Norma Ammo 300 WSM

remington jim

remington jim

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Super GunNutz
Rating - 100%
514   0   0
Location
Deep in the Darkest Bush there is ! and Kamloops
This is from the Norma web site :

300 WSM

The .300 Winchester Short Magnum is a 7.62mm short action magnum cartridge with considerable effect. It is very similiar to the regular .300 Winchester Magnum in terms of ballistics, but takes advantage of the short action design which allows more powder to sit closer to the flash hole. When the primer ignites, it allows a more uniform burn which in turn translates into more efficient use of energy. A 300 WSM can therefore achieve the same ballistics with less powder.
H:S:
Read this TWICE and you will BE LAUGHING as hard as I am ! Laugh2 RJ
 
remington jim said:
This is from the Norma web site :

300 WSM

The .300 Winchester Short Magnum is a 7.62mm short action magnum cartridge with considerable effect. It is very similiar to the regular .300 Winchester Magnum in terms of ballistics, but takes advantage of the short action design which allows more powder to sit closer to the flash hole. When the primer ignites, it allows a more uniform burn which in turn translates into more efficient use of energy. A 300 WSM can therefore achieve the same ballistics with less powder.
H:S:
Read this TWICE and you will BE LAUGHING as hard as I am ! Laugh2 RJ
Click to expand...

Tee-hee! ha: Flash hole is what I call me bunghole when doin' "blue flamers".

I reckon the guy that wrote that ad wasn't a handloader. Oy vey. f:P:
 
I dunno. I have a long history with the 300s, mostly the Win Mag but Weatherbys, the RUM, an H&H and a couple WSMS got in the mix.

My current 300 WSM load is in Norma brass. Id's picked that up years ago when it was still a novelty but never got around to trying. I stumbled into a pile of Winchester factory ammo at a give away price and stuck with that brass. I had early success with the Win stuff for accuracy even though the velocity was less than stelar, (early pressure) and since I have more rifles than I can shoot the load development never progressed past that. I did like the little Kimber Select grade quite a bit and the last several years it's been following me around.

Fast forward a bit; there isn't a whole lot of snow for snowmobiling so I've been reworking loads for a lot of rifles that had been back-burnered. Nothing else to do. Using the Norma brass and what ended up at exactly the max load in the Nosler manual for 7828 and 180s. 3050 fps on nose on the Garmin, and a boat load of little bitty groups with Ballistic Tips and Accubonds. Took it out to 600 yards and the actual drops match the theory.

Contrast that to the 300 Win. I've got an armful of those and have come to expect 3150 from 26" barrels and 3050 from 24s regular as clockwork. That's with the same 180s and a fair smattering of high BC VLDish 190s.

I don't know whether to be pleased or annoyed, but there isn't much point in ignoring that at the 24" barrel/ 180 gr mark in my rifles they are exactly the same thing.


Maybe there's a joke I'm missing?
 
I think it's the translation that talks about powder closer to the flash hole that sounds a bit funny.

But even if the wording is clumsy, it's basically correct. The WSM is wider in diameter so the powder is "closer" to the flash hole, resulting in a more efficient burn.

Real life performance of the WM and WSM has always been about the same but the WSM uses a bit less powder and fits in a short action.

But it does sound funny :)
 
NORMA says “ but takes advantage of the short action design which allows more powder to sit closer to the flash hole. When the primer ignites, it allows a more uniform burn which in turn translates into more efficient use of energy “

Read this part only and tell me how the powder sits closer to the flash hole and allows a more uniform burn ? In ANY cartridge vs another cartridge ? RJ
 
Some writeups say the wider base and shorter powder column of the 300 WSM brings more of the powder closer to the source of ignition.
 
remington jim said:
NORMA says “ but takes advantage of the short action design which allows more powder to sit closer to the flash hole. When the primer ignites, it allows a more uniform burn which in turn translates into more efficient use of energy “

Read this part only and tell me how the powder sits closer to the flash hole and allows a more uniform burn ? In ANY cartridge vs another cartridge ? RJ
Click to expand...

Obviously it won't make the bottom granule that fell in the flash-hole sit any closer to the primer; but aren't all the granules touching the base of the neck about .600" closer? I measured with my thumbs, so that might not be exact.

You have a benchrest background right? Isn't that the natural habitat of short and fat cartridges? Hey, I'm still trying to get the joke.


So; an SBR guy is at the World's and after a couple nights finds himself at a whorehouse. The madame asks "What'll you have" and he; with a red face, tear in his eye and a little sob says "I want something short and fat". Madame says "I think I get it, you're making a benchrest joke right?" SBR guy says, "No...................I'm just homesick".
 
remington jim said:
NORMA says “ but takes advantage of the short action design which allows more powder to sit closer to the flash hole. When the primer ignites, it allows a more uniform burn which in turn translates into more efficient use of energy “

Read this part only and tell me how the powder sits closer to the flash hole and allows a more uniform burn ? In ANY cartridge vs another cartridge ? RJ
Click to expand...

I think you missed their point in the translation... the "short action" is their way of saying that amount of powder spread in a wider/shorter case... ergo, more powder closer to the "flash hole." Whether you buy the concept of quicker ignition and more efficient burn with a "fatter" powder column or not, it is a theory... and after all, that is simply a marketing blurb. Me thinks you may be giggling too much.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom