Atleast they could of made have something different, I was shocked to see it in a WSSM. That makes no sense

The shorter action is a stiffer action in that it won't flex as much as a long action when fired . In theroy this makes a more accurate gun. In practice very few can shoot well enough to take advantage of this small gain in potential accuracy. The whole short Magnum fad is just a lot of phooey . You would think they were trying to sell new guns and ammo . Do you think?

I know this is the "common knowledge" of bolt action receivers, but I've never seen any substancial proof that this is the case. I for one am not at all convinced that this is true to any measurable degree. I strongly suspect that this is a "flat Earth" theory, having been repeated enough times without rebuttal to be assumed as fact.

I would love to see someone build two rifles to identical tolerances with identical barrels cut with the same reamer, one built on a short and the other on a long action and really see if there is any measurable difference in accuracy.

Mike

I had the chane to talk to on of the Cheif desingers of the WSM and the WSSM revolution this spring.
I asked him this same question why the 25 WSSM?
His answer was they wanted a round that would be more favaroble to the varmit shooters,yet be a true cross-over round.
I told him we already had one and it is called the 25-06 Rem.,.243 Win,6mm,257 Rob...ect.
Then he also added that alot of this was caused by the hole .223 WSSM and .243 WSSM,so they thought they would add the .25.
I looked at him a said if you realy wanted to make the head lines why not the .25 WSM.
He said liability and barrel life would be so short that it would not be economical.I called BS cause the .257 Weatherby has been pushing those levles for years.
Then I said what about .260 WSM,he said it would be to close to their pet the 270 WSM and they already had loads coming out for the .270.
By this time he had grown tired of my ? and went back fishing and I left more fustrated cause I realy wanted a .25 WSM.
I tink the .25 WSSM will be the first to die IMHO.BBJ

I love short actions and love the option for a WSM. I find them so easy to load up for. But I am not a big fan of any of the WSSM. Getting into the territory of hard to chamber. Even with Winchesters new CRPF.

Hey, I am not complaining. Another choice for us hunters. Can't beat it.

bareback I think the whole lot of WSSM will die ..and yes that 25wsm would be a good one..barrel burner my bass

Why do you think the 25 WSM will be an improvement oldelk? What would be the difference with 25-06?

I guess I'm not that familiar with the whole WSM advantages/disadvantages...

it would probably be close to a 257 Weatherby

Ok here is the ballistics for a .257 Weatherby
100 gr SP(nosler)
Muzzle 3600 FPS 400 yds 2500 FPS
Tra. @ 100 yds 1.5+ 400 YDS -7.7

Barnes X 115
Muzzle FPS 3400 400 yds 2500
Ft/lbs 2950 400yds 1600
Tra. @ 100yds 1.5+ 400yds 8.1-
Now here is the 25-06 Rem(I love this round)
100gr BLT/Nos
Muzzle 2990 400yds 2350
Ft/lbs
Muzzle 2290 400yds 2350
Tra.
100yds +1.2 400yds 17.0-

115 Nolser(No barnes 3-shok yet)
Muzle
2990 Fps 400yds 2140 fps
Ft/lbs
2280@M 400yds 1274
Tra.
1.5+ @ 100 yds 400yds 19.8-
Now I shoot alot of antelope and deer here in the BIG SKY state and 10 inches of drop @ 400yds is a lot and if I could have a gun the would do that,and not be a weatherby I would have it plated in gold.It would still be cheaper than the ALMIGHTY . 257 Weatherby.
You make the choice,I mean the 25 WSSM lame duck.If I can't have the 257 W. I'll keep my 25-06's.
BBJ

The whole WSM and WSSM thing is bunk. With the exception to the .300 and .270. And thats because people keep buying them. Real world ballistics in the .270 don't show as much gain as some belive. And downrange, anything that gets shot with either a .270 or the WSM won't know the difference. But the numbers look good on paper, so what the heck?