I was in a gun store the other day looking some long guns and there was a sign up that said all WSSM's $100 off. With the plant closing is it pretty much it for this line of cartridges? I can't recall if anyone else chambered them off the top of my head.

Browning is owned by the same parent company as Winchester and chambers their bolt action A-bolt in 223 WSSM, 243 WSSM and 25 WSSM. I am shopping for a new varmint rifle and am considering one of the WSSM's but will probably go with one of the old timers like the 22-250.

Browning is owned by the same parent company as Winchester and chambers their bolt action A-bolt in 223 WSSM, 243 WSSM and 25 WSSM. I am shopping for a new varmint rifle and am considering one of the WSSM's but will probably go with one of the old timers like the 22-250.
I have heard that the WSM's and WSSM's are getting on their last legs.

I have heard that the WSM's and WSSM's are getting on their last legs.
I can only hope this is the case, as I have seen first hand how overrated these cartridges are.

I can only hope this is the case, as I have seen first hand how overrated these cartridges are.

Me too. I don't necessarily like a bunch of new calibers. But new guns, that is a different story! You can hunt anything on the planet with 3 calibers: .22-250, .30-06, and .375 H&H. I am pretty sure each one of those has been around for a while. Outside of the 300 and 338 RUM I just haven't seen a significant difference in what we already have. For the record I don't own a 300 or 338 RUM, but I did sleep at a Holiday Inn Express.

C'mon, guys - how do you think the economy would keep churning if everyone hung onto their .270's and '06's? I like the new chamberings - just opens up the used gun market for a bunch of the "older" chamberings! :D

C'mon, guys - how do you think the economy would keep churning if everyone hung onto their .270's and '06's? I like the new chamberings - just opens up the used gun market for a bunch of the "older" chamberings! :D
I hate to say it, but, you are right, when a new fad in the gun world hits, a lot of people take a closer look at, and appreciate, the old standbys a little more.;)

I can just see them ol boys around the pickle barrel way back when....them durned fools is gonna replace the flintlock...idiots are gonna ruin everthang.

Hang in there kdub....I have about three fingers of scotch, neat, no ice sittin in front of me...you shoulda saved a few miles on the Blazer!

While sobbing in self pity over not being able to hurry to Okie Land to claim my booty, the darling wife presented me with two (count'um - 2) bottles of 12 year old single malt. Guess I did something right, somewhere! ;)

Me too. I don't necessarily like a bunch of new calibers. But new guns, that is a different story! You can hunt anything on the planet with 3 calibers: .22-250, .30-06, and .375 H&H. I am pretty sure each one of those has been around for a while. Outside of the 300 and 338 RUM I just haven't seen a significant difference in what we already have. For the record I don't own a 300 or 338 RUM, but I did sleep at a Holiday Inn Express.
You can hunt any game in the world with, a .22 LR, .300 Win Mag, and .338 Win Mag, and a 12 Gauge for game of the flying type.:)

I'm surprised that all the gun magazines are pushing the WSM & WSSM cartridges so hard, and at the same time are completely ignoring the existence of Remington's nearly identical SAUM line. At the other end, they're totally ignoring the RUM's, too.

I guess Win. offered more payola, so much that it ran them bankrupt??

M1Garand,
The reason for the $100 mark-down is that they are probably stuck with merchandise that has no customers. I have seen M70s in Cabela's and a couple of other stores, with lots of WSMs and WSSMs. Only one 270 WCF that I can recall. Also Coyotes still in stock. Nary an M94 in sight.

Browning slipped my mind, but I wonder how much longer they'll continue to chamber the WSSM's? Seems like they're not doing well. I guess for anyone who owns one, stock up on rounds or if you load, brass. You never know.

I'd like to see the .325 WSM survive, if for no other reason than a popular 8mm cartridge in this country is long overdue.

