ORIGINAL: bigcountry
ORIGINAL: SwampCollie
I think the recoil of the WSM is a little bit less. The of course, depends a lot on the individual gun, cut of the stock, type of recoil pad etc etc. I have shot Browning A-Bolts in both, and thought the WSM was a quicker sharp kick, while the WindBag was a longer whallop.
And the WM should have a bit more kick. It does have more case capacity. And powder wieght is a huge contribution to kick even if both bullets from both guns are coming out the same velocity.
I love the WSM line. Don't get me wrong. Just know,it will not keepup with awinmag. At least thetwo I own. And I too notice the WSM's seem to be easier to work up a load for. Little more dynamic.
Big;
Just a few ?'s for you here. Not meant as arguements at all, just ?'s for my own clarification.
The performance of the WSM is nearly that of the WM, but, as you said the WM has a greater capacity. A quick search tells me the WSM has 80.4gr (water) and the WM 87.0gr (water). Thats quite a bit of difference isn't it? Why is it that the WSM is so close in performace to the WM when the capacity is (apparently) pretty drastically different? Is it just because the WSM is more effiecient? Something with the wider body of the shell or the like?