Done a fair bit of shooting with 300 WMs, my go-to rifle is a Vanguard.
Not ashamed to say that about 10 rounds at the range would wear me down. That was when I was running 180 gr. stuff down the barrel.
Then several years ago I read an article about Barnes TTSX bullets, the gist of which is that bullet weight isn't nearly as critical as bullet construction. It talked about 130 grain TTSXs through both 300 WMs and 30.06s with excellent performance. I discovered that Federal happened to be loading this round for 300 WMs, and rated it at no less than 3500 ft/sec...!!! So I ordered up some. (Now no longer available, darn it!)
First thing I learned at the range was that my 300 WM's recoil was barely on par with any 30.06s I'd shot over the years. I'm likin' that!
The next thing I learned was that when I sighted my rifle 1.5" high at 100 yds, it shot about 2 to 2.5" high at 200 yds. Now I'm really likin' this stuff! That's pushing MPBR into the realm of 400 yards, give or take (and probably why I don't get as excited as some over the .26 Nosler).
And so was my Wby Vanguard, which consistently would put three of 'em into a 1/2" group! Perhaps in part because the rifle wasn't so punishing.
That season I drilled a 6 point bull elk at about 100 yards a tad high through the lungs. It made about 30 yds and piled up very dead. Mush pretty much describes those organs when I dressed it out.
I've taken several deer at close range since, and I'd say results weren't quite as spectacular. Too much zip, is my estimation, for a bullet of that construction on a relatively thin skinned critter with less mass than an elk. But not to the point I had to chase down a wounded animal or anything like that. In all cases there was very little loss of meat due to bullet performance.
Point being, with the quality of bullets now available, either to handload or in factory ammo, save for hunting dangerous game, or where long range ballistics come into play and...Hunting Gods forbid...taking 800 yard pokes at live game, there's no need to shoot heavy for caliber bullets.
With a magnum caliber like the 300s, 130 to 150 gr ammo can tame a lot of recoil...IMHO, unnecessary recoil, that can cause flinching, missed shots, poor shots resulting in wounded animals, and reluctance to practice ahead of time.
I have read numerous articles citing professional guides and outfitters who will state, literally categorically, that about 30% of hunters who show up in camp with a .300 magnum can actually shoot them well. The rest are basically scared of their own rifles' recoil, with all the problems that causes...including guides having to sort out situations gone to hell.
Punch in some numbers on the following calculator and watch what happens to recoil as bullet weight drops. It's surprisingly significant...
http://www.shooterscalculator.com/recoil-calculator.php
If a .270 Win and 130 to 150 grains of quality bullet is enough for elk, and it certainly is, why does a .300 WM somehow require 180 to 200 grains to get the same job done? Big bullets certainly won't make up for lousy shot placement, we all agree on that, right? Hell, a lot of hunters take elk every year with a 25.06...not that I'd recommend it, albeit I love the caliber! Keep in mind that most of the moose in Scandanavia taken each year are handled with 6.5x55 Swedes.
Indeed, John Barsness recently wrote an article in Rifle magazine on this subject, making the same points regarding modern bullet construction and quality. He noted, too, that as people get older, their ability to soak up recoil often goes south, and that his wife started getting headaches from recoil, so they had to find a level she could handle in lesser calibers and adapt to that.
Anyway, it's quite possible to take a lot of the bite out of the south end of a .300 WM with lower weight bullets, and still be every bit as effective and successful with the business end of the gun.
FWIW.
