Any real advantage?

Does the 300WSM provide any real advantage over the 308?

Yeah I suppose it does give and edge in the ballistic department. One might say that it fixes problems we never had. I suppose there is people who require the extra energy at extended ranges.

A cartridge like the 308 has a few advantages over its predecessor the 30-06. The 30-06 has a huge casing given its ballistics. The 308 provides a smaller package for very similiar ballistics. Are you going to notice the action of the rifle is .25" shorter? How about the bulkiness of carrying ten rounds of 30-06 vs 308? Probably not.

There is lots of great calibers to choose from. The most important two aspects IMO are having something you can afford to shoot, and something you can shoot reasonably well.

The less cailbers you own the more you can spend on optics:cool:
 
I'm not a ballistics expert, but I do understand there are as said, basic laws of energy.My 100 plus year old 65x55 swede duplicates pretty close the ballistics to a 270 ,after 100 yards,but with less recoil,but more than makes up for being a bit slower out of the muzzle by having a higher SD,making it one of the most efficient calibers in terms of lethality.Not bad for an 'obsolete'old milsurp cartridge that has survived when many newer ones are relegated to off the shelf status .Some stuff just 'works' in spite of the fickle sentiment of 'must have' ( deer and moose don't seem to know the diference
Please note,I am not downgrading load development or pushing the limits on TARGET SHOOTING....but shooting live animals under field conditions involves more than bench rest shooting where a miss doesn't result in a wounded animal
 
Last edited:
One of the best things about hunting, shooting, fishing, and other outdoor sports is that it isn't about "need" but it's all about "wants!"

Do I need a new gun/fishing rod/accessory/ATV? Maybe not... but I sure do want it! When I go in to that outdoor store I'm super excited to be there... it's not "I have to buy milk..."

I WANT that new gun. And oh boy I can't wait to shoot it!
 
I wouldn't say the 6.5 x55 hits like the hammer of Thor, but the 9.3x57 chucking 285 gr of soft lead does...that's gotta be some serious 'thump'
 
ratherbefishin said:
I wouldn't say the 6.5 x55 hits like the hammer of Thor, but the 9.3x57 chucking 285 gr of soft lead does...that's gotta be some serious 'thump'
Click to expand...

Many serious "Thumpers" are available to hunters who want a bit of extra muscle. I can drive a 220 grain pill out of my 8mm Rem mag at just over 3100.
Do I need that? No. Do I like it in some situations? Absolutely.
I have shot a fairly substantial number of Big Game animals with the 6.5x55 and the 7x57. Theses are both great chamberings, and would do for 90% of
all my hunting. One of my 308 Norma Mags would be fine for 100%.
As one poster stated...it is not about "needs", but rather about "wants" :) :) Dave.
 
Jack O'Connor was not only the most popular gun editor, ever, he also was one of the very most accurate and he was always tempered by common sense in everything he wrote.
In his later years in Outdoor Life he wrote the following. He wrote about many hundreds of game he had either shot, or saw shot, with the 7x57 Mauser.
He also stated how many hundreds of big game he had either shot, or seen shot, with the Remington 7mm Magnum.
He stated that in all reality he could not distinguish any difference in killing power between the two calibres!
He said a good hit with either, was a dead animal and a poor hit with either meant a wounded animal.
 
If the 7x57 was good enough for killing elephants ,I'd say it's pretty much proven itself in the field-if you hold it straight.One factor that seems to be overlooked ,but crucial is not ballistics but can the hunter handle the recoil of that particular rifle in order to shoot accurately?

I recall reading about an Alaska guide who said he much preferred to see a client showing up packing a well used 30/06 than a brand new 338 magnum..
 
Last edited:
ratherbefishin said:
If the 7x57 was good enough for killing elephants ,I'd say it's pretty much proven itself in the field-if you hold it straight.One factor that seems to be overlooked ,but crucial is not ballistics but can the hunter handle the recoil of that particular rifle in order to shoot accurately?

I recall reading about an Alaska guide who said he much preferred to see a client showing up packing a well used 30/06 than a brand new 338 magnum..
Click to expand...

Likewise African PHs are happier to see clients arrive with .375s and tend to shudder at the sight of a .378 or a .460, at least until the client is able to prove he's competent.
 
