.

Couldn't give Ruger two-thumbs up in stock ergo's,though they are better than quite a few.

My 7.25lb 7SHAMU is a pussycat on the shoulder............

I have had both, I find no significant difference in recoil, mostly because the WSM was a little lighter, 100-200 fps in most bullet weghts to the 300 WIN. I settled on the 300 Win, probably more for the rifle than the cartridge. I am shooting a Sako AV 300 WIn that weighs a whole 6 oz more than my Browning hunter did in the 300 WSM.

I'va had far more 300Winny's than WSM,but prefer the WSM easily.

Really never expected to see that transformation.

Sako AV's is far from lithe and A-Bolts...well,you know...................

I've never been a big fan of anything that "headspaces" on the belt. That said, an extra half pound in a magnum rifle doesn't bother me either. Yes the 300wsm is a shorter, lighter, more compact, stiffer action. But you'll never find anyone who knows better bitchin' about the accuracy that can be obtained with a 300Win mag, short case neck or not. If milkin' the absolute most velocity out of it is your goal, then the 300Win wins. But as far as practical hunting purposes go, you'll never tell the difference in performance on game. I will say the 300wsm seems to recoil slightly less, but it is slightly less of around, although you'll never notice the difference in the field. Earlier model 70's(first 1/2 yr production) had some feeding issues. I've still heard stories of Kimber 8400's having them(didn't they learn anything from the rifle they've tried so hard to copy). The 270wsm has already become a favorite of mine, and I recently blew about 3 grand on a custom 270wsm. Regardless of what Layne Simpson wrote, I believe it has an edge over the great 270 Win. Either cartridge ain't goin' anywhere any time soon, so I wouldn't sweat it. I'd stay away from the RSAUM's though, and also the 7mm WSM(Remington seems to pretty much own the 7mm market)---2MG

The 7WSM has it over all of 'em.................

I don't disagree, but the one place where it counts most as far as the manufacturers are concerned, sales, it doesn't have it all over 'em. If any of the wsm's has a chance of fadin' out, the 7mm would be the one. Not a concern of us avid handloaders though......2MG

I do have one of those and I do like it, better than the 300wsm, kicks a whole lot less. That 300 wsm with 180's is one mean kickin' sb.

The 7mm has a shorter case neck, and affords a bit more powder capacity...---2MG

Exactly why my first WSM was a 8400 Classic in said chambering and I just bought my 8400 Montana to duplicate it. As someone above said, a 160 TSX at 3000 fps or a 160 Partition at 3100+ is pretty potent!

My AV with 6.5 oz optilok rings and bases and a Zeiss conquest 3x9x40 scope that weighs 15 oz more comes in with a belly full at 8lbs 6oz. To me just about right for carrying and shooting a magnum cartridge.
I have other guns that are much lighter in milder calibres, but when I want to launch a 168 gr TSX at 3200 fps a hair under 8.5 lbs is just right for me.

Other than keeping some of the fellas in a job for a while longer , ah......no I can't think of one reason for them (that of course being the short fats).

Mark D