I think the jury will be out for a long time on the .325 WSM. I, for one, would probably choose a .338 Win Mag over the .325 WSM if given the choice. They both are ballistcally similar, but the .338 handles even heavier bullets and makes a bigger hole.
I am a bit baffled myself. The 338 win mag is pretty well established yet it won't tear your shoulder off, either. With all these new introductions, I can't help but wonder how many will be orphans soon......
What they said
And, they should have called it the 320WSM. I too, don't see much
in this short mag. phenom., but then I'd be happy if all we had were the 30-30, 45-70,
270Win., 7x57, 30-06, 308Win., 358Win., 35Whelen, and the 375H&H. Oh yeah, and the 22LR, and 22WMR. Also, the 243Win. for varmints
All this stuff reminds me of something Jack O'Conner once wrote: " Nine-day wonders in the way of cartridges come and go. One year rifle nuts are in a lather about one caliber;
the next year they are swooning about something else. ...... The peasants may be conned by every pitchman that introduces a new super magnum, but the members of the
congnoscenti stick with the classic calibers."
From "The Hunting Rifle" (pg.66)
What's this "8mm" going to do that you can't do with a 30-06 loaded with 200gr. bullets, or even a 338Win.Mag.? Ok, shorter action? - whoopie! Makes no sense to me.
Maybe I'm just too old fashioned - or just too old
