PDA

View Full Version : .300 WinMag or .300 WSM?


Para Bellum
January 25, 2010, 03:43 PM
Title says all. Own neither, will buy, but, which one?
thx, PB

uncyboo
January 25, 2010, 03:45 PM
Basically SA vs. LA. Whichever rifle fits you best is the one to go for.

Para Bellum
January 25, 2010, 03:52 PM
:) I expected a little more "less recoil here - more possible bullet weight there" / "Like it ditfor / lite it thatfor".... :(

sasquatch
January 25, 2010, 03:52 PM
I've owned a Weatherby Vanguard in 300 Win mag for about 6-7 years, and I like it very much. I use it as my elk rifle, and it is very accurate with the 180 gr. Nosler Partition Federal ammo I use. It is a little heavy for my taste.

From what I've read, the 300 WSM has nearly identical ballistics, with a little less recoil. However, for some reason, the premium ammo seems to be quite a bit more expensive in 300 WSM than the 300 Win mag.

I don't think you can go wrong with either one.

b12alex
January 25, 2010, 04:13 PM
I have had my 300 win mag for 4 years and ya it kicks alot more then most cal. but it can be used on about anything, i use it for deer bear and moose. i have shot out past 400 yards and it shoot flat for me. i dont ever plan on getting rid of it. that price isnt bad either

warbirdlover
January 25, 2010, 04:34 PM
.300 WSM can be had in a short action. .300 WM ammo is way cheaper.

Both are identical ballistics.

rudy270
January 25, 2010, 04:49 PM
The best in my book is the stevens model 200.Then go with the marlin xl7. Put a muzzle break on it, have about 500.00 .Scope it for 250 or less good redfield comes to mind.Got the hole thing for the price of a top gun and you got it all. Then just go hunting ,good luck

misterE
January 25, 2010, 05:17 PM
Well I got a 300wm and my brother in law got a 300wsm and like has been said the ballistics are nearly identical. Major selling point to me was ammo price and availability. Also, Im sure someone on here is more educated about the short magnums than me, but Ive never really understood them at all. Especially in the 300s which is all I really have any experiene with. Seems to me all you are gaining with the 300wsm is a cartrige that is about 1/2 inch shorter. How much better is that really? In what way? If this is the only difference it seems like someones just created something to profit off of. I really dont understand how a 1/2 inch shorter pull of the bolt makes that much difference. Anyways, just my 2 cents and like I said theres probably someone on here that may have a valid reason ballistically and practically.

GeauxTide
January 25, 2010, 05:44 PM
The Marketing Mags are in rifles that weigh about a pound less. That translates to a recoil energy increase of 2/3. My buddy has a 7mmWSM and the most impressive thing is the recoil velocity over my 7mmRM. The ammo is twice the cost and so is the brass. For the same capacity, I'd go with the 300WM every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

uncyboo
January 25, 2010, 06:59 PM
I expected a little more "less recoil here - more possible bullet weight there" / "Like it ditfor / lite it thatfor"....

That's what turns these threads into a pi$$in' contest. Win mag factory ammo is a little easier on the wallet. If you handload, it's a moot point. Recoil on both is somewhat substantial; depends on the shooter's tolerance level. Still, in all practicality, it boils down to LA vs. SA, and fit. You'll be happiest with a gun that fits your frame. That will probably not feel like it's kickin' you so hard, too.

mapsjanhere
January 25, 2010, 07:03 PM
300 RUM - no belt :D

Big Bill
January 25, 2010, 09:22 PM
I have a WSM and wish I had bought a WM. Ammo is cheaper and more redily available. The ballistics are almost identical. BTW, I dpn't reload - yet.

hoghunting
January 26, 2010, 01:01 AM
I use my 300 WSM significantly more than the 300 WM, as it is more accurate in my rifles. If you reload, I'd get the WSM. If you will buy factory, I'd live with the WM.

