The .300 Debate

Post #19 and #20 I whole heartidly agree apon.
It's too bad this cartridge wasn't named the 308 Winchester Magnum.
I honestly believe that it would of been somewhere in the lead if it
had an American title to it.
A great caliber that offers more than enough bullet varieties and powder
charges to toy with.
 
I like the medium .300's - the Norma, Winchester, H&H and Weatherby. The only one of those I have not owned and hunted with is the H&H. I prefer the 200 and 220gr bullets in these chamberings and don't need anything more than 2900-3000 fps for the 200's. That shoots flat enough and hits hard enough.

With respect to weight, there are good lightweight options available in the .300 WM, and you could easily put together a light H&H or Wby, if that tickled your fancy. My Model 96 (1996) Mauser weighs a hair over 6lbs without mounts and scope (it uses Remington bases). Add Talley mounts and a light scope and you are ready to go at ~7lbs. The T3 Lite weighs about the same.

I think the majority of people would find a 7 lb .300 Mag with full power loads, um, less than enjoyable. Felt recoil approaches that of a 9lb .375 H&H. How much lighter does a fellow want to go?
 
This reminds me of the old Greek argument of how many spirits can dance on the head of a pin? :p

In all seriousness, some points to ponder.
The 2 grand daddies of the pack, the 300 H&H and the old 30 Newton, were very balanced rounds, so is the 300 wm and 308 norma. The new short mags and big case boomers make their magic at some very stiff pressures, with the latest modern powders. If you loaded the all to the same pressure level, you'de be suprised how level the field gets. There is no free lunch, the laws of physics still apply. Not to mention how some bullets react when driven hard.

Some points already mentioned, ammo availability is a very good one. Case in point: wife & I went out in southern sask last fall, me with a 308 win, her with a 7-08 rem. She made the mistake of putting all of her 20 rounds into her coveralls. After one bushside stop, 1/2 hr down the road, out pops Bambie's daddie and the girls. Wife reaches for ammo, it's gone. Now try to find 7-08 in the middle of buttf*ck sask! Lots of 308, 06, 300wm, 270, 243, 303, the usual basics. But no 7-08. :mad: Same situation some years back in Saskatoon. Sitting in hotel talking to some US hunters on the way to a camp. One fellow had a beautiful Weatherby, 300-378 jobbie. Problem was, ammo got shipped seperate from gun, and lord knows where it went?? :confused: That beautiful gun became a large paperweight when he couldn't find any ammo for it. :( Something to be said for a standard caliber.
 
Jb101:

I used to hunt & fish in the Biscotasing area. 1998-2005.
Miss the great grouse and fishing!!!
And bears EVERYWHERE!

A friend of mine still has a cabin there.
His name is Lindsay Millet.

Hmmmmm memory lane! Lol!
 
There is no appreciable difference in the ballistics between the 300 WM and the 300 WSM. The .300 WBY beats them both in that field. Its a matter of personal choice on the individual rifle that is being used once you get into the realm of .30 cal magnums.

I really don't understand the reason behind the WSM cartridge line up. Just more choices for the stores to carry, I suppose. And a whole lot of marketing hooey.

The only WSM that I'd consider would be the .270. But then again, there's nothing different in terms of ballistics between it and the .270 WBY. The WSM is available in a lot more rifles, however.
 
1899 said:
I like the medium .300's - the Norma, Winchester, H&H and Weatherby. The only one of those I have not owned and hunted with is the H&H. I prefer the 200 and 220gr bullets in these chamberings and don't need anything more than 2900-3000 fps for the 200's. That shoots flat enough and hits hard enough.

With respect to weight, there are good lightweight options available in the .300 WM, and you could easily put together a light H&H or Wby, if that tickled your fancy. My Model 96 (1996) Mauser weighs a hair over 6lbs without mounts and scope (it uses Remington bases). Add Talley mounts and a light scope and you are ready to go at ~7lbs. The T3 Lite weighs about the same.

I think the majority of people would find a 7 lb .300 Mag with full power loads, um, less than enjoyable. Felt recoil approaches that of a 9lb .375 H&H. How much lighter does a fellow want to go?
Click to expand...

