7mm WSM VS 7mm rem mag
03-16-2011, 07:50 AM
#31
Fork Horn
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Southeastern PA
Posts: 136
Much Ado About Nothing
I never saw the value of the short magnums. It was just re-inventing the wheel. The ballistics I have seen are not different enought to mention and the so called "weight savings" is minimal.
It simply gave the gun manufacturers something new to sell. If you did not have the parent cartridge, one was as good as the other in a new rifle. For those that had the parent cartridge, there was nothing to be gained by buying one. The short action myth is just that. A couple of ounces? Who cares?
In light of the cost of ammunition, I see the short magnums disappearing in favor of the original cartiridges. Why pay more for nothing?
It simply gave the gun manufacturers something new to sell. If you did not have the parent cartridge, one was as good as the other in a new rifle. For those that had the parent cartridge, there was nothing to be gained by buying one. The short action myth is just that. A couple of ounces? Who cares?
In light of the cost of ammunition, I see the short magnums disappearing in favor of the original cartiridges. Why pay more for nothing?
03-16-2011, 09:13 PM
#33
Fork Horn
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Slippery Rock, Pa.
Posts: 393
I never saw the value of the short magnums. It was just re-inventing the wheel. The ballistics I have seen are not different enought to mention and the so called "weight savings" is minimal.
It simply gave the gun manufacturers something new to sell. If you did not have the parent cartridge, one was as good as the other in a new rifle. For those that had the parent cartridge, there was nothing to be gained by buying one. The short action myth is just that. A couple of ounces? Who cares?
In light of the cost of ammunition, I see the short magnums disappearing in favor of the original cartiridges. Why pay more for nothing?
It simply gave the gun manufacturers something new to sell. If you did not have the parent cartridge, one was as good as the other in a new rifle. For those that had the parent cartridge, there was nothing to be gained by buying one. The short action myth is just that. A couple of ounces? Who cares?
In light of the cost of ammunition, I see the short magnums disappearing in favor of the original cartiridges. Why pay more for nothing?
03-17-2011, 07:21 AM
#35
Fork Horn
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Southeastern PA
Posts: 136
Stapher1,
There is no comparison. The .308 was and is a military round and, as such, was bound to have an extended life in that role and thereafter as a surplus round. While is is not too different on ballistics to the 30-06, it has a life of it's own. The short magnums differ in minimal ways from the original round and cost much more. Where is the appeal?
Eventually, people who own the short rounds will fade waway and new buyers will see the wisdom of sticking with the parent round. You will see many inexpensive short magnum rifles on gun shops racks looking for new owners.
There is nothing wrong with the short magnum rounds. They just do not provide any special reason to buy them. I now see them an attempt to boost rifle sales.
If someone wants one, great but, they must be willing to pay more for the ammo and accept less availability as time goes on.
There is no comparison. The .308 was and is a military round and, as such, was bound to have an extended life in that role and thereafter as a surplus round. While is is not too different on ballistics to the 30-06, it has a life of it's own. The short magnums differ in minimal ways from the original round and cost much more. Where is the appeal?
Eventually, people who own the short rounds will fade waway and new buyers will see the wisdom of sticking with the parent round. You will see many inexpensive short magnum rifles on gun shops racks looking for new owners.
There is nothing wrong with the short magnum rounds. They just do not provide any special reason to buy them. I now see them an attempt to boost rifle sales.
If someone wants one, great but, they must be willing to pay more for the ammo and accept less availability as time goes on.
03-17-2011, 10:15 AM
#36
Fork Horn
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Slippery Rock, Pa.
Posts: 393
The short magnums differ in minimal ways from the original round and cost much more. Where is the appeal?
Eventually, people who own the short rounds will fade waway and new buyers will see the wisdom of sticking with the parent round. You will see many inexpensive short magnum rifles on gun shops racks looking for new owners.
There is nothing wrong with the short magnum rounds. They just do not provide any special reason to buy them. I now see them an attempt to boost rifle sales.
If someone wants one, great but, they must be willing to pay more for the ammo and accept less availability as time goes on.
There is nothing wrong with the short magnum rounds. They just do not provide any special reason to buy them. I now see them an attempt to boost rifle sales.
If someone wants one, great but, they must be willing to pay more for the ammo and accept less availability as time goes on.
03-17-2011, 01:15 PM
#37
Fork Horn
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Southeastern PA
Posts: 136
I beg to Differ
So your saying, nobody in the 50's that said there was no need for a 308 win when they got a 30.06. And didn't the 308 replaced the 30.06 as a military round. For the reasons you've just stated.
IF you buy off the shelf...yes, if you reload...no. My ackley cost way more to reload.
After 10yrs and shelves full of used "old" school magnums at my local gun shops and other forums like this that either guys shoot competition or long range hunting with the short mags makes me doubt that. It's not like gun companies are making you get rid of your mag, it's that the short mag is another option if don't already have a magnum. Plus if that many guys were that worried about prices, then the weatherby mags would have disappeared.
IF you buy off the shelf...yes, if you reload...no. My ackley cost way more to reload.
After 10yrs and shelves full of used "old" school magnums at my local gun shops and other forums like this that either guys shoot competition or long range hunting with the short mags makes me doubt that. It's not like gun companies are making you get rid of your mag, it's that the short mag is another option if don't already have a magnum. Plus if that many guys were that worried about prices, then the weatherby mags would have disappeared.
You are correct but, most hunters do not reload.
The .308 replaced the '06 simply to make NATO ammunition common to all members. There was no other "benefit".
Weatherby is different because they have a true speed advantage if you feel that is helpful to you as a hunter.
In the end, some people just have to try the latest thing, or just want one of each or can afford to indulge wims. My postiion is that, if you look at real needs, it is superfluous to have both the parent and short magnum. I would rather spend the money on something entirely different to ad to my collection. Whatever floats your boat.
Last edited by Big Bullets; 03-17-2011 at 01:19 PM. Reason: placement
03-17-2011, 05:34 PM
#38
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,679
That lame argument of "reinventing the wheel", "no need for a new cartridge when the old one works just fine", bla bla bla bla.
If companies weren't constantly coming up with new designs and marketing them we would all still be hunting with flint tipped spears and driving model A's. We wouldn't even have gun powder.
So save that BS argument and be dang glad that we have such a variety of cartridges to choose from and own.
If companies weren't constantly coming up with new designs and marketing them we would all still be hunting with flint tipped spears and driving model A's. We wouldn't even have gun powder.
So save that BS argument and be dang glad that we have such a variety of cartridges to choose from and own.
03-17-2011, 08:21 PM
#39
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location:
Posts: 5,130
".....be dang glad that we have such a variety of cartridges to choose from and own." Bulls
We do & there will be many more to come; and we all choose which we prefer to buy and use !
Some cartridges come into fashion and then a decade (or two) later just fade away.................your call ???
We do & there will be many more to come; and we all choose which we prefer to buy and use !
Some cartridges come into fashion and then a decade (or two) later just fade away.................your call ???
03-18-2011, 05:04 AM
#40
Fork Horn
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Southeastern PA
Posts: 136
Engage the Brain
That lame argument of "reinventing the wheel", "no need for a new cartridge when the old one works just fine", bla bla bla bla.
If companies weren't constantly coming up with new designs and marketing them we would all still be hunting with flint tipped spears and driving model A's. We wouldn't even have gun powder.
So save that BS argument and be dang glad that we have such a variety of cartridges to choose from and own.
If companies weren't constantly coming up with new designs and marketing them we would all still be hunting with flint tipped spears and driving model A's. We wouldn't even have gun powder.
So save that BS argument and be dang glad that we have such a variety of cartridges to choose from and own.
Extending the argument to cars is a specious attempt at making your point. However, since you brought it up........since the mid seventies, car prices are around 7 times higher for the same or less capabililities. Would you like to extend that "benefit" to firearms?
Now, before you get all angry, think about it before you reply. All I ask is some thought.
