I had been looking for one of these for a while. Ruger stainless compact magnum in 300RCM. Has a 16.5" barrel, I just mocked up a burris fullfield E1 in 4.5-14x42 on it, but may end up putting a smaller scope on it later.
When I see that combination of rifle and cartridge two things come immediately to mind, loud muzzle blast and long muzzle blast flame in early morning or late afternoon low light conditions.
l told my pap and mam I was going to be a mountain man; acted like they was gut-shot. Make your life go here. Here's where the peoples is. Mother Gue, I says, the Rocky Mountains is the marrow of the world, and by God, I was right. - Del Gue
With a 16" barrel it probably ain't far off is the point I was getting at. Admittedly I know nothing about the 300RCM, but 16" seems like it would be one heck of a down step in performance.
With a 16" barrel it probably ain't far off is the point I was getting at. Admittedly I know nothing about the 300RCM, but 16" seems like it would be one heck of a down step in performance.
ok, gotcha. Yeah I am sure there is some velocity loss with the 16" barrel. All of the marketing hype said magnum performance from a 20" barrel, but when you look at hornady's test barrel they used a 24" to get stated velocity on the ammo.
With a 16" barrel it probably ain't far off is the point I was getting at. Admittedly I know nothing about the 300RCM, but 16" seems like it would be one heck of a down step in performance.
ok, gotcha. Yeah I am sure there is some velocity loss with the 16" barrel. All of the marketing hype said magnum performance from a 20" barrel, but when you look at hornady's test barrel they used a 24" to get stated velocity on the ammo.
Looking at Noslers load data for the 308 and 300 RCM it looks like the former in a 24" barrel equals the later in a 16", at least with 180gr or lighter bullets. Let us know how close it is after you've chrono'd a few 300 loads,yeah?
I have one of those in 223Rem. In that cartridge, it's about as handy a rifle as a man could want. Loud though. The muzzle blast, even with a cartridge using that little powder, has stopped me from having any interest in one chambered in a larger cartridge.
Those who must raise their voice to get their point across are generally not intelligent enough to do so in any other way.
I have one of those in 223Rem. In that cartridge, it's about as handy a rifle as a man could want. Loud though. The muzzle blast, even with a cartridge using that little powder, has stopped me from having any interest in one chambered in a larger cartridge.
I made a comment yesterday on this thread. I have to laugh a little at myself because the reason for the comment was I'd just come in from shooting an 18" .223AI and could see the flash with my left/off eye after every shot. The flash didn't really bother me but the difference in the sound between the 18" and 22" shooting the same ammo was VERY noticeable to me.
I have one of those in 223Rem. In that cartridge, it's about as handy a rifle as a man could want. Loud though. The muzzle blast, even with a cartridge using that little powder, has stopped me from having any interest in one chambered in a larger cartridge.
I made a comment yesterday on this thread. I have to laugh a little at myself because the reason for the comment was I'd just come in from shooting an 18" .223AI and could see the flash with my left/off eye after every shot. The flash didn't really bother me but the difference in the sound between the 18" and 22" shooting the same ammo was VERY noticeable to me.
I know exactly what you mean. I have a similar rifle in 223, a Ruger M77 Ultralight. Between the 20 inch barrel and the extra LOP, it moves the muzzle out 4-5 inches further from my face. That's enough to make it far more pleasant to shoot.
Those who must raise their voice to get their point across are generally not intelligent enough to do so in any other way.
With a 16" barrel it probably ain't far off is the point I was getting at. Admittedly I know nothing about the 300RCM, but 16" seems like it would be one heck of a down step in performance.
...............Well not really that much of a down step in performance as you might think. The 300 RCM might also apply in the following example.
A few years back me and some buds as an experiment chrony'd dozens and dozens of the same identical re-loads in three 300 WSMs one of which included my 300 WSM Ruger Frontier with the 16.5" barrel. The Frontier ran only 4.1% to 4.7% behind in velocity lvs their 23" and 24" barrels. Modern powders allow that to occur.
Notice that one factory ammo box using a 180 gr gave a high of 2796 fps. Back in 2007 that same factory ammo got me 2827 fps. Tack on some max doses of RL17 my little Frontier can push a 180 to slightly over 2900 fps.
A shorty 300 RCM just may follow suite given the same experiment.
![[Linked Image]](https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/gallery/80/full/162332.jpeg)