News to me that the WSMs, at least, are at risk of going away. Friends that own them seem to really like them. (Though, it was interesting the other night when a non-reloading friend brought some new cases to reload at my bench. I found that the WSM cases wouldn't fit in my Lee hand priming tool! Dremel tool fixed that in a hurry....)

I ran across two .223 WSSMs at a local gun shop the other day. I was surprised to see any NIB Win M70s, so I asked to look at one. Synthetic stock....fairly ugly looking rifle. I asked if they'd make me a deal on it (it'd been in stock for 2+ years); they said NO and I thanked them and left. I don't think they're big sellers. ;)

Yeah, I thought the WSM's were doing OK. The only one that really peaks my interest is the 325 WSM.

Ruger and Savage are also chambering the WSM's, and Kimber. I too think they'll survive. WSSM's may be on their way out....so better get one soon so you have a collector! When Winchester closed their doors, the WSSM's were the only rifles that hung around on the shelves. Now, the SAUM's aren't gonna make it. Remington is chambering their rifles in the WSM's and I'm sure they swallowed hard on that decision.

I too hope the 325 makes it; only one of the bunch that isn't in an already saturated caliber field.

Ruger and Savage are also chambering the WSM's, and Kimber. I too think they'll survive. WSSM's may be on their way out....so better get one soon so you have a collector! When Winchester closed their doors, the WSSM's were the only rifles that hung around on the shelves. Now, the SAUM's aren't gonna make it. Remington is chambering their rifles in the WSM's and I'm sure they swallowed hard on that decision.

I too hope the 325 makes it; only one of the bunch that isn't in an already saturated caliber field.
I think they will all eventually get phased out, within the next 2-3 years, also, the 325 WSM, can't do anything any better than the .338 Win Mag, which is what it was supposed to replace.

I think they will all eventually get phased out, within the next 2-3 years, also, the 325 WSM, can't do anything any better than the .338 Win Mag, which is what it was supposed to replace.

This is a cross-post. I apologize to any who may have already read this:


I think the .325 WSM is one of the more useful of the "short magnums" that have recently come to market. I have lots of friends in Montana that hunt elk in areas that may require a shot of 400 yards in open country...or, two hours later, 60 yards in black timber...and they are moving to this cartridge as one that can be made up into a smaller, lighter gun for carrying and handling in the thick stuff that still packs a wallop (this is grizzly country!) and long range performance like a .338 Win Mag.

Granted, it doesn't do anything the .338 Win Mag doesn't....but, hey, is their really a difference in the .260, .270, .280, 7mm-08, .308 or .30-'06 to a dead deer? Nope.

But we all have preferences and a popular 8mm cartridge in this country is long overdue. Folks from around the world have used the venerable old 8x57 Mauser to take every game animal on Earth...and it's about time we followed suit.

To wit....there really is no difference in the utility of a Ford pickup or a Chevy pickup, but lots of folks buy both. Heck, some even buy Dodge, Toyota, Nissan...you get the picture.

Life would suck if there was only one bottle of cabernet...variety is indeed the spice of life!

I think they will all eventually get phased out, within the next 2-3 years, also, the 325 WSM, can't do anything any better than the .338 Win Mag, which is what it was supposed to replace.

They are not all going to get phased out. Not the WSMs anyway. The .300 and .270 WSMs are quite popular with the younger generation of hunters. Myself, I used to scoff at them. That lasted until I found a NIB Model 70 Classic Laminate in 7mm WSM for the right price. Since new M-70 Classics were getting hard to find, I bought it. I have to say I love it. MOA out of the box and it hits hard. Sure, no harder than the 7 Rem Mag, but I dislike belted cases. So I like it.

