300 wsm or 300 mag
10-07-2007, 07:18 PM
#51
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 125
RE: 300 wsm or 300 mag
All I asked is for you to explain your opinion, actually somebody else’s opinion. I am not defending anything! Why? because I just spent a ton of time going through this exercise for myself and I thought I covered all my basis that’s all. I wanted to know if I made a mistake or missed something in my research because I have never heard that a 300WM is hands down better than a 300WSM, that’s why I asked.
Now back to the original post. Yesterday I had the opportunity to shoot my friends 300WM BAR side-by-side against my Sako. First off I really like my Sako and my opinion is probably a bit biased but it really fits me nicely. The BAR is heavier and I think it kicks harder, but this may be just a fit thing. Plus the recoil in the BAR is just different, not sure why, just different. I also have an inherent fear of failure w/ an automatic. My friend, told me he will never shoot another rifle other than a BAR, so go figure.
WM vs. WSM. I bought the WSM to save a few ounces, shorter throw using a bolt, and I love new technology. I bought the 300WSM over the 270 WSM because this gun will hunt mostly elk, sometime deer. If Elk only I would have bought the 338WM. Deer mostly I would have bought the 270WSM. I bought Sako cause it fit me better than any rifle I shouldered.
Now back to the original post. Yesterday I had the opportunity to shoot my friends 300WM BAR side-by-side against my Sako. First off I really like my Sako and my opinion is probably a bit biased but it really fits me nicely. The BAR is heavier and I think it kicks harder, but this may be just a fit thing. Plus the recoil in the BAR is just different, not sure why, just different. I also have an inherent fear of failure w/ an automatic. My friend, told me he will never shoot another rifle other than a BAR, so go figure.
WM vs. WSM. I bought the WSM to save a few ounces, shorter throw using a bolt, and I love new technology. I bought the 300WSM over the 270 WSM because this gun will hunt mostly elk, sometime deer. If Elk only I would have bought the 338WM. Deer mostly I would have bought the 270WSM. I bought Sako cause it fit me better than any rifle I shouldered.
10-07-2007, 07:30 PM
#52
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Coralville, IA. USA
Posts: 3,802
RE: 300 wsm or 300 mag
Six of one...
Half-dozen of the other!
For those who think that the WSM are somehow inherently inaccurate by design, then tell me why ALL competitive benchrest cartridges follow they same general design as the WSM cartridges (i.e. short, fat non-belted case with nearly straight walls and a steep shoulder angle). Personally, all else being equal, the WSM are as accurate or slightly more accurate than their long-action belted cousins. I had a Tikka T3 Lite in .300WSM that was an honest-to-God sub-MOA (but not by much) rifle with handloads when bagged in on the bench. It was a fine shooting rifle, but I didn't like how the 6.5lbs rifle beat the snot out of me every time I shot it. I shortly realized that it was starting to give me a flinch and so I got rid of it.
I, personally, believe that these "reports" by "experts" that the WSM's are inaccurate are likely projecting their poor shooting of a hard-kicking cartridge onto the cartridge itself rather than placing the blame on themselves where it belongs. The fact is that most shooters just can't tolerate the recoil and muzzleblast produced by the short -barrelled (for a magnum) ultra-light short action rifles that the WSM's are commonly chambered in and still shoot well. I've been-there-done-that-got-the-t-shirt. It's been my experience that most men are just too darn proud to admit that they can't tolerate the recoil so they blame the gun and not the flinching egotist behind the trigger.
I know you asked about the .300WSM v. the .300 WinMag. And if it were me I'd pick the WinMag if buying factory ammo or the WSM if handloading. I'd bet that that the BAR will shoot just fine with either. However, unless you are genuinely one of the select few that can shoot a magnumb well, I'd recommend that you consider the .30-06 or .308Win. Plenty of power for just about every hunting situation in North America (except dangerous game), plenty of reach for almost all realistic hunting ranges, ammo is relatively inexpensive and available everywhere, and it won't loosen your teeth every time you pull the trigger especially in a semi-auto.
Good luck with whatever you choose.
Mike
Half-dozen of the other!
For those who think that the WSM are somehow inherently inaccurate by design, then tell me why ALL competitive benchrest cartridges follow they same general design as the WSM cartridges (i.e. short, fat non-belted case with nearly straight walls and a steep shoulder angle). Personally, all else being equal, the WSM are as accurate or slightly more accurate than their long-action belted cousins. I had a Tikka T3 Lite in .300WSM that was an honest-to-God sub-MOA (but not by much) rifle with handloads when bagged in on the bench. It was a fine shooting rifle, but I didn't like how the 6.5lbs rifle beat the snot out of me every time I shot it. I shortly realized that it was starting to give me a flinch and so I got rid of it.
I, personally, believe that these "reports" by "experts" that the WSM's are inaccurate are likely projecting their poor shooting of a hard-kicking cartridge onto the cartridge itself rather than placing the blame on themselves where it belongs. The fact is that most shooters just can't tolerate the recoil and muzzleblast produced by the short -barrelled (for a magnum) ultra-light short action rifles that the WSM's are commonly chambered in and still shoot well. I've been-there-done-that-got-the-t-shirt. It's been my experience that most men are just too darn proud to admit that they can't tolerate the recoil so they blame the gun and not the flinching egotist behind the trigger.
I know you asked about the .300WSM v. the .300 WinMag. And if it were me I'd pick the WinMag if buying factory ammo or the WSM if handloading. I'd bet that that the BAR will shoot just fine with either. However, unless you are genuinely one of the select few that can shoot a magnumb well, I'd recommend that you consider the .30-06 or .308Win. Plenty of power for just about every hunting situation in North America (except dangerous game), plenty of reach for almost all realistic hunting ranges, ammo is relatively inexpensive and available everywhere, and it won't loosen your teeth every time you pull the trigger especially in a semi-auto.
Good luck with whatever you choose.
Mike
10-07-2007, 08:00 PM
#53
Fork Horn
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 208
RE: 300 wsm or 300 mag
ORIGINAL: cma3366a
I've heard alot of knocks on the WSM's, butI've got to hand it to you, thats the first time I've heard them called inaccurate, particularly in relation to the belted mags.
Tell, if you will, how minimal case taper, steep neck angles, thick webs, and generally tight chamber dimensionscontribute to innaccuracy? Perhaps you have some other 'theory' if so, please share it.
ORIGINAL: dso66
There is no reason to buy a short mag unless you are going to use a short action rifle, they were designed to go into conpact guns. The short mags a inherntly less acurate. Yeah I know what some of you read. If winchester is paying you to write an article you'll say it shoots well. Go with the .300 win.
There is no reason to buy a short mag unless you are going to use a short action rifle, they were designed to go into conpact guns. The short mags a inherntly less acurate. Yeah I know what some of you read. If winchester is paying you to write an article you'll say it shoots well. Go with the .300 win.
Tell, if you will, how minimal case taper, steep neck angles, thick webs, and generally tight chamber dimensionscontribute to innaccuracy? Perhaps you have some other 'theory' if so, please share it.
owned!!!!!
