Short mag recoil vs. Standard mag.

[Darkhorse]

How does the recoil of a WSM compare to the regular Magnum round?
A friend bought a M70 in 300WSM and his 16 yr. old daughter has claimed the rifle as hers after shooting it. That made me wonder how it compared to a .300 Win. Mag.
I know some of you own both so I'm just wanting a true comparison.
270WSM and 300WSM are what I'm really interested in.

 

[Anonymous]

This has been debated a bunch since the introduction of the short mags and I've shot both quite a lot.

Mathematically the short mag gets to the same MV with less powder...and less powder zipping out of the muzzle yields less recoil. That was the marketing and that's the physics.

But we're talking a minuscule difference here. Mathematically speaking it's true but factored in to all the other things that effect felt recoil (what you actually perceive, not what math says) it's probably nearly impossible to tell the difference.

IMHO- the .300WSM generally has less "felt" recoil because the rifles chambered in it probably have better rifle fit. My old Ruger 77 in 300WM would kick the snot out of you much more than my Nosler or Tikka .300WSM. But that difference is purely stock fit- not the powder or shape of the case.

 

[DrMike]

Hodgeman nailed the answer. Felt recoil is subjective, whereas recoil is what it is--a physical phenomenon that can be calculated.

 

[jimbires]

here is a chart to help compare . rifle weight and fit means a lot .


http://www.chuckhawks.com/recoil_table.htm

 

[wildgene]

...like they said, "felt recoil" is subjective, but one more factor in the equation is the pressure curve. The pressure spike on the WSM's tends to be much shorter than on the full size magnums, a fast poke as opposed to a big "whump". My .300 WSM 165 & 180gr. loads are only about 50fps slower than a .300 WM load, but they're a lot more comfortable to shoot, even in my 7.3lb Tikka T3 Lite. Same thing w/ my 220gr. .325 WSM load compared to a 225gr. .338 WM, less than 100fps difference in MV, but the recoil in the WSM's is just a lot more manageable...

 

[Vince]

Like everyone has said, perceived recoil is subjective and the stock fit plays an important role.

I have a heavy sniper rifle, bull barrel and all, in .300 Win Mag. Due to the stock fit, recoil pad, and various other things, I'd rather shoot my .338 Win Mag where the stock was cut to fit me. Heck, I prefer shooting the .338 as opposed to my 25-06 for that same reason. So, as noted, it's very subjective.

My $0.02, have the shooter try various rifles with differing lengths of stock to find that which is most comfortable for the shooter and don't be afraid to shoot a youth model either. It's best if they can all be the same caliber so a more fair accurate assessment can be made but that may not be feasible. When you get a stock that really fits you will know it in that a smile will develop on the face and an anticipation of joy will occur.

Vince

 

[Oldtrader3]

The other thing to consider is that the WSM is generally chambered in a shorter rifle with less weight and therefore, since the velocity and powder charge are similar, the WSM will kick more.

 

[LD375]

I found that when I had my Sako in .270wsm the recoil was kind of like a sharp kick, and with more muzzle jump as opposed to the standard magnums, no big deal, but that's what I found.

Lou

 

[JD338]

My built in recoil estimator (my shoulder) doesn't really see a difference between the 300 WM and the 300 WSM.
As mentioned, proper stock fit and a good recoil pad will make a big difference.

JD338

 

[SJB358]

I can't really notice the difference. I shoot my 7mm Rem Mag and 7mm WSM side by side a bunch. Couldn't tell the difference if I was blindfolded. I will say my 270WSM feels pretty gentle, just about like my 264, but then again, they are virtually the same loads between the two of them..

I believe as the others said, the fit of the rifle makes or breaks them more than the actual cartridge.