Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles 300 wsm it is.

Got to checking out the 300 wsm in a search for a good all around rifle for the lower 48. The 300 wsm appears to be one of the most versatile cartridges going. Bullets from 110 gr to 220. The 110 or 130 ttsx for a blazing flat killer out to 3 or 400 yards, to the 210 ABLR or 212 ELD-x for a hammer on bigger stuff out to a lot farther than I ever plan to use it. That 210 ABLR looks to stay supersonic to 2k for target use, if one desired to work that far out. And almost 4000 lbs. of energy at the muzzle. Runs out of expansion velocity and drops below 1500 ft. lbs past 1k. Be a darn hard cartridge to end up needing more than...

Yep. I am pretty sure my next build will be a 300 WSM. Not that I need one, but until they start making .35 cal rifle suppressors, I won't be going above a .30 cal.

I’ve had at least seven 300 WSM’s starting in 2002. I’ve used the cartridge (the 300 WSM is a cartridge, not a caliber) to kill a variety of game, including mature bull elk, deer, and antelope (the farthest at 548 yards). It works.

I just prefer the 308 Win...

I had a 300 WSM for a few years. I like the round a lot and would pick it 10 times out of 10 over any other 30 magnum. Recoil is noticeably less than the bigger magnums and it does 95% of what they do in a lighter more compact rifle. But I had 308, and 30-06 rifles that do the same thing, albeit at somewhat closer ranges. A 308 does at 400 what a 30-06 does at 500 and a 300 WSM does at 600. When reality sunk in that 400 was probably farther than I could shoot I let the 300 WSM go.

I've owned a number of rifles chambered in .300 WSM and still have 2. I've killed elk and dozens of deer with the cartridge. While I do like the bigger 30 cal magnums as well, the combination of power and the size and weight of the guns I've had these chambered in means the bigger 30's usually stay in the safe (as does most of the smaller stuff).

Same here. I used 300 win mag for most of 30 some elk.. Now the little 308 does the same thing with a lot less drama.

Fixed it. Thanks for pointing it out. 👍

That's where I ended up. I built a 300wsm as my main do everything rifle. Really love the cartridge so far. Lots of ammo availability and lots components to choose from.

Mine is a stainless m70 with a 24" proof carbon barrel, Micky HTG Edge, nightforce nx8 2.5-20. It weighs around 8.5 and balances perfect for me. With the supressor it kicks a lot less the my win m70 featherweight 308.

Sounds like the build I am considering. Looking at the 70 EW, with a McMillan and either the SS 3-9×42 I already have, or some NF offering. Should do all I ever want from a bolt rifle setup.

I have two 300 WSM bolt guns, one does not like 150’s at all. It does shoot 165’s so well. The other loves 155’s as does my favorite 7 Wby. I once lost sleep over which to carry on a hunt, so I carry them both. Since the 300 WSM is the ballistic twin of the 7 Wby, I feel no loss of gain.

I used a .300 WSM for 4 years hunting Mule deer. For 500 and under I prefer more speed on a bullet. Settled on a stout charge behind a 150gr Nosler Accubond. The combo performed flawlessly. Most often than not, I would find the bullet just under the hide on the off side.

This is a 150gr Accubond recoved from a mature buck shot at a bit over 400 yards. Recovered just under the hide on the off side. Bang/Flop!

I really like the .300WSM. I have two of them, and while one has given me fits since I bought it (used), I resolved the issue this week. I just need some time at the range with it now.

Bet that was a big sigh of relief.

Text book Accubond performance.

I came to the same conclusion when contemplating a rifle that would perform on anything from TX Hill Country deer up to Elk, or even Nilgai. Picked up a M70 EW and made loads from mild 150gr up to a stout 180gr. It is accurate and and tough and feels good to carry and shoot.

It seems like recoil is a good bit less than my 300 Win mag. I wouldn’t mind having one. I have a 270 WSM. I really like it!

Yes it was. Now maybe I can see how well it actually shoots.

I dont know about a good bit less. More like slightly less IME.

Depends on rifle/stock/weight.
My 300 wsm is a pussycat compared to my fils.
I hate his.

My 300saum is pretty similar and I love it. Way less recoil than the 300 win mag tikka I owned and got rid of. Drops stuff dead too.

What are you running. Knowing what a difference stocks and weight make, this is info that interests me. Also for comparison, what does the FIL run?

When they first came out, rifles and ammo were sporadic in the pipeline. Ibought a Mod 700 HB Varmint (26" barrel) in .308 and had it converted to the 300WSM. It used an inline magazine, loaded by dropping the floorplate, dump them in ( like an Old Krag, ha) Anyhow, that puppy shot wonderful, and beat my 24" 300WM with the 168 NBT. I gave it to a dear older friend in Texas for a Beanfield rifle. I have three friends who use the 300WSM on everything. I am back to a lighter weight 300WM. I'm not picky. I can make both of them go fast enough for what I want.

The .300WSM is a fine cartridge. That said, if I was going to buy or build another .300 it would be a .300 PRC.

I am running a SS Rem 700 with 26” fluted barrel with a McMillan Rem Hunter stock.
He a SS Winchester 70 with a 24” barrel and a factory composite stock shortened 3/4”
Mine weighs upper 7’s his lower 7’s
His recoils twice what mine does to me.

I have a Tikka T3 .300WSM, and that gun kicks harder than any other rifle I own to include my Ruger Hawkeye .338WM. The Tikka will be getting a replacement recoil pad in the near future.

No kidding.

I met a guy at the range once who was selling one for a decent price and was nice enough to let me shoot it to test accuracy before making my decision. It proved accurate enough, but after a 5-shot group I handed it back to him and said, “No, thanks. This thing kicks like a pissed-off horse!”

He told me right then that was why he was getting rid of it.

Where did I read that an ammunition maker or bullet company was using a .300 WSM for accuracy testing and that they got even better results from it than a .308?

My 300 wsm is probably the most consistently accurate rifle I own and shoots great with several bullets. I probably have over 50 hunting rifles but for the last 6 years or so I keep taking the 300 wsm. It's a 24" brux 10 twist #4 fluted on a stiller predator.

Bb

SOP before you shoot tikka in the magnums, is put a limbasaver recoil pad in it.

Some of us have to learn the hard way! I actually thought I ordered one before I left the Stan, but it must have been a dream. I'll be getting one in the near future.

Ha. No pun intended 😉!
The pad on the t3x is much improved over the brick that came with the t3.

This! I've found the limbsaver to be a life saver on magnum T3s. Its the first thing I add. I think I even put one on my 6.5 Swede. It didn't really need one at first but when I got the 147s up to about 2900 i thought why not.

Bb

My Rem. 700, SPS, 300WSM shoots very well, MOA and smaller. I had a muzzle brake installed for recoil reduction. I load 180 grain Accubonds with 66.0 grains of IMR4831. This is the only load that I use with my 300WSM due to accuracy and has taken 22 big game animals from North America, Africa and New Zealand. This load chronographs at 2900 FPS +/- 1% deviation. Not going to change load.
I pillar bedded and glass bedded the original Remington tupperware stock and painted it camo. It does everything that I require out to 500 yards. That being my self imposed shooting limit. Good luck! MTG

I don't think the .300WSM is as useful as the 7mmWSM or even the .325WSM, but it is a respectable all-around cartridge.

Please elaborate. It seems to me the 300 is slightly less flat than the 7mm, but has more energy, and slightly flatter than the 325, but carries less energy. A good mix of the two, it would seem. The 300 has more readily available components and ammunition as well...

Tom264, I take it from your post that the McMillan makes a difference in the recoil vs. the Model 70 stock. Good to knows as my initial thought was a 70 EW and the addition of a McMillan of some flavor, not with edge fill. Probably add the SS 3-9 for optics, so not a super lightweight rig, looking for about 8 lbs. all up, or thereabout. Can fiddle with mounts and such to add or reduce weight a little if needed. Or do you suspect there is a recoil difference between the different actions? I figured the stock and weight had most of the effect one way or the other.

Why the 300 prc? It needs a long action, and what does it do much better than the wsm? Not that familiar with it, so your comment makes me curious.

Yeah, If and when I buy a 6.5 CM it will be a Tikka T3x. I'll still probably put a Limbsaver on it. I just need to order one for he T3 .300WSM I currently own.

I believe wholeheartedly it is the stock in my case that suppresses the recoil.
Not to mention I have a 1” Packmayer Decelerator pad and he has the factory harder rubber pad.

It would be really hard for me to consider a 325 more useful than a 300. I could agree on the 7 wsm but in my opinion the only thing the 325s are useful for is picking them up used for cheap and rebarreling them to 7s.

I've just never found 8mm bullets very appealing. BCs are never very good and most stores don't stock many of them. I'm sure some people love them but some people love 270s too. I'm guilty of owning a fee 98s in 8mm and even had a weatherby Europa in 8x68s for a while. I could consider an 8mm usable but never more useful than a 30 cal. Every bullet is available in a 30 cal and even their BCs look good next to an 8mm. But, to each their own.

I did have a friend in high school who was convinced his 303 British had way more knock down than my 30-06 because it had a bigger diameter bullet. Now that he's all grown up he probably moved up to an 8mm and really has my 06 beat.

Bb

They have them at Sportsmans warehouse for the t3

In my opinion, the 325 wsm is a very underrated cartridge. The above statement by Burleyboy is one of the reasons. The fact is, in my opinion, if someone is buying a 325WSM for long range, that person is extremely misguided, unless he is just seeing what he can do with the round. And that is where the higher BCs come in to play. However, as a normal day to day round for larger big game to be shot at ranges most hunters will be shooting, it is an excellent, under-appreciated an under-rated cartridge.

I'd love to hear the thought process behind this. Especially that the 300 isn't as useful as the 7mm.

I'll got back up there today if I am feeling better around noon. I didn't see them for the T3 when I was in there Saturday. If not, I'll be in Anchorage tomorrow and may swing by that one or Cabela's.

The 325s have a very specific application - when loaded with the 220 Weldcore they are a far better bear stopper than any 300, while also retaining a long range trajectory in line with most small bores although not quite as good as the best 7mm and 6.5 magnums. For the american hunter who is hunting any animal at a distance and wanting a light and handy rifle, but still concerned about close range bear encounters, it's arguably the best option. The only real downside is recoil. The .338 RCM is a decent option as well, but the rifle situation there sucks. There are plenty of good new manufacture CRF rifles in 325 to choose from.

You would certainly hope they would. The .308's steep shoulder angle is a major liability.

Well that's obvious - for thin skin non-dangerous game, the 7mm bore is far superior to .308 - higher BCs and higher sectional densities on typical hunting bullets.

Fan boy here too. I think it's perfect.

So what you are saying is that a guy should buy two rifles and cover small and large to a tee, rather than one rifle in a medium caliber that can do both satisfactorily?

Nothing obvious about it. I'd take the .300 over the 7 every time if performance on game is the only criteria. The increase in SD in the 7mm is minimal as is the difference in trajectory inside typical hunting ranges. The 300, however does carry more energy and it makes a bigger hole. I don't think it's a coincidence that one cartridge is thriving and one is on life support. That said they both are excellent cartridges for nearly everything in North America.

A minimal increase in SD and a minimally flatter trajectory are both significantly more important in the killing of critters than a minimal increase in kinetic energy. The difference in hole size in the critter is also minimal. At the end of the day, when it comes to killing power any variable that aids in precise bullet placement trumps one that doesn't, like energy or caliber.

The success of the .300 WSM vs the 7 WSM has nothing to do with the merit of each cartridge, and everything to do with the 30-cal bias of the American people. Of course other factors, like ammo selection, the long-standing 7mm dominance of the 7mm Rem Mag at a critical time when the 7 WSM was trying to gain a foothold, etc, play a role, but the 30-cal bias is a huge one.

Correct. The 7mmWSM is simply superior for thin skinned non-dangerous game. That doesn't mean it's more popular. Just better.

And at least an additional rifle if you want to hunt thick skinned dangerous game.

The reality is that the cost of hunting (especially in terms of time) is very high compared to the cost of rifles. You might as well be shooting the right thing.

The sectional density advantage only exists because you are comparing bullets of higher SD in the 7mm to ones of lower SD in the 300. I could compare a 200 grain 30 cal bullet to a 140 7mm bullet and claim the same. Additionally, you claim these differences are significant. At the ranges 99% of game is killed they are irrelevant. Frankly, at the point that the BC makes any significant difference in trajectory you probably shouldn't be shooting at game anyways. For example, a 180 grain Accubond from a 300 WSM at 2950 FPS sighted in at 200 yards has 61.2" of drop while a 160 grain Accubond from a 7mm WSM at 2950 FPS sighted in at 200 yards has 60.3" of drop even though the 160 grain 7mm bullet has a slightly higher SD and BC. If you think .9" flatter trajectory at 600 yards is significant I'd venture to say you are in the minority.

Nice theory, but not true. Here's your task: find a .308 bullet with a higher SD and higher BC than the .284 175gr Weldcore. It must be a lead core bonded hunting bullet with 90%+ weight retention.

I'm not going to hold my breath because you'll be looking for a while.

Yeah, the difficulty with getting good groups out of a 308 is well known.

Actually I won't be. I'm not wasting my time trying to find something that meets the parameters you set forth. You are completely ignoring my example above. The benefits you speak of are of no real significance in the field and really only start to possibly be a benefit once you get past reasonable hunting ranges. Inside of those ranges the 7mm is inferior, albeit fairly insignificant as well. I'm done with this conversation since keeping up is proving to be a challenge for you.

False again. Increased SD, and thus penetration, is advantageous starting at the muzzle.

Nosler Accubond Long Range 210 grain .30 cal.

SD .316

G1 BC .661

https://www.midwayusa.com/product/1010505254?pid=149294

Talk about pole vaulting over mouse turds...

That's basically what I've said multiple times. The difference between the 2 is negligble. But I'm sure this douche cake will continue to tell us all how much better the 7mm WSM is.

Close, but crap weight retention. At least you tried

No, I claim that they are more important than some minor difference in kinetic energy, which is nearly worthless as a predictor of killing effectiveness.

Guys often argue that BC is irrelevant within "hunting ranges", since they're thinking only of how it affects elevation, but the difference in BC between two bullets can be significant in terms of wind drift from the muzzle on out, when the wind is blowing...

At the end of the day, the differences in effectiveness between the .300 WSM and 7 WSM are very minor within a few hundred yards.

Yeah right.