Doodlebugger45
January 26, 2010, 02:24 AM
I have a 270 WSM and a 325 WSM. Nope, there is no real good reason for any of the WSM cartridges. I like them and they shoot very well. They are just different is all. I reload, so the cost difference is not a factor. I like being unique though. Realistically, the 270 WSM duplicates my 7 mm Mag when it comes to 130 and 140 gr bullets. It is slightly better than a regular 270 win, but not as versatile as the 7 mm mag. From what I can see, the 7 mm WSM is the ballistic twin of the 7 mm mag and the 300 WSM is the twin of the 300 mag when it comes to particular bullets and velocities. I think the recoil is about the same as well. The only perceived advantage is a short action compared to a long action. Some people might think that's important. Makes no big difference to me. Perhaps the .325 WSM fills a small niche. But the 338 Win mag is pretty darn close to the same bullets and velocities.

At the end of the day, the WSM's don't offer anything revolutionary other than a shorter action. It's just a chance to have something different than your hunting partner. If you reload, it's kind of fun. If you don't reload, then YIKES, those WSMs are very expensive in factory ammo. It is kind of funny to show the unitiated folks the loaded rounds of a WSM and tell them they will give the same results as a long belted magnum. The ammo is very unobtusive compared to something like a 7 mm Rem mag or a 300 Win mag. It is all simple physics, but the results out of that little fat case are surprising.

If there's a downside to the WSMs (besides trying to afford factory ammo), it is that they feel a little different loading into a magazine. Yes, the short length is nice, but they are fatter than normal and it takes a bit of getting used to the feel of them fitting down into the magazine properly.

pichon
January 26, 2010, 02:27 AM
The ammo is twice the cost and so is the brass.

Wrong.

Brass is usually the same price and in some brands the WSM is cheaper. Norma for instance is like that. Also non-belted brass doesn't stretch as much from what I have heard so it lasts longer.

Factory ammo is evening out too. Cheaper than dirt sells a lot of their ammo for identical prices for the same ammo in either cartridge.

Availability is a different story... That is why I reload.

Like many have said, it's mostly about SA vs. LA.

handlerer
January 26, 2010, 04:21 AM
I have been reloading for magnum rifle cartridges since '76, with 7mm Rem MAg, and reloaded for a buddies 300WM. I now reload for 300WBY,340WBY, 6.5x55, 223, and 44 mag. knowing what I do now I think I would go with WSM. It is not a belted case, and that's where every magnum case I have ever discarded was going to fail. I have read, from reliable sources, RCBS, Speer, ect, that at magnum pressures the belted magnums would have fewer reloads possible. I load pretty hot so I use special caution in examining brass for signs of wear.The Rsaums are even better from a reloaders standpoint.

Suwannee Tim
January 26, 2010, 06:18 AM
The "belted magnums" are one of the most amazing artifacts of firearms history. Roy Weatherby, a wildcatter and entrepreneur designed his magnums based on the obsolete 300 H&H. Being a small shop he lacked the capability to produce cases so he used the H&H. Making virtue of necessity he used the belt as a selling point, persuading people that it was a good thing, not a bad thing. Winchester, Remington and Norma, rather that refuting Weatherby's assertions went stupidly along with them and produced the 7 mm Remington, 338 Winchester, 358 Norma magnums all of which have unnecessary belts. This continued right up to modern times with Remington introducing the 8mm magnum then the 416 magnum, both of which have the unnecessary belt. I have a 300 Winchester magnum that I shoot and love but all else being equal I would buy a beltless magnum over a belted magnum for certain.

jmr40
January 26, 2010, 06:51 AM
Advancements in any field are taken in small steps. The WSM cartridges address some of the short comings of the older standard cartridges, but for most people the differences are so small that it is not worth the negatives the newer rounds come with. Namely price and availibility.

The newer Ruger Compact Magnums are another small step towards improving the WSM's, but once again the differences are small and most people will probably not see enough of an advantage to change.

The older cartridges have proven themselves and advancements in powders and bullets have made 100 year old designs like the 30-06 even better than they ever were. But if the newer short mag rounds as well as the older traditional rounds were all introduced new today and sold at the same price, the short mags would be far and away the best sellers and the other rounds would die a quick death.

That said, just like most others, I'm not going to change what I have for a small improvement in performance. If I were a new shooter just getting started I would look seriously at the newer rounds.

lt dan
January 26, 2010, 09:40 AM
cant add much more than what has already been said, except that if you wanted to hunt outside of the usa , then the wsm has some problems with ammo availability. especially africa: my 2 c.

fisherman66
January 26, 2010, 09:44 AM
I'm curious if anyone has had feeding issues (especially with a push feed type rifle) with that squat WSM case?

taylorce1
January 26, 2010, 10:39 AM
based on the obsolete 300 H&H.

I wouldn't call the .300 H&H obsolete, it still shoots and kills game as good as ever. However it is expensive to own as far as brass and ammunition, I know I've got one. It takes a longer action and that is the real downfall of this cartridge. Yes I know unless it is a special run it isn't being produces with any regularity by todays rifle makers.

If it would fit in a Mauser 98 legnth action, it would be the .300 Win Mag of today. The .300 H&H is still the better cartridge of choice when running bullets over 180 grains when compared to the .300 Win, and long bullets don't work very well in the .300 WSM. I like my H&H and will never get a .300 of any other variety as long as I own it.

The .300 Win mag is the obvious choice for me between your two options. Handles a wider variety of bullets especially the heavier ones. You can down load it to .30-06/.308 levels as well as crank up the power to full house loads powerful enough to take down the biggest game in NA without much fuss. I'm not a big fan of the hyper velocity light weight mono-metal bullets, I like 200 grain Nosler Partitions in my H&H and would probably stick to a 180 grain bullet in the .300 Win Mag and 165 grain in the .300 WSM.

Jimro
January 26, 2010, 01:47 PM
If you handload, the 300 WSM. If you don't handload the 300 Win Mag.

Up until 210 grain bullets there isn't a ballistic difference to a handloader.

Jimro

taylorce1
January 26, 2010, 02:07 PM
If you handload, the 300 WSM. If you don't handload the 300 Win Mag.

Up until 210 grain bullets there isn't a ballistic difference to a handloader.

Jimro


How do you seat a 210 grain bullet to mag length and still get a bullet that long to .300 Win Mag velocities with a WSM? I'd think you would be eating up too much powder room since you would have to seat the bullet below the neck to get it to work from the magazine. If you are feeding them single are the throats deep enough on most factory WSM rifles to keep that long of a bullet off of the lands to keep pressures safe?

Jimro
January 26, 2010, 05:05 PM
Vern Harrison of Virginia Tactical loads 210 VLD's in his 300 WSM, and I'm pretty sure he's using an AICS on a Rem700 with DBM. I am pretty sure there isn't much "factory spec" left on Vern's rifles. But then again he is pushing 1600 meters with his 300 magnums. If you want I can look into his COAL and load recipe, but since I'm pretty sure he's using AI mags it makes the whole issue moot anyways.

Over his chronograph it clocks the same as his 300 Win Mag. This load is ballistically superior to the 190 gr SMK at 2950 fpa A191 milspec loading. Vern loads for small standard deviation in velocity, which for a given bullet is usually at several "nodes" of barrel vibration.

I was looking into doing a Savage build in 300 WSM and ended up sticking with the 308 Win because it is really once you get past 600 where magnums start making a lot of sense.

Jimro

sourdough44
January 26, 2010, 05:13 PM
I like the 300wsm better, but either will do. I don't feel the need for bullets over 180 grn for what I want. Yes, it is sorta a beefed up 30-06, but it looks cooler.

taylorce1
January 26, 2010, 06:17 PM
Vern Harrison of Virginia Tactical loads 210 VLD's in his 300 WSM, and I'm pretty sure he's using an AICS on a Rem700 with DBM. I am pretty sure there isn't much "factory spec" left on Vern's rifles. But then again he is pushing 1600 meters with his 300 magnums. If you want I can look into his COAL and load recipe, but since I'm pretty sure he's using AI mags it makes the whole issue moot anyways.

Over his chronograph it clocks the same as his 300 Win Mag. This load is ballistically superior to the 190 gr SMK at 2950 fpa A191 milspec loading. Vern loads for small standard deviation in velocity, which for a given bullet is usually at several "nodes" of barrel vibration.

I was looking into doing a Savage build in 300 WSM and ended up sticking with the 308 Win because it is really once you get past 600 where magnums start making a lot of sense.

Jimro


So basicly it can't be done in a OTC rifle. Which again makes the .300 Win Mag a better choice when going over 180 grain bullets even if you handload when compared to the WSM factory rifle.

