Tikka T3 300WSM or 300 win mag
- Thread starter 9945
- Start date
LongBomber
CGN Regular
- Location
- Fernie, bc
If I remember right they are b oth based off the long action in a t3. So the advantage of saving a few ounces and an inch in length is not there with a T3. I would go with the standard win mag.
I have the exact gun, T3 lite in 300 wsm. You don't get the short action length but I like the .300 wsm, mine loves 165 partitions going about 3100 fps. Works wonders on moose so should also handle caribou. 300 win mag or 300 wsm is pretty much the same until you move into 200 gr bullets - if you want that go with the standard 300 win mag.
MuleyMadness
Regular
- Location
- Kamloops, BC
And I have a T3 lite SS in .300WM Here's my take. Ballistically they are identical up to 180grn bullets at which point and beyond the winmag seems to have the advantage. Both will shoot excellent, both are very reliable cartridges for any north american game, you can find the ammo for both most anywhere now. What I would tell you is this...sniff around and see which one you can get the best pricing on, because it's not going to make any difference which one you pick for the hunting you want to do, so you might as well save a couple of bucks.
All T3's are the same action length, All magazines are the same length.
The WSM mag has a spacer in the back of the mag to take up space and the bolt stop is in a different place. Other than that its the same critter. After 180 grains the WM has the advantage, below that its a dead heat. Both are fairly easy to reload for and both are easy to find factory cartridges for. Both are very acurate as well.
But for the life of me why is it so hard to find a WM on the shelf and WSM's are stocked out the hoop? And in a lot of actions for more money.
I had both and would own either again but I wouldn't pay more for a WSM and if I was only set up for reloading one, then thats the one I'd buy.
YMMV.
The WSM mag has a spacer in the back of the mag to take up space and the bolt stop is in a different place. Other than that its the same critter. After 180 grains the WM has the advantage, below that its a dead heat. Both are fairly easy to reload for and both are easy to find factory cartridges for. Both are very acurate as well.
But for the life of me why is it so hard to find a WM on the shelf and WSM's are stocked out the hoop? And in a lot of actions for more money.
I had both and would own either again but I wouldn't pay more for a WSM and if I was only set up for reloading one, then thats the one I'd buy.
YMMV.
300 win mag is a much more accessible cartridge for reloading data, components, and finding factory loaded ammo. The cartridge has been shot at long distances that you would like to attempt, so for these reasons I would get the 300 wm. I have 3 close friends I shoot with that shoot 300 WSM and 2 of the 3 rifles have feeding issues. 1 rifle is a Browning A-Bolt is stainless synthetic and the other is a Tikka T3 in stainless synthetic. The one that did not have any issues is a Sako Finnlight. Both rifles needed to have the feeding path modified by a gunsmith. The short, wide cartridge seems to be a tough one to make feed properly. Let us know wihch way you go!
To my way of thinking it is more a matter of bullet weight.
If you want to shoot bullets of 180 grains or less either chamber will do.
If you want the long range capability of the aerodynamic 200 grainers the 300win is (in my opinion) the best choice.
One interesting little tidbit about the 300Win is that 75-76 grains of RL-22 over a 180 partition is good for around 3100fps and has been very accurate in every rifle I have ever tried it in (work up carefully). I assume the 180gr TSX would produce the same results....just haven't got around to trying it in a few different rifles yet.
If you want to shoot bullets of 180 grains or less either chamber will do.
If you want the long range capability of the aerodynamic 200 grainers the 300win is (in my opinion) the best choice.
One interesting little tidbit about the 300Win is that 75-76 grains of RL-22 over a 180 partition is good for around 3100fps and has been very accurate in every rifle I have ever tried it in (work up carefully). I assume the 180gr TSX would produce the same results....just haven't got around to trying it in a few different rifles yet.
My T3 300WSM is one of the slickest, best feeding rifles I've ever picked up and this is the first I've come across any T3 having feeding issues. I will agree though in some actions it may be an issue. Alot of actions in the WSM also carry one less round in the magazine and that could also be a concern.
Just my 2 cents
No difference.
700 ft is just a bit over 200 metres, You don't need a magnum for that. 30-06, 270, .308, - they will all work as well.
I by no means am knocking the Tikka T3 rifle, I actually think for certain uses it it very nice. I have seen and used it in many different calibers and not one had any issues except the 300 WSM. I know with other rifle makers when they ran into these issues it was in the early production of the rifles. Some also had issues depending on whether or not they were double or single stack magazines. The Tikka has a single stack and a nice straight feed path but this ones feed ramp angle needed to be modified, no biggy. Still a great bang for your buck rifle.
Max handloads for the 30-06 can close in to commercial 300 mag to near the gap of dropping back to 308, at least according to my Lee reloading manual and the ammo brochures I've seen.
edit: Not that I do that, but I do have a pound of 4350 to see how it does with the 180 grains.
I haven't chronographed many 300Win factory loads so you may be right here.
The fastest (pressure tested) 180 grain load I have seen for the 30-06 is H-4350. If you are running over 2800fps you are over pressure....Period.
Some of the old reloading manuals are way out to lunch...be careful.
I just checked the 2009 remington catalog, and the same 180gr bullets for 30-06 vs 300mag is as follows:
2700fps vs 2960fps both at muzzle
long range trajectory:
300 yard drop 9" vs 7.4"
400 yard drop 26.3" vs 21.3"
The hotter handload, at 2800 fps will have significantly less difference of what is already not a huge difference in the field, hence my point, and I dont think it's worth the extra powder to get that performance. Of course I'm talking max load vs off the shelf but I was clear on that.
Maybe I shouldn't be throwing out things like max load performance so freely, but I expect anyone working up a load will show proper dilligence as well as understand the concept of accurate loads for each rifle...
As you probably guessed I'm a 30-06 fan, I dont think the extra noise, recoil and gunpowder is worth the little extra range you might get, because at ranges exceeding the 30-06 marksmanship becomes the big issue, not hitting power.
But IIRC we're hijacking the thread, i meant to make a small aside without sparking a debate.
