Why? Of what possible use is this cartridge?

Status
Not open for further replies.
O

Ought Six

New member
Why? Of what possible use is this cartridge???

For tactical shooting, the weight saved by a short action over the long action in a non-issue, as tactical boltguns weigh upwards of 10 lbs. For hunting, due to the recoil of the standard .300 WinMag in a 7 pound hunting rifle, shaving half a pound of weight off the rifle is a *bad* thing. Making the rifle a bit shorter and handier is also a non-issue, as the .300 mag calibers are for long range shots in open country, and are almost always found in longer-barreled rifles. As for accuracy, anyone who thinks they have the skill to actually take advantage of the miniscule difference in accuracy between the standard and short .300 WinMags should immediately apply to the US Olympic Shooting Team - or get real. The only venue where this cartridge may have some realistic utility is competitive benchrest shooting, where small differences in accuracy can win matches (for the pros, anyways). Otherwise, this caliber is a solution in search of a problem. But there's always many who are dying to have the latest and greatest, what sense it may make or what real utility it may have not being an issue even considered. The .300 Remington UltraMag is a case in point. For this reason, the new .300 WinShortMag will probably sell like hotcakes - until a new latest and greatest caliber comes along.
 
Above post meant to be a response on another thread...

Sorry, I meant to post this under the '.300 Win Short Mag' thread. Since I can't edit or delete my own posts (why, I don't know), it'll have to remain here.
 
It's true you can't delete your own posts, but why do you say you can't edit them?

If you want to, you can copy your response and paste it in the thread where you wanted it. I'm sure one of the Rifle moderators will be glad to delete this thread after you've done that.
 
FWIW, I agree

There's actually a pretty good argument that the .300 WinMag itself is a solution in search of a problem. It's a popular round (I always get a kick out of the guys traipsing around the woods with an extra 4 pounds of rifle they don't need hunting whitetails in heavy brush with the latest "Ultramag") but does it really do anything that the .308 or '06 can't at reasonable yardages? Out past 600 yds I can see the advantages, but at 300?
 
Let's see. The original question is "Of what possible use is this cartridge? Why to bring your hard earned cash into USRAC's (IE the French's) coffers. let's face it, there is always someone who wants the lastest whatever "whizbang that comes out.
About the only real used I can see for a round like that is someone who is way out yonder in the boonies who needs (wants) the most potent package he can carry without breaking his back and arches down.
I have a 7.5 pound .300 Win. Mag. now, and it belts me enough as it is. I sure don't want one that's a pound lighter. I'm not that masochistic. :)
Paul B.
 
We can let both threads run, or Ought Six can repost and I'll lock this one, with a cross-reference...

The general thoughts I've been reading from the benchrest and long-range shooters here are close to unanimous that the short actions contribute to accuracy, because of stiffness. There ain't no doubt in my mind that shorter is stiffer, be it soda straws, rifle barrels, or rifle actions. They are all tubular, right?

As far as weight, sure, a light rifle will hammer you on the bench rest. Once you have your sight-in work done, how often are you going to shoot at game requiring the power of a .300 Mag? Once or twice a year? Maybe a couple more, if you're rich, lucky, or a sure-nuff big-game devotee?

If you want that sort of oomph for prairie dogs and coyotes, build another gun in the 10-pound class.

Nuff fer now,

Art
 
Short actions do tend to be stiffer. Plus, the "short & fat" cartridges tend to be more inherently accurate. It's a matter of powder efficiency, etc. I suspect that the only reason the 6PPC is still running better than the shortened 6BR is the case web design.

FWIW, I shoot benchrest. If long actions were better, or even the same, folks would be using 'em.

That said, if I was gonna meet a bear close up in the woods, and had to choose between a WSM and WinMag, I'd pick the WinMag, since the longer and skinnier cartridge will feed more reliably from a magazine.
 
All good points Ought Six. My only consideration is the short action. Easier to cycle the bolt smartly after the shot.

I'm no rifle expert. I know nothing about "head space" or why a shorter/fatter cartridge might be slightly more accurate, or much else, for that matter. If I can shoot a .300 Win. Mag. and be able to cycle the bolt faster, that's enough for me.

I'm usually the first to bring up the "answer in search of a question" argument. Did it for the .40 S&W, still do. It's all marketing. Once the market is saturated with a particular gun/calibre, manufacturers need new products to make more money.

I still like the .300 WSM.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top