- Location
- AB foothills
Camp Cook said:
I agreed with you untill you said you drove a Ford
The reality of the new Magnums!
- Thread starter BIGREDD
- Start date
I agreed with you untill you said you drove a Ford
- Location
- The Conservative part of Ontario
Camp Cook said:
So why is it you drive the ford?
- Location
- AB foothills
I think he forgot to add that the Toyota will be running long after his Ford was dead and burried
captonion said:
Well how about you take a look at the facts Captain.... go into the hodgdon manual and then compare max loads for both the 7mmRM and the 7mmWSM! You will find that the WSMs generally use less powder to achieve the same velocity. How can a cartride with less powder achieve the same veloctiy as one with more? By being more efficient... which by the way is much easier on throats and barrel life. And how can a cartridge that uses less powder and achieves the same velocity burn a barrel out faster than one that uses more powder?
You will also find that the Rem Mag Pressure is measured in CUP and the WSM in PSI... Do the correlation and you will find they are very close in chamber pressure... and with many loads the WSM comes in with less chamber pressure than the belted mag.
OK... OK... to answer the questions on why I drive a Ford...
It's simple a Ford is built over spec and all the other makes are only built to spec resulting in a Ford F250/F350 series being a tougher truck.
If you try and argue with me on this it only tells me and the rest of the world that you don't have an understanding of the facts/statistics and you are running on emotional thoughts like an anti-gun Lieberal or an NDP'er...
I'll also comment on the more efficient shorterer/wider WSM cases...
Yes they are more effiecient but they only do what is already being done so I don't have any interest in them at all.
If I was new to shooting sports I may consider going to a 300WSM but I'm not soooooo....
I have no desire to have anything to do with them...
It's simple a Ford is built over spec and all the other makes are only built to spec resulting in a Ford F250/F350 series being a tougher truck.
If you try and argue with me on this it only tells me and the rest of the world that you don't have an understanding of the facts/statistics and you are running on emotional thoughts like an anti-gun Lieberal or an NDP'er...
I'll also comment on the more efficient shorterer/wider WSM cases...
Yes they are more effiecient but they only do what is already being done so I don't have any interest in them at all.
If I was new to shooting sports I may consider going to a 300WSM but I'm not soooooo....
I have no desire to have anything to do with them...
Last edited:
I am well aware of the correlation between CUP and PSI and have been aware of it for 40 years. My point is that the difference in pressures is not due to the use of a different measurement. It is because the pressures are higher in one cartridge than in the other. That this pressure may be stated in different terms is only of acedemic interest. Higher pressure is a fact regardless of the standard of measurement.
Is the achievement of higher velocities with higher pressures from a smaller case an indicator of greater efficiency? I don't think so. It is only an indication that high velocities can be reached with high pressures. In fact, there are some real drawbacks to working "at the edge". Wear and tear on the action is one (the large diameter WSM cartridges also produce greater bolt thrust than the smaller diameter cartridges). The increased chance of a failed extractor from a stuck case is another.
As far as throat erosion goes; there is likely little discernible difference. Powder choice can make a difference but, generally speaking, the advantage goes to the smaller case if all else is equal. There is insufficient data to be able to say with any certainty. I doubt there would be a great deal of difference. In other words, I suspect a 22-250, if loaded to 222 velocity levels, would give barrel life quite similar to that of a 222 but probably no better. Regards, Bill.
Is the achievement of higher velocities with higher pressures from a smaller case an indicator of greater efficiency? I don't think so. It is only an indication that high velocities can be reached with high pressures. In fact, there are some real drawbacks to working "at the edge". Wear and tear on the action is one (the large diameter WSM cartridges also produce greater bolt thrust than the smaller diameter cartridges). The increased chance of a failed extractor from a stuck case is another.
As far as throat erosion goes; there is likely little discernible difference. Powder choice can make a difference but, generally speaking, the advantage goes to the smaller case if all else is equal. There is insufficient data to be able to say with any certainty. I doubt there would be a great deal of difference. In other words, I suspect a 22-250, if loaded to 222 velocity levels, would give barrel life quite similar to that of a 222 but probably no better. Regards, Bill.
Shutting down other opinions
OK, It's a free country. You can express your opinion on any suject whether it be cartriges or trucks. I'm interested. No support (i.e. facts/statistics) for your statement need be given. The following, however, diminishes your case considerably.
OK, It's a free country. You can express your opinion on any suject whether it be cartriges or trucks. I'm interested. No support (i.e. facts/statistics) for your statement need be given. The following, however, diminishes your case considerably.
