53 replies [Last post]
Offline
Location: Missouri/Arkansas
Joined: 08/21/2003
Posts: 891
WSM performance comparisons:

The BAR is a semi-auto, right?

Offline
Location: Wisconsin
Joined: 12/08/2003
Posts: 134
WSM performance comparisons:

Yeah. The original Safari is the only one that comes with the BOSS now, but it's so dang heavy. My Dad's got one in .308 without the BOSS, and its heavy enough. Probably go with the new BAR ShorTrac. Not so heavy. Of course, by the time I get funding, I could switch to the A-Bolt again, or the Model 70, or even a BLR, the Browning Lever action.

_________________
So many guns, so little money.

[ This Message was edited by: mister_venison on 2004-03-13 00:34 ]

Offline
Joined: 03/24/2004
Posts: 6
WSM performance comparisons:

obvious I hate to tell you but mister venison is correct. I'll tell you why.
In science we alway use a control and a variable to prove or disprove. Simple rule is never use two or more variables or we wont know the cause for a different result. Here we are using the old belted vs. the new wsm. That is the variable. Different powder, primers,barrel length, or bullet can and does alter the outcome. That said, the case capacities between the two are approx. 10% different(the belted being the larger)So we now have Two variables add to that that each seem to have a slightly difference taste in powder type and huh-oh this comparison is really getting to suck, we can't tell which is better! Luckily I have both,reload for both, chrono both and this is what I came up with; on the average using max loads of varying powders(three each) with 180 grain noslers(from the same box) The belted beat out the shortfat guy (velocity only) by around 7%, both with 24" barrels. The belted is tricked(for accuracy) the wsm factory (except trigger) wsm very, very close in accuracy. The coolest thing though my pound of powder lasts longer, my rifle is lighter, and shorter and a don't need a fancy collar
to resize my case for a smooth action. Over all the wsm is almost all they claim right up to 180 grains of lead. Its really a matter of preference---would you prefer the browning or the winchester? Cause everyone should have a wsm right along side the old belted. P.S. I was comparing the .300 's not the 7 's.

bitmasher's picture
Offline
Moderator
Location: Colorado
Joined: 02/27/2002
Posts: 2973
WSM performance comparisons:

Good info Bcmontana! So at the muzzle the WSM is about 7% slower with identical bullets. One might guess this from the start considering that is working with less powder as you state.

Now here is the killer question, do you have chrono data at set distances for each cartridge so we can determine if the BC is more reduced in the WSM? I.E. with identical bullets does the WSM lose velocity faster?

Offline
Location: Missouri/Arkansas
Joined: 08/21/2003
Posts: 891
WSM performance comparisons:

The advertisements claim vast ballistic superiority for the WSMs, and that's been the main thing I have argued against. Even your post seems to reflect this.

Offline
Joined: 03/24/2004
Posts: 6
WSM performance comparisons:

bitmasher, I have not set my chrono up down field to test actual velocities(I like to fancy my self an alright shot but murphy and that law of his scares me into leaving my chrono real close to my muzzle)I can tell you however that at 300 yds the difference in drop(using nosler partion 180's) is just over an inch on average. I have only had the short mag for about a month and a half and havent taken the time to see what happens at 400 or 500 yards but according to some of the data I've gleened my actual loads from I suspect to see maybe 4" difference at most.
Again, close enough in performance that I know what rifle Iam packing next year. Captain obvious is on to something with the hype some guns get though. I fell into the 7mm stw rage, which has since tapered off greatly and I must say alot of powder and brass to achieve little more than what was previously available, but I'll keep it anyways it keeps my shotgun from looking so long.

Offline
Location: Missouri/Arkansas
Joined: 08/21/2003
Posts: 891
WSM performance comparisons:

I'm not into hype, it doesn't deliver the right message, I shoot with a guy who is an avid reloader, and for his 300 Winchester Magnum, some of his 180 grain loads chronograph at 3100 to 3120 fps. The bullet holes touch at 100 yards. A test 7mm Remington Magnum at the same range has driven 150 grain bullets at 3300 fps, and 160 grain bullets at 3200 fps. Needless to say, all 7mm Remington Magnum rifles I've shot were extremely accurate, my own model 700 ADL in 7mm magnum has produced 1 inch groups at 200 yards on several occasions.

[ This Message was edited by: Captain_Obvious on 2004-03-29 20:28 ]

Offline
Location: Missouri/Arkansas
Joined: 08/21/2003
Posts: 891
WSM performance comparisons:

So long? How long is the barrel on your shotgun, 28 inch? 30 inch? I have a 28 inch on one of my shotguns, it would be fine for waterfowl, but tote that thing in the woods hunting turkeys and you'll wear yourself out on brush tangles.

Offline
Joined: 03/24/2004
Posts: 6
WSM performance comparisons:

Captain, I havent read the same info you have, but I have seen alot of print and ads that refer to the larger shorts as being equivalent to the "originals" which I think they are darn close. However, it is my understanding that in the smaller short actions (like up to the .270 short they actually are superior but take into consideration that case capacities are increased over the "originals" in the wssm's). Correct me if I'am wrong on the wssm's somebody because I haven't paid much notice to them.

Offline
Location: Missouri/Arkansas
Joined: 08/21/2003
Posts: 891
WSM performance comparisons:

The WSSM's offer very little, so little that they of no practical value, over the .223, .243, and 25-06. The dumbest ad I have seen for the WSMs was one that said the 300 WSM approached the .300 Weatherby Magnum in ballistics and performance. NOT EVEN CLOSE! I think that was the last one I read before I started this thread.

Related Forum Threads You Might Like

ThreadThread StarterRepliesLast Updated
Why the skepticism for short roundfuzzybear308/01/2007 12:57 pm
Sub MOA @ 100, but not so @ 200CVC909/10/2007 18:58 pm
Performance of my first reloadsCVC305/21/2007 17:40 pm
Caliber comparisonsandythejerk208/29/2005 20:23 pm
500 Smith and Wesson in a RifleAlphaMan212/30/2005 21:49 pm