How useful is the extra 200 fps MV from a Short Mag/ SA Ultra Mag?

M

Major Dave (retired)

New member
Is the extra 200 fps MV generated by the Short Mag version of the 270, compared to the MV of the original 270 Win that Jack O'Connor used, useful enough to put up with the additional recoil and the extra cost of the ammo?

Also, is the "short/fat" design of the cartridge case really more accurate than the "long/slim" version based on the 30-06 case.

Further, is the supposedly stiffer short action really more accurate that a less stiff long action?

Then again, is a short action rifle's supposedly lighter weight enough to even be noticed?

And, finally, just how much faster is the bolt throw from a short action rifle? Is it enough to make a functional difference?

In short, was the shooting public sold the WSM (and Rem SAUM) family of cartridges/rifles on the basis of marketing hype, or actual, useful advantages?:cool:
 
Many, many new guns have been sold on that extra 200 fps. Many, many claims have been made as to the advantage of that extra 200 fps. What it amounts to is about 1"-2" less drop at 500 yds, and about 3%-5% more energy on target at that range. Flatter trajectory makes range estimation less critical, the main advantage of the faster magnums IMO. It also means about 20% more recoil, along with the corresponding increase in muzzle blast. Some claim there is little advantage over a standard cartridge (30-06, 270, 280, etc). Is it worth it to you? I mean, if ya gotta, ya gotta.

The "short-fat" cartridges are no more accurate than standard cartridges, but they are more efficient (more fps with the same powder charge) than slimmer-longer cartridges of the same case volume.

Faster bolt times? Neglible. The biggest advantage of a short action IMO is the reduced weight and the roughly 3/4" more of usable barrel length. You would probably not notice the reduction in weight, it amounts to about 3 oz. And yes, there is a lot of hype.
 
A few months back I was researching this...sorta...for me the question was 30-06 or 300 WSM.

When I compared the trajectories and energies of them...the answer was clear.

The WSM's or even the long mags just don't offer anything that really matters to me. Most of my shooting is 600 yards or less and within that range the 30-06 (or a 270 Win) will do anything I'll ever need it to do.

The difference in trajectory is mere inches, and not enough of them to matter...with that in mind, along with the difference in the price of brass...you do the math.

I didn't buy into the hype, many people have...and I'm sure most of them are happy...but it wasn't for me. I bought a 30-06...its not a new "sporty" round...but it does its job. I'm happy with it...a 270 Win would have worked for me too...but I have a few thousand 30 caliber bullets already (308 Win leftovers :D)
 
Well if you and your friend had a competition to see how fast you could get a round on target and your rifle shoots 200 fps faster and you shot at exactly the same time, you'd win.
 
Just pull targets at a Highpower rifle match, or F class match, or a mid range match, and decide for yourself what is more important: bullet velocity or practice.

Bullet velocity will not compensate for poor shooting skills. Guys with poor shooting skills are going to be all over an 8 by 8 target and the further the distance, the wilder the shots.

So when you hear of such and such cartridge drops a couple of inches at 400/500 yards, think of the aiming error that was in yards for those newbies whose target you pulled.

Sometimes, especially at 1000 yard matches, they use up all their 20 minutes and never hit the target!
 
Many, many new guns have been sold on that extra 200 fps. Many, many claims have been made as to the advantage of that extra 200 fps. What it amounts to is about 1"-2" less drop at 500 yds, and about 3%-5% more energy on target at that range.
Click to expand...

The difference in drop between 2900fps and 3250fps at 500 yards is ~9 inches for the 140gr Accubond, not 2-3 inches. About 30% more energy at 500 yards... unless I'm running the numbers wrong. Accubond BC=.496.
 
Major Dave (retired) said:
And, finally, just how much faster is the bolt throw from a short action rifle? Is it enough to make a functional difference?
Click to expand...

I retired as a major, also.

But that's not the question. How much faster is the bolt throw from a short action, and does it make any functional difference? For the vast majority of us, probably not. However, several decades ago I was reading an interview in a gun rag. Someone was interviewing W.D.M. Bell, the renowned elephant hunter, and the question was put to him, if he had it to do all over again, with the modern rifles and cartridges available, which cartridge would he pick to harvest elephant. We might remember that Bell used (among others), the 7X57 cartridge to harvest many of his elephants.

As I recall the interview, Bell thought about it for several moments, then said that he'd probably use a Mauser action, in .308 Winchester. When the interviewer asked him why, he said that when he hunted elephants, he liked to get close. Real close, and the difference in the long action and short action might be the difference in time it took him to get off one shot, or two shots.

So, yeah, in some very limited circumstances, the difference between a long action and a short action can be a functional difference.

That said, I'll stick with my .30-06 and my .25-06. Both long action cartridges and I don't think it makes any difference in the way I hunt.
 
Most hunting bullets will give good expansion and kill well as long as they are moving at 1800 fps or faster at impact. I don't have the specifics on the 270 WCF vs the 270 WSM, but do own a 30-06 and 300 WSM and have run the numbers with 180 gr bullets.

In my case you are looking at 14.5" less drop at 600 yards with the 300 WSM compared to the 30-06 if both have a 200 yard zero. The 300 WSM maintains 1800 fps to almost 700 yards, while the 30-06 drops below that mark at about 550.

is the "short/fat" design of the cartridge case really more accurate than the "long/slim" version based on the 30-06 case.
Click to expand...

Yes, it results in more efficeint powder burn. It also means you need less powder to get equal velocity, which translates into less recoil. And work better with shorter barrels The new 1,000 yard bench record was recently set with the 300 WSM. They are proving to be very accurate.

In regards to recoil when I run the numbers for 30-06/180@ 2750fps vs 300 win mag/180@ 3000 fps vs 300 WSM/180 @3000 fps the recoil numbers show the 300 WSM almost exactly 1/2 way between the 30-06 and 300 WM, even though it is getting equal velocity to the 300 WM.

Further, is the supposedly stiffer short action really more accurate that a less stiff long action?

Then again, is a short action rifle's supposedly lighter weight enough to even be noticed?
Click to expand...

In theory the stiffer action should be more accurate, but not enough for me to notice. If the shorter action is enough lighter to matter depends on the gun. Most companies only use a shorter action and reduce the weight by about 1/4 lb. A Winchester 70 in 300 WSM is 3" shorter and 4 oz lighter than the same gun in 300 win mag, but Kimber has designed their WSM line of rifles around the cartridge and it will save you a full pound over a long action Winchester.
 
I shoot 168 grain Nosler Ballistic Tips at 2,850 fps...they keep the 1,800 fps all the way to 650 yards.

And the 600 yard drop is about 57 inches for the 30-06, 44 inches for the 300 WSM (3,200 fps)...OK, so its a foot (or so)...still, within 600 yards its not anything to fuss over, then there is the cost of practice ammo (brass).

Do the WSM's have more OOMPH? Sure they do...the question is does the OP need it? Or rather, can he afford it...thats what it came down to for me.

I shoot quite a bit...at least 1,000 rounds per year...not near as much as I have in times past, but still more than I can afford to feed a rifle where the brass costs $40 a bag.

I figured that much out with the 45-70 (also expensive brass)...fun to play with (hot loads), but an expensive habit.
 
I welcomed the short magnums. While I have had the old belted magnums for decades I never liked their design for headspacing when handloading. The belted rounds are a poor, unnecessary design when a cartridge has an adequate shoulder.

At the same time the Kimber Montana rifles were introduced and it was my chance also to get into the SS/SYN rifles. A Kimber Montana WSM weighs a half pound less than a M70 Featherweight yet it has a longer barrel and more power.

Win-Win's for me!
 
Depends on the use. For a deer hunter, I don't see any real advantage; most deer are shot at 200 yards or less.

Long-range targets? Generally, people seem to get better scores or groups with higher-velocity cartridges. Less wind drift, mostly, seems like, if shooting at known distances.

Tight-group accuracy? Lots of arguments, but so far it looks like the short-action folks are ahead in that game.

Weight? There seems to be a four- to six-ounce difference between long and short. That shouldn't affect the "carry-ability" of a seven- or eight-pound rifle. It's roughly a four- or five-percent difference.
 
If someone already owns a traditional belted magnum it would be hard to justify trading for a WSM. But if someone were buying for the 1st time I simply could not recommend one of the belted magnums over either the 300 WSM or 270 WSM. Those 2 are brisk sellers, and are gaining in popularity. The 7mm WSM's future is less certain. It my make it, maybe not. The rest of the short magnums are either dead, or will be soon.

The short fat cartridges are no doubt better than the traditional belted magnum cartridges and it is better to compare them to those rounds than traditional non-magnum rounds such as the 270 or 30-06.

All of the WSM's and other short fat cartridges do offer some advantages over older rounds. But if you only look at one aspect at a time they don't really look that much better. You have to consider everything as a whole. The 300 WSM combines the best qualities of several cartridges. You get match grade accuracy, 300 Win mag velocity, slightly more recoil than the 30-06, and do it in a 308 sized package. When you look at everything they start looking much better.

Lots of concern about price. Until recently it was a huge concern, but I'm seeing lots of 300 WSM ammo now selling for only $3-$4/box more than 30-06 ammo. Same price as 7mm Rem mag ammo. At one tme you only saw the premium lines of ammo costing $50+/box on store shelves. Which is only $5 or so more than the same premium 30-06 ammo sells for. In todays world I don't see how anyone who shoots can afford not to reload. Not only is ammo cheaper, it is almost more accurate and faster the factory ammo.
 
I like the short action WSM rifles. I do think the round gives me more than the 30'06 I used to shoot, but....and a very big but, it is a completely different system.

My 30'06 was a sporterised WW2 or WW1 rifle which held 6+1 rounds and is 1" at 100 yards accurate with a 4x scope. Weighed 13 lbs. I could hit to 400 yards. The scope was probably the weak point in the setup.

When I built my rifle for the next 100 years, I wanted to go with the modern round 300 WSM, in a SA 10lb varmint style rifle shooting modern VLD bullets. I tried 210 VLD's but they are too unstable in my gun. Probably the twist rate. 190 VLD's have been a hit!

My new gun is a Savage 12 BVSS in 300 WSM with a Burris XTR scope. The results are regular .6" at 100 groups. The system is better except mag capacity went from 6 to 2.

For me, no one part like SA, WSM round, VLD bullet, Savage rifle, etc is big enough on it's own, but building a new system with several good attribute changes can make a big improvement. I wouldn't build a new system in 30'06. It cannot push the large VLD bullets as well and it offers little over some modern staple like a WSM. I also wouldn't buy a new gun just because it offers slightly better performance.

Personally, to build another rifle today, I like 243 Win, 6.5 x 284, 300 WSM and 300 RUM.
 
I think anytime you have something build you get to pick the parts vs buying a factory rifle.

I've had two 300WSM and a 270WSM build and I put accuracy from those three rifles on par with the other calibers I have build.

The only thing I notice some cases are just little easier working up loads for or doing the fine tuning. I think there was lot of hype was over blown on what the short cases could do and some of that was from the gun rags as they never met a rifle they didn't like.

I never looked any of the short mag as replacement caliber it should just be another choice we have and I'm sure the debate go on for years to come.
 
The best advise I was given in regards to Magnum or not to magnum is look at the ballistics table. If you plan to shoot at specific distance (say 500 yards) and the standard round doesn't have enough energy, mv or has too much drop, then look at the magnum and see what its numbers are at that distance.

Remember, a magnum will have the same velocity and energy usually at about 200 yards as the standard does at the muzzle. (That's a ballpark, each one is different). It's not some unquantifiable, hard to determine guesstimate on what the differences is. It's the same bullet.. just faster. Which means at some point it's the same bullet, just farther away.

Hope that makes sense and helps you in your decision.
 
If someone already owns a traditional belted magnum it would be hard to justify trading for a WSM.
Click to expand...

Why must we "justify" buying a new rifle?

Personally, I enjoy shooting and loading for my WSM's (.270, and the "already dead" .325). I also enjoy shooting my standard long action .270 and .30-06 as well as my "belted" .300 win mag and 7mm mag, not to mention my short action .220, .223, and .243!

I didn't need any justification to purchase any of the above mentioned rifles other than I like rifles.

OP, I do notice better balistics in the field with the .270wsm as compared to the .270 win. Nothing scientific, but real world on real game.
 
I don't think anyone has mentioned the reduced throat life of the magnum cartridges...there is no free ride...

If you shoot comps, or long range, it may be important for your bullet to get to the target that much faster...less time for external influences on the bullet- obviously...

But for me, the diff is not enough to offset the reduced barrel life. I'll just dial up a couple more clicks on the scope, thank you...
 
In short, was the shooting public sold the WSM (and Rem SAUM) family of cartridges/rifles on the basis of marketing hype, or actual, useful advantages?
Click to expand...

When a factory tools up to make a new item you can bet they hype it all they can:D What the manufactures said was they were selling us a more accurate and efficient cartridge design, in a lighter, quicker, and more accurate action. Now I don't think that any of that means beans to the next elk I shoot. We all know that my old 30/06 is going to do the same job as my new 7WSM is but hey, I really wanted that WSM;)
 
The BC is better on the WSM's and no body has mentioned wind drift.

On the flip side I have hunted deer for many many years and have yet to take a 300 yard shot.

Under 300 yards BC and retained energy makes .30-06 vs WSM a non issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top