Burnie, taking from the responces you got from your high-fence post, I think you should re-enter this one as "Between the .300 WSM and the .300 WM, which one will kill an animal faster?"
That should get some debates going. Hopefully stealthycat and JRW don't end up on opposite sides.
Location: land of the Lilliputians, In the state of insanity
Posts: 24,186
RE: 300 WM vs 300 WSM
stubblejumper
So if I were to buy a new 300 I should go with a WSM. I like the idea of the increased accuracy, but was concerend on losing velocity. I have looked into the factory loads and it seems to be very little difference. Im rather new at reloading (I have been only reloading for my pistols) and just needed some experienced advice.
Thanks.
__________________
kaafir mushrik
Unintended consequences and God have one thing in common: Liberals don’t believe in either of them.
I agree, that for a typical hunter grabbing a out of box rifle, there is no accurace of accuracy in buying either. I do find the WSM's easier to find a load for. I have got 300wins shooting well before. Seemed a tad more finicky. Get either, and you should be happy.
I have a WM and don't know if there would be too much difference between these 2 cartridges. I read recently too either in NA Hunter or American Rifleman that the short mags fat stubby case is more efficient at burning powder. I makes sense I guess. My 300 WM is a Ruger 77 but if I were to buy one today it would probably be a Browning Micro Hunter in 300 WSM.
__________________ PLEASE NOTE THAT DUE TO THE RISING COST IN AMMO PRICES I WILL NO LONGER BE FIRING A WARNING SHOT.
A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take away everything you have.
I'm not as good as I'm gonna get - but I'm better than I used to be. "Life without God is like an unsharpened pencil - it has no point."
Hello, there is not that much diffrence between the two. If you compare the long range trajectory the WSM is a little better. The short fat column burns powder faster simular to the Benchrest and PPC wildcats. Becareful when buying a rifle chambered in short magnums make sure the action is actually shorter. The Brownings are chambered this way. Some of the other rifles manufactures chamber these newer short magnums but do not have any diffrence in bolt throw. You can compare balistics on Winchesters and Remingtons web sites. Compare apples for apples like 180 grain Power point VS pointed soft point(basically the same bullet diffrent brand).
Personaly I would buy a 300 Remington Ultra magnum Not the SAUM(short action ultra mag). The 300 Remington Ultra Mag is more powerful than a 300 Weatherbee mag. Since I reload there is not that much diffrence in the price of the reloads. I own a Ruger Model 77MKI in 300 win mag and love it. I wouldnt buy another 30 cal to replace it But If I bought a new gun today I would buy a newer caliber.(better resale if you ever need to sell)
Remember though if you dont reload then you are going to pay more for this newer caliber ammo. Winchester and Remington want to sell ammo Period. Its residual income for them, you need ammo to shoot. Winchester cornered the market on these short mag rounds. Remington came out with the Ultra Mag first(1998??) and had to hurry up and try to sell SAUM's to catch up with Winchester. Check out the prices on ammo you will see that the short actions and ultra mags cost more.
300 WM vs 300 WSM
