300wm vs 300wsm

D

Danny Boy

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
63   0   0
Location
GTA
I owned an A-bolt 300wm for many years. It served me well and earned the title as my meat gun. Two seasons ago, I sold it to a good friend to get him started on moose hunting. I have since been using a 308 and 270 for moose/deer hunts. They work just as well.

I miss my 300wm and now considering a 300 class rifle. Do you think it is worth the while going to a 300wsm with 4” shorter barrel and a lighter weight? :confused:

Note I still have the 300wm dies, 150 rounds of brand new brass not to mention a ton of 180 gr and 200 gr bullets.

Your thoughts!
 
I have an A-Bolt in 300 WSM and love it. It is light - ~7 pounds scoped - and very easy to carry. It is as accurate as any sporter weight rifle I have owned and is very reliable. More often than not it is my "go-to" rifle when I head out the door even though I have other rifles to choose from.

The downside? Recoil. Sharp hard jabs that will bite you if you are the least bit careless in your grip when shooting.
 
I have both, if you forget your ammo you will be better off with a 300wm, beside that they are the same to a moose, deer or bear. They both hit hard in a light gun. You cant go wrong with either, just make sure you bring lots of ammo if you get the wsm.
 
Dies and brass will be less than $100 so I wouldn't factor it into your equation too heavily. In all reality a moose will never be able to tell the difference and the difference in trajectory is almost nothing within hunting distances. It's up to you whether or not you want the lighter, easier to pack around rifle at the cost of recoil.
 
MattMoser said:
I have both, if you forget your ammo you will be better off with a 300wm, beside that they are the same to a moose, deer or bear. They both hit hard in a light gun. You cant go wrong with either, just make sure you bring lots of ammo if you get the wsm.
Click to expand...

The ammo point is moot in my opinion. Have you ever known a serious hunter (especially a reloader) who forgot his ammo? I haven't.
 
300wm shoots bigger bullets better, more factory loadings available, it generally feeds better, one more in the mag usually, who gives a crap about a half inch shorter action. Thats just hoopla if you ask me.
Nothing wrong with the WSM, and I don't think its a fad. They are here to stay, I just prefer my .300wm. This comparison is kinda like .308 vs .30-06. One is shorter, one shoots bigger bullets better(.30-06) etc
 
Well, I'm from the Old School, and I think your 308 will continue working just fine. On the other hand, I've caved in quite a few times myself and bought a number of rifles on quite a variety of flimsy excuses, so practicality isn't everything. I wouldn't worry about the small amount of weight saving. If a fellow can't haul a 6 or 7 pound weight around all day, then he ain't eating enough Wheaties. On the other hand, saving 6 ounces off the weight of the rifle, could be a prime candidate for one of those 'flimsy excuses' that I've often used to justify another gun. Bottom line: if you really like a particular rifle, then that's all the excuse a fellow needs.
 
They seem pretty equivalent to me,although the 300WSM seems to take a few less grains to drive a 165gr bullet to 3000fps. The only reason I switched from 300WM to 300WSM was the rifle I wanted, not the ammo. I'd have stuck with 300WM because I already had reloading supplies and brass. Oh well, its good for the economy, right?
 
You are correct in saying dies and brass worth $100-$200 – should not be a show stopper.

As a reloader, ammo cost is not a consideration. I have never forgotten about bringing or running out of ammo at a hunt. Each hunt, I bring eight rounds for each of my primary and backup rifles. The most I used was five rounds.

I know the 300wsm is lighter but I am not sure if recoil is noticeable with a few oz difference in weight.

The lighter and shorter 300wsm is definitely a positive factor for me as I often do a full day hiking during my hunts.

I will likely get a Sako for a change this time around as I have enough A-bolt, X-bolt and T3.
 
They both do the same thing. Factory loads are about equal, with handloads the WM will go a bit faster. WSM's can use every bullet the WM can.

They both feed just fine, as long as the rifle itself doesn't malfunction.

Anywhere that sells ammo sells 300WSM, even Canadian Tire (in BC, anyway)

Noth will kill anything in North America quite easily.
 
Pretty simple isn't it?

Short action=300WSM
Long action =300 Ultra mag? :D
JK!

Long actions=300Win.
 
I have both the 300 win's. The only difference between them is the rifle. If you would prefer a shorter barreled rifle, go for the wsm in a rifle that uses a short action (not T3..) with a shorter barrel. Both my 300's are 24", but the wsm is roughly a half pound lighter (lighter scope/rings as well) the recoil is pretty much even with the same bullet weights.

I ran both win mags over a chrony and I was roughly 100 - 150fps slower with top loads with both rifles. Also my wsm pushed a 200gr accubond just over 2900fps, so I am unsure where the tail about the wsm not pushing the heavier bullets fast came from. Most loading manuals have it holding the 100fps difference with the win mag throughout the weight ranges.

Take a look on the EE if you need die's or brass that's one thing that is usually a decent price on the EE.

Really there is no bad choice, both are really the most versatile big game caliber.
 
I've never owned the WSM, but it seems really popular and looks pretty cool. (I have tried it on the range, and it recoils about like a 7mm Remington Magnum with a 175 grain bullet.)

However, I have a fair amount of experience with a .300 Winchester Magnum over a number of different rifles. This is why I, personally, would stick with the .300 Winchester Magnum. My own personal experience counts for me, and I know the old-fashioned .300 Win. Mag. works. For example, I know to first load a 180-grain bullet with 73 grains of IMR 4831 when starting to work with a new rifle in .300 Winchester Magnum. If this load doesn't give me groups in the range of 1 m.o.a. or better for three shots, I know that something is wrong with the rifle, and I will start checking for problems.

I would not be in a similar situation with the .300 WSM because I don't know the magic "universal" loads for it.

Apart from that, I'd personally go with the rifle that actually feels the best in your hands, and comes up to your shoulder like it was a natural part of your body. If given the choice between a .308 that carried like a dream and fit me perfectly, and a .300 Magnum that felt like a club and bobbed around when I brought it to my shoulder, there would be NO choice in the matter. A hunting rifle must work for HUNTING. That means, it must be comfortable to carry and come up naturally, even when your muscles are aching and tired, and you are shivering cold.

My Sako .300 just points like it is a part of my arm. The shape of the old Sako Monte Carlo stock seems to be perfectly made for my face and the length of my neck. I can bring it to my shoulder with my eyes closed, and when I open them, it's pointing where I want it to be. That's the reason why I always want to grab it when I go hunting.

The fit of the rifle to your personal ergonomics is far more important than cartridge choice, in my opinion (within reason, of course -- we're not talking .223 for grizzly). Therefore, you should actually shoulder the rifles you are contemplating and choose the one that feels the best to you, and not worry about the minute differences between the .300 WM and .300 WSM, or 7mm Rem Mag (or .30-06), for that matter.
 
Danny Boy said:
I owned an A-bolt 300wm for many years. It served me well and earned the title as my meat gun. Two seasons ago, I sold it to a good friend to get him started on moose hunting. I have since been using a 308 and 270 for moose/deer hunts. They work just as well.

I miss my 300wm and now considering a 300 class rifle. Do you think it is worth the while going to a 300wsm with 4” shorter barrel and a lighter weight? :confused:

Note I still have the 300wm dies, 150 rounds of brand new brass not to mention a ton of 180 gr and 200 gr bullets.

Your thoughts!
Click to expand...


I am partial to long, heavy for caliber bullets, so for me the best .300 magnum is a .300 H&H and the least desirable is the .300 WSM. The short neck and body of the WSM means that a long bullet will by necessity extend down into the powder capacity of the case, where the short body length resulting in a greater percentage of the case capacity being lost. There is a way around this of course, simply use a standard or magnum length action, and chamber the barrel with a long lead, then seat your bullets so they do not extend below thew shoulder of the cartridge. But if you are going to go through all of that, you might as well just choose a .300 with a standard body length.

I'm not surprised that you find that the .308 and the .270 produce similar results on game. This whole idea that one cartridge is so much better or worse than another, when there is little difference in caliber, bullet weight, or velocity is unreasonable. If you want a .300 just to have one, there is nothing wrong with that of course. But perhaps you might find a long range target rifle more interesting, than you would another hunting rifle, that fills the same role as your others.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom