Home Forums Hunting & Shooting General Big Game Cut the Bull on the WSM

Realistically, in an average hunting application (shots under 250 yards, for example) does the .300WSM have an advantage over the .30/06 for deer and elk? I hunt in Oregon, and I have taken exactly one shot over 250 yards. My average shot is much closer to 100 than even 200 yards. I'm probably a typical hunter. So, in a real-world sense, with no ballistic tables or energy charts or drop compensators or handloads, can anyone tell me the practical advantage of the .300WSM over the .30/06? The shells cost close to twice as much and I have to believe the recoil is greater. Let me know what you think. BTW, Cade took his first steps last night. Ten months and three weeks old. It's a hell of a thing.<P>Quinn

Quinn, with shots under about 300 yards or so, you won't see any real advantage to the 300 mags in any flavor unless you feel the need to use really heavy bullets (220 grain). Where the mags shine is beyond that range when you have to deliver a heavy premium bullet to a target you can't get closer to. For all intended purposes, the 30-06 is the equal of almost anything out to 250-300 yards on any game you can hunt in the lower 48. <BR>Now if you decide to hunt where the shooting might be longer, you would have a decision to make but that is a discussion for another topic. <BR>Congrats on the boy walking- I bet everything around the house is being set on higher shelves now. [img]images/icons/smile.gif" border="0[/img]- Sheister

Quinn" And to me the 300 WSM is the least intersting of all the suggested and/or coming variants. Going up to a 338 or 375 WSM sounds interesting in a very lightweight mountain rifle config as well as going down to the 6.5 WSM for a long flat shooting cartridge sounds neat? JMHO.<P>Tex

I think Winchester should have begun this saga with the .270 WSM since everyone but Weatherby has chosen to ignore that caliber and they have the most "History"..ala Jack O'Connor with the .270. I consider .30 cal to be like vanilla ice cream, good, but just kinda plain..I have seen reports of the .278 Ultra Mag getting 4,000fps with 130gr bullets!! I believe it, but I can't confirm it!<P>Mike

I kinda like vanilla, goes good with pecan pie, but then so does chocalatewalnut with a little whipped ceam, hum don't that sound good......

I think a good 30-06 is all the average hunter will ever need. The 30-06 is still a great choice and I am a big fan of the cartridge.I don't care what the 308 boys say, the 30-06 is a far superior hunting cartridge! I will be happy to explain why if asked. The 30 calibers are big sellers so I believe Winchester was concerned with selling the most rifles. Not to mention beating Remington to the punch. The 270 is sort of sacred O'Connor territory. I would be surprised to see a major manufacturer want to touch this. Anyway, when you start getting up into the magnum velocities a 7mm is always a more versatile than any 270. Don't get me wrong, I am convinced that the standard 270 is a better cartridge than the standard 280. I just think that in the magnums the 7mm is the more versatile choice.<BR>I know someone will get upset and ask me how the hell a 270 is better than a 280. If I am forced, I will go into detail. [img]images/icons/crazy.gif" border="0[/img]

I'm not a magnum fan, but, there is little doubt in my mind that you are asking the question in reverse. The real questions, if one reloads, are: Is there any possible reason for using a .30-06 instead of the .300 WSM if one had a choice? Is the .30-06 more or as accurate? Does a rifle based on the .30-06 promise to be a more accurate hunting rifle than one based on a .300 WSM? Will a light rifle using the .30-06 as a basis weigh less than one using the .300 WSM? Under any conceivable conditions, can the .30-06 given duplicate or maximum loads with a given bullet outperform the .300WSM? In short, is there anything the .30-06 does that the .300 does not do as well or better? Since the anwer to all of the above is NO, then if you choose to hunt with the .30-06 you are obviously choosing to hunt with an inferior cartridge. That is fine, and there is absolutely no doubt that the .30-06 is a very capable and fine cartridge, but ballistic knowledge has antiquated it to some extent, and using one is remotely related to muzzle loading, you are handicapping yourself a little bit, and that bit will only be obvious on a very small percentage of shots, but that little bit might well be the difference between a lost animal and a clean kill. I own several .30-06s and no .300WSMs but facts are facts.