True but a modern muzzle brake will reduce felt recoil by 30%-40%, this development makes lightweight magnum viable.
Felt recoil is inversely proportional to rifle weight so you could reduce a rifle's total weight by 15%-20% with no increase in felt recoil.
Basically, a 7 1/2 pounds 300 WSM rifle is shootable.

I know of one well known gunsmith/machinist who works non-stop for 3 months every year installing muzzle brakes. (many Tikka T3 Lite magnum rifles).

Alex
 
Wow It never ends the 30 cal debate. My 2 cents not worth much but all the thirties being equal in the eyes of the game your hunting id shoot the gun that feels best in your hands and gives you confidence to make a good slipp
 
AlexF said:
True but a modern muzzle brake will reduce felt recoil by 30%-40%, this development makes lightweight magnum viable.
Felt recoil is inversely proportional to rifle weight so you could reduce a rifle's total weight by 15%-20% with no increase in felt recoil.
Basically, a 7 1/2 pounds 300 WSM rifle is shootable.

I know of one well known gunsmith/machinist who works non-stop for 3 months every year installing muzzle brakes. (many Tikka T3 Lite magnum rifles).

Alex
Click to expand...

Except that I like my hearing and hate muzzle brakes. I don't have one on my 6 1/2 lb T3 Lite in .338 WM, which has noticeable recoil with 250gr Partitions. My friend's T3 Lite in .300 Win Mag is altogether fine to shoot...for both of us.

BUT, for most people I believe it is too much. I think that is why you quite often see the magnum chamberings in T3 Lite for sale with "only 1 box fired". It is too bad that those folks don't appreciate that a good load in a .308 Winchester will deal with 99% of North American hunting out to ranges that most people can effectively, and consistantly make clean killing shots.

Different strokes for different folks I guess.
 
dthunter said:
Jb101:

I used to hunt & fish in the Biscotasing area. 1998-2005.
Miss the great grouse and fishing!!!
And bears EVERYWHERE!

A friend of mine still has a cabin there.
His name is Lindsay Millet.

Hmmmmm memory lane! Lol!
Click to expand...

It's a beautiful area! We fish Bisco and nearby Ramsey lake a few times a month. The bear numbers have only increased in recent years! I'm about two hours south of there. Haven't heard that name before, but I know a bunch of people who have places in the old townsite. I'll ask around!



As has been mentionned the 'best .30' debate is very subjective and far from over. I immagine 50 years from now, our grandkids will still kick this idea around future campfires. The debate is half the fun!
 
If I was going to go with a WSM it would be the 325 WSM.

It should do well in a slightly shorter barrel than a 300, and if the whole purpose of the WSM is to have a shorter or lighter action, then why not go to the 325 and a shorter barrel?

That in my mind would be taking advantage of the only benefit over the 300WM, less length, easier packing in thicker bush.

As far as norma vs. wby vs. WM, other than a bit of velocity, is there any practical difference? Can the other calibers outshoot the 300WM in distance? Recoil and muzzle report will likely be more than any other benefit IMO.
 
AlexF said:
True but a modern muzzle brake will reduce felt recoil by 30%-40%, this development makes lightweight magnum viable.
Felt recoil is inversely proportional to rifle weight so you could reduce a rifle's total weight by 15%-20% with no increase in felt recoil.
Basically, a 7 1/2 pounds 300 WSM rifle is shootable.

I know of one well known gunsmith/machinist who works non-stop for 3 months every year installing muzzle brakes. (many Tikka T3 Lite magnum rifles).

Alex
Click to expand...

My 300wm build came to about 10lbs with a 28" sendero contour barrel, Choate stock, 8-32x56 scope and muzzle break... Before that it was a 6-7lb plain old Salvage 111... Kicked the piss out of ME with every shot... Now my 120lb 5' nothing better half actually shoots it in comfort off a bench.



You buy a 300 to shoot bigger game or farther out, ya you can pop deer and such with it but really?!?! .308 or .270 or various other calibers are much more enjoyable for walk and stalk hunting not to mention when faced with overall cost the smaller calibers are a better long term investment with barrel life and powder cost... I'm putting 80gr of powder in a 300 case and about half of that in a .308...

I should have just built a -06 :D
 
I had a 300WM but along came a rifle I liked, but in 300WSM so I made the switch. I'm confident that 300WSM will be supported for a long time. My experience with shooting deer with the 300WSM demonstrates to me that it is equally effective for this application. I would have preferred to stick with 300WM, but only because I have amassed a collection of brass, reloads, and already had the dies.
 
