The 300 WSM ??

J

jrhilde

New member
Maybe some of you can enlighten me--- I had a vanguard chambered in 300wsm, a little easier to shoot than the full length Winchester 300 magnums and by far the most accurate rifle I've ever owned---also had a beautiful Rem 700 chambered in the 300 short mag---now as I go thru Buds looking for a new rifle, I see nothing chambered for the WSM---did I miss a great caliber dropped due to lack of interest? What happened ??
Is anyone still chambering for this round ? John
 
Savage winchester browning cz sako and tikka all still make rifles chamberd in 300wsm. I dont think the cartridge is going away anytime soon.
 
Winchester and Browning offer the round and probably always will. A little history. Rick Jamison, a gunwriter, developed the 300 Jamison wildcat cartridge and tried to sell the idea to Winchester who declined. Shortly thereafter they came out with the 300 WSM. Jamison sued claiming they stole his idea and won a settlement.

The WSM's were on their way to becoming a huge success, but after the lawsuit Jamison gets a royalty on every rifle and box of ammo sold for a period of years. Gun manufacturers must either make less profit on each rifle sold, or charge more in order to pay Jamison. After the suit it inspired Ruger to drop the WSM's and develop their similar Ruger Compact Magnums. Remington did the same with the Short action Ultra mags.

The WSM's are still the best of the bunch and a darn fine cartridge. You get 99% of the speed of 300 WM, but with about 20% less powder and recoil. You basically get 300 WM performance in a 308 size package with 30-06 recoil.

Once the settlement is over and rifles can be made with no royalties paid I think the round will become mainstream. Actually the 270 WSM and 300 WSM are doing right well considering. Most of the others are pretty much dead.
 
Even if you get 99% of the velocity with a 20% reduction in powder, you won't get a 20% reduction in recoil, more like 5%. The mass of the bullet and the velocity are still the same, and they are the major contributors to recoil. Just changing from one powder to another can sometimes cut the weight of the powder charge by 20%. For instance compare the maximum load for a 160 grain bullet in the Rem 7mm mag of 79 grains of H780 with the maximum load of Reloader 22 of 65 grains. Frankly I have never noticed the difference. Not knocking short magnums as they work through short actions which has its advantages, but reduction in recoil is mostly in the mind of the user. Nothing new either. Case in point the 350 Rem mag. At least they did away with an unnecessary belt this time.
 
Plug in the numbers yourself

http://www.handloads.com/calc/recoil.asp

These are actual loads that I've used or are still using. Not top end, I can get another 100 fps out of either, but the ones that proved to be the best combo of speed and accuracy. It is possible to play around with various load combos and make the end result come out any way you want it to. I tried not to do that by selecting loads that I've actually used and have worked for me.


300 WM 180 gr @ 3000 fps with 75 gr powder in an 8 lb rifle
27.95 ft lbs recoil

300 WSM 180 gr @ 2950 fps with 64 gr powder in an 8 lb rifle
24.53 ft lbs recoil

OK, so it's about 14% less recoil and about 14% less powder and 1.7% less speed. Pretty close for estimating off the top of my head.

For reference my 8 lb 30-06 shooting 180's @ 2800 fps would generate about 22 ft lbs of recoil.

The 300 WSM is pretty efficient as to powder and recoil. It comes close enough to 300 WM to not matter with recoil about 1/2 way between 30-06 and 300 WM.

This is exactly what Jamison was attempting to achieve when he developed the round. The real purpose was to be able to package it in a lighter, trimmer rifle without excessive recoil. In the real world most 300 WM's would be about 9 lbs instead of 8 lbs. At that weight difference you wouldn't notice any difference. My 300 WSM weighs 6.5 lbs, about 7.5 lbs ready to hunt. I wouldn't want to shoot a 300 WM in a rifle that light.
 
I have a 300 WSM and rarely ever shoot it. I usually hunt with one of my two 7WSM's. I like the .270WSM, but it is still anemic compared to my .270WBY.
 
Correct, there are no free lunches in rifle ballistics. To get a velocity in a certain projectile in a certain barrel length, you have to expend the energy to attain that velocity. Expending the energy requires burning the powder.
 
Its amazing how alot of ppl want to squeeze ever ft/s ot the expense of inconsistency..I say....FIND THE LOAD THAT YIELDS THE MOST CONSISTEN VELOCITIES INRELATION TO STANDARD DEVIATION AND TIGHT GROUPING...everything else is mastering the beast ( enviromental, physical and shooter)...often times this magical zone tends to reveal itself at lower velocities with extreme consistency and accuracy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top