IIFID-I know where there is a shiny new stainless/synthetic winchester in .300WSM on the shelf waiting to be had by someone for the paltry sum of $650(give or take)...he,he,he...<P>Mike

I own a 30-06. However, I have a 300 WSM on order... I see it as the "30-06 for the new millenium." 180 grainer's at 3,000 - 3,050 fps means it hits as hard at 350 yards as the 30-06 does at 225 yards. Also has about 50 yards greater PBR... all with litte more powder and recoil... plus in a SA. How can anyone knock such a creation?<P>Brad

im a whitetail hunter, in missouri a .270 is just plain hard to beat, it does an excellant job, i have a hard time believing that there is anything that will kill deer deader...gut

Has anybody heard an update or is it all still "guessing" on what the next calibers in the WSM line will be and when they will be announced?<P>Is brass readily available now? This one intrigues me more then any other lately. I kept thinking about a 338 or 375 WSM in a very lightweight mountain rifle. I was thinking about using a model 7 Rem as a starting point? But that would be like sacreligious wouldn't it (grin)<P>Tex

IIFID's mimics my thoughts on this matter. Nostalgia doesn't impress me and I wasn't ever afraid to "upgrade". I don't go grasping at straws at every new cartridge that is schemed,but I can fully appreciate a good design and concept. The WSM and new Remington Short Ultra Mags,nicely fill that bill. <P>They offer performance of a long action and that speed is harnessed in the most mechanically accurate of designs(short/fat powder column). Though it isn't for everyone,the design is 100% on the money. I won't sell every long action rifle I own,but this new design and it's .532" boltface,lends itself well to a myriad of applications. Seems foolish to me,to tote something longer and heavier,that only duplicates the "Midget Magnums" performance.<P>Eventually,I'm sure I will phase out most of my long actions and replace them with cartridges based on the new design. I've yet to own a rifle that was too accurate,too light,or hit too hard,BUT I am still searching..........

I see a definite niche for the mountain hunter wanting the ultimate light rifle in one of these chamberings, but I see the real sales in standard weight, heavier rifles. These things are going to have a little recoil to them and I am sure the average 2 box a year man won't want to deal with the light, light rifles. For that matter I bet they won't be the most popular shooters as much as they will be the one that gets drug up the mountain a few weeks out of the year.<P>Will both Rem. and Win. survive or will one fizzle in a few years? I can se it now the .270 vs. 30.06 thread of the future! Rem Short Ultra vs Win Short Magnum.<P>Mike

I HATE to say it,but I think winchester wins that contest. Despite Remington having the capabilities,Winchester beat them to it. Remington also sells that nasty bolt locking device and I won't own one.<P>Though I'm Remington through and through,they shot themselves in the foot and it will prove quite costly. I look for Ruger to adopt one of these chamberings and it will likely outsell both the Remington and Winchester rifles combined. Whatever cartridge they adopt,will gain widespread acceptance,the other will go quietly away. <P>If Ruger would introduce a short/fat 25,338 and 375 based upon the WSM or RSU,they would gain a huge corner of the market. Ruger isn't afraid to try new things,I look for them to be both the trend setter and the leader of the Industry..........

The poster who stated that the .30/06 is an antiquated cartridge should contact the manufacturers of rifles, reloading equipment, etc. to find out that the .30/06 outsell all the other cartidges available every year. Out of 70 rifles I own, two of them are .30/06, one, a 1971 Rem 700, my favorite rifle but not necessarily my favorite cartridge. Personally, I think anything larger than a 6.5X55mm is a waste of energy.

