I'm considering purchasing one or the other. Of course I know the short action vs long action thing but past that are there other reasons to choose one over the other?

I think the short magnums are a fad.

To a certain they've already proven to be a fad. The .300 WSM is still the best-seller, but even it isn't nearly as popular as it was during the peak years. These days .300 WSM rifles are't selling nearly as well as plain old .300 Winchester Magnums, one reason .300 WSM ammo and brass isn't nearly as available as it used to be.

Probably the second most-popular SFRM (short far rimless magnum) is the .270 WSM, and it's way behind both the .300 and standard .270 in sales.

For me it would boil down to the rifles, i.e. which one I liked the best.

A 180 gr bullet at 3000 fps is what it is,no matter what case you use to get it there. I have owned quite a few 300 Win Mags and always liked the cartridge and hunted a lot with it.

Despite several 300 WSM's I have not hunted with one. IME there is no difference in accuracy between the two.Take your pic.

The 300 Winchester Magnum ain't never been broke.

It's been broke since '63, don't cha know...the neck is way too short to be accurate.

The whole "if it ain't broke don't fix it" thing certainly has crossed my mind. And of course rifle selection and ammo selection favor the Win Mag.

Oh yeah, there is that.

.300 Win Mag.

I roll with a 26" 300 WBY for all-around to longer range hunts and a 300 WSM cut down to 23" in an Edge that is great to carry, especially on timber elk and deer hunts. Probably could use the WSM on everything but the WBY has been very good to me and I really trust it. I typically take the WSM as backup or for specific hunts where the lighter weight and handling make a difference.

moose, I have had a .300 WM since the early 70's.. It is my most trusted game rifle.. Having shot big game with everything from the .22 Hornet though the .45-70, it is my favorite.. I have messed with the .300 Rem. Ultra, H & H, WSM.. The WM is still my favorite.. I gave my super grade .300 WSM to a very good friend.. There were little things with the WSM I didn't care for.. But if you like the caliber or rifle, it wouldn't make a bit of difference which you choose.. I do feel the WM has an edge on the WSM, just as the Wea. has an edge on the WM..

On a technical basis I see no reason why the short mags should be so hard to make into a good shooting rifle. And there surely are some good ones out there.

Have numerous friends and acquaintances that have tried the .300 wsm. I reckon about half of them have left it behind in disgust over accuracy issues which were in some cases chamber dimension flaws.

My model 700 winnie was chambered and barreled by a shade tree gunsmith in a mobil home park. It is and has been a tremendous performer since 1978.

Remarkable how few issues are ever seen with the winnie and rifles so chambered, of any make...

They are accurate, the neck is short, true facts. However, the 308 Norma is better.. . If I were going to really rock a 300 magnum, it would be a pre 64 model 70 chambered in 300 H&H. 4 in the magazine and 1 in the chamber. It's the ballistic twin to the WSM and treads very closely behind the 300WM. No feeding issues, like you run into with the WSM on occasion.

The 300 WSM was never intended to compete with the 300 WM. It was initially called the 300 Jamison before Winchester stole the idea and hung the "magnum" label on it. This probably hurt the chances of success because people keep comparing it to 300 WM.

It is a good round giving 150-300 fps more speed (depending on bullet weight) than a 30-06 from a lighter more compact short action rifle. With the hotter loads it will somewhat overlap lower end 300 WM loads, but with the best loads is always 50-100 fps slower. The 300 WSM works very well with shorter 22-24" barrels whereas the 300 WM really needs 26".

In equal weight rifles recoil is almost exactly 1/2 way between 30-06 and 300 WM due to 50-100 fps less speed and about 10-12 gr less powder than 300 WM. Or you can shoot a 300 WSM in a 1/2 lb lighter rifle and get about the same recoil as 300 WM.

For someone putting together a lightweight mountain rifle and wanting more punch than 30-06 with manageable recoil it is a good choice. If you want that last 100 fps and don't mind more recoil or a longer heavier rifle any of the other 300 magnums will out perform it.

Good post.. I too gave up 2 WSM's for certain reasons that seem maniacal to some, but issues that erked me none the less..

Very fair and accurate in my opinion! I like the WSM's personally, because I prefer the short action and lighter rifle. I don't need that last 100-300fps of a Win or Weatherby Mag. But if I didn't reload, I would probably not choose it.

So since I already have a good .30-06 the WSM would be redundant. Sounds like the Win Mag is the way to go then.

Essentially so... Ask yourself what you want the extra velocity for.

The 30-06 will do all that most bullets are meant to do, and it'll do it a fair ways out there.

Adding velocity really only helps to overcome added distance or wind deflection conditions.

When you really get out there and the wind won't stop, the fast .30s and a bullet like the D46 (or newer and better) make a real difference.

Me too.

I will not leave it in the silly 30/06 length box,but will put it in a H&H box, seat bullets long in the skimpy neck and load 180-200 gr bullets about the same as a 300 Weatherby, but in a 24" barrel. (Actually only a few fps behind a top end Weatherby).

I know this because I have done it. Thee is no difference on any BG animal.

More magazine length is good.

Bob,with todays choice in powders,you think it's possible to nudge Wby velocities in the .300 Win without the long box?

Ken I'm not sure. Have not seriously run a 300 Win Mag in awhile. One 24" Douglas barreled Mauser I had gave 3150 with 76 RL22, 180 Partition. This is not too far off some 300 Weatherby factory ammo I have clocked.

My standard load in my old "long throat" 300 WM on a H&H action was 76 IMR4831-180 for 3140 from a 24" Krieger stainless.

But I guess with todays slow burners you can see 3100 from a 24" barrel pretty easily. Beyond that maybe!

My life was always easier with the 300 Win when I used a H&H action for them.

Thanks Bob.

Not Bob, Elk, but yes, 74gr of RL-22 under a 200 gr Partition will register 2990 fps from my 26" barreled NH super grade 300 Win Mag, it will also fit at 3.340" c.o.l.

But like Bob, I knocked the mag spacer out of this rifle after finding out how long the factory chamber was, had my 'Smith cut the ejector back a bit to prevent rounds from the mag getting hung on it on the way up and into the chamber, my c.o.l.s in this rifle are 3.585" and shoot like a house of fire.

I mostly use the rifle on dry hunting days for deer and pigs, it wears an older 3.5-10 matte Leupold in DD bases and rings, it goes without saying, but a 200 gr NPT at 3000 fps is an exceedingly quick killer, plus, it is one of the best flying hunting bullets to 500 yards I've ever fired.

elkhunternm,

I tested a bunch of newer powders (as well as some "traditional" ones) in my present .300 Winchester Magnum a couple of years ago for an article. It's a Heym SR-20 with a 24" barrel and standard length magazine, and with published powder charges got the following velocities with the 180's:

4000-MR 75.0 3132
Magnum 86.0 3152
Magpro 85.0 3211

In the same rifle, muzzle velocities using maximum published charges of Hodgdon Retumbo and Ramshot Magnum were over 3000 fps with 200-grain bullets.

Thanks Gunner & Mule Deer.

I have both and am a big fan of the 300WSM. My 180's I run about 2940 in WSM, 3040 in the big mag. I carry the WSM almost always due to the lighter rifle and less recoil. I could have lived just fine with the 06 truth be told or a 308, but that wouldn't be any fun.

And forgot the two loads mentioned above same powder, 64-grains verse 70-grains.

Wow! In 1000 rounds, that 6 grains difference will save almost a pound of powder!

Exactly, that's why I chose the Wby over the Winchester, all the correct improvements are integral to the cartridge/rifle from the get go.


41

I agree.

Marketers create fads and make money off of them.

I appreciate your honesty.

An '06 or .308 Win will kill just as dead as any other cartridge. Big game have no clue of what cartridge destroyed their topside oxygenated blood flow apparatus.

Rifle loonies will always experiment with the next best cartridge. Only a few will hit the market and the public will judge. Some are always attracted to the newest bling while others use what has worked for decades.

Thats true.

Except in the bad old days (when I played with this stuff) the 300 WM on a Holland action was just as good as a 300 Weatherby if both had 24" barrels. The Weatherby needed 26" to really gain anything over the long throat 300 WM, and even then it was not much. I never saw any 300 Weatherby factory ammo that clocked better than 3180. YMMV.

Even today, as Gunner points out, you can knock the spacer out of a M70 box and have 300 Weatherby level performance if you want it.

That said I liked and used both cartridges for hunting,although I have to admit any differences when it came to killing were imaginary. Both edged the 30/06 out pretty handily.


But there must be a few hundred 300 Win Mags out there for every 300 Weatherby. Not everyone wanted the cartridge or the rifles chambered for it.

Wasn't so much as a savings but more for comparison.

Feeling crotchety today?

I think most of us here are guilty of that, and we also come full circle back to the 308 win or 30-06. It's good to try the new stuff out, just so you can say you did it and have the experience to compare different cartridges. Nothing wrong with the short mags for most people, but the old tried and true still offer things that can't be topped by the latest greatest fad..

The WSM seems like the clear winner to me with it using almost 10 grns less powder to come within a 100 fps of the old tech belted case.

Yep, exactly like the "old tech" .300 H&H.

Exactly, A piss poor case design.

If you care about 10 grains of powder....which is funny.

I doubt very many WSM's give real life velocities within 100 fps of a properly loaded 300 Win Mag.

No one read what Mule Deer posted about modern powders in the 300 Win Mag? Theres more than 100 fps difference.besides with 200 gr bullets I bet the advantage is greater in favor of the 300 Win Mag.

The 300 WSM is a clear loser. Its only "virtues" are a short action and no belt, both of which are boutique advantages. Hardly worth considering.

Well, they are if somebody wants a .30 caliber cartridge with ballistics between a .30-06 and a real .300 magnum...:-)

All this pissin and moaning over 10 grains of powder. I see it as 5 cartridges in the rifle over 3. Short and fat doesn't always cut it from where I'm standing.. Oh and yes, the 300 H&H is an old dated cartridge with an unnecessary belt on it. So obsolete that no one should really be using it. They belong in a museum somewhere. . Just like the old 06. Too old to be useful.

Thing to do is have at least one of each, plus a 300 H&H, there is little difference between any of them. Any animal you hit wont be able to tell the difference. The short mag seems to have a touch less recoil.

You can't put "modern powders" in a WSM? Who knew....

In factory ammo... the lawyers have to be careful with the .300 Win Mag loads... you never know what kinda rifle that stuff will end up in. The WSM fodder can be (and often is) loaded to the gills... there's almost no difference in velocity between the two rounds when factory loads are shot from factory guns... at least that I've seen.

Just read an old post where 3000-3100 was pretty common with 180s in the .300 WSM... out of 23-24" barrels. Seems 66 grains of RE17 (a "modern powder") was running 3060 with 180 NBTs. Giving up only 75-125 fps to the .300 Winny loads MD referenced above... and using as much as 19 grains more powder (25-30%).

I have a 17" barreled .300 WSM that'll run 2850 with a 180... which bests about any 24" 30-06 with the same bullet.

I was in Cabela's yesterday... they had as many varieties of .300 WSM factory loads as they had .300 Winchester.

What factory rifle holds 5 .300 Winchester rounds in the mag... but only holds 3 WSMs in the same guise?

The .300 Winny is a bad ass round, and deserves its place as one of the preeminent big game cartridges of the world... as does the '06... something right in the middle of the two ought to do pretty well in the field... even if it is 60-90 years younger....

PS.... here's the link to that old .300 WSM thread....

http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/5000039/all/R17_and_the_300_WSM

My original first cartridge choice of 308 Winchester was at age 17. At that age, knowing nothing of wildcatting or having custom rifles built, I used to sit at night thinking the perfect cartridge would be a 350 Rem Mag with a 308 bullet. I would have likely stepped up to the 30-338 had I known how to get one.

I have 300 WSM's because it was what I was looking for when I bought that first 308.

The short mag cartridges are hard to find fault with, per se. Execution on the rifles built for them has sometimes been a bit off.

By far, the best thing about the .30 Holland is the rifles it was built on.

Same could be said about the Winnie, albeit from a different perspective.

The market will go where it will go. Sure people get emotional regarding 'their' rifle. As I see it the 06 will be where it is a long time. Brass is cheap as is ammo, you can find it everywhere. That promotes its use. It os an excellent cartridge.
The 300 Win Mag is very popular. I believe the most popular 30 caliber cartridge. You can find ammo and brass nearly everywhere ammo and brass can be found. These things promote the cartridge's use and it stays popular. There's nothing wrong with the 300 Win Mag.

So a new cartridge comes along and gets almost.,. Well the brass isn't everywhere and the ammo isn't everywhere. So what that it is faster than the 06 and is almost a 300 Win Mag in power. That's not the point!

It's a fad. A rifle for loonies. Nothing wrong with it if that floats your boat. But don't expect that the short magnum will upset the 300 or the 06. It's really nothing but a fad. A cartridge that has few advantages and a few disadvantages besides not being available as the 300 Win Mag.

If someone wants a short magnum good for him or her. To me these short magnums have not caught on with the mainstream hunters/shooters for reasons. But go ahead and buy what you want. It's good to have choices.

Well .....I don't recall saying you couldn't feed modern powders to a WSM. Not that it will do any good....The 300 Win Mag will always hold the velocity advantage,due to greater capacity. Also don't recall saying the round isn't useful......simply that it does not have the horsepower and flexibility of the 300 Win Mag.

My old rifle gave 3210 with 77 gr IMR4831 and a 180 gr bullets so who needs modern powders anyway?

I settled for a more sedate 3140 and killed everything from here to Alberta and the West. BTW this was back in the roaring 1980's and early 90's. You gotta come up with something I find "new and exciting" but the 300 WSM sure ain't "it"...

I was fooling with powders similar to RL17 before some on here were born,so know the capability.

As to the 300 WSM, I had 4-5 of them wrung out before the round was 5 years old.....of course I sold them all after noting the "advantages". Most all were New Haven M70,s which shot well but functioned like junk....a Kimber Montana that functioned well but shot like junk; ditto a M8400; and a M70 EW that was far and away the best 300 WSM I've owned. Very accurate rifle.


Nothing wrong with it...I just had no need for it. It's a short,fat 300 H&H.Even the charges are almost the same for those two cartridges.

I concluded....then as now....it aint no 300 Win Mag, but does fits squarely between a 30/06 and the Winchester magnum.

In choosing one, I will take the 300 Winchester Magnum round.

My friend who is an outfitter,has had several hunters with short mags,have them jam in the heat of elk hunting battle. Not sure if this is pilot error by the dudes, or something which occurs because of the short, fat case.

A lot of takers though. The 300 WSM was Federal's 10th best selling ammo in 2015. Not as popular as the 300 WM at 7th, but a popular fad none-the-less.

My current .30 hunting rifle inventory includes the 308 Win, 30-06 Sprg, 300 WSM, and 300 Win Mag. Of them all, I like the 300 WSM best by a noticeable margin. All three of the 300 WSM I've loaded for have shot 66.5gr RE17 with a 168 TTSX very accurately. There's nothing I can do with a 30 cal hunting rifle anywhere in North America that I can't do with a 168 TTSX @ 3100fps. The fact that the two 300 WSM that I currently own hit the field under 7lbs each total with optics makes them easy to carry and generally cause me to leave the 300 Win in the safe, though I love that rifle, too...

The short answer is that you can't go wrong with either. Even better, buy both!

Short fat cases don't help feeding issues,although it isn't impossible to get them to feed. Early M70 Classics WSM's were mostly junk when it came to feeding WSM cases.Part of the problem seemed to be box magazines that were too small...one I had would throw cases out of the box when you pulled the bolt back. The rails wouldn't hold the rounds down.

Later South Carolina rifles I was exposed to functioned beautifully and Kimbers likewise.

Other problem is manufacturers don't hand coddle rifles for great function today...they can't afford to and sell them to us at prices we like. Americans love cheap shidt.

Not like Mausers, Mannlichers, and pre 64 M70's and old school winchesters in general,which mostly never left the factory unless they worked . Those were different days and different rifles.

Who cares about the "mainstream hunters?" Do they call an annual quorum & decide what cartridges to promote?

I bet you probably own a .270......

R28, what about those that own both a .270 and 300 WSM?

Yeah, like me....

Then again, maybe I'm not a "mainstream hunter."

300 Winchester Mag...deficient?? Damn! I'm gonna go open the safe and get that bastid out I used to win all those 1000 yard LR matches over in Texas and give it a good cussing for letting me down!!

If you have one rifle, you would be better off with a common caliber, I think. But if you have over 20 rifles as many of us do then why not have odd ball cartridges. I have a 256 Mag in a lever action. Would that be my one rifle? NO!

I also own a 350 Mag in on a 600 action. Not the best prairie dog rifle. But I can afford more than one rifle. If I had to have a 35 caliber rifle and it would be my main rifle, I'd have a 35 Whelen, btw.

I don't give a $hit about what rifles others like. Most of my rifles were picked for a particular reason. I have little need for the all around rifle as that would be boring.

But the short magnums are a fad. I just happen to be a bugger about fads and have several rifles that are fads. I'll keep buying them

But I own 6 30-06's and a 270, (I've never shot that 270 at big game BTW)

I do not like short magnums but I don't care that you do. My friend loved his 25 WSSM. He talked his buddies in getting some. Now they can't buy ammo for those rifles. That wouldn't be a problem for most loonies. BUT IT IS FOR HIM!

I'll bet he wishes now that he went with a 25-06 instead. I'll also bet that in 10 years the 25WSSM is all but gone. A passing fad.

I simply find it objectionable when people make choices based solely upon what everybody else is doing. And, of course that usually results in them owning a 270. Thus, those who promote that cynicism rub me the wrong way.

Some one commented that the short magnum lacked something in the execution. I have a Win. M70 Super Grade and don't think it lacks anything in the execution, be it looks, function or accuracy.

I have a 30/06 but have never taken any game with this caliber. For bigger I have a .338 Win. mag. Next to my .270's this has been my most successful caliber.

When circumstances force me to start culling out my collection I will have some hard choices to make.

Jim

What's a 25 wssm?

It's not a huge deal, but load your 300 WSM up with 3 in the mag and 1 in the chamber and see what it does to the case (particularly the shoulder) on the top of the mag when you extract the fired round. I've had 2 FN's (300WSM's) and they still suffered from the tight mag box BobinNH talked about earlier. Although he said the Newhaven classics exhibited the problems, I've seen the same problems with the FN's.

Lemme guess.....with three down they pinch at the shoulder?

If you bought a quality rifle like Sako you wouldn't have that issue. And they hold four in the bottom for those that issue with killing stuff with only three (two good ones and one pinched) in the mag...lol

Yeah, not accurate...

DF

BSA 1917 - maybe something happens if you jam 4 rounds into the gun, I've never tried it. One usually does the trick so I don't worry about it.

Jim

I wanted another 30 cal and decided on the 300 WSM again. Hope it shows up soon.

It's really ridiculous, the level of inaccuracy is discombobulating.

You evidently get rubbed the wrong way quite a bit, I'd venture.

And yes the mainstream hunters/shooters do vote on what's the best cartridge. They do it with their check books. The manufacturers set lower prices on the ammo most people by and it's a rolling stone. Go to a store, most any ammo store or even on line. The 06 and the 270 shells are cheaper than the less appreciated cartridges. The 30-30 ammo is dirt cheap. The 300 Win Mag is cheaper than the 300 Weatherby and so forth. The most popular cartridges are the cheapest thus promoting more people buying that cartridge. The same with rifles. Take a stroll over to Gunbroker. This is a perfect example of what I'm saying. You can buy a 270, a 30-06, a 7mm RM and a 243 cheaper than you can buy a 280, 338-06, a 7mm Weatherby or a 6mm. I recently rebarreled a 280 which was shot out. I'm part Norwegian (read that cheap). I could get a 270 new take off barrel for $75. Take off barrels in 280 are rarely new and in my opinion would be a pig in a poke. I'd rather have the 280, but it would have cost me at least $300 more. I still have another 280 BTW. And it shoots < 1 MOA with the three loads I like best in it. The 150 grain Nosler Partition is under 1/2MOA.

I also like 6mm Remington better than 243. But I just bought a as new Model 7 in 243 for my future daughter-in-law.

Roll with it.

Life's a bitch if you let these things get to you.

I thought a fad was something that was popular at least for a short time.

Don't the the 25WSSM was ever very popular. Prettying much a commercial bust. I have 2 of them and like them very much.

But I'm glad I wasn't the guy who convinced the Winchester brass to go with the WSSMs!

A different perspective.

Several years ago I was preparing for my first Moose hunt in Newfoundland. I entered Louie's gun shop in Bath NY and there in the used rack sat a nice T3 Lite Tikka in 300WSM. My reaction was "that'll work." Bought it. It cycled OK and shot under 2" at 200 yds. Shot two 180 TSX through bull moose diagonally. Moose went less than 30yds. It worked!

Traded it and some cash for a 300WSM Stainless Kimber Montana 8400 a slightly lighter rifle. (I have a thing for lightweight rifles.) I have enjoyed hunting and shooting it. "It Works." Sometimes I can shoot 1.75" groups at 200 yards and sometimes I mess up. Gun is fully capable. Mag primers - Win or CCI, H4350, 180 TTSX, 3000fps, Leu. 3 2.5X8, Talley rings, Titanium bolt handle - just for the fun of it, aftermarket recoil pad, adjusted trigger pull at 2.5#. Don't know the round count without going to my notes and doing the addition but I do know that I'm on my seventh pound of powder. Love it. NOT FOR SALE!

Why would I want a 300 Win Mag?

Jim

The old 300 mag rifles weigh a lot more than the WSM rifles and we carry those rifles all day.

A Kimber Montana WSM 24" bbl weighs only 7# 1.5 oz with it's 4.5-14X VX3.

The M 70 custom with a 22" bbl in 300 Win M. with it's 3-9 Conquest weighs 8# 11oz!

A pre-64 M70 300 H&H with its 3.5-10 Leu and 26" bbl. is 9# 4oz.

Here is the M70 300Win M.

I carried an 11 pound Sharps rifle and a 10 pound 400 Whelen for what must have been near a hundred miles in 7 days hunting in 90/100 degree African heat, I still don't understand this jenny craiging a rifle chit.

If I want a fat case, I want it fat and long.

Another different view is for those that want/can only have one .30 caliber hunting rifle. Now don't laugh, the laws in my country allow you to have only three hunting rifles and one for self-defence.

Anyway, after extensive analysis of the 30-06 / 300 WSM and 300 WM, I felt that the 300 WSM was the most attractive option for my needs. Some would call it a compromise of the three .... I would call it well balanced and the ideal all-rounder.

I now have to wait for 3 months before my license application is (hopefully) approved ..... you guys have it easy over there (for now!).

Why would anyone want a 300 WSM? I'd need more than one animal shot at short range,and some range tweaking to make a decision.




The OP asked a simple question and said he was aware of the short action thing, but were there any other reasons to choose one over the other.

- The 300 Win Mag is faster, with everything.And likely at less pressure as well.In other words it will easily equal a 300 WSM top end velocity but at lower pressure. Load it as hot,and t will beat a WSM substantially.

This may not be important if you have little experience hand loading but the WSM barely beats a warm 30/06 load. 300 magnums are all about speed with heavy bullets of 180-200+ grains.and if you don't want the speed you are better off with a 30/06. If a compromise cartridge is what you are after have at it. The 300 WSM has lots of "compromise". It will suffer velocity wise with any bullet over 180 gr because hit has less power capacity.

-High Pressure: The factory stuff as loaded by some companies is so damned hot that I personally would not trust the stuff on a hunt. This is characteristic of not only the 300 WSM but the 7mm and 270 WSM as well. I've seen WSM ammo loaded so hot there were ejector marks smeared on the brass,and the velocities were off the chart(Federal Premium). The brass was so ruined you couldn't get it to chamber again. It's been true of the cartridges ever since they were introduced.

Some rifles will handle this ammo and some will not. The factories have to load to those levels to get the velocities that everyone says makes it the equal of a 300 Win Mag (BS. Marketing hype). Get a stuck case or other high pressure problem at the range is one thing.....get it in Africa or Alaska or Wyoming on a hunt and its no joke.

So load it down for less velocity/pressure? Great. It's got nothing over a 30/06. Why bother?

- Feed/Function. Well know fact that short/fat cases don't feed through staggered box magazines as well as the belted standard cases. Makers have had close to 100 years to perfect feeding with belted magnums and problems are almost non existent. Not many 300 WSM rifles id trust on a hunt.

-The 300 Win mag is more popular world wide and proven for accuracy in competition and reliable function and game killing in the hunting fields....everywhere from Asian mountains to North America and Africa. The 300 WSM is too much gimmick for me. I gave the cartridge a fair shake in a few rifles, Can't love it.

I'd really rather have a 7 Rem Mag but that's not what the OP asked. Between the two....300 Win Mag no question.

had both, used both. Still have the 300 WM

Preference is acceptable reasoning. I prefer the 308 to the 30/06. I prefer the 280 to the 270 or 30/06. I prefer the small velocity edge of the 300 WSM to any cartridge it supersedes. I prefer the short action over the long action.

I understand the performance differences of short action vs. long action.

Still, I prefer short.

Very good Bob; exactly my experience.

My 26" .300 Win would actually slightly pass my 24" .300 WBY in ballistics.

Just as a point of reference, I've owned 6 in .300 Win Mag with barrels from 23" to 26". The 26" was the best performer and only weighed 8.5 lbs ready to shoot. I've also owned a 21" .308 Norma (custom) and the afore mentioned 24" WBY.

Four of the six .300 Win Mags were factory, an M70 (way too heavy), a Ruger SS (24") with the "boat paddle" handle (an excellent working rifle), a Browning A-Bolt SS in LH (26" - the best performer, and 1/2 MOA), and a Savage 111 (24") that would also shoot 1/2 MOA and sail the 200 AccuBond along at 2970 fps into tiny little groups from a book load (Nosler).

The .300 WM is my favorite of the .300s, and one of three BG rifles I'd always have in my gun cabinet. I've never tried a .300 WSM and really have no interest in doing so.

If I were to recommend one rifle cartridge to a serious BG hunter, it would be a .300 Winchester Magnum. And I've done that to a young man who wanted to hunt bear with me. It was his first BG rifle. The fact that he was 6'- 5" and nearly 300 lbs may have helped. But I've never found a well-stocked .300 WM to be any kind of problem in recoil. But then, I do shoot some pretty heavy artillery.

Bob

www.bigbores.ca

I would actually say your '06 is probably fine and you don't need the WM unless you really want to eek out a few more FPS.

There ya go makin' sense! It gets harder and harder to be impractical.

You guys have me halfway convinced to take one of my 06s on my elk hunt!

That about describes it.

Come on, Jorge, there's nothing better than a 300 WBY.

Do it!

Says a NM farmer that uses a 460 Weatherby for rabbit.

It does, good post. However I'd simply add that in addition to working well from a shorter barrel, it's also a short action. I'm done with long action, 26" barrel rifles. To me, a 24" short action rig feels great. 26" barreled long action feels like a log. And who cares about 50 fps. The elk won't.

JMR40,

Yes, the .300 WSM was indeed intended to compete with the .300 Winchester Magnum. Rich Jamison may never have seen it that way (I'm not going to go back and reread his articles on it), but Winchester did. Their advertising/publicity campaign constantly emphasized how the .300 WSM matched factory 180-grain .300 Winchester Magnum muzzle velocity through some magic in the case shape that allowed "more efficient" use of the powder. But the fact that the standard SAAMI muzzle velocity for 180's in the .300 Winchester Magnum was only 2960 fps, well under the capabilities of the round, was never mentioned.

And no, the .300 Winchester Magnum does not "need" a 26-inch barrel. With a 24" barrel it beats the top loads in the .300 WSM by around 150 fps (not 50-100), with both using 24" barrels. Both rounds will lose or gain just as much velocity from the use of a shorter or longer barrel.

The average "short" action for any rifle the .300 WSM is offered in weighs 3-4 ounces less than one of the same model of "long" actions used in .30-06's and .300 Winchester Magnums. The ONLY meaningful weight savings in a .300 WSM is due to using lighter stocks and/or barrels. The difference in action lengths runs .5 to .8 inch, depending on the action, which makes about as much difference in "handling" quality as using Weaver scope mounts instead of Leupolds.

It's easy to buy or build any of the three in a rifle weighing the same, and with factory 180-grain ammo the recoil of the .300 WSM is far closer to the .300 Winchester Magnum than it is to the .30-06. In 8-pound rifles, Sierra's recoil computer recoil calculator puts it at 22.9 foot-pounds for the .30-06, 31.1 for the .300 WSM, and 34.8 for the .300 Winchester Magnum. Now, we can manipulate rifle weight and handload numbers all we want, but those are the facts with 180-grain factory ammo in rifles of equal weight.

Part of the reason I know all this is because I've owned and handloaded for several rifles in each chambering, and hunted big game from "deer-sized" up through 6x6 elk with all three cartridges. I still own rifles in all three right now, and may (or may not) hunt with all of them this fall.

I am NOT anti-.300 WSM, but the claims Winchester made in the beginning about the magic case shape and less recoil were ballistic BS. The .300 WSM gets exactly what it should from it's case capacity, nothing more, and if somebody wants a slightly milder .300 magnum then it's certainly a cartridge to consider--as is the .300 H&H.

John, I personally perceive a significant difference in handling between short and long action rifles, all else equal.

However, I can certainly concede that others may not.

26" v. 24" is no contest, again speaking of my own feelers here <g>. Really dislike 26" rifles, particularly long action 26" rifles. Blech. Too looooong.

Now 'scuse me while I go count some angels dancing on pinheads........

Not to detour here but to pick up on Win's "smoke 'n mirrors" marketing of the WSMs, I remember a poster showing the 270 WSM equaling the 270 Wby, the former with some
streamlined bullet and the latter with some truncated pill. 🤔 IIRC, the point was that at 400 yards there trajectory was the same. 🙄

Jeff,

Where did I say anything about either cartridge "needing" a 26" barrel? Some other people posted about 26" barrels on the .300 Winchester, but I sure didn't.

You might want to check back in this thread a little ways for another of my posts listing the velocities of 180-grain bullets from a 24" barrel in the .300 Winchester with some powders introduced in the last 12-15 years.

Some short actions are much shorter than the same "long" action, because the long action is enough longer to handle cartridges like the .300 Weatherby and .375 H&H. But others are just long enough to handle the .30-06 or .300 Winchester Magnum. I'd bet that if blindfolded you couldn't tell the difference in "balance" between a couple of rifles using the latter sort of actions. This is because I've invited some people to try with NULA rifles.

Whew......nice to see some common sense to cut through the fog and hype.

There is no significant difference in the all the new data found in Nosler #8 than what Nosler #1 can provide. Its marketing hype for those who are never satisfied.

Started hunting with a 30-06, went 300 WM and then back to 30-06 and now 7-08

I liked the 300WM enough just wasn't enough more than the 30-06 for me to put up with it.

As to the 300WSM - I couldn't talk myself into buying one.




Someone once said "critters can't read head stamps"...

Seems appropriate still.

I've never killed an animal and said that would have been so much better with a short action.

I have several rifles in 308 3006 300WSM and 300WM. I choose which rifle to shoot each year if I have worked out a new bullet powder combination. I have bagged game with each including deer and elk. The 300WSM and 300WM are so close to not make any difference in the hunting fields.

I have a Ranching for Wildlife cow elk tag for mid November and I will use my Extreme Weather Model 70 chambered for the 264 WM. I have a load that shoots with a Barnes 127 gr LRX in front of 70.1 grains of Ramshot Magnum. In the sagebrush country of Northwest Colorado I think this will be a flat shooting good choice. I have never bloodied this rifle so now is a good time.

as long as you hamstring the Weatherby by some means , sure.

which is the same song as the 300WSM vs 300 Win mag

Excellent observation! And, that is what I love about it.

What Jorge, are you going to try and bore an elk to death?

Yep, it's perfectly designed to fill the slot between the .30-06 and larger .300 magnums. But I don't think it really needed the, ah, exaggerations of Winchester's PR department to sell well. Pent-up demand for short, beltless magnums had been building up due to articles in various magazines for several years. But PR people do need stuff to keep them occupied.

One thing I've noticed over the decades is that the most successful new factory cartridges are almost those on already successful wildcats, NOT cartridges rifle/ammo companies come up with on their own. The list of examples of former wildcats becoming well-established factory rounds is almost endless, including not just the .300 WSM but the .204 Ruger, .22 Hornet, .243 Winchester, .257 Roberts, .25-06, 7mm-08 Remington, 7mm Rem. Magnum, .300 Winchester Magnum, .338 Winchester Magnum, .416 Remington Magnum and, of course, all the early Weatherby rounds.

The list of successful rounds totally designed by factories is much shorter, with most dating back to the first few decades of smokeless cartridges. The .270 Winchester and .375 H&H are good examples, but after World War Two it was much harder for factories (and wildcatters) to fill empty slots. The most successful post-war factory round not based on an already existing wildcat might have been the .222 Remington.

Like the .243 Winchester and 7mm Remington Magnum, the .300 WSM's considerable success was due to several years of publicity surrounding similar wildcats, not because of the ballistic "magic" promoted by Winchester's PR people. Though obviously the magic claims didn't hurt, since some people still believe in them!

I am clear that the marketing department of Winchester hyped the 300 WSM a bit and that it slots in somewhere between the 30-06 and the 300 WM.
It is an excellent cartridge in its own right and for someone looking for slightly better ballistics than the 30-06 / 180gr combo – a good choice.

Agreed MD.

I had followed Jamison's development of the 300 Jamison with intense interest. And, I had every intention of having one built once he settled on the final dimensions. And, then the bomb went off.

I have other stuff & like it too. However, I must be akin to Dick Fickle when it comes to the 300 WSM.

yeah, if I were an elk and I showed up with a plastic stocked 06', I'd be pissed

Guilty as charged.

Im not a Winchester fan. But, I am thankful for the 300 WSM and its offspring.

No, other than if you can only find the exact rifle you like in one or the other.

You can't put "modern powders" in a WSM? Who knew....

In factory ammo... the lawyers have to be careful with the .300 Win Mag loads... you never know what kinda rifle that stuff will end up in. The WSM fodder can be (and often is) loaded to the gills... there's almost no difference in velocity between the two rounds when factory loads are shot from factory guns... at least that I've seen.

Just read an old post where 3000-3100 was pretty common with 180s in the .300 WSM... out of 23-24" barrels. Seems 66 grains of RE17 (a "modern powder") was running 3060 with 180 NBTs. Giving up only 75-125 fps to the .300 Winny loads MD referenced above... and using as much as 19 grains more powder (25-30%).

I have a 17" barreled .300 WSM that'll run 2850 with a 180... which bests about any 24" 30-06 with the same bullet.

I was in Cabela's yesterday... they had as many varieties of .300 WSM factory loads as they had .300 Winchester.

What factory rifle holds 5 .300 Winchester rounds in the mag... but only holds 3 WSMs in the same guise?

The .300 Winny is a bad ass round, and deserves its place as one of the preeminent big game cartridges of the world... as does the '06... something right in the middle of the two ought to do pretty well in the field... even if it is 60-90 years younger....

PS.... here's the link to that old .300 WSM thread....

http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/5000039/all/R17_and_the_300_WSM[/quote]
------------------------------------------------------------

After an extended hiatus of over 3 1/2 years, I find upon my return that little has changed in regards to discussing the pro's/con's of the 300WSM......LOL. I do notice however, that, even though 11 pages have already been dedicated to this subject, that the posts have remained much more civil and informative than several years back.....and that's a very good thing.

Since the 300WSM's inception, I have found it to be very terminally effective, easy to load for and very accurate. My particular recipe consists of a compressed load of RL22, Fed. GM215's, Norma brass and 180gr. TSX's from a 24in. barrel. Since many here are handloaders and do so for many reasons, which includes safely attempting to get the most accuracy, reliability and velocities out of our firearms, I am certainly no different. After 40+ years of doing so, I enjoy it as much today as I did when I started handloading in the early 70's after my separation from the USMC.

As stated above, the 300WSM using 180gr. loads was touted to be able to achieve velocities very similar to that of standard 180gr. 300WM loads. Not having owned a 300WM nor any .30 cal. offering except an '06, I had no preconceived notions about what I was to really expect from handloading for this particular cartridge. Having handloaded for several decades prior to purchasing my first 300WSM, I felt pretty confident in my handloading abilities and set forth to put together as reliable and terminally effective a round as I could without running afoul of even the slightest of pressure signs.

After several range sessions using numerous different combinations of components, I settled on the aforementioned recipe. It gave me all that I could have hoped for without the slightest sign of excess pressure. I also did my testing in 75-80 degree weather so that any possible pressure signs had every opportunity to reveal themselves. The temps that I actually hunt with this particular rifle range from 8-49 degrees (an average of some 30 years of hunting this particular area at 5,500 ft.).

I shot 25 rounds over a high-end chrono, measured the distance from muzzle to chrono, GPS'd the altitude
(800ft),noted the temp. just prior to each cooled barreled shot and averaged all that info to find that my MV out of that 24in. barrel was 3,130fps.

I hope that the civility will remain as I had earlier observed and mentioned, but I also know that some will be pushed beyond their limits to not respond 'productively'. Sure.....I can take it as many here might remember from several years back, but my point being, my results were gleaned as honestly and accurately as possible for several reasons. I don't just assume as I'd like that all other accounts of such things are definitive and as we all know, every rifle/chamber/scale/batch of powder, primers and brass are all different. And how many articles or posts on such sites give us the actual temps/altitude/etc. that were in play during their gathering of such information. I also 'range proof' my loads as to drop up to the range that I am confident shooting, but I also always like to compare those results with those on paper after all of these calculations and range sessions have been completed.

Do I advocate any others search for 'their load' as I do......nope. Do I expect to wring out any future purchases as I did this load and all others for decades......yep. Was I expecting to observe pressure signs prior to the load I ended up with......yep. Had I purchased commercial loads or accepted only the loads printed in the very, very few articles printed at that time for the 300WSM, I would have been left with would have duplicated a healthy '06 load (not that there's anything wrong with that.....LOL). But that's not why I bought the 300WSM and purchased another one shortly after taking my bull with it that same season (my son hunts as well).

Sooooo....in my experience, the 300WSM with my load in my rifle shoots a 180gr. TSX out my rifles muzzle of a 24in. barrel at 3,130fps...........very, very accurately and with, in my estimation, less recoil than my 'ole '06 did with a healthy load.

Good to read all of your posts as I'm still always learning and willing to listen and I expect will continue at least throughout today, at a minimum......LOL.

So, in the generous spirit so common on the Campfire, are you going to share your charge of RL-22?

Mmmm....so the 300 WSM pushes a 180 gr bullet as fast as a 300 Win Mag does, with less case capacity....(71.3 gr with a 180 gr bullet seated vs. 82.3 gr with a 180 gr bullet seated),yet kicks less than a 30/06 that goes 300-400 fps slower (?) (See Nosler Manual #7).


