300 magnums

Coyote_Hunter_ · Posted: Tue Dec 27, 2005 10:29 pm Post subject: Re: 300 magnums

Welcome, RangerR70!

Let me be another voice in support of the .300 Win Mag. Iâ€™ve been using a 7mm Rem Mag for over 20 years here in Colorado and have taken all but one of my elk with it without any problems of lost game or long tracking jobs. In fact, the longest â€˜trackingâ€™ job was about 40 yards through open sage. But I recently corrected the â€˜mistakeâ€™ I made all those years ago and purchased a .300 Win Mag because I think it is the best all-around western caliber.

If a short or long magnum does it for you, then get one. You plan to reload so ammo cost wonâ€™t be a big factor once you get started. But recoil might be with the longs. Might be so bad you decide to go with a brake, which is definitely bad for your hearing, and sometimes worse for those around you. At my range you cannot shoot a rifle with a brake without first notifying everyone on the firing line. And if anyone objects you are out of luck.

From a practical standpoint, a .300 Win Mag will do 99% of what a .300 RUM will do. And in 24 years of hunting elk I have NEVER run into a situation where that extra 1% would have made a difference.

Crackshot · Posted: Wed Dec 28, 2005 12:25 pm Post subject: Re: 300 magnums

The 300 Win mag is a very useful round and in my opinion does not kick hard at all. It is used alot at the long range (1000yds) rifle matches and holds some world records I believe. Quite a few Snipers use this cartridge as well as the 308 win. and the 338 Lapua.

Flint54 · Posted: Thu Dec 29, 2005 2:44 am Post subject: Re: 300 magnums

I've never been much for Magnums, In all actuality I'v only had 4. Two of them were .30s, a 30/338 and a 300 H&H. My other two were a .264 Win in a M70 Westerner that I got for $300 and sold for $900 after using it in Alaska for @ 3 years and a 338 Win. The 30s were ok but they caused IMO far too much destruction of meat and didn't kill anything any better than my .308 or any other rifle for that matter. My favorite was the 338, it was great at throwing a 180gr at darn near the same as a 150 in a 270.

I'm thinking of a .308 WSSM? A very short action with .308 balistics, I wonder if it would be possible?? Very Happy

515034s10ring · Posted: Thu Dec 29, 2005 10:10 am Post subject: Re: 300 magnums

Flint54 wrote:

I'm thinking of a .308 WSSM? A very short action with .308 balistics, I wonder if it would be possible?? Very Happy

My old 300 WSM kicked less than my 308 and had comparable ballistics....but the idea of cutting it down and decreasing shoulder angle to make a 308 WSSM would be a nifty thing to see Very Happy

Crackshot · Posted: Thu Dec 29, 2005 11:44 am Post subject: Re: 300 magnums

The 300 Win mag works, "If it aint broke dont fix it"
The 308 win work as well, so why fart around with a 308 WSSM? the 308 win shoots well and is very accurate as is. I have a Springfeild M1A Super match that can cut a hole in a target with 20 round magazine so neat you cant count individual shots @ 200 yds. (from a bench) Smile

515034s10ring · Posted: Thu Dec 29, 2005 12:08 pm Post subject: Re: 300 magnums

Granted, if it ain't broke don't fix it......but the point of the matter is a reduced COL length (and action) by atleast 1/2" with the same and better ballistics would be pretty cool to see Cool

Crackshot · Posted: Thu Dec 29, 2005 1:00 pm Post subject: Re: 300 magnums

Yes I know, experimentation is the heart of what we do aint it! Sorry I forgot myself for a minute.:)
BUT, aint the 308 already in a short action? I think so!

moose2 · Posted: Thu Dec 29, 2005 2:11 pm Post subject: Re: 300 magnums

R70, Indeed the 300 Mags. have a definite purpose and I'm not here to discourage you from getting one, but I would suggest to you to make an attempt to find someone who has one and shoot it some before you purchase one. After shooting one for a bit you will have a better feel for the caliber. You may find its exactly what you thought it would be or not.
Good Luck!--tr

515034s10ring · Posted: Thu Dec 29, 2005 7:09 pm Post subject: Re: 300 magnums

Crackshot wrote:

BUT, aint the 308 already in a short action? I think so!

And 1/2" less would make it super short Very Happy

Flint54 · Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2005 12:13 am Post subject: Re: 300 magnums

One of the main reasons that I would like to work on a .308 WSSM is that the main idea is to get the shortest possible action legnth and the maximum ammount of effective barrel legnth. One of my main canidates for this project would be a TC Encore or a Ruger #1 or #3. By using a single shot I would gain the most possible effective barrel legnth in the shortest possible firearm.

For the new comers: Effective barrel legnth is the actual legnth that effects the bullet in its flight down the barrel. IE. Given a barrel legnth of 24" a short cartridge such as a WSSM allows @ 1.5+ inches more barrel for the powder to burn than the same 24" chambered for a .300 Win Mag. This is due to the actual chamber legnth.

In addition combining this with a single shot action you are able to effectively use a longer barrel for better ballistics than you can with a bolt action due to the actual action legnth added onto the barrel. Cool

Crackshot · Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2005 10:11 am Post subject: Re: 300 magnums

Seems like alot of messing around for alittle gain!

515034s10ring · Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2005 10:40 am Post subject: Re: 300 magnums

Crackshot wrote:

Seems like alot of messing around for alittle gain!

Maybe, but when you look at the history aspect of it...In the early 1900's the 30/06 was developed and at almost 50 years later (49 to be exact) the 308 was developed in 1952 for an effective short action cartridge with machine and semi-auto rifles in mind. Then after WWI the cartridge being called at that time "T65" it was saught after as being effective in the military tests, and then called the 7.62 NATO in 1954.

I can go on and on about the development of powder specifically for the 308, but it would take a lot of time Cool

But my point is, with evolution, it makes since to me and we are long over due (54 years in two days Very Happy

) for the non magnum cartridge, starting based off of being a half in shorter than a 30/06, and now for these times, a half inch shorter than a 308. Cool

And plus what Flint 54 said Cheers

shrpshtrjoe · Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2005 12:05 pm Post subject: Re: 300 magnums

Build it and people will come Very Happy

Coyote_Hunter_ · Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2005 12:18 pm Post subject: Re: 300 magnums

Not to be contrarian, but I would like to point out that the military, at least potentially, gains a lot more with a short cartridge than any hunter. The advantages of a short cartridge include reduced weight which in turn allows more ammo to be transported for the same cost â€“ whether the cost is measured in terms of space, fuel or wear and tear on the ground pounders. Smaller also means less powder and brass are consumed, which is important in both reducing cost and conserving raw materials when you are turning out hundreds of millions of cartridges.

I would suggest that for the average hunter there is no practical difference between a .30-06, a .308 or a .308 Short.

515034s10ring · Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2005 12:24 pm Post subject: Re: 300 magnums

shrpshtrjoe wrote:

:D Build it and people will come Very Happy

Yes sir indeed......And if ya didn't know, that's what happened with the 7mm. Although it took Remington to build a 7mm some 20 years later to really get the Weatherby 7mm noticed (Weatherby was the first Americam 7mm mag in non wildcat status) and people bought more than production could hold.