View Full Version : Anyone tried some of the new short magnums?

07-01-2005, 11:03 AM
What caliber and your opinion? Thanks, grayghost

300 RUM
07-01-2005, 11:23 PM
My brother got a 300 WSM, he likes it, I am not real impressed. The ammo is still too pricey for what you get. His is a Winchester M70, I think it only has a 22" well it has to be a 24" barrel? Im not sure it feels short but all my rifles have 26" barrels with an extra 1.5" for a break so they are looong. But my old 300 Winchester with a 26" barrel seems to actually have less drop with similar factory ammo. I once read an article on the ballistics of the 300 WSM that made it look great but when I really looked it said the test barrel was 26" and I have never seen a 300 WSM with that long of a barrel. I think that may explain why my brothers does not seem to shoot as the hype leads you to believe.

I do know of people who swear by them, but I have only shot one, and I admit the gun is lighter but thats all I noticed.

But as my name implies I love my 300 Ultra and many people say alot of bad things about it. But as for me I will keep my 300 RUM :)

07-07-2005, 02:49 PM
Just bells and whistles to sell a cheaper gun action & product to dumb people who think new is better.:eek:

07-13-2005, 11:44 AM
I have a Sendero in 300RUM and I can say this; it kicks like a Mule...lol. It's quite heavy especially with the large Harris bi-pod but I think once I get comfortable with it, I'll love it. May take it to WY this fall for Deer, but maybe not. My old .280 serves me very well in that department. Ammo is half the price of the RUM. Hope to visit Africa next summer. I think the 300RUM will be the ticket on large plains game. I tend to agree with you guys; short magnums seem like a lot of extra expense with no merit. I have a new .243 WSSM in a model 70 (won at the RMEF banquet). Not my cup of tea but I'll give it a go. May make a decent Antelope cartridge, but I'll have to see. Good hunting, and thanks for the opinions. grayghost

07-14-2005, 01:20 PM
I've shot the 300 WSM of my sons quite abit. He's had it for one season and has successfully taken one bear and one deer with it in northern Idaho. His is a Savage. I found the recoil to be very tolerable and the rifle accuracy to be very acceptable using factory Federal premium 180 grs. I haven't shot any other 300's to compare it to. Have a Great Day!--tr

M.T. Pockets
07-14-2005, 03:18 PM
If I didn't own an elk rifle at all I think I would give one serious consideration. I was kind of waiting for the .338 version, but Win. came out with the .325 - that also interests me.

I have a regular old .300 Win. and I like it. I've been with a coule guys that have killed bulls with the new Short Mag. Killed them fine. Personally, I like 200 grain bullets and the old .300 Win. or .300 RUM, or Weatherby would all be a better choice than the Short Mag.

I think the biggest advantage of the Short Mag wouldn't be performance, but length & weight. Nice in & out of the scabbord and nice to carry in timber. However, I think a mountain weight .30-06 or .338-06 or .35 Whelen would be a great elk round in a smaller, lighter action too.

Heck, they're all good.

08-14-2005, 09:31 AM
first off we need new to keep going, either to show us that our old stuff is still plenty good enough to do the job. or as peice to take the olds place. the present turns into history as we speak. im so glad new calibers came along in the past. boy would it be boreing if they hadnt.

yes ive tried one of the wsm calibers. im a 270win freak so the obvious choice was to get the 270wsm. rifle was win featherweight with 24". i belive most all ammo manufacures when testing theyre ammo atleast in wsm calibers use the 24" as theyre test bed. the 24" tube is more or less the standerd when ammo is tested.

ill do search here in few and find out what manufactures use to test what calibers.

back to the topick. i think the wsm hav an advantage in the recoil dept and that dept only. i dont see any balistic improvements. anywhere. but recoil when compared to the 270wsm and 270win. the wsm is definatly less when pushing hot 140gr loads.

i cant say if this is true of its bigger 300wsm brother but its rumored to be.

i do still like the 270wsm and will have another someday in ruger 22" barrel rifle. i wont miss 2"s of steel. got rid of the last one because of the rifle not the caliber. plus i was lusting for a new rifle in a old caliber at the time.

i go from wanting the new fangled to finding the new fangled is just the same. man when will it ever end


09-15-2005, 12:54 PM
It will be interesting to see what they come out with next. My 300RUM is much too heavy IMHO for our local Whitetails, so my hunting with it will be limited. Plan on taking it to Africa next summer if all goes well. Thing still kicks like a Mule :D

10-02-2005, 06:28 PM
those who buy the wsm calibers over the old calibers are not dumb.

maybe those sticking with the old and not haveing an open mind are dumb.

hell maybe way back when the 270was dumb to. whyd we need 300win anyways. the simple fact is we didnt need them. we were dumb to buy them then and we are now.

just be thankfull there are people buying the new calibers. people like me and others keep this shooting world eveolveing.

i can not belive weve made it where were at when odviously the generation that got us here is so closed minded. whoooooooa wait a minute. maybe they arent closed minded. maybe these are just the calibers of theyre time and there just closed minded to the new.

i can count the calibers of our time my time heck id have to actualy study to figure out what calibers have come out in my time. but i know theres a handfull i can think of off the top of my head.

and you know what i like them. i like all the new calibers and im gladd theyre here even if the dont shoot twice as fast as other calibers or even faster at all.

thanks you for the selection of old calibers. dont worry the ones that make it will be old soon enough then this generation can back them 60 years from now when something else new is comeing out


10-02-2005, 10:19 PM
Just my take on the "new" short stuff. Mostly HYPE so the companies can sell more New guns. Sales on firearms has been in the doldrums for a few years. There may be some useable calibers in the mix...but I really don't think so. I am old enough to remember when the "new calibers" were brought out. There were calibers that were designed to fill niches that weren't filled at the time. Things like the 338 Win(in fact I at one time owned the 11th mod 70 ever made in the 338) and the Norma calibers like the 358. Personally I think the ol 300 H&H was just fine but they "Improved" the sucker 3 or 4 times. The 7MM Rem Mag(have 1) was nice as was the 25-06 and 22-250(have 2)(they were wildcats till the 60"s ya know). But the niches are filled and the new stuff really isn't enough better than the old to make much difference to any critter we may shoot. Yeah... I like new rifles etc but I'll leave the Ultra high priced short mags etc alone till they can prove they are so much more necessary:rolleyes:

Guess it just goes to prove I'm an old stick in the mud fuddy duddy:D

10-03-2005, 03:07 AM
Hi All,

No I will not be bothering with the short mags, however if I see something which I think is worthwhile and I can have it then I will give it a try. Following this theory is how I went to using the .41AE pistol cartridge for ISPC shooting. This cartridge was not everyones cup of tea but it served me very well. Of course it's been gone about 8 years now as they banned Handguns:( I miss that Tanfoglio Ultra which I had:mad:

10-07-2005, 11:55 PM
well there is nothing so much more neccesary that we needed such caliber list even in the 60s but they kept comeing out with new caliber left and right even though they werent necesary.

even some of the calibers took over other calibers that mirrod almost identicaly.

why isnt the 6mm as popular as the 243 today. was it the caliber or the rifle it was chamberd in. or maybe how the manufactures twisted the barrels at the time would have made or broken an almost identical caliber.

there realy isnt any reason the 243 is more popular then the 6mm other than what i just said above.


10-08-2005, 07:28 AM
The 6mm Rem is a better choice than the .243 Win, it's balistics prove that fact
The diff was in the marketing of the profuct. Winchester simply did a better more through job of it with product presintation and bribing so-called outdoor writers with free products. Fairly simple really.

10-08-2005, 01:09 PM
On the 243, Vs. 6mm Rem issue....
Winchester DID do a good job of marketing the cartridge as a combo deer/varmint rifle. And chambering the 243 in the Model 70 Featherweight sure didn't hurt.
And, Remington helped them, a LOT.
The tale of twist rates is well known: the 243 a 1-10 twist so that it could handle the 100 grain loads, and Rem using a 1-12 twist in the 244 Rem, in theory for better accuracy with light bullets.
Remington viewed the 244 Remington as a varmint cartridge, pure and simple.
Winchester, from the start, loaded 80 grain varmint loads and 100 grain deer loads- and marketed them as such.
Remington's factory loads when the 244 came out were 75 grain and 90 grain- and they weren't marketed as deer loads.
The 6MM is a really fine cartridge. But, by the time Remington wised up to the dual use (varmint/deer) concept, the 243 was way out in front, and chambered in a lot of brands of rifles.
The problem was never the cartridge, really, it was Remington's marketing.

10-08-2005, 03:21 PM
wasn it called the 6mmwinchestermagnum for awhile.
i threw the magnum part in there ;)

isnt the 257 current roberts desing actualy a remington version of the 257 roberts but the roberts name stuck.

im pretty sure remington standerized robert's 257.