That is totally good humour...
Most people do not know that Ford F250 and F350 series trucks are actually build to far higher load capacity ratings/standards than the other makes thus my statement in reference to the anti-gun Lieberals that don't know the statictics/facts either but they will argue till the bitter end that their opinions are correct no matter what facts/statistics/rational thought are given to prove otherwise...
Most people do not know that Ford F250 and F350 series trucks are actually build to far higher load capacity ratings/standards than the other makes thus my statement in reference to the anti-gun Lieberals that don't know the statictics/facts either but they will argue till the bitter end that their opinions are correct no matter what facts/statistics/rational thought are given to prove otherwise...
troutseeker
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Prince George, BC
I had a Savage in 7mm SAUM once. The darned best caliber ever made, bar none! No one can argue that irrefutable fact. Dont even dare!!!!
Troutseeker
Troutseeker
- Location
- The Conservative part of Ontario
Amazing Bigredd, a magnum thread that's not locked..... yet
But then, it's a hunting forum right. Nowhere will you find a group that gets along better than hunters. Ok, so we're not perfect, but you get the drift.
By the way, the hole in the end of my barrel is bigger than yours! So There!
But then, it's a hunting forum right. Nowhere will you find a group that gets along better than hunters. Ok, so we're not perfect, but you get the drift.
By the way, the hole in the end of my barrel is bigger than yours! So There!
DANCESWITHEMPTIES said:
Tod bartell has developed a 277 caliber wildcat form the 50BMG case, it is a 50BMG case, "ackley improved" and he calls it the 270-BMG Tod mofo Bartell Improved.
Velocity is nutty, and it is very, very accurate, about 1" groups at 300 yards.
I think going 17 might be a tad overbore, though
WSM is faster than a XYZ!
A "standard" .270 (i.e. a .270 Win.) is supposed to get 3112 ft/sec using a 140 gr BarnesX, and 59.0 gr Reloader 22. If the .270WSM is to get 3312 ft/sec, a 200ft/sec increase-everything else being equal- then the case capacity of the .270WSM must be over 25% larger than the .270Win. The velocity is increased by 6.4% so it follows that the case capacity must be 6.4x4=26% larger. My source for this is John Barsness' (Handloader #241, p.44) rule number 1:"Potential muzzle velocity increases(or decreases) at one fourth(1/4) the rate of case capacity in cartridges of the same bore diameter".
My question is the following: Is the case capacity of the .270WSM about 26% larger than the .270Win. or is it that other things are not equal when comparing the velocities of the two cartriges?
John Barsness tries to put an end to the myth that short, fat, beltless magnums have some extra efficiency over the long, skinny, cases. He shows you the calculations in this article. What it boils down to is this: If everything else is equal (it seldom is) more velocity requires more powder.
I'm not knocking any caliber here. I like them all and I have several standard and magnum calibers that I shoot and reload. It's the hype that I'm questioning.
Peter
BIGREDD said:
A "standard" .270 (i.e. a .270 Win.) is supposed to get 3112 ft/sec using a 140 gr BarnesX, and 59.0 gr Reloader 22. If the .270WSM is to get 3312 ft/sec, a 200ft/sec increase-everything else being equal- then the case capacity of the .270WSM must be over 25% larger than the .270Win. The velocity is increased by 6.4% so it follows that the case capacity must be 6.4x4=26% larger. My source for this is John Barsness' (Handloader #241, p.44) rule number 1:"Potential muzzle velocity increases(or decreases) at one fourth(1/4) the rate of case capacity in cartridges of the same bore diameter".
My question is the following: Is the case capacity of the .270WSM about 26% larger than the .270Win. or is it that other things are not equal when comparing the velocities of the two cartriges?
John Barsness tries to put an end to the myth that short, fat, beltless magnums have some extra efficiency over the long, skinny, cases. He shows you the calculations in this article. What it boils down to is this: If everything else is equal (it seldom is) more velocity requires more powder.
I'm not knocking any caliber here. I like them all and I have several standard and magnum calibers that I shoot and reload. It's the hype that I'm questioning.
Peter
Good question, Gun5tuff.
I suspect the 1/4 rate vs case capacity pertains more to standard length/width cases. There is no doubt that the WSMs can produce a given velocity with less powder, those facts are in every reloading book out there.
Leeper's post about manufacturers downloading standard magnum cartridges is bang on. The factory loading for a 300WM with 180 gr bullets was at one time, 3070fps. Now it's 2960fps. Personally, I think they did this so they could invent something like the 300WSM sometime in the future and have a chance at claiming it could equal the WM.
Lots of good info and opinions in these threads. The one thing I really don't like to see is the claims made by people as to how much most hunters shoot. How most hunters prepare for hunting season. What most hunter's capabilities are.
Where does one find this information on most hunters? Why the intent on painting most hunters with the same brush? Wonder what most non-hunters think when they read these claims?
I have not dabbled in the short/ultra magnums yet. But I look forward to the day I do.
joe-nwt said:
Here is what John Barsness had to say in his article "The Rules - Do the Math" (Handloader #241 , 44) to summarize this point: "Go ahead. Compare the data for the long, skinny, "inefficient" .300 H&H case and any of the short-fat-beltless magnums. You will find that their supposed extra efficiency is a myth. This does not mean they are not good rounds, just that they do not break any basic ballistic rules. This isn't saying that somebody might not invent a magic case-but I just haven't found one yet."
Now if someone is looking to buy a .30 calibe rifle with a little more oomph than a .30-06 there are many options in the non-wildcat area which includes the .300WSM, .300 H&H Magnum, .300 Winchester Magnum, .300 Remington Ultramag and many others. An article like that by Barsness above is much more informative than the line I quoted in my last post above.
Well lets take the 300WSM then. How do you and John explain the fact that the WSM can produce an equivelent velocity to the 300WM with less powder?
Here's another article by Layne Simpson, another writer who has at least as much credibility as Mr. Barsness. As far as magazine writers go.
http://www.galleryofguns.com/shootingtimes/Articles/DisplayArticles.asp?ID=858
Now if you can get equal velocities with a few grains less powder, there must be some flexibility with the 1/4 rule.
Come to think of it, the 1/4 rule is likely a lot more accurate for a given case. But a different shape case means a different shape powder column which means a different burn pattern, the pressure curve is different and the end results will be different. Although I don't reload the 300WSM, I believe it uses about 3-5 grains less powder to equal the WM. (WSM reloaders chime in here, please) Up to the point that the WSM runs out of capacity. Then further gains can be made with the WM because it has a greater capacity.
The efficiency gains are not that spectacular IMHO but they cannot be dismissed either.
Here's another article by Layne Simpson, another writer who has at least as much credibility as Mr. Barsness. As far as magazine writers go.
http://www.galleryofguns.com/shootingtimes/Articles/DisplayArticles.asp?ID=858
Now if you can get equal velocities with a few grains less powder, there must be some flexibility with the 1/4 rule.
Come to think of it, the 1/4 rule is likely a lot more accurate for a given case. But a different shape case means a different shape powder column which means a different burn pattern, the pressure curve is different and the end results will be different. Although I don't reload the 300WSM, I believe it uses about 3-5 grains less powder to equal the WM. (WSM reloaders chime in here, please) Up to the point that the WSM runs out of capacity. Then further gains can be made with the WM because it has a greater capacity.
The efficiency gains are not that spectacular IMHO but they cannot be dismissed either.
The 300WSM will produce the same velocity as the 300 Win mag with less powder because it is smaller. It will not produce the same velocity if both cartridges are loaded to the same pressure with the same powder for the same reason; it is smaller.
Factory WSM loads in a factory chamber are hot. Occasionally too hot. Factory 300 Mag loads are far from hot.
The 300 Win mag will hit 3100-3150 with 180's from a 24 inch barrel at workable pressures. The WSM will not. That's just the way it is. The short, fat case is no more magical now than it was back in the fifties when people were wildcatting the 348 Improved case (remarkably similar to the WSM!). Advertising is more magical though and this is where the short fats really show their advantage! Regards, Bill.
Factory WSM loads in a factory chamber are hot. Occasionally too hot. Factory 300 Mag loads are far from hot.
The 300 Win mag will hit 3100-3150 with 180's from a 24 inch barrel at workable pressures. The WSM will not. That's just the way it is. The short, fat case is no more magical now than it was back in the fifties when people were wildcatting the 348 Improved case (remarkably similar to the WSM!). Advertising is more magical though and this is where the short fats really show their advantage! Regards, Bill.
- Location
- Hillbilly shack in the boonies
And the boys that make the guns said , lets make a beefy action for these new pills, and for sure they will sell like crazy. And they did , so everyone lived happy for a year or so. Now their not so hot. true story
Now their not so hot. true story 