Amazing cartridge!

Apparently today a difference of 10 gr of powder capacity is meaningless.

If we made it shorter and with less capacity, it would go as fast as a 300 Weatherby, right?

That the miracle powder in this case is RL 22 does not surprise me,..... why? (people experienced with RL22 will know exactly what I'm talking about).

That the poster has never owned a 300 Win Mag and is apparently basing his conclusions on having loaded for a grand total of one(1) 300 WSM also does not surprise.....why?

I just looked at four(4)reloading manuals and never saw a single load for the 300 WSM that hit 3100 fps with 180 gr bullet.

The wonders of marketing.


I hope I've been civil enough.

Bob,

The latest Nosler data does list one .300 WSM load at 3092 fps--and from a 24" barrel. (You've got to look close to notice that most Nosler .300 WSM data is from a 26" barrel, but 165-180's are from a 24". Probably their old barrel wore out, and they're reshooting data for the most popular bullet weights in a new one.)

But the 3092 is from RL-17, not 22. The top load with 22 is 3052 fps, which was the fastest I'd found for a 180 in any pressure-tested data before Nosler's latest manual appeared last fall.

I agree with you, I like the 300 WSM. I think it's every bit as capable as the 30-06 or 300 Win...

and probably the better choice if you want to run 80k psi loads.

John,

From knowing a little bit about each other from years past and knowing myself just how imprudent and irresponsible your request would be to satisfy given the possibility that another member might go directly to that charge without passin' 'GO' (ie: doing the appropriate and necessary load work-up), I will pm you the charge that I use. I trust that you are not so inclined and/or really perhaps not all that interested, but I will forward on that charge to you as soon as I finish this post. As I would totally expect, I look forward to your pm'd response and any suggestions comments that you might have.....thanks in advance.

As I've tried to convey all along and in any post that I have ever posted prior to today, we are all responsible for the results of our behavior and unless one has a death wish, do not take lightly the entire process that is 'working up a load'. I'd venture a guess that there are very few experienced handloaders here that have not ever pushed past printed charges, slightly or otherwise, to levels where your abilities and knowledge to reliably acknowledge the slightest signs of pressure is truly our last line of defense, if you will. I have stopped at charges that exhibited just the tiniest and slightest signs that pressure might be the cause and I then backed down from there to my next tightest and acceptable group.

I will say that with this particular 300WSM load, there was never and has never been a single 'visual' pressure sign after hundreds and hundreds of reloads and firings. I fully expect that John and perhaps others will comment that the 'invisible' pressure effects are no less reason for worry and/or consideration and that would certainly be true. But in regards to having 'pushed the envelope' whether it be only once or perhaps many times or enhancing a charge just ever so slightly to several grains more per charge, I don't expect that many, if any of us, can say that we haven't BTDT. If so, my hat's off to you. If not, I think that we finally made the majority list in something.

Nope.....not a death wish for me or anyone else. When working up loads and getting at or above where max's are now being chambered, I choose a weekday at a time when I have several benches open on either side of me. I said earlier that we are responsible for our own actions/decisions. I fully expect an uneventful trip every range session, but I choose to cover all bases, especially those of others. While actually hunting, I have already sent hundreds of TSX's downrange in 75-80 degree weather without a hitch so I feel almost 100% comfortable that all will go well in 22 degree weather. I would assume that there are more catastrophic events caused by reasons other than excess pressures caused by too large of a charge (stuck bullets, wrong powder, barrel obstruction, etc.).

Given the work put in with this particular handload and the results from that work, my 300WSM adds a bit more horsepower than what my 'ole '06 could have ever hoped to achieve. Is it really necessary? In most cases......no. But I'm not a 'one gun' guy and the whole idea of handloading for me, is to wring out the most accuracy I possibly can. How often is that done with the lightest of printed charges or even the middle weight charges?

Not always is the most accurate load in one's particular rifle the heaviest charge possible of a certain powder, but never have I ever found the most accurate load to be the lightest printed charge either.

I always end up with what my gun wants to shoot and to shoot extremely accurately. I am as responsible as I can be given that I know full well that 99.9% of the time, I'll inevitably end up using an extended dropper tube if I chose my powder/cartridge/charge possibilities correctly.

Good luck...........

Looks like Coyote Hunter has a viable competitor for longest average post.

Bob,

It always amazes me why someone would actually try to attempt to discount another's experience, be it playing horse shoes or handloading. Why is someone elses' experience so threatening to some, in this case, obviously you. Lighten up. Since you've decided that the information I've offered here is either just #'s I've decided to use or that I'm trying to demean the 300WM, I don't think that you or anybody else can truly believe that to be true. But since you don't seem to trust anyone elses' #'s and experiences, it is puzzling as to why you haven't questioned John as to the veracity of the #'s he pulled directly from a handloading manual, be it John's veracity or the manuals......as you did the #'s I offered. Do you actually think it impossible that my 180gr. load can't be a bit faster at 3,130fps faster than their published load? Identical loads from identical rifles can and do differ by 100fps, but you should know that.

As to RL22.......I have had zero problems with it's reliability in terms of uniformity or otherwise. Perhaps it's the combination of components that I use, who knows? I have heard the negative reports, but I also have heard many positive reports. But, once again, it seems that you have the definitive answers on all such things.

As to my 'grand total' of having loaded only one 300WSM in my life, please refer to many of my posts that would correct that intentional mischaracterization on your part to place my handloading experience in doubt by those that may not know me or have chosen to read only bits and parts of this thread. I have handloaded for many different handgun and rifle cartridges and had you done a bit of homework before rushing to show your ignorance in that regard, this correction could have been avoided.

People's experiences are exactly that....their experiences. What would be to gain by lying about their findings such as with the information that I have offered and even the #'s that John showed you from a handloading manual? Does my experience and claim of getting 100fps(+/-) from what that manual even states as possible that much of a threat to you so as to elicit such an inaccurate and rather useless response from you? What's the point in that....?

Civil.......solely considering the source when deciding that question makes that task so much easier.

This guy need some pictures though...

Magnumb: I'm not discounting your experience; I have had the same ones with so many cartridges in rifles that were ..."just a little bit faster than the manuals or every one else rifle" that I am a carping skeptic, having BTDT so many times.

I use a LOT of RL22;even most recently with a brand new 270 and have no problem with its reliability. I have been using it ever since it was first introduced. Thousands, and thousands of rounds in a variety of cartridges.

What you have missed apparently.....and it is characteristic of the powder, is that it is "double based" powder; and as long as you add powder, you will add velocity until stuff blows up.

This is unlike many single based powders where velocity "flattens" and tops out at max charges,and you add powder but DON'T get the added velocity. You know you have reached max. Experience tells you this.

When I see a load for the 300 WSM that shows 80-130 fps more velocity than any manual I can find is showing, and that gives the same velocity as a case with 10 gr more capacity,I don't chalk it up to your unique "experience"......I would wonder why you above all others in the universe were chosen for such blessings.

I assume, probably correctly, that your charge is excessive.So "no" I don't pay any attention to your "experience" because I have loaded for several 300 WSM's and I will trust my judgement over yours any day of the week.

You still have not told us what charge of RL22 gave you that velocity.

So......how many 300 WSM's have you loaded for?

How many 300 Win Mags have you loaded for?

My point is you may have loaded for 40 years for a 30/06 but that does not mean you know anything....at all... about loading a 300 magnum that is new to you, which you have demonstrated.

If you are so experienced, why are you not suspicious of a load that equals the velocity of a case holding 10 gr more powder? Is that magic or something?It would cause me to be suspicious.

Its always the guys reaching for the last 100-150 fps that blow things up. Your handle on here is appropriate.

I remember when the 7/08 was about the age that 300 WSM is now, similar conversations that it was a fad, why have it, but it is still popular now. Maybe not for everyone if they have an '06 right?

