300 WSM

[bugledemin]

Just bought the model 70 classic in 300 WSM is the hype about this round for real haven't shot it yet, let me know what you guys think. Also heard a rumor that people are smokin barrels with this round any truth to this.

 

[muzz]

I like mine, I havent noticed or heard anything about smokin the barrels. Just when you break it in and shoot your groups wait a 2 minute period between shots. If the barrel is hot you got a good chance of ruining the barrel. I have the stainless model 70 and have put about 200 rounds thru it with the break in and working up loads for it.

 

[warbird]

Anybody telling you this round is smoking barrels is BSing you.
The round is actually slightly slower than the regular 300 win mag.
I own one as a back up gun and it shoots really well for a factory gun,I had a muzzle break and a trigger replacement done to mine and is definately noticable over the factory stuff.
The real story is the rifle is lighter than the full size 300 win mag due to the action is shorter end of story.As far as acuracy there is not much differance to the full size, the necking down really did not make a miracle cartridge out of the 300 wsm but if it's lighter and still packs a punch then the public will buy them.
thats the fact jack

 

[RLH]

i think warbird is right. the .300 short mag ain't been out long enough for anybody to shoot one enough to wear out a barrel. it's next to impossible to burn up any .30 cal. barrel. the .300 short mag is one i don't get. it won't even equal a .300 win mag. not to say it's a bad gun or caliber, i just don't understand all the hype. i've got several thousand rounds through a model 70 .300 win mag, and it doesn't show any signs of erosion. i shoot the hell out of it and it doesn't get cleaned that often either. sometimes i'll shoot it 100 times in the matter of a couple hours. only gun i've ever burned up a barrel in is a .264 win mag.

 

[muzz]

What you mean the short mag won't equal a 300 win mag? I think your nuts. My 300WSM has passed the win mag in my tests, Not much but it has past it. I am not going to get in a pissin match over the two great calibers. If you like it shoot it, and shoot it well. All you need to know! I don't see any wear in my throat or barrel on my WSM that is any different than any other gun. Good luck.

 

[RLH]

all the factory balistics i've seen show the short mag to be a little slower than the win mag. less velocity with the same weight bullet means it ain't quite as hot to me. i can't figure out why they wanted to make a basic clone of the .300 win mag. as far as bein' nuts, caliber preference ain't got nothin' to do with it. in my opinion, unless you're bettering something by more than a couple hundred FPS at least, it's basically a waste of time. take all the .300's, win, short, norma, h&h, weatherby, etc. and there ain't enough difference in em to matter much. not until you get into the warbird and .30/.378 class do you get enough difference to matter a lot. i'll shoot my .270 against anyone with anything.

 

[dryflyelk]

The 300 wsm was created to equal or surpass the performace of the regualar 300 with a short action. The short action is the key. It enables you to have a lighter rifle and a quicker bolt throw. The powder column in the 300 wsm is also more effecient, so in theory, the wsm could be a more accurate cartrige.
There is no significant advantage in ballistics one over the other. It is just style and preference. I have seen many reports, most saying they are about even. I read all the info and bought the browning 300 wsm stainless stalker and I love it. Either way, you won't go wrong. I would seriously look at the .270 wsm as well. That is a great one.

 

[m1fan]

I have a Howa 300 WSM in a Boyd thumbhole laminate. I like the caliber and was in the market for a new rifle so the 300 WSM got the nod. I hung out at www.shortmags.org to glean some valuable information. Check it out! Seems like the best buy going is the Winchester Super Shadow from Walmart. With a mounted scope, it goes for $389.