AllenJ
January 26, 2010, 06:31 PM
I have owned a 300WM Browning A-Bolt SS for over 15 years and a 300WSM Ruger Mark II for 2. My pros of the WM are reloading components are easy to get and in an emergency almost every sports store stocks cartridges. Cons are it kicks HARD and reloading for it is a pain. That belt costs me brass every time I load for it.

My pros for the 300WSM are it does not kick nearly as hard and it is much nicer to load for. Cons are ammo availability at sports stores and I wish they made it with a 26" barrel.

If you reload seriously consider the WSM. Just my opinion.

Big Bill
January 26, 2010, 07:17 PM
I'll probably be happy with the wsm, when I start reloading this year.

Jimro
January 26, 2010, 07:35 PM
So basicly it can't be done in a OTC rifle. Which again makes the .300 Win Mag a better choice when going over 180 grain bullets even if you handload when compared to the WSM factory rifle.
taylorce1 is offline

Well, factory rifles are known for a generous throats, so loading long bullets isn't an issue, single loading is fine for long range target shooting. Since hunting bullets are shorter than the long VLD's it isn't hard to get them to magazine length.

I don't see how that makes the 300 Win Mag a better choice.

Jimro

misterE
January 26, 2010, 10:40 PM
Good point about the short mags being beltless. By the way, Im just about to start reloading for the 300 WM and was wondering if someone could expound about reloading problems with the belt and how many reloads I should expect out of my brass.

pichon
January 27, 2010, 02:03 AM
Cons are ammo availability at sports stores and I wish they made it with a 26" barrel.

Savage does. Just ordered a Savage 12 LP in 300 WSM myself. Heard good things.
https://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/images/D11/52/52942.jpg


Good point about the short mags being beltless. By the way, Im just about to start reloading for the 300 WM and was wondering if someone could expound about reloading problems with the belt and how many reloads I should expect out of my brass.

The only problem I have heard of is brass longevity. Not sure how many loads each piece of brass averages though.

Jimro
January 27, 2010, 02:28 AM
Most of the downside of reloading belted brass is discussed here (http://www.larrywillis.com/answers.html) and I am not so sure that the bulge above the belt is as severe a problem as some make it out to be. I'm happy with 3 to 5 reloads on magnum brass. In my humble experience case necks go before bulges prevent reloading. Like anything, ymmv.

Jimro

moosemike
January 27, 2010, 09:44 AM
The .300 Win mag is still going strong after all these years. Where will the .300 WSM be in twenty years? Obsolete? Maybe.

taylorce1
January 27, 2010, 10:37 AM
I did some more poking about and as far as I can tell Accuracy International only builds the AICS to accept the Rem 700 SA. I couldn’t find the internal dimensions of their Magazines but I didn’t look too hard. However, I’m sure with what Vern Harrison is doing and teaching he would have modified it to feed from the Magazine a bullet as long as the 210 grain VLD bullet.

Since we don’t know for sure about Vern Harrison’s rifle, any bullet 180 grains or heavier is going to have to eat up the powder column to keep the COL to 2.86”. As you go to heavier and longer bullets even for hunting you are going to have to compress the loads even more or reduce powder charge to make COL to feed from the magazine. If you compress the loads near max charges you run the risk of driving the pressures too high. The easiest way around all of this is to put your WSM into a standard length action which cancels out any advantage that you had using a magnum cartridge in a short action.

So if you want to build a single shot long throat target rifle for competition then maybe the .300 WSM is a better choice for shooting heavy bullets. Then you will not have to worry too much about seating depth and enough neck tension to keep the bullets seated under recoil. I agree the .300 WSM is a more efficient cartridge, but efficiency and not being able to feed from a magazine unless you limit your bullet weights to 180 grain or less isn’t a good thing IMO.

If you want to buy a hunting or tactical rifle and feed heavy bullets (180+) out of the magazine then the .300 Win Mag is still a better of the OP’s original two choices. Even the .300 Win Mag may not feed the long 210 grain VLD or 240 grain Sierra MK bullets out of the magazine but it can sure handle the 200 & 220 grain Nosler Partitions. Making again the .300 Win Mag to me the better choice all around rifle cartridge belt and all.