I'm with you stick! I have been asking around various shops when visiting and they all say Remington sales have been off compared to the others. I also agree on the winner of the dual. I have heard NO and others talking about Remington leaving them hanging on chamberings they introduced and I worry about that hurting them. From a purely marketing point of view WSM sounds better also. I'm partial to Win. cartridges in Remington rifles anyway!!<P>Mike

IIFID, if you reread my original post, I'm posing the question in the correct sequence. Remember, I'm not talking about reloading or shots out to 350 yards. I believe that the average Joe (...and every Saturday we work in the yard, Joe Walsh song) hunter is not proficient enough to hit at that distance, so I'm talking about 250 and closer, more like 200 yards max. Judging from some of the areas I've hunted, often a hunter can't even see that far. Sure, all things being equal more power is usually a good thing, but will the buck or bull know the difference between an /06 and a .300WSM? At the distance most game is taken what's the difference? A fun new caliber, but in a practical sense I just don't see what the hulabaloo is all about. Granted, most posters here are not the typical two-boxes-per-year shooters. But for the unwashed heathens who make up the vast majority of gun-toters, is there really an advantage? I say no. At the distances indicated I see no compelling reason to look twice at the WSM. A great way to sell rifles, but no advancement in the sport.

Quinn, congratulations on Cade. Kids rock, no doubt about it. The just-walking stage is precious, and will soon blaze into the crib-self-evacuation stage. Welcome to the intimidating world of cabinet locks and child-proof toilet seats.<P>I'm like you -- I don't see much point in most of the standard rifle calibers, much less the new ones. But that just illustrates my personality type, or perhaps my personal point of diminishing returns.<P>I'm not an envelope pusher. My .270 can do a whole lot more than I can, with factory fodder, so why not spend my money and time scouting or hunting? When you look at the multiple loadings available for the '06, it's not hard to see the thing pretty much covers everything.<P>Add the availability of new premium ammo and it gets even better for clods like me who don't even reload. My gun shoots the factory stuff better than I can. The most I can justify is a trigger job (or adjustment) and perhaps floating the tube for insurance. But hey, my main gun is plastic anyway.<P>A note here. I AM this sophisticated: I think everyone who pulls a trigger owes it to themselves to pull a good one. The rest of the accuracy/ballistic enhancements are peanuts compared to the benefit in the field of a decent trigger.<P>That said, it's the latest and neatest stuff that sells guns and is snapped up by those specialists who can and do max out their potentials. I can relate to the shorter action being more useful. Ditto the accuracy potential of the short, fat case. <P>Heck, I want the gun companies to make money. And I benefit from the information provided to the rest of the shooting world by those who wring the most out their hardware. Hats off to them. I agree with Stick -- you can't get too light, too accurate, or too hard-hitting. If my hunting/shooting "career" progresses to the point where it becomes worth it to fiddle with the infinite variables of riflery, whoopee for me. But I doubt it will. I'll let better shooters than me do it, and read about it later. <P>Meanwhile, hopefully I'll be in the bush with my boring old guns. Hopefully I'll be gutting something.<P>Cheers, Talus

If it flies it dies,<P>On the contrary, I think the 30-06 has become more modern and better than ever. With the super premium bullets one can drop down effectively from 180 to 165 for use on large game, with all the added benifits of a flatter trajectory. I don't know how much you have worked with the 30-06, but it can be loaded to be hard on the heels of a 300 magnum without the blast and recoil. I still think it is the top choice for most big game hunting.<P>I personally cannot crown the 300 WSM King of all hunting cartridges like you seem to have done. Your accolades are premature in my opinion. I have already heard of feeding problems with this cartridge. Only time will tell if this cartridge can garner the international acclaim of the 30-06.

Headhunter:<P>You can soup up an inline 8 and it is still an antiquated design and that is just as true of the .30-06. <P>You are fighting a lost war, but fight on, doesn't matter to me.<P>BTW, your original argument which you took me to task for was for non-reloaders, now you are loading up the .30-06. Be consistent.