Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles 300 WSM OR 300 WBY

This argument is as silly as the debate over 9mm vs. 45 auto. Short magnums don't do anything a standard caliber hasn't done or even done better ballistically for years.


This picture is evident of that. The two rifles don't have the same barrel length, so you can't say that you are saving in weight due to the shorter action. Look at the actions and you can see less than 1 inch in length difference.

The weight save in a short action is in the middle of the action where the least amount of steel is removed. The difference in case length between a 300 Winchester short mag (2.1 inch) VS. a 300 Weatherby Mag.(2.815 inch) is a whopping .715 inches.

In terms of weight, when you take .715 inches of steel out of the center of the action (because the overall action in front and rear needs the same steel for bolt and lugs) you are only talking a couple of ounces of weight.

Now if you can tell the difference in the weight for that couple of ounces of steel and the stock (as you have added stock material to handle that extra .715 inches of action), fine, you are welcome to that.

Most of the people comparing short magnum rifles to standard rifles are using the concept of a "Mountain Rifle" which has been cut down in weight for carrying in the mountains and needs to be light. The same can be done in weight savings on a standard caliber and the only difference comes down to the .715 inches. That is all you are saving.

If you happen to like all that load of marketing crap to sell new ideas on an old and proven caliber/rifle, so be it, go and get one. When it comes to preferring a peanut butter and jelly sandwich over Ham and Cheese, that is personal preference, just the same as a short magnum preferred over a standard.

I reload as well. I just didn't happen to have any put together and wanted to shoot my Wby that morning. So yeah I was glad to pay the money. Similar stuff for the WSM was running $35.99 I guess I don't think the extra $4 is that big of a ball buster. Maybe thats just me.

I really like it, it says weatherby but it's the anti-bling version.

I'll have to PM buffybr & get the lowdown.

like i said, i would like to do that with a vanguard in 257

The owner of a 30 06 could tell you the same thing.

Brad, not Minnesota but I've shot deer with a 300 Roy in Wisc at about 12 yards............grin

The flat trajectory really helped out

Now the 308 Montana gets the woods nod.

Now that right there is priceless...

this has been a great article to read, much more entertaining then a pair of range dorks nit picking every little detail only to come to a conclusion ya'll did in one sentence.

I'll just say follow your heart. You've gotten some good arguments, and some not so good.

I've had both and the Weatherby is now gone. Mine is not a fair comparison, a MK-V vs a custom Remington. The Weatherby did not shoot particularly well and the Remington shoot extremely well. I could not get my handloads to shoot as good as the Weatherby ammo either. The first and only time that this has ever happened. For a while the WSM's looked to be on the extinction list but the 300 WSM seems to be doing ok. When I had my MK-V Weatherby/Norma was the only game in town for ammo. Now there are a few more choices although I expect the Weatherby/Norma stuff to be better quality.

Good Luck with your decision!

I actually had a 300wby back when this thread originated... 10 damn years ago.. I still prefer that over the wsm. But would take a 30-06 over either one, personally.... Just sayin..