53 replies [Last post]
Offline
Moderator
Location: Wa.
Joined: 03/31/2004
Posts: 1300
WSM performance comparisons:

I've had a year to play with this 300 wsm.
What I have discoveres is,
It is extremely accurate.
Shoots a variety of bullet well. Mine doesn't like the Hot Core in any weight.
With greater than 180gr the perfomance drops substantially. It will shoot the larger bullets but, with little or no improvement over the 30-06.
With 150 gr and 165 gr it stays up with the larger capacity 300 wm. 10% difference in powder charge.
With 180 gr it's an improvment over the 30-06 but, falls a little bit shy of the 300 wm
The felt recoil is the same as the felt recoil from the 30-06 or 308 win. Much more comfortable than the 300 wm.
I used it last year on my Elk hunts. It was easy to carry around thru the trees and brush we have up here in Washington. Sporting a 22" barrel the rifle is still very light and easily handled. I had the stock fitted to my pull and mounted a 2x7 32 scope on it. It comes right up, with authority.
My opinion only. The 300 wsm is one of the better developments in cartridges to date.

Offline
Location: Anchorage AK
Joined: 12/03/2004
Posts: 46
WSM performance comparisons:
Captain_Obvious wrote:
Like I said before, no, you do not have to use the very same bullet. Two pointed bullets, same weight, same general caliber (.284 and .308, respectively), close enough. MY POINT IS, it's a lot easier to find 7mm Remington Magnum ammo that outperforms the short mag than vice-versa.

Capt. O, The above arguement you make is incorrect. To compare the velocity between the two you need to use similar ammunition. Not the same pawders or primers but the same bullets in each cartridge for each caliber loaded to factory specs. Either that or you need to obtain the best handload for each using the same bullet. You can not compare the 7mm WSM firing a 160 grain Nosler Partition (spitzer bullet) at say 3100 fps to the 7mm Rem Mag firing a 160 grain Speer Spitzer Boat tail at 3100 fps. The BC is so different that it will affect drag thus decelleration will be uneven between the two. Your comparison is like comparing BP roundballs to like weighted sabot rounds. Apples and oranges. "Close enough only counts in horseshoes and handgrenades", as my Grandfather used to say.

Factory velocities as advertised by the manufacturer is like being told that the check is in the mail, I'll call you in the morning and I won't... well, you know the rest. Don't you believe it. Not unless you want to buy my swampland? I'm joking about that swampland.

I know, you like the 7mm Rem Mag. Cool. It's okay not to like the 7mm shorty. But don't run it down with bad info.

I'll let you in on a little secret. I don't care for it myself. It's got no character. None of the shorties do. If someone else wants to buy them, so be it. I won't. Won't say anything bad about them that isn't true either.

Basically the short mags as far as I can tell from the reading I have done has brought me to the understanding that they are magnum versions of the standard length calibers in similar length. So 300 WSM is basically a 308/30-06 magnum without the belt. 7mm WSM is a 7x57 magnum sans belt. Okay, I can live with that. It isn't a perfect understanding but it works for tool purposes.The boost is in the internal ballistics and how efficiently it burns it's powder to achieve those velocities with the chosen bullet weights. The whole shorter powder column of different powders for more velicity and accuracy. Kind of why the .308 fares so well against the -06 in the lighter bullet weights because of it's shorter powder column and nearly achieves similar velocities in similar length barrels with similar bullets using good handloads. (See Ken Waters' Pet Loads section on 308 and 30-06). But once you go heavier bullet weight, the -06 really shines. I wonder if the same happens with the shortie 300's?

Would I trade in my 06 for a new 300WSM? Nope. You don't dump old friends for new ones is what I learned as a kid. Might integrate if someone gave me one though ;)

Just my $1.45 or so on this.

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

''Kind of why the .308 fares so well against the -06 in the lighter bullet weights because of it's shorter powder column and nearly achieves similar velocities in similar length barrels with similar bullets using good handloads.''

Noting that you said similar velocities rather than exceeding the -06. This I HAVE seen in reloading manuals and ballistic charts and chronograph results. With say, 150 grain bullets, a 308 can come close, but a 30-06 can always exceed it. Not the other way around. No 308 load I have ever seen or heard of can break 3100 fps.

In the weeks before I posted this particular thread, I had the misfortune of coming across the wildest and most absurd exaggerations, probably at the hands of overheated gunwriters. One fellow even said the 300 WSM equaled the 300 Weatherby and 300 Remington Ultra Mag. I have actually tested my 7mm Remington Magnum rifles against the 7mm WSM twice now. Although the 7 WSM approached some of the 7 RM velocities, it in no way exceeded them over a chronograph. I have chronographed bullets such as Sierra boat-tails at up to 3300 fps using stout but safe doses of H-1000 powder in handloads. It might have been slightly unfair that in both cases I had two guns, one with a 26 inch barrel and one with a 24, but even in the 24, the 7mm Remington Magnum shot faster, and was every bit as accurate. I have also chronographed 160-162 grain bullets at 3100 to 3200 fps MV, also with H-1000 powder, but H4831 gave the same results.

All three rifles were shooting 160 grain Noslers for those tests, and the 7 RM retained the edge.

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