Sometimes you just gotta laugh...

A 300 WSM or 7mm Wby makes a whole lot more sense than a 7mm Mashburn........

Bob,

Actually, I have to thank magnumb: His post made me update some of my load data. In my computer I keep a list of "fastest" loads with various bullet weights from all published sources, for the several dozen rifle cartridges I've loaded for over the years. However, these days this means rechecking on-line data, not just buying the latest paper manuals (which I still do as well).

I hadn't done a check on .300 WSM data since late 2015, when I purchased my latest rifle in the chambering. Yesterday I rechecked on-line data for the .300 WSM and .300 Winchester Magnum and found several new loads, including the interesting fact (noted in an earlier post) that Nosler now lists both 26" and 24" barrels for some .300 WSM data, probably because their older 26" test-barrel wore out.

Anyway, the three fastest published loads for 180 grain bullets in the .300 WSM, all from 24" barrels, are:
72.5 Hunter, 3107 fps (Barnes)
64.0 RL-17, 3092 fps (Nosler)
66.0 RL-17, 3082 fps (Alliant)
[average 3094]

The three fastest for the .300 Winchester Magnum, again from 24" barrels, are:
81.5 780, 3194 fps (Barnes)
86.5 Magnum, 3193 fps (Ramshot)
73.0 IMR4831, 3160 fps (Nosler)
[average 3182]

However, less new data has appeared for the .300 Winchester Magnum than the .300 WSM. Still, the data that has appeared for the WSM has shown a more consistent increase in maximum velocity of around 50 fps. This may not sound like much, but less than a year ago the maximum listed velocity for 180's was around 3050, and most was around 3000.

Am guessing the reason for far more new data appearing for the .300 WSM is it's still a relatively new cartridge, while the .300 Winchester is over half a century old. Many sources of reloading data don't really lean into retesting established rounds. Instead they tend to put their time and energy into newer rounds, since there's less data available for them. (Or at least they do if the newer round sticks around. I'm not seeing any new data for the .25 WSSM--but am for the .17 Hornady Hornet.)

By the way, the average difference in top velocities between the two rounds is what the 4-to-1 Rule predicts.

So it took an average increase of 19% in powder (67.5 vs 80.3) to equal a 3% increase in velocity (3094 vs 3182)...

Or to put it another way.... the WSM does 97% of what the Win Mag does.... using 84% of the powder... in a shorter/lighter rifle.

Whoa!!! Easy Gerry, I am about to file a hurt feelers report...

After shooting a bunch of them and way less than others here I'm pretty sure I could have hunted and taken everything I killed with a 30-06 or a 270 Winchester.

I did have a 300 WSM and did fine with it, but now I've got a 300 Wby and gotta say I like how easy it is to load and get easy 3100 plus with 180's and know I'm not hammering it too awfully hard.

I love when we stick numbers on it, but honestly at the end of the day how tough or awkward is a rifle an inch or two longer or an ounce or 8 lighter. Most of the M4's I've carried were as heavy as any of my hunting rifles when fully outfitted and I know I've carried them miles further and never really thought much about it.

Each to their own on this but at the end of the day shoot what you like and shoot well and enjoy using.

Just my .02c on it.

[/quote]
I hope I've been civil enough.
[/quote]



That's funny.

I like new cartridges. They are fun to try, fun to play with. But why do I have so many '06's???

And how do I end up burning up a couple of barrels a year in different cartridges I sure don't have that many hunting licenses? Maybe using the 300 WSM means no more burned up barrels.

One thing I like about the 300 WSM is that a 300 WSM chamber reamer might open up a 350 Magnum chamber so that it would have more capacity and no belt. But then that is only theoretical for me. I don't mind the belt either.

Still think the 300 WSM is a fad. But this fad may stay. If the factories didn't push hard for their new magic cartridges the sales of new rifles might not be so good.

This thread may go on forever.

Getting 97% of the performance... for only 84% of the charge... dumping 6oz of rifle weight... and reducing recoil by 10%... seems like a lot of small wins adding up to a pretty good reason to run a WSM to me....

Bob,

How is it that some here have access to so many more manuals from this century than the 'King of Handloading' himself.....?

If you're desire to keep as current with potential loadings for such 'newer' cartridges is as necessary as your trying to find fault with others experiences, I would have thought that you would have certainly taken the time to do your homework prior to posting your 'amazing cartridge' comments and the like and save yourself the position you now find yourself. That is.......now having to refute both a very respected members finding (done with that little bit of homework you evidently don't put any stock in) along with several well known and respected manuals and their long established companies that obviously did not check with you first as to your definitive and final finding on the potential of the 300WSM.

I did purchase my 300WSM immediately following it being offered. As you should know and as was very clearly explained to you by another member, there isn't always much information nor components/charges that have been used and assessed to pass on to new owners at that stage. And what is offered oftentimes is a conservative to very conservative #'s. Case in point......the 3-4 manuals who have quite substantially 'upgraded' their printed findings concerning the 300WSM that was very nicely afforded you quite recently. So yes, we new owners of this very new and unique big game hunting cartridge were unintentionally left to much of our own devices to find what it could do. My load was rather easy to find since RL22 (yes, I have been well aware of most all powders characteristics, including RL22's as I do my homework) worked so well even though it was also a newcomer to the powder line-up. The TSX design also intrigued me and due to it's published and advertised ability to exhibit much lower pressures than bullets not so designed, that made sense too.

So there you have it Bob. And no.......as a longtime member here you should know that only the less intelligent and unconcerned members post charges that come up against or exceed even the most liberal publications charge weights. Why would you want that information since you clearly stated that "you will trust your judgment over mine any day of the week".....? Your logic is both confusing and a bit all over the board, so if you don't truly care really, why ask.....?

A good day to either go online or to finally venture out amongst the people into the sunlight and purchase some handloading manuals that don't consist of parched, yellow pages. Had you done so earlier (ie: doing your homework), you could have saved us all this unnecessary back and forth.

As your last post and last sentence allowed me this thought....It's always the guys who believe that they are the most intelligent and knowledgeable that find out eventually that the object in their hand is their hat.

Enjoy your outing.....

You know, you could put an END to this endless bloviating by just putting up your load data instead of acting like an internet lawyer...

quote:

Whoa!!! Easy Gerry, I am about to file a hurt feelers report... grin


You guys crack me up.

You also should know why not doing so is much more safe and prudent than doing so. A prime example as to why people should give little credit to #'s of posts as it has little to do with either common sense or intelligence.

Lawyer.....LOL.

I don't get why guys push a given cartridge to the brink when they can just go up to the next more potent cartridge?

I prefer the 300 Win Mag over the 300 WSM. The Win Short Magnum starts and stops with the 270 version

Pardon me. I'm guessing you don't remove the "do not remove under penalty of law!" labels from pillows. Me, I run with scissors...

Hard to argue that line of reasoning in most cases.

Let's say that we all consider the 300WM the next standardized cartridge in the next level up in 'potency' over the 300WSM. In play then becomes one's desire to then reconsider a chamber in long action, the belt inherit in the design and, albeit minimal, the additional weight in similarly designed rifles.

There are among us a large and growing % of hunters/shooters that personally desire to put together the lightest rifle possible. Few companies offer heavier models in hopes of gaining a larger market share of firearms, be it in long guns or handguns. Their reasons for 'going light' are their own as it should be. The 'belt, no belt' argument comes down also to a personal choice and is of no consequence to anyone but the owner.

So you're right in most instances except that the very distinct and unique designs of the both of these two particular cartridges not only help most of us to make that decision somewhat easily as there's not much middle ground between the two in regards to personal taste and opinion, we also need to consider just as importantly the rifle for which our choice will eventually be chambered. Do you prefer a longer action over a shorter action and do you want a belted .30 over a non-belted one...? Again...the weight difference is minimal in like offerings, but a few ounces can be a deal breaker for those who are trying to put together the lightest rifle or rifle/scope combination possible.

Those are just a few of the possible reasons that came to mind for reconsidering a 'move up'.

No problem, we all suffer from lack of good judgment at times, especially when we feel the urgent need to satisfy a more personally demanding itch.

That you run with scissors, well, strike 2 in the good judgment category, but I'll defer to your years in experience in doing so.

Why wouldn't I.......?

Appreciate the same considerations........

You lack any meaningful experience.


Mag NUMB is a good name for you. LOL!

I love this place.

Tell me again....how many 300 magnums? ONE!?

What was the powder charge?

Hilarious.

That's what I was getting at, for you it seems meaningful, me it doesn't make a hill of beans difference. Being that I'm 77" tall an inch longer or shorter barrel or a couple of ounces doesn't feel like much.

I'd be the last to say the WBY, RUM or Win Mag will kill any better than a WSM. Had them all and shot a bunch with all of them. Right now I'm running a 26" 300 Weatherby. I don't feel like it'll slow me down anymore than my other shorter barreled rifles.

Not directing this at you DS, just that a % just doesn't add up to me or other shooters most of the time. We shoot what we shoot because we like what they do for us, not an extra lb of powder saved throughout the year.

Everyone has likes and dislikes. Shaving ounces for me is pretty close to meaningless. But then I don't do sheep hunting. I'm 77" tall and old and 285 lb, last I checked.

To me smooth feeding is more important than lesser ounces or short rifles. Grab a 98 Mauser with a 7.92x57 or a Springfield 06. Feed the shells into the chamber. After shooting until the magazine is empty feed 5 more rounds into the magazine.

Now do that very same thing with a short action and a stubby fat cartridge in a minimum size magazine.

Then down the road, after the throat gets worn move the bullets out to get closer to the lands. Or maybe not.

I have both - short actions with stubby fat cartridges and long actions with magazines long enough for moving the bullets out.

I'll pick up the long action virtually every time I go hunting.

It's my experience that short stubby cartridges in short action rifles are my less desirable rifles.

Plus a shorter rifle. Agree.

But then I'm only 76" tall <g>...

This thread isn't about "using what you like"... it's about the WSM vs. Win. Mag. The numbers are what they are... you be the judge of how important they are.

My preference is the WSM... it does pert'near everything the Winny does... but weighs less, kicks less, and is more efficient.... the numbers all back that up.

The Winny wins in the raw speed, brass availability, factory fodder commonality, COAL latitude, and rifle availability arenas. To many... those are more important than the wins in recoil, weight, and efficiency that the WSM has.

I'd take a stainless/synthetic .300 Winny over a blued/wood WSM in a heartbeat... because my preferences in rifle systems are more important than my preference of cartridges.

Either way... a .30 cal 180 at 3k will f'n clobber about 99.5% of the furry stuff any of us will ever have the opportunity to shoot at.

Winchester and the industry tried to thread the ballistic needle with a "tweener".
They have had reasonable success. Ask yourself - what would the 300WSM owner have bought, if at all, if the shortmag didn't come into the marketplace? Would they have been satisfied with their 30-06 or moved up to the 300WM?

Same question with the 280AI owner (280Rem. v. 7mm RM)? There are more similar comparisons too.

Overall there is no appreciable difference between the two in question. Some are attracted to the latest and greatest, while others sit back and relax.

Well, one does have a belt and the other doesn't. Short 'n fat was a hot trend too. I think that's how 'Flave likes 'em

A 300 Mag is something that slings a 180 over 3,000 fps. The 300 WSM does that amply.

The WSM doesn't have a belt which is an outdated marketing ploy the 300 WM is saddled with. The 300 WSM does the bulk of what a 300 WM does without the baggage of the "marketing belt", and does it handily with less powder, and recoil in a shorter package.

I think I've had 6 or 7 300 WSM's, it's a great round.

Brad, that belt has been nothing but a burr in my shoe ever since it's inception, the dang thing.

Really? I couldn't resist. 😀

Edit: it may be a great round; I've not had one. I'll be glad to take your word for it.

That belt makes for shorter brass life, unless you headspace reloads on the shoulder. Even then, it's unnecessary... I like things designed from the bottom-up with more than marketing in mind. Form following function, not the reverse.

But I'm not wedded to the past, and think most 1960's TV sucked. The 300 WM is another "great" 1960's production...

Just kidding Brad but I'll really feel badly of you didn't like the Andy Griffith Show..

I headspace on the shoulder.

For you 300 WSM guys: Any brass other than Nosler/Norma that's commonly available these days?

So, designing from the ground up you'd put a belt on anything?

PS, not saying the 300 WM isn't a fine round, just that the 300 WSM isn't a POS just because it's "new" and challenges the old. It's really a finer design in many ways, despite its 100 fps less velocity.

Jeff O,

For some reason .300 WSM brass has been scarce lately. Luckily, I have a more than adequate supply (mostly of Nosler and Norma), but quite a few people have been looking and not finding much. It might be going mostly into factory ammo, but dunno.

I do't know what 'Flave likes but consumers have choices and that is a good thing.
The "Wizzums" began a short/fat deluge of competitors. All that has calmed down as hand loaders and hunters determine what is right for them.

I've had probably 15 or more WSM's, mostly 300's, a few 270's and one 325.
They all put elk in the freezer, but so did my .270Win, .308, 30-06, 300WM and the .338WM..

John, I was honestly surprised to see ANY out there!

But I've been in a 7 WSM bubble lately. Brass is unobtanium. As I shoot through my stash of bullets, brass, and my two 7 WSM barrels I'm contemplating what next, in particular for the "short action Sendero" I built. It could become a 300 WSM... or a 7 SAUM. At least there's some brass out there for those... crazy expensive, but it's available.

I heard that WW was going to do a run of 7 WSM brass this summer. I'm gradually losing hope.

I thought I saw some bagged WW 7WSM brass at Fleet Farm a few weeks ago. If I see it there again, I'll quickly PM you with quantity and price. I've been surprised as to what they have in their "reloading department".

Don't tease me now

No I wouldn't but neither do I see it as such a gremlin at this point in its long history; superfluous? Yes.

Hey Jeff....good to see you're still around.

Because I found the difference in case life and quality with Norma brass was so outstanding over Win brass, I ended my hunt for brass right there. I use Norma brass for most every cartridge/rifle that I load for and find it to be excellent brass. I get several more reloads with Norma over Win brass in all cartridges and especially in regards to the several WSM's that I own. Norma brass comes so uniform throughout from the factory that I was sold before I ever knew how many extra reloads their purchase afforded me. Their price seems less steep once the extra reloads are factored in and my groups tightened up even more than what I was already quite pleased with.

It is still a bit tough to find Norma brass for my 25-06, but at least they offer it now. My 300 RUM would definitely benefit from a switch from Rem to Norma brass.....perhaps that will be possible in the near future. I made the same switch with my 270WSM brass and couldn't be happier.

I do lots of shopping at Sinclair Int. for all the different cartridges that I load for and purchased my Norma 300WSM brass there. Perhaps better deals elsewhere, but a great bunch of guys to deal with.

Good luck Jeff and sorry that Rem brass is all that I could add to your quest that I have had experience with.

Take care.........

I'm seeing lots of Federal blue box 7mm WSM around for dirt cheap. If a guy didn't mind shooting factory ammo for a few years, a brass supply would be easy to create.

Yeah, these days it's often cheaper (and far easier) to buy some factory loads than empty brass. I did just that early last year with the 7mm-08, buying 100 rounds of Hornady American Whitetail factory loads with 139 Interlocks cheaper than I could find brass anywhere. (They shoot fine, of course!)

Yep! I buy more factory ammo these days than ever.

I never mind shooting Federal blue box. 2 boxes of 30-06 150's just followed me home from Wal Mart. 17.49 a box.

35 Remington was cheaper loaded than the brass. It seemed the people with the brass were trying to make a bit too much profit.

Lots of 300 WSM brass on gunbroker. Also 40 pieces of 7mm WSM Tons of 270 WSM