View Full Version : Curiosity got the best of me.

November 19, 2002, 07:21 PM
I have heard so much negative stuff about the .300WSM that I just had to go and get one to really see. Reports to follow. What I like so far it is shorter than a standard .300 mag. It will hold 3+1 which I've been told it will not.

It seems to me if your looking for a mag mountain rifle for sheep and deer and goats and such it may well be a decent platform.

I have not shot it yet so I can't tell about recoil and accuracy though I suspect it'll be simular to a .300 win.

Ammo is stupid expensive. Reloading is the same price as any other Brass Dies are $29.00 and it fits in a standard mag face shell holder.

I am not sold on this idea yet . It just seems pretty viable for a compact light mountain rifle. May be I'm nuts we'll see (well I know that I am nuts) I'm just currious about this new short fad.

Now I tried a 7MM that was pretty doggy.:)

7MM fans feel free to lay it on me:)

Art Eatman
November 19, 2002, 09:06 PM
The cartridge itself has been discussed over in "Rifle". Only time and specialty rifles will tell about target-quality accuracy. The ability to have better performance than, say, an '06, but from a lightweight, short-action rifle, strikes me as a Good Thing for a hunter. As usual, it all depends on what one's needs are.

Out of curiosity, to which 7mm were you referring? I meddled around with a 7mm RemMag for a while, but it seemed like too much thump at the shoulder for what it delivered within the ranges most common for me. Certainly, it was far more than was needed for CenTex whitetails. Since neither it nor a .264 WinMag struck me as better than an '06 or even my .243, I wandered off from them.

A 7mm SM might be sensible for a lightweight, high-country walking gun for elk...Or the .270 SM and your .30. Back to the old, "Whatever turns you on." :)

But ain't choices fun?


November 19, 2002, 09:18 PM
I'll admit to holding a few fantasies about the new short magnums. But when I think about it, they don't offer much of an advantage against the kinds of game I hunt and envision hunting. I currently have a .260 Remington. You could say I'm a little caught up in the myths and what-nots of the 6.5mm. What would I possibly hunt where I would need more power? Well, moose and elk, hopefully someday. Beyond that? Nothing that I can immediately envision. But I have always fancied having a 300 Weatherby also.

Good luck to you on your short-magnum quest. Please keep us posted on your opinions and observations.

November 19, 2002, 11:01 PM
I started to get a bit excited when Shooting Times' Jamison came out with his .30 Too bad it didn't fit well with quite a few standard bolt faces, etc.

Glad to see that a couple manufacturers have mainstreamed the shorties.

One day, perhaps, I'll break down for a mountain rifle. Problem is, I already have what'll do stuff quite well, & that extra boot out of something light enough I'd consider lugging it through Colorado ....

Keep us posted.

Al Thompson
November 20, 2002, 06:46 AM
I have a friend who got one - M70, IIRC, Coyote Special or some such. It shot fine... Velocity right on the heels of a .300 Win Mag.

I have long action rifles and short action rifles and really can't tell the difference in bolt manipulation. I do tend to work the bolt with Jeff Cooper's "flick" motion, so the extra half inch or so seems moot.

Perhaps if I was a benchrester or something I'd see the need.

Art Eatman
November 20, 2002, 09:48 AM
From reading the gunrag articles, and comparing case dimensions, it seems to me there is/will be a bunch of arguing about comparing the short magnums with the "regular" magnums in the same style as the .308 vs. .30-'06.

I tend to call this sort of argument "mental masturbation". (MM, for shorthand.)

:), Art

November 20, 2002, 12:06 PM
Hi, Gizmo - glad to know another Cooper rifle-handling aficionado!

I get very, very tired of all the hype about these new cartridges. They are so pointless! I really can't see any point in having a cartridge (developed at great expense, and very expensive to acquire - new gun, new ammo, new reloading components [well, some at least], etc.) that has as its chief claims to fame that it can deliver 1,000 more foot-pounds of energy 6" higher on the target (from the same zero) at 300 yards range as an older competitor can!