I don't require the power and recoil of either .30 cal magnum ... My 7mm-08 or my 338-06 cover my needs.
 
AlexF said:
True but a modern muzzle brake will reduce felt recoil by 30%-40%, this development makes lightweight magnum viable.
Felt recoil is inversely proportional to rifle weight so you could reduce a rifle's total weight by 15%-20% with no increase in felt recoil.
Basically, a 7 1/2 pounds 300 WSM rifle is shootable.

I know of one well known gunsmith/machinist who works non-stop for 3 months every year installing muzzle brakes. (many Tikka T3 Lite magnum rifles).

Alex
Click to expand...

Muzzle brakes are the crutch of the over-gunned and under-practiced. They encourage the carriage of arms of insufficient weight and excessive power by those neither inclined to practice nor capable of the proper employment of such a rifle. Anyone who has hunted with someone using a rifle with a brake on it can attest to the obnoxious nature of such a rifle.
 
I looked at the whole .30 cal magnum thing about three years back, and decided that, as long as I stayed away from any short action .30 cal magnums (I already own a couple of 30-06's thank you very much), it would probably not matter much which .30 cal long action magnum I got.

I ended up with a 300 win mag because the deal on that particular rifle was just too sweet to pass up. If it had been a Norma, or RUM or whatever, I would have bought it too.

It's not a .30 supermag, but hit shoots 180s at a no-bs 3165 fps, and I can find 1F brass easy and relatively cheap, or buy factory ammo for $29 per box.
 
BigUglyMan said:
Muzzle brakes are the crutch of the over-gunned and under-practiced. They encourage the carriage of arms of insufficient weight and excessive power by those neither inclined to practice nor capable of the proper employment of such a rifle. Anyone who has hunted with someone using a rifle with a brake on it can attest to the obnoxious nature of such a rifle.
Click to expand...

LoL...

A brake has a time and a place... I on the other hand firmly believe a lead sled is an utter waste of time and money and for the most part breeds a large crop of hunters who wound game and step far beyond there abilitys too quickly...

Say what you will about a brake but recoil intollerent people who use brakes know the only punishment is noise whilst folks without a brake know its going to hurt so there is jerking pulling and flinching... I have seen all sides of the argument and firmly believe in muzzle brakes.
 
Hotwheels81 said:
LoL...

A brake has a time and a place... I on the other hand firmly believe a lead sled is an utter waste of time and money and for the most part breeds a large crop of hunters who wound game and step far beyond there abilitys too quickly...

Say what you will about a brake but recoil intollerent people who use brakes know the only punishment is noise whilst folks without a brake know its going to hurt so there is jerking pulling and flinching... I have seen all sides of the argument and firmly believe in muzzle brakes.
Click to expand...

If you hunt with friends/family you better tell them to plug those ears because I prefer not to wear a hearing aides in my old age. If you have a break then you are shooting too much gun. I think this argument over 2 pounds when I read it is just plain makes no sense. Most guys will have packs on so what the hell is 2 pounds difference when they are carrying a 40 pound pack. I hate shooting my 12 gauge 375 grain Partition golds at the range so I sight the gun in at the range with a sled. When I am shooting at a bear/deer I have never felt the recoil. If you think a 300 win mag kicks the slug gun is like getting a kick in the nut$. When you have game in your sights the gun feels like a 22lr.
 
I have shot slug guns from rifled hunting to tactical, 375 weatherby's, .30newt, 100rnds of .303 in a day etc etc etc... Everyone harps about how loud a brake is and for that reason there is no excuse to run one at all, EVER.

Think hearing aids suck? Try getting a shoulder socket rebuilt and told you can never shoot again... I don't associate with a lot of shooters but I had a friend who died not long ago who had shoulder surgery due to a life long gun hobby and a very good friends wife has had surgery on her shoulder due to??? Yup, hunting since she was a child then a stint in the rangers, another friend served in England and had an honorable discharge?? Retina damage... This "brakes are too loud" excuse has worn thin on me after seeing what other effects recoil has on the body...

Besides... If your shooting a 300wm without hearing protection in the bush at an animal do you really think its going to be less damaging to your ears then if it wore a brake? A naked ear drum is going to receive damage either way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom