300 win mag vs. 300 wsm

[Albertahunter]

This is my first post here. Excellent site. Currently Im shooting a rem sendaro in 25-06 with 115 gr bt's around 3200 fps. I love the gun but its a heavy sucker to pack, especially sheep hunting. I am looking at getting a 300 win mag or 300 wsm. A big part of it is going to come down to recoil. I sold my 338 win sporter mag and got into my 25-06 sendaro. No recoil and no flinch. Comparing the 300's, what one has less recoil, mag or wsm? I plan on shooting 165 gr or 168 bt's. Should be a flat shooter. Anyone out there that has put some shooting time in with both rifles. Bye the way, got my first sheep this year, with my old man along.

 

[rick smith]

In spite of what has been said in the gun rags, the win has more velocity than the WSM. The only advantage I see with the WSM is it can be used in a short action. I have both and the WSM is not more accurate nor is it as fast as the win. I think either will work in your application. Kick is a relative thing, how the rifle fits you has about as much to do with recoil as caliber. I can't tell the difference between the two.
Welcome to the board.Rick.

 

[R Flowers]

I pretty much concur with what Rick said above.

Except that I have chronographed a number of 300 Win Mags and only one 300 WSM. There just was not any difference in them. I work mostly with 180 grain bullets and either cartridge will safely shoot a 180 grain bullet at 3050 fps give or take a little. I have found 180 grain bullets at that speed to be very accurate in either caliber.

In regard to recoil, the hype is that the WSM will kick less. I cannot say that I could tell any difference, personally.

I would consider the 300WSM if you are interested in hunting sheep with the rifle. A short action would be an advantage, I would think. (Hauling it all over those mountains.)

However, if sheep were my primary game hunted with the rifle and I was concerned about recoil, I would not buy a 300 magnum anyway. I would opt for the 270 WSM or the 7mm WSM. I have friends who own both and the model 70 Winchesters they are chambered in carry well and shoot good groups. If you are looking for an all around gun I would tend to go with the 7mm version just for the heavier bullets if you wanted to hunt something like elk or moose.

Do not misunderstand, I really like 300 magnums, but for a sheep rifle I just do not think they are necessary. For an all around gun, they are great!

Fun trying to decide what to buy, isn't it?

 

[Albertahunter]

Thanks for the info. It is going to be an all around gun. From whitetail to moose. I have been looking for a while and think I am going to go with the 300 win mag in rem xcr or a tikka t3. There is a lot of good things said about both rifles. Just waiting for my scope to show up so I can run down pick up the gun, rings and bases. Again thanks.

 

[longwinters]

One other thing with the short mags is that if you are going to hunt with a heavier bullet, than 180 gn, you lose case capactiy.

Long

 

[Reloder28]

Alberta,

go to www.shortmags.org

You'll find good stuff there. I am neither a proponent or opponent of either cartridge. Were I to make an objective choice, it would be the 300 Winchester Magnum. I personally do not like long action rounds but one thing I have come to terms with: Long Cartridge is long on performance, Short Cartridge is short on performance. That's just the cold hard facts.

I love short case rounds such as the 7-08, 284 & 7mm Wsm. However, the fact is, you cannot get 3200 fps with a 160 gr 7mm bullet from any of these. I want my 160's pushing 3200 fps and this is why I shoot a 7mm Weatherby. With the Weatherby I can hit any velocity range of the lesser rounds or I can kick it up to "Top Fuel" high octane lead.

 

[sewwhat89]

I am shooting a pair of 300 RSAUMs and a 300WM. I have shot my Model 7 next to a 300 WSM Browning Titanium, and the Model 7 outperformed the Titanium by about 50 fps with similar weight bullets (175 SMK in Model 7 and 180 NBT in WSM).

HOWEVER, with 165s the WSM will outpace my Model 7, but my Sendero shoots 165s at 3241 with RP factory rounds, 9 rounds 0.79" @ 100 yd. My 300 WM, 24 5/8" Sako, shoots 165 NBTs at 3230 fps (MAX in my gun).

Bottom line, compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges . . . whichever chamber you pick, the one with the longer barrel will most likely shoot the fastest. That being said, day-in and day-out, performance at any altitude, in any weather will be the following: 1) 300 WM 2) 300 WSM 3) 300 RSAUM. For example, 190 Berger VLDs in all three with max loads I have or have seen tested; 300 WM 3091 fps; 300 WSM 2870 fps; 300 RSAUM 2819 fps.

Those are the facts I have proved to myself over the last 3 years playing with these rounds.

 

[Blaine]

One thing about the new short mag's to consider......The shorter action cannot possibly have less felt recoil than the long actions, despite the hype. Short action = less weight = more felt recoil. The hype is purely to sell new rifles. I have shot both my 300 winnie and the 300 wsm (a cousin's) quite a bit and I can tell you that the velocity and accuracy is better with my winnie. Both rifles have the same recoil pad (limb saver) and I feel that the recoil is more with the WSM. Not exactly a scientific test, but that's my opinion and I'm stickin' to it. :lol:

Blaine

 

[tapehoser]

I was never under the impression that they advertised the short mags as having less recoil. I owned a Ruger M77 MKII in 300 WSM and it kicked like a mule on steroids.

The hype that I heard was that the quicker, more uniform burn made it great for accuracy. Easier to accurize a load for 300 WSM than the long mags.

Never got a chance to prove it though.....sold the gun.

 

[NTM]

The main differance that I have heard is that the 300 mag will shoot heavier bullets-ie over 180gr-better than the wsm.

 

[moreloader]

I have shot both and in my case the WSM had less recoil and better accuracy, however I believe this is gun to gun and has little to do with the caliber. I will say that the WSM uses approximately 10% less powder for the same velocity. This will make the cartrigue more consistant and reduce recoil. But, again it would be almost impossible to compare the two. To begin with most 300 win have 26 inch barrells and WSM have 24 in Winchester and Browning, and 22 inch in Rugers. I would never recomend the WSM in anything shorter than 24 as you can really lose velocity.

 

[Richracer1]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but read some where that you shouldn't shoot the 200gn or larger bullets in the 300WSM.

 

[moreloader]

there is now warning against using 200g bullets. What you are refering to are reccomendations in the loading manual that you lose performance with heavier bullets. It is true that the WSM is outran by the Win in 200g bullets due to the bullet being shoved too far into the case. All of the loading manuals show this cartrige loaded for 200 or 220g bullets. You just lose a lot of velocity. 2900 fps range with 200g is about all you can do.

 

[Savage99]

All bullets take up powder space in all cartridges! In fact it's the 300 WM that can't handle long bullets. Just look at the caution in the Noser manual.

I prefer cartridges without belts for postitive headspacing, long case life and common sense.

Get what you want but I prefer the WSM's over the 300 WM.

It's true that WW claimed that the WSM's had less recoil. Of course they could have less recoil if the pressures were higher.

Another thing is that cartridges overlap in ablility. What counts more is the rifle. I would select the rifle type and size first and then take whatever reasonable cartridge that was available.

 

[big rifle man]

I have shot and chronographed both the 300win mag and the 300 wsm with 165 and 180 grain bullets and based on the design of the bullets you are shooting you can get a bit of variance in velocity. I have shot the 700 Sendero and the 8400 Kimber Montana and found that the Kimber is a better shooter. The Kimber is also much lighter and a pleasure to carry up and down mountains in Colorado. By the way the 165Grain Nosler Partition works great for Elk and gives me 3100FPS with IMR483l and no signs of pressure.

 

[roysclockgun]

Albertahunter wrote: "I love the gun but its a heavy sucker to pack, especially sheep hunting." and later in the post: "A big part of it is going to come down to recoil."

The two issues above are very important, as you cannot get a really lightweight rifle in a .30cal. Magnum caliber and not expect recoil that may be hard to handle. You may go to special stocks, rccoil pads and muzzle brakes and reduce the recoil to acceptable levels, which is what I would do.
About comparing 300WM against 300WSM, for me it is a no-brainer. The 300WM is so much more versatile as a hunting rifle, especially for those of us who hand load our cartridges.
The only advantage offered by the 300WSM, is in that case of someone wanting and ultra-light rilfe in a .30cal. Mag caliber and is after shaving off every possible ounce of weight. Other then the weight factor, 300WSM has nothing to offer over the 300WM.