BTW that link to Larry Willis web site is awesome. He makes a great Collet die for reloading all belted magnum cartridges and remove the bulge.

On a side note two Magnums I’d like to see Hornady & Ruger produce instead of the RCM is a .308 and .338 caliber based off of the full size .375 Ruger cartridge.

GeauxTide
January 27, 2010, 12:33 PM
Case fatigue is accentuated in both bottleneck and belted cases IF the cases are full sized, moving the shoulder back to spec. Because the cases are fitted to the chamber by firing the first load, neck sizing would be the preferred method (bolt rifles only). In the 40 years I've been loading, I've not had a head separation. After 5-7 full power loads, the primer pockets lose their hold and the case is discarded.

Hawkshaw
January 27, 2010, 03:15 PM
I like the 300 Win Mag, it does kick pretty good but you can manage it with practice. Very accurate and hard hitting long range cartridge.

Jimro
January 27, 2010, 03:29 PM
Taylorce,

Bottom line up front, either magnum is going to be a dang laser compared to the 308 at distance :-)

I took a look at the reloading numbers from Hogdon, and I pulled two loads that I think represent the capabilities of the two rounds in question.

300 WSM
200 GR. SFT SP IMR 4350 .308" 2.790" 63.5C 2827 63,700 PSI
220 GR. HDY RN Win Supreme 780 .308" 2.830" 67.5 2735 62,900 PSI

300 Win Mag
200 GR. NOS PART IMR 4350 .308" 3.340" 69.5 2860 62,600 PSI
220 GR. SIE RN IMR 7828 .308" 3.340" 75.0C 2760 61,700 PSI

I see that the 300 Win Mag does have a ballistic advantage on paper. I am not so sure how that really translates into advantage in the real world. Sure wish I had the money to build two rifles to find out!

Jimro

taylorce1
January 27, 2010, 06:04 PM
Jimro, thanks for the fine debate.

I never doubted the efficency of the .300 WSM just the length of action it is on. I think with this magnum you have to build on a Standard Long action to wring the most performance out of it which really defeats the case design. Kind of like the .284 Win and its offspring, made for a short action but works better on long ones.

Your loads that you posted prove that to me to even reach COL with a 220 grain the WSM had to use a short RN bullet. Nothing wrong with RN bullets they have been killing game effectivly for years, just don't reach as far as the Spitzer style. To use the 200 grain bullet they had to push the pressure past 63K psi to nearly match the velocity of the .300 Win Mag. Maybe by design the short action can handle more pressure but when you start approching that kind of pressure what kind of brass life are you going to get belt or not?

So, I still think even though there is no real world difference between the two cartridges it all boils down to bullet selection. If you go with bullets weighing less than 180 grains you'll be well served by the WSM. However if what you are looking to do is push heavy bullets the Win Mag will serve you better. I tend to lean toward heavy bullets thats all.

lefteye
January 27, 2010, 09:47 PM
Factory throats are long so they accomodate heavy (long) .300 Win Mag bullets. Magazines are a different story. A Nosler 180 gr. Partition Protected Point (made expressly for the .300 Win Mag) seated to nearly touch the rifling will not fit in the magazine of my fairly old Browning A-Bolt SS. Nevertheless, even when seated to fit in the magazine the load (neck sized with a near max load of IMR 4350) is very - I mean very - accurate in a virtually unmodified factory production rilfe. I did have the trigger spring replaced to allow a lighter pull (adjustment range of factory spring wasn't enough for me.) While I don't like the neck being shorter than the caliber, that design "defect" has not prevented the .300 Win Mag from being a superb big game cartridge.

Txhillbilly
January 27, 2010, 10:59 PM
I shoot quite a few rds of 300WM out of my tactical rifle every month and usually get 6-7 reloads out of each case. The belted case gets just as many reloads as any of my none belted cases.

I have never seen any advantages of the short magnums over the originals,only a shorter action,and more expensive ammo.

woods
January 27, 2010, 11:07 PM
I reload for 2 of the 300 WSM's and have 9 of the 300 win mags on my data spreadsheets. One of the 300 WSM's (Kimber) liked the 200 gr Accubonds best with RL22 and the other shot the 180 gr Accubonds also with RL22. The velocity of the 300 WSM's shooting the 200 gr Accubonds worked out about 50 fps behind the 300 win mags but mainly because I get better accuracy in the 300 win mags if I lower the velocity on that bullet to around 2900 fps. I have pushed that bullet to 2950 fps but accuracy suffered.

In contrast to conventional wisdom, with the 180 gr bullets the 300 WSM's maxed out at around 3050 fps and started exhibiting pressure signs and in all the 300 win mags I regularly push the 180's to 3150 fps with good accuracy.

Personally I do not like to load the WSM's but that is mainly because the cases don't fit in the loading blocks, the outside chamfer tools hit the shoulders and the compression with the long 200 gr bullets. I also don't like the way they load in the mag and feed and it seems like with a short action you should be able to get more loads in the magazine.

There is a general problem with short 300 win mag magazines where you can not load out to the lands. The gun manufacturers seemed to have made the win mag caliber magazines for the 338 win mag, 7 mm mag and 264 win mag cases which are shorter than the 300 win mag. The Brownings are particularly bad about it. By contrast I look for 300 win mag guns that have longer magazines such as my Beretta Mato or Remingtons. With those there is plenty of mag room. So short magged 300 win mags make great candidates for rebarreling to 6.5 rem mag or 375 Ruger ;)!

Make mine a 300 win mag.

Jimro
January 28, 2010, 01:38 AM
taylorce1,

No problem, actually talking design points for long range shooting is endlessly fascinating. I've had this debate on bullet seating length in my head for years now. I decided that the 7mm SAUM was preferable to the 7mm WSM only because the slightly shorter case allows for more seating depth options, allowing longer barrel life because you can "chase the lands" further and still load from the magazine.

Jimro

iamkris
January 28, 2010, 08:50 AM
I own a Tikka T3 in .300 WSM that I love...I call it my "Hammer of Thor" since I have never shot an animal that has taken more than a few steps. I bought it because it was claimed that 1) the short action is lighter, 2) accuracy was better with the short/fat powder column, 3) recoil was less with the powder column.

Lighter? If I was walking in the Rocky Mountains with it...maybe.

Accurate? The rifle is scary accurate with factory loads and my handloads...usually 0.5 MOA or so...but is is the rifle or the cartridge?

Less recoil? I don't find the recoil objectionable but a lot of that has to do with stock design (Tikka has a very straight stock). My guess is that few can tell the difference.

Ammo cost is not an issue with me since I exclusively handload.

All that said, I wish I would have bought a .300 Win Mag instead if for nothing more than having a wider bullet selection. Based on my reloading manuals, up to 180 gr the cartridges are the same. Over that, then the WM wins.

I'm not unhappy though.

Lawyer Daggit
January 28, 2010, 09:57 PM
I would stick with the Winchester win mag. I think a lot of the short magnum marketing was just 'hype' and people shooting the short mag rounds pay a lot for more for the ammo because it is not as popular.

deadcoyote
January 28, 2010, 09:59 PM
This may sound dumb but I'd say 300 win mag because they sell it for half as much as the short mag at my local shop.

GA Limited GM
January 30, 2010, 07:05 PM
I can't add much to what these guys said, but I'll add this. I bought a Savage WSM from a buddy who had installed a JP Enterprises Muzzle Break. Believe me when I say it is unbelievable how much recoil it removes. Absolutely amazing. Loud as F, but amazing. Feels like a .243.

David Turley
February 28, 2010, 05:45 PM
the 300 short mag advertises more velocity than the regular 300 mag but put both of them through a chrnograph and you will see the short mag isnt quiet as fast not far behind but the nod in velocity goes to the regular 300 win not to mention the ammo is much cheaper and easier to find and as far as acuracy goes if you couldnt make a kill on a animal with the 300 win mag youre probally not going to have any better luck with the 300 short mag and the short mag has more recoil

uncyboo
February 28, 2010, 09:33 PM
David, man, take a breath. That post, with no punctuation, was almost impossible to read. Almost exhaustingly so....:D

cafsman
March 1, 2010, 12:46 AM
I own four different Ruger No. 1's in 300 win mag and a Model 70 Super Grade III and really like them all. You can load up or down and it still packs plenty of punch. I may be parting with one of the Ruger's in a couple weeks as I am looking at an even larger caliber.