I've standardized on .308 as my medium- to long-range cartridge, since I don't shoot beyond 300 yards (again á là Cooper, but also based on African hunting experience - shots beyond that range are just too unpredictable in medium to heavy cover). Sure, I know one can shoot out to twice that distance or more in mountainous country or flat terrain, but I don't see myself trying that, so the .308 will do everything I need it to do on anything up to and including elk. (After all, our Scandahoovian cousins routinely use 6.5x55 on their version of elk, and that's rather less powerful than a .308!) If you want a bit more loading flexibility, use the good old .30-'06, but the .308 will do just about as much with the right loading.

For bigger, dangerous game - Africa again, or Alaska - I fail to see why any of the "super-.30's" or a .338 would be any better than the old standby, .375 H&H Magnum. I've taken buffalo, eland and other game with this, and it's always performed superbly. For something heavier, .416 (Rigby or Remington), or the .45's (my favorite being the .470 Nitro). Virtually all of these cartridges are nearly a century old, and whilst they may have been equalled or surpassed in ballistics and energy by more modern rounds, I don't think their terminal effectiveness has been surpassed.

Just an old, tired rant, I know... but when, oh, when will manufacturers stop wasting resources reinventing the wheel, and turn their minds to something that will truly advance the art???

Keith Rogan
November 20, 2002, 02:16 PM

I don't think the interest has anything to do with the POWER of the short cartridges, per se. It's all about having such power in a short action which saves you a pound or a pound and a half in weight and a bit less in length over a standard or magnum length action.

Consider that many people are willing to spend a huge amount of money for custom lightweight rifles, and here you have the same weight on an off-the-shelf rifle at minimal cost.

This may not mean a thing in the east where hunting is normally done from a stand, but in the west or Alaska where you may cover ten miles of mountain terrain in a day of hunting, it means a lot.

I'm holding out for a .375 WSM and when it appears (if ever), I'll get one.

November 20, 2002, 02:17 PM
I've played with the 7MM in the past and find it completley lacking when it comes to heavier bullets and to much in the lighter loads. It is a meat detroyer with light bullets when deer hunting and it doesn't push the heavier bullets at any velocity fast enough to give it any edge over a .30-06.

I also tend to notice that many newbie 7MM shooters think that they have a long range death ray which is just not the case on elk. The 7mm is a very minimal elk gun at range just like the 06.

(I SAID AT RANGE !!!!!) say past 300 yards.

The 7 is a great long range deer, sheep, pronghorn, goat sized critter gitter. So is the 06 minus the belt and the magnum thump so I see no need for a 7 whatsoever.

Preacherman Here is my thinking on the WSM I love the .308 primarily because of the cool short action light weight rifles on can obtqain in that caliber. And the WSM is the same length therefore it is possible to obtain the same cool short light rifles only with magnum reach. I am primarily thinking of a sheep rifle with this set up. And yes i am occasionally guilty of MM.

We'll see how this turns out. It is competing with my .300 Weatherby light weight to see which I perfer in steep deep cross canyon country.As far as Copper goes I enjoy reading the rantings of a senial old gun nut as much as the next guy, However in specialized hunting conditions there is a need for better than 300 yard reach. In fact I believe the guru himself has admitted to this when discussing sheep hunting himself. The .308 or 06 is a great sheep rifle but I enjoy the flatness of a mag when hunting in the way high tops of the mountains and my only shot may well be past 300 or 400 yards cross peak or canyon. And what better platform than a shrot light rifle?

Thanks for all the input. I am curious as to any actual field notes or hunting experience anybody may have with the WSM?

I am also having some unpure thoughts about rebarreling to .358 and necking up to have a .358 Winchester short mag. Oh what an Elk rifle that has the potential to be!! MM to the max:)

Art Eatman
November 20, 2002, 02:21 PM
Gross weight of a rifle is a factor. I have gone to a 700Ti in 7mm08; totals out with scope, sling and ammo at 6-1/4 pounds. It could just as easily be a .300 Shorty.

Even in my best years, the end of a 12- to 15-mile day with a 9.5-pound rifle had my shoulders sagging and my back aching.

:), Art

November 20, 2002, 02:31 PM
Keith Rogan.
Their already is a .375 Short mag it's called the .376 Styer. It's a bloody shame none of the majors have chambered it. Oh well.

Keith Rogan
November 20, 2002, 03:32 PM
I think the .376 Steyr is just a hair too long to fit in a true short action, though I could be wrong about that...

Right now I'm using a Custom Shop .350 WinMag in a model 7. I love this rifle, but a .375 in the same action would be even better.