In the 1960s the Weatherby craze hit rural BC like a winter blizzard.
All the "bigger is better clan," saw it as the salvation for all their troubles, be it killing big game or immediately being long range target shooting champions, plus there was nothing better to prove ones manhood, than, "I use a Weatherby."
At the same time I never saw such terrible flinching from shooters in my life.
We were going into a match of 200, 300 and 500 yards, shooting prone, with iron sighted hunting type rifles. A fellow came with his scope sighted 300 Weatherby. The range master said he couldn't compete, because of the scope, but go ahead and shoot with the fellows.
With his two sighters he got on target pretty good, but on his first shot for score he missed the four foot square target completely!
He struggled through the ten shots for score at 200 yards, making as many clear misses of the entire target, as he did hits, while some of us ordinary mortals were being flagged as having mostly bulls eye hits.
At the end of the 200 yard shooting he slunk off and went home.
Meanwhile a representative from Weatherby came to a sorting goods store in our town. When no one else was present, except the store owners, he stated flatly that at the Weatherby firm they estimate that only 20% of shooters buying their rifles can shoot them properly and the rest shouldn't be using them.
 
I think people who shoot/hunt are prone to seek out perfection...weather its perfect accuracy, perfect weight retention, or perfect bullet penetration. Nothing wrong with trying to perfect the harvest of game. Realistically from my point of view specialization will almost always trump generalization. Example, if you can cater you caliber and round to the exact species you are hunting you'll be better off than someone using one gun for everything. That being said if you can't hit what you are aiming at it becomes irrelevant. There's a lot to be said for the old saying "beware the man with one gun"
I think generally speaking you only"need" a couple different rounds to hunt almost anything in north America but it's nice being able to choose what you want.
 
ratherbefishin said:
I'm looking at the once popular for hunting 30/30,303 ,30/06 ,270 and 65 x55 swede and the new flavour of the month offerings touted as the 'must have' for the well equipped Hunter.Even the run of the mill .22 seems to have survived despite the .17 much touted greater accuracy.

I totally agree that for specialized situations,magnums,now surpassed by 'short' magnums and ultra high velocity cartridges do offer an advantage-that is if the average guy can hold the rifle straight in the field ( sans bench rest) I also agree that modern powders ,load development and bullets are valuable-but are they enough to relegate the old rifles to a permanent place in the gun rack? Seems to me an awfully lot of deer ,moose and elk ended up in the freezer notwithstanding the gun writers articles resulting in guys heading down to the gun store to replace their old stuff....

Makes me wonder if hunters with money burning a hole in their pocket are just like golfers thinking a new club will greatly improve their game....when maybe spending some time shooting in hunting conditions and practicing actual hunting skills might result in more game on the ground( I'm reminded of old Joe Gibault who told me I didn't need a brand new 338 magnum , there was nothing wrong with my 100 year old 65x55 swede for moose,all I needed to do was take my time and put one shot in the lungs and sit down for 20 minutes ,then walk up and chances are my moose would be very dead within 50 yards
Click to expand...

You make it sound like those that are shooting a magnum or newish cartridge don't practice, while every 30-06 owner is at the range every day, finely honing his shooting skills with Ol'Betsy. Laugh2

Nothing is further from the truth. Willingness to practice isn't dictated by the whether your cartridge is new or old, it's all about the individual. FWIW, the guys that I see at the range shooting the most are using .223, 308 and 338 Lapua. End of August is when I see the 30-06/300/270 crowd show up. Obviously there are some exceptions, but the reality is that most hunters don't actually shoot much, regardless of cartridge choice.
 
H4831 said:
In the 1960s the Weatherby craze hit rural BC like a winter blizzard.
All the "bigger is better clan," saw it as the salvation for all their troubles, be it killing big game or immediately being long range target shooting champions, plus there was nothing better to prove ones manhood, than, "I use a Weatherby."
At the same time I never saw such terrible flinching from shooters in my life.
We were going into a match of 200, 300 and 500 yards, shooting prone, with iron sighted hunting type rifles. A fellow came with his scope sighted 300 Weatherby. The range master said he couldn't compete, because of the scope, but go ahead and shoot with the fellows.
With his two sighters he got on target pretty good, but on his first shot for score he missed the four foot square target completely!
He struggled through the ten shots for score at 200 yards, making as many clear misses of the entire target, as he did hits, while some of us ordinary mortals were being flagged as having mostly bulls eye hits.
At the end of the 200 yard shooting he slunk off and went home.
Meanwhile a representative from Weatherby came to a sorting goods store in our town. When no one else was present, except the store owners, he stated flatly that at the Weatherby firm they estimate that only 20% of shooters buying their rifles can shoot them properly and the rest shouldn't be using them.
Click to expand...

Yep that sums it up. Out of all of the folks I see at the range I have yet to see a single person that can shoot a magnum caliber sporting rifle worth a darn. I am sure their is people who can, but if experience has shown anything the vast majority simply can't handle their magnum rifles. I would take a half decent shot with a plain caliber any day.

Also how does one practice with a 300 weatherby when it costs 5$ a shot? I guess reload but even still brass ain't cheap.
 
In the firearms and ammo business? Want to make money? Keep putting the newest and greatest out--- according to them. What's old gets a remake and an ad campaign and a herd of people run off and buy it. Think the newest Big Bang caliber is all that and a bag more, dig out some ballistic charts. If some of the hundred plus year old calibers,like the 30/06 ,came out to day there'd be a line up to buy firearms chambered in it. Some really good products have come out over the years but some of it's smoke and mirrors. Buy with your head not your wallet.
 
There is always a new rifle, old rifle, new bullet, Old bullet, new scope, and on and on. If people think its about money then its really nor their sport. Try knitting instead, i'm sure it will be cheaper.
 
coleman1495 said:
Yep that sums it up. Out of all of the folks I see at the range I have yet to see a single person that can shoot a magnum caliber sporting rifle worth a darn. I am sure their is people who can, but if experience has shown anything the vast majority simply can't handle their magnum rifles. I would take a half decent shot with a plain caliber any day.

Also how does one practice with a 300 weatherby when it costs 5$ a shot? I guess reload but even still brass ain't cheap.
Click to expand...

I'd say you need to spend more time at the range. While I agree there is no point to hunting with a rifle that is beyond your ability to use, an 8 pound .300 Weatherby is by no means a brutal rifle for the seasoned rifleman. Mostly getting used to recoil is a matter of exposure, you don't get good with a .300 by shooting a .223, but anyone who is determined to master it can.

Handloading provides a number of advantages to the enthusiast, not the least of which is that he only has to pay for his brass once, rather than each time he fires. Additionally, he can choose between premium game bullets designed for high velocity impacts, and more cost effective bullets that are suitable for target shooting and plinking. Finally, the handloader can tailor his loads to fit his comfort level, then as he gains confidence ith his rifle, over time he can heat up his loads. Shooting a .300 Weatherby is pretty cheap compared to .416 Rigby, a .375 Ultra, or almost anything that shoots a .458 bullet.
 
Boomer said:
I'd say you need to spend more time at the range. While I agree there is no point to hunting with a rifle that is beyond your ability to use, an 8 pound .300 Weatherby is by no means a brutal rifle for the seasoned rifleman. Mostly getting used to recoil is a matter of exposure, you don't get good with a .300 by shooting a .223, but anyone who is determined to master it can.

Handloading provides a number of advantages to the enthusiast, not the least of which is that he only has to pay for his brass once, rather than each time he fires. Additionally, he can choose between premium game bullets designed for high velocity impacts, and more cost effective bullets that are suitable for target shooting and plinking. Finally, the handloader can tailor his loads to fit his comfort level, then as he gains confidence ith his rifle, over time he can heat up his loads. Shooting a .300 Weatherby is pretty cheap compared to .416 Rigby, a .375 Ultra, or almost anything that shoots a .458 bullet.
Click to expand...

Err no I think you missed my point on that one. My point is that the vast majority of magnum rifle owners are using guns that are beyond their ability. I realize that there are people that are capable of handling magnum rifles- I simply haven't seen one yet. I guess you could say I am not the one who needs to spend more time at the range.

Also you are preaching to the choir about handloading. I am well aware of the benefits and take advantage of them myself.
 
coleman1495 said:
Err no I think you missed my point on that one. My point is that the vast majority of magnum rifle owners are using guns that are beyond their ability. I realize that there are people that are capable of handling magnum rifles- I simply haven't seen one yet. I guess you could say I am not the one who needs to spend more time at the range.

Also you are preaching to the choir about handloading. I am well aware of the benefits and take advantage of them myself.
Click to expand...


Err... no...

You need to spend more time at the range... there is nothing difficult about magnum chamberings and I see very few at the range that can't shoot them well... your range wouldn't happen to be in the GTA would it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom