statjunk

If you were in the market for a 300 which would you choose?

I look at the trajectory and there doesn't seem to be a lot of difference at 180 gr. Am I looking at the wrong statistics?

Tom

bigcountry

I used to say WM but lately, I have found it hard to get the WSM to shoot bad. I love short actions. Less powder almost as good performer. seems very popular.

Cottoneye Joe

The .300 WM seems to have a slight edge over the .300 WSM, on paper. In practice, I don't think the difference would be noticable, except the WSM would have slightly less recoil. If you reload, you would use less powder for the WSM, giving a slight savings over time. The WM is belted, and as such, headspaces on the belt, as opposed to the WSM which headspaces on the shoulder, making it inherently more accurate, but again in practice, I doubt the difference would be noticable to the average shooter.

If I were to go out and buy one of the two today, I would choose the WM, but only because I am more of a traditionalist. But that's what it all boils down to, is personal choice. One really isn't all that much better than the other.

James B

I would pick the WSM hands down. You just as well have the short action. Feeding problems seem to have been taken care of. Performance wise there isn't enough difference to make any difference on North American game. There isn't enough difference in any of the 300 Mags to give much of an edge to any over the other. IMO.

Superpig

If you aren't a handloader I would say go with the WSM. If you do handload the WM will achieve more velocity than is capable of the WSM case. I'm a believer that the WSM needs a barrel of 24" and the WM benefits from a 26" tube. So be careful when choosing a rifle such as the Browning A Bolt it's offered with a 23" barrel in the WSM and the WM comes with a 26" tube. In the Winchester line the WSM comes with a 24" and the WM with a 26". If you're looking to Savage they provide both with 24" tubes. There are many others but I would say these are the most populare American made rifles. I left out Ruger because looking throuht their catalog it appears they only put 22" barrels on their WSM rifles. Also, of note if you are looking for a light easy to carry rifle the A-Bolt is the way to go and you will have to live with the velocity loss of the 23" barrel. I do believe both rounds are capable of taking all but the largest bears on the NA continent. For most people you won't be able to tell the difference in the two. Best of luck on whichever you decide to buy!!!!!

SHoNUFF

i was in same situation about 6months ago i went with the WSM i love it. To me it shoots better than my buddys 300WM

Gundigest

A year ago I decided to get a Ruger 77 MKII in 300 WSM, and I love it. It will put my 180gr and 150gr handloads in a .5" group at 100 yards. If you are going to use 180gr or less most of the time I would say go with the WSM. If you want it for the heavy bullets over 180gr the WM will have a bit more case capacity and faster velocities. I went with the WSM because I wanted a short action magnum with no belt and a 180gr X bullet will kill anything in North America and then some.

brother hal

i had a wm and now have a wsm. what one will do, the other will do equally well.

trailer

I just love the WSM. I wouldn’t know how they compare but would go with the 300 WSM because of the short action.

bigbulls

For me the WSM would and did win over the standard mag.

I chose it because it uses shorter action and it uses a bottle neck caase instead of a belted case....... Belted cases are absolutely worthless on cartridges that have a pronounced shoulder.

The standard magnum will have an advantage with bullets larger than 180 grains but with todays bullets there is absolutely no reason to use a bullet weighing more than 180 grains in a 30 caliber rifle so IMHO this argument is pretty much moot.