The reality of the new Magnums!

actually i used the load data that seems better for each specific one.
is it law that you have to use the same powder in everything you shoot. not here. i use what works best. besides.......4831 powder in both the wsm and the old win show the same pressure. the new fat cases were meant to use different powders to perform the best
 
blindside said:
Poor beggers been marketing suckered. I'd try to justify it to if I were you..I watched a fella spend over 4000$ trying to get one of these 300w%^&M whatevers to peddle 180 grains of lead over 3100, something my weatherby's been doing for years, and if that 300 weath is in a sako they've been dime groups outta the box.
Click to expand...

HA HA HA HA HA

You own a Weatherby and call others 'marketing suckered?"

HA HA HA HA HA

Roy Weatheryby was the High Priest, the Ultimate Guru, The Grand Poo-Ba,The King Himself, of MARKETING HYPE.:dancingbanana: :dancingbanana:

PS The 300WSM isn't suposed to fling 180gr bullets at 3100 fps. More liek 2950-3000fps. Trying to squeeze an extra 100FPS is not only pointless, it's probably dangerous too.;)
 
Last edited:
sksavenger said:
actually i used the load data that seems better for each specific one.
is it law that you have to use the same powder in everything you shoot. not here. i use what works best. besides.......4831 powder in both the wsm and the old win show the same pressure. the new fat cases were meant to use different powders to perform the best
Click to expand...
This I know....You however were making reference to Pressure differences !
Tough to compare different Pressures when using different powders in each example:rolleyes:

The 300 WSM runs at higher pressures to achieve the same performance(or close) as it's larger "Brothers" this is a FACT;)
 
if you can achieve the velocity without the high pressure by using a different powder wouldnt that make sense????? my point is when pushing the 3000 mark with the old win mag, the pressures are getting quite high with any powder. there are powders out that work well in the fat cases and keep the pressure lower. the idea you have to use the same powders is ignorant.
it seems to me your just against change or progress..........you should move out here to saskatchewan......no change or progress. you might like it.
 
sksavenger said:
if you can achieve the velocity without the high pressure by using a different powder wouldnt that make sense????? my point is when pushing the 3000 mark with the old win mag, the pressures are getting quite high with any powder. there are powders out that work well in the fat cases and keep the pressure lower. the idea you have to use the same powders is ignorant.
it seems to me your just against change or progress..........you should move out here to saskatchewan......no change or progress. you might like it.
Click to expand...
Have you read anything I said at all....:confused:

Noone insinuated that one must use the same Powder, what I tried to do was show YOU that one cannot compare Pressures in 3 different Cases by using 3 different powders... :rolleyes:

What I pointed out was that ALL things being = a Smaller case that generates the same VELOCITIES as a Larger CASE does so by increasing Pressure ! Pretty simple concept isn't it;)

And WHO said I was somehow against "change or Progress" ? I have NO bone to Pick with the "New" Mags...I actually LOVE them.
And NO thanks to Saskatchewan, I'm quite happy here Thanks :)
 
From the comments about pressures above it seems that no one actually measures the pressures of differing amounts of powder, different powders, and different bullets in their guns. All seem to know however when a maximum load is shot by examining the primer, by bolt stick and by measuring the web of a new case before and after it is fired. If one is below the maximum where the fired case shows no pressure sign, one can only guess what the pressure is.

Does anyone use a calibrated or even uncalibrated strain guage when choosing powders in developing your hunting loads? It would be fun to use if it were as cheap as a Chrony.

All of this information really isn't needed to develop an accurate load, but it would extend our enjoyable pastime of reloading, shooting and B.S.ing about the subject on GunNuts.
 
Gun5tuff, all good points made. BCwill, i still dont agree that the WSMs run higher pressure for the same effect...but if i agreed with everyone, life would be no fun. I mainly though you were one of those "magnum haters" that bigredd was talkin about.
Oh.............i cant blame you for not movin here. i was out your way last winter for the first time......didnt wanna come back
 
As far as pressure goes, the shortmags are DESIGNED to run at higher pressuress than the standard magnums.

The cases are typically thicker to facilitate this.

it startedn as an idea with a wildcatted case, and developed from there.
Case in point, the 348 Winchester has been necked to .30 , and then the rim turned off to to make a rimmless cartridge.
It is short and powerful, but it can in no way come anywhere near the shortmags because of the thinner case.
These shortmags are not some big conspirecy to make the stsandard mags obsolete!
The are made to give shooters another cartridge and rifle system to use
IF we choose to.

I have one in 300 short that I built as a target rifle, and a feew thhat are wildcatted, not becuase I think they are better, but because they are different , period.

The short action/long action thing is nitpicking unless you are trying to shave eevery once you can to make a finme custom hunting rifle , then it is an advantage, otherwise it is not a point to sway either way.
It doesn't sway me at all, becuase I use don't often use bolt actions, but that is just me.
Cat
 
Excellent thread about the WSM here (http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=249585).

The relevant point is: smaller cases are more efficient at burning powder in a given bore size, but case shape doesn't matter. People seem to forget that the .300 Win Mag is over bore capacity, so that a slight reduction in that capacity (see: .300 WSM) should produce equal or very nearly equal velocities, especially in lighter bullet weights. The exact same mechanism is at work in the .308. With lighter bullet weights, it could be loaded to equal the .30-06, at the time it was created.

With both the .300 WSM and .308 Winchester, when you load heavier bullets their parity with the larger .300 Win Mag and .30-06 cases disappears.
 
I think the only rational way to come to a decision is to buy one of each. Still working diligently at it.

My criteria, inorder are:
Has to shoot straight
Pretty
Not too loud (anything requiring muffs+plugs is out unless crew served).
I can almost afford it.

By the way, I DO own a strain gage outfit; thought it would be neat to have as an argument settler. Just haven't run into any arguments worth settling yet. Before pontificating on powder/pressure/velocity issues it is useful to do a little reading on Interior Ballistics (what happens inside the barrel) It was all worked out meticulously at the beginning of the twentieth century by artillery engineers. The laws of physics haven't changed.
 
Last edited:
Strain Gauge

oldbadger said:
By the way, I DO own a strain gage outfit; thought it would be neat to have as an argument settler. Just haven't run into any arguments worth settling yet. Before pontificating on powder/pressure/velocity issues it is useful to do a little reading on Interior Ballistics (what happens inside the barrel) It was all worked out meticulously at the beginning of the twentieth century by artillery engineers. The laws of physics haven't changed.
Click to expand...

I can see exterior ballistics worked out beginning at ninteen hundreds and on, but not the interior ballistics. Were they able to time fast events like this? It's an interesting topic.

How and in what situations do you use your strain gauge, Oldbadger? For example, how far down the barrel is the bullet when the maximum pressure is reached? How does this vary with powder burn rates? Etc., etc.?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom