What's up with Winchester's WSSM

BareBack Jack · 05-27-2004, 10:35 AM

I realy don't see the difrence of these "Super Short Magnums",I mean other than a lighter gun or short action is that enough to keep them around?
I look at the 243 WSSM and see the 6mm Rem performance.The .223 WSSM has 22-250 preformance all over it.

Why did Winchester put a .25 cal cartrige in the line up,if the wanted to make sparks fly,why not load it on the WSM casing,and make a cartrige that has Magnum potential!
I'm just arguing for sake of arguing on this,I mean I have two 300 WSM and think they are the cat's meow.
I was just hoping they would have made a 25 WSM not a 25 WSSM Super Dud.

oldelkhunter · 05-27-2004, 10:56 AM

Bareback you'll get no argument with me over this. I agree with you They should have put the 25 on the WSM anything else is STUPID. The whole thing WSSM is really not necessary not with a good 243 or 22-250/220 swift..

neweboarhunter · 05-27-2004, 11:25 AM

I see no need for the WSSM family of cartridges. As well as the .204 Ruger. I do however like the WSM line up, adding the .25 to it would have been good, better would have been a 6.5 WSM. So why would anyone buy the new .223 WSSM over the .22-.250, .220 swift? Probably because of the "magic" words ---short magnum, so a supper short magnum must be even better [8D]

. As hunters and shooters we sometimes forget that the real goal of firearms manufactures is not to make something useful, but something that sells in quanity. Don't forget also they always are looking for the next best thing. On the other hand if it brings new shooters and hunters to the sport, then it is all good.