Armory Sponsor
Posted: 11/3/2004 4:57:16 AM EDT
|
Does anyone else feel as though this round is an answer to a problem that has yet to exist? The only benifit I would see is for youth/ womens models shortening up the LOP. Although it does alow some hotter loads in the AR10 type rifles. But I don't see what it does in over the standard bolt guns. Okay, I'm done with my rant Polytech |
|
Every ten years or so the firearms industry has to invent something new so they can sell guns to the people who just have to have the latest whizz bang. This is how they stay in business. Modern hunting rifles last virtually forever so to move guns they have to come up with something new and different. Like short mags. Or worse yet the ultra mags. Encouraging hunters to get bigger and more powerful calibers just encourages them to take shots they have no busy trying. While the cartridge may well be effective at 400 yards damn few hunters have any business taking such a shot. So yes, an ingenius answer to a question no one asked. |
|
I think there are three advantages to the WSMs. First, you get the same performance as the old cartridges with a lighter and shorter rifle because: -The action is shorter. -You may lose less velocity with shorter barrels. 24" seems to be ideal, versus 26" for the old mags. -The cartridge recoils a bit less when the velocity is equal, so you can have a lighter recoil for the same performance. Second, the WSMs will be cheaper in the long run to shoot because: -The cartridge uses less powder to get the same velocity. -The brass will last longer because it is beltless. -The brass will be cheaper (300 WSM is actually cheaper than 300 WM from Cabela's already). Third, the shorts mags are theoretically be more accurate, although I doubt whether this will be detectable in a hunting rifle. So if you can get a slightly lighter and more accurate rifle that is cheaper to shoot and has the same performance, would you really say it is a bad idea? What is the downside? If you handload, you can sometimes get a bit more velocity with the old mags. This, for example, gives the 300 Win Mag a 2-3% velocity advantage over the 300 WSM for if you handload. That is the only drawback I see to the WSMs - if you handload. Most of the WSMs mimic an older belted magnum, but they have come out with some cartridges with interesting ballistics. For instance, the .270 WSM gives you about 200 fps over the old .270 Win and they are coming out with a .325 WSM that will have a better trajectory than the old .338 WM but have roughly the same energy. If you wanted two rifles for North America, rather than just trying to do it all with a .300, those two would make a good pair IMHO. Just like th old .270 and .338 did, but with a little better trajectory. I don't think the old mags are obsolete. They will do the job just as well. I am certainly not going to get rid of my 300 Win Mag. If I were buying a new rifle, I would definately take a look at the WSMs though. |
I really dont see the point of your statement? What is wrong with people selling and buying guns whether it is a new caliber or an old caliber. I would think you would be for sales of any firearm to a legal to own citizen. Why do car makers come out with a HOT new model every year when the ones they made last year are running perfectly fine or why do they have a new gaming machine out every six months or why is it when I buy a computer it's outdated 6 months later. IMHO It's the American way to make things Bigger, Faster, and more advanced. I also have never heard of anyone saying that you should take shots at 400yds, I think your ethics should take place there. Not ragging on you but people have every right to buy what they want when legal to do so |
|
oneshot1kill and Ameshaki: I agree 100% that anyone should be able to buy whatever they want. I mean, the fact still remains, yes, they have to move a product like everyone else, "new, improved and shiney" sells, so why not. But the question was purely about the advantages of WSM calibers if one wanted to upgrade. And I believe there are MANY people out there, using imposters scenario, who ARE getting rid of their .300 WinMags (that they've shot 4 boxes of ammo through  ) because they believe the new .300WSM is a miracle round and bounds ahead of the "old junk" . I find the same trend with the new .17HMR. Especially here in KS, HOW many people have I heard who just "need one of these 'cause the varmints are just getting too bad and the .22 just won't cut it, it's not fast enough". (and of course when they have a .223 sitting in the closet). Well, let me tell you about KS wind and .17grain bullets.... So yeah, the WSM's have some advantages. Imposter did a great job of covering all that  . But I would rate the increased brass life, the slightly more inherent accuracy, and the short action to be the most important. However, I believe these are things that the average "5 shots a year" hunter is not going to give a lick about. However, he'll be the first one at the counter for one. It's his right, but if you ask me, it's a silly decision. My $.02.Overall, PolytechKID, I would strongly agree that the advantages are minimal and do not merit "upgrading" from the old rounds these WSM's replace. Gundraw P.S. imposter, would you be able to explain to me why these cartridges are inherently more accurate? I know they are said to be, BUT, I've never been able to get a clear explanation. First, I know that the headspacing of a standard bottleneck is alledgedly superior to that of a belted mag. However, is some of this from the actual shoulder angle? What do they say makes the WSM's more accurate? I know this advantage is arguable, but I'd like to know their rationale. |
I think the alleged superior accuracy comes from four sources. First, the shorter actions are stiffer and more rigid. Second, the jug-shaped "semi-PPC-type" case provides improved load density and uniformity of burn that occurs in a short, fat case as opposed to a relatively long, skinny case. The theory is that this shorter but wider powder column is more quickly and evenly ignited by the explosion of the primer, yielding more consistent pressure and somewhat improved accuracy compared to a standard length cartridge of the same capacity. Third, one of the negative aspects of a traditional belted case has been the overly generous variations one finds when measuring the width of the belt from maker-to-maker and from lot-to-lot. Headspacing as they do on the shoulder, rather than on a belt, the new short magnums are more uniform in terms of headspace tolerances and as a result, more consistently accurate from shot-to-shot. Fourth, and related to the third point, because the cases are beltless and headspacing can be more precisely controlled, the rifles have almost no freebore. The rifling starts right in front of the chamber’s neck, which not only keeps overall length of cartridges short enough to fit in a 2.05" magazine, but eliminates any worry about inaccuracy resulting from "bullet jump." I don't know if I believe all of that, but those are the explanations I have seen. FWIW. |
|
I think it should be noted that the WSM cartridges are loaded to chamber pressures of 64K. The 300 WSM loaded with 180 Gr. or less bullets comes pretty close to 300 Win Mag loaded to chamber pressures of 53K. If you pickup an older reloading manual (70's vintage) you will see the 300 Win Mag of today is not the 300 Win Mag of yesterday. If you load the two to equal pressures the WSM falls of the pace and it becomes more pronounced as bullet weight increases mainly due to Case Capacity. I think these are very good cartridges as there are a lot of places to go with them if one handloads, the 8mm Remington Magnum is one of my favorite cartridges but I don't care to shoot it much (about 2 boxes at a time is adequate  ) due to recoil. When the 325 WSM shows up it may be just what I'm looking for. |
Armory Sponsor