They are not all going to get phased out. Not the WSMs anyway. The .300 and .270 WSMs are quite popular with the younger generation of hunters. Myself, I used to scoff at them. That lasted until I found a NIB Model 70 Classic Laminate in 7mm WSM for the right price. Since new M-70 Classics were getting hard to find, I bought it. I have to say I love it. MOA out of the box and it hits hard. Sure, no harder than the 7 Rem Mag, but I dislike belted cases. So I like it.
I take it you are under 35 years old? That seems to be the age class that the WSM's prefer, BTW, good luck using factory ammo, as I haven't found a WSM that would perform anywhere near the advertised numbers, but, those worthless ole' belted cartridges, usually exceed or match factory numbers, oh well, belted magnums suck, I guess, thats why they are still way outselling the Winchester Sucky Mags?:) I don't see why people hate the belted cartridges, I haven't seen any inherent problems with them, they all have shot under 1", what is wrong with that? The problem with these rebated rim cartridges is feeding reliability, I would take a belted mag on a DG hunt anyday over a Rebated rim magnum, because of feed problems associated with the rebated rims, oh well, my opinion doesn't account too much, Winchester already suckered you in, it looks like.:)

I think they will all eventually get phased out, within the next 2-3 years, also, the 325 WSM, can't do anything any better than the .338 Win Mag, which is what it was supposed to replace.

I really doubt the 300 and 270 WSM's will die as they were the two most popular of the line; many manufacturers chambering them now, at least the 300.

I don't think the 325 was introduced to replace the 338 - it couldn't anyway with the 338 able to throw much heavier bullets. Some of the gun mag writers may have written it up that way, but if so, it was poor writing!

Just about all new cartridges introduced these days aren't meant to fill any performance gaps, they're introduced to sell more guns and ammo! And for that purpose, I think most get the job done.

I'm over 35....even over 40, but I'd still like to have a 325. :)

I take it you are under 35 years old? That seems to be the age class that the WSM's prefer, BTW, good luck using factory ammo, as I haven't found a WSM that would perform anywhere near the advertised numbers, but, those worthless ole' belted cartridges, usually exceed or match factory numbers, oh well, belted magnums suck, I guess, thats why they are still way outselling the Winchester Sucky Mags?:) I don't see why people hate the belted cartridges, I haven't seen any inherent problems with them, they all have shot under 1", what is wrong with that? The problem with these rebated rim cartridges is feeding reliability, I would take a belted mag on a DG hunt anyday over a Rebated rim magnum, because of feed problems associated with the rebated rims, oh well, my opinion doesn't account too much, Winchester already suckered you in, it looks like.:)

No I'm not under 35. I wish I was. In any case, your quite rude. I never said I "hated" belted magnums, or that they "suck" or are "worthless". So I'm not sure where you got that negative stuff.

As for the rim, I am obviously not hunting anything that bites back with this gun, so what difference does that make? It's still a CF action and has been flawless to date with reloads and factory ammo.

I guess I did get sucked by Winchester. They sold me a rifle that shoots 3" groups at 300 yds with both 150 grain Sierra SPs and 160 grain Bear Claws. And kicks light like a .270. It sure stinks to be stuck with that kind of performance. What will I do? If I was only younger than 35, I would have time to make up for this horrible mistake!

OK, guys -

Let's tone it down and extend a little courtesy to each other in the discussions. A difference of opinions is healthy thing. Being cute or belittling isn't.

No I'm not under 35. I wish I was. In any case, your quite rude. I never said I "hated" belted magnums, or that they "suck" or are "worthless". So I'm not sure where you got that negative stuff.

As for the rim, I am obviously not hunting anything that bites back with this gun, so what difference does that make? It's still a CF action and has been flawless to date with reloads and factory ammo.

I guess I did get sucked by Winchester. They sold me a rifle that shoots 3" groups at 300 yds with both 150 grain Sierra SPs and 160 grain Bear Claws. And kicks light like a .270. It sure stinks to be stuck with that kind of performance. What will I do? If I was only younger than 35, I would have time to make up for this horrible mistake!
You did too say that you "disliked" belted magnums, hey it isn't my problem you are a complete moron, I think its funny that you are stupid enough to fall for such a dumb marketing ploy, you know why the 7 WSM doesn't kick as hard as a .270? Becuase it isn't pushing as much powder down the barrel as a 7mm Rem Mag, the WSM's can't match the Long Action Magnums in peformance, plain and simple.

Chantecler111, you don't learn too fast. You're banned for a month.

Bye
Jack

They are not all going to get phased out. Not the WSMs anyway. The .300 and .270 WSMs are quite popular with the younger generation of hunters. Myself, I used to scoff at them. That lasted until I found a NIB Model 70 Classic Laminate in 7mm WSM for the right price. Since new M-70 Classics were getting hard to find, I bought it. I have to say I love it. MOA out of the box and it hits hard. Sure, no harder than the 7 Rem Mag, but I dislike belted cases. So I like it.
BDII, What's a "belted cartrage"? Heard of 'em but don't know what tey are.

I don't think the 325 was introduced to replace the 338 - it couldn't anyway with the 338 able to throw much heavier bullets. Some of the gun mag writers may have written it up that way, but if so, it was poor writing!

Just about all new cartridges introduced these days aren't meant to fill any performance gaps, they're introduced to sell more guns and ammo! And for that purpose, I think most get the job done.

I'm over 35....even over 40, but I'd still like to have a 325. :)

I'm with you Shawn. I'm over 35 and wouldn't mind a 325. I don't think it was ever intended to replace the 338, it's too established and effective a cartridge. I think the 325 was an attempt to give similar power with flat trajectory and less recoil.

BDII, What's a "belted cartrage"? Heard of 'em but don't know what tey are.

It's a cartridge with a belt at the head of the case in a magnum such as the 300 Win Mag, 7mm Rem Mag, and 338 Win Mag to name a few.

It's a cartridge with a belt at the head of the case in a magnum such as the 300 Win Mag, 7mm Rem Mag, and 338 Win Mag to name a few.
Thanks. Just googled a pix and I see the raised "belt" just forward of the head.

Im new to the board here but, I hate to say it, but the WSSM's and the Saum's and later than those will be the WSM's, they will be phased out, sometimes marketing just don't work out as planned. Having just a little inside information is a bad thing. I have a soft spot for all rifle cartriges and hate to see any go regardless of their performance. The ol' standby's are still far and away the biggest marketshare holders. But expect a few new chambering's in the next few years, and hopefully they can stand the test of time. I really like a short action but it has to out perform an existing cartridge or find its own niche in order to survive. Will be sad to see any offering go, but they will come and go, as many cartridges have done before. But there is what could be some cool offering's on the horizon.

Being an 8mm fan I to find the 325 interesting. I've always liked bigger bores and adopted the 8mm Rem mag years ago.

I've never held that short actions are any different than long actons as far as using them. When your shooting at game bolt comes back and goes forward and I never could tell the difference in feeding my full length long mag or the 308 model 7.

I do like the way those 32's and 33's and 35's kill and I didn't like the way my buddies 7mm Rem mag blew up meat til he went to a heavier bullet especially on elk size critters. In all actuality the 270 or an 06 with light bullets tore up critters worse than any of the magnums I used.

Got to say though that now with so many premium good bullets that the smaller bores are becoming lots more popular. Had to throw that in now that theres a 280 Remington sitting in the safe.

it looks like the 325, the 270 and the 7mm WSM are becoming more popular around here along with the old standby the 35 Whelen for goodness sakes.

There is a very good article in the March/April 2006 issue of RifleShooter. It explains in detail the effective advantages of a short fat case. Even shorter and fatter than the WSM's and SAUM's. I am 41 and bought a 270wsm as if my age makes any difference. It's different, it shoots quite well, and I like it. I don't understand the anger some feel when these things are brought up. Am I a moron because I bought a rifle I liked? Maybe in the eyes of some. I don't really care what others think of my purchase. It's mine, I bought it and I shoot it. I'd like to think we could buy a gun of our choice and enjoy it. Do I like the older cartridges? Without a doubt, in fact my next purchase will probably a 45-70 Marlin. But it will be stainless and wood.

There is a very good article in the March/April 2006 issue of RifleShooter. It explains in detail the effective advantages of a short fat case. Even shorter and fatter than the WSM's and SAUM's. I am 41 and bought a 270wsm as if my age makes any difference. It's different, it shoots quite well, and I like it. I don't understand the anger some feel when these things are brought up. Am I a moron because I bought a rifle I liked? Maybe in the eyes of some. I don't really care what others think of my purchase. It's mine, I bought it and I shoot it. I'd like to think we could buy a gun of our choice and enjoy it. Do I like the older cartridges? Without a doubt, in fact my next purchase will probably a 45-70 Marlin. But it will be stainless and wood.

Not in the least are you a moron. Those are nice little rifles and of course being a youngster at 41 it's a good time to start a collection. Keep in mind that I was in my late 50's when I finally figured out you can never own enough guns.

Being older now and to the point I can't get out and hunt and shoot like I would like to, you just keep getting new rifles and shooting them to boot.

Folks will always have favorites and some get really worked up over something touted as better, but keep in mind that some of these new cartridges though perhaps not any better are still a bunch of fun and anything that stimulates our sport is good.

I've only had one 45-70 and it sure whacked deer and elk at ranges out to 200 yards. Was a fun gun, but I ended up going to the 8mm Rem mag to increase the range some. Sure wish I'd kept that 45-70, for the life of me I can't remember what I traded it for.

Seems like the .223 WSSM is the real problem child in the Winchester family, if the chatter over at www.benchrest.com is on the mark. It's not a good sign if those old boys can't make it shoot.

Bye
Jack

Seems like the .223 WSSM is the real problem child in the Winchester family, if the chatter over at www.benchrest.com is on the mark. It's not a good sign if those old boys can't make it shoot.

Bye
Jack

I was talking to one of the pharmacists up at the VA last week while spending a few days in the hospital and SHE just bought a new 223 WSSM in one of the little Browning gold models. She has put about four boxes of shells thru it without any trouble and really likes it.

She's 50 and lives outside of Spokane WA and has enough ground that she can shoot off her back porch. She's accounted for eight or nine coyotes so far this winter. Sure good to see a gal enjoying whacking coyotes. She also just bought a new Browning over under and is awaiting bird season this coming year.

BDII, What's a "belted cartrage"? Heard of 'em but don't know what tey are.

M-1 is right on. Initially, the belt had to do with strengthening the critical part of the case for magnum rounds. Rimless cases generally seperate just above the rim after multiple loadings due to stretching. Belts also provide the advantage of an additional headspace back-up. If the shoulders of a rimless cartridge are not head spaced correctly, the round can move forward a bit in the chamber a bit when struck by the firing pin. This can cause mis-fires. This will also cause the case to stretch more. The belt, like a rim on a rimmed case (a.k.a. 30-30, 45-70, etc) will help eliminate these misfires. However, a bottle-necked belted cartridge will still stretch if the shoulder headspacing is off - it just stretches forward of the belt. So the strength advantage is really somewhat of a myth. (Some will probably disagree).

I prefer to figure the headspacing of my rifles out and size the case accordingly - to headspace off the shoulder (in bolt guns for varmits and non-dangerous game).

Nothing wrong with belted cartridges though. For dangerous game, I would prefer one - to minimze the chances of a mis-fire if I ended up with a long chambered gun, or if I headspace a reloaded round incorrectly. (Long chambered refers to the fact that shoulder and throat tolerences can vary by a few thousands from gun to gun). They can be "tight" or "long/loose".

As for the published performace of WSMs and standard mags, I have found that most factory data for both to be overstated. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if a 7mm Rem Mag was 50-100 fps faster than a 7mm WSM, even though the factory data says otherwise. It holds more powder, so that would make sense. And I do not care. No game animal in the world will notice as it dies, and the trajectory difference is negligible and any responsible hunting range. Accuracy is all that matters.

To that end, I have noticed the bench rest folks are starting to warm to rounds like the 7mm WSM and wildcat 6.5mm WSM. It gives them the type of platform the .284 cartridge did, but with more power. They like short powder columns, good shoulder angles to headspace off of, and short stiff actions. All these attributes assist in their quest for hyper accuracy.

Having said that, one of the most famous bench rest rounds in history is the .300 H&H, which has polar opposite attributes - so go figure. Its day has passed, but it goes to show that any round can be very accurate.

Belt is for controlling headspace on long tapered rounds. I believe the patent states this.....

The first belted case, the 400/375 Holland & Holland Belted Nitro Express, has almost no shoulder. See the attached picture. It was a solution for feeding from a box magazine. Anyone who's got the rims hooked in a Lee-Enfield will understand. The later and larger .375 and .300 H&H Magnums used the belt as they were first loaded with cordite, and cordite is inserted in the case before it's necked. A sharp neck complicates things when you do it this way.

Bye
Jack

From the few WSM's I've chrono'd I've found factory specs out of line also. Friend had Blount give him a new gun for his 25th anniversery working there and he got one of the new Win 70's, stainless, camo, new Leapold 4.5 to 14. All in all a nice gun, but were were not breaking 2900 fps from it with Federal factory 180's. I was not impressed in comparing it to a 300 Win mag.

Not saying it won't do a good job on animals, but I wouldn't buy it over an 06. Recoil was on par with any of the 300 Win mags I've shot.

Only cartridge on the WSM list I am led to is the 325, but I do like the bigger bores.

Belt is for controlling headspace on long tapered rounds. I believe the patent states this.....

Mike is right. Here is a quote and site from an outfit that deals specifically in developing dies for belted cases:

http://www.larrywillis.com/answers.html

28. Where did the idea of the belted case come from, and what purpose does it serve?

The belted cartridge was first used by Holland & Holland (H&H) on their magnum cases to provide a positive forward stop for the extremely tapered shoulder on their cases. These cases actually need to have a belt, because H&H cases have almost no shoulder and without a belt, they would be pushed forward absorbing some of the firing pin strike.

From the few WSM's I've chrono'd I've found factory specs out of line also. Friend had Blount give him a new gun for his 25th anniversery working there and he got one of the new Win 70's, stainless, camo, new Leapold 4.5 to 14. All in all a nice gun, but were were not breaking 2900 fps from it with Federal factory 180's. I was not impressed in comparing it to a 300 Win mag.

Not saying it won't do a good job on animals, but I wouldn't buy it over an 06. Recoil was on par with any of the 300 Win mags I've shot.

Only cartridge on the WSM list I am led to is the 325, but I do like the bigger bores.
What kinda velocities were you getting from the .300 Win Mag?, I would assume at or over factory specs.

From the few WSM's I've chrono'd I've found factory specs out of line also. Friend had Blount give him a new gun for his 25th anniversery working there and he got one of the new Win 70's, stainless, camo, new Leapold 4.5 to 14. All in all a nice gun, but were were not breaking 2900 fps from it with Federal factory 180's. I was not impressed in comparing it to a 300 Win mag.

Not saying it won't do a good job on animals, but I wouldn't buy it over an 06. Recoil was on par with any of the 300 Win mags I've shot.

Only cartridge on the WSM list I am led to is the 325, but I do like the bigger bores.

I agree 100% with you on the 300 WSM. If you go up to 200 or 220s, I'm told there is very little difference between it and an .30-06. But that one seems to have caught on quite well. I don't think the 7mm WSM is going anywhere in the market except in BR circles. The .270 and .325 make the most sense. They actually fill niches. The .270 weatherby has never been popular, but I am seeing a lot of .270 WSMs now. I also agree that the .325 is the most appealing to me. I'd have to do some head scratching to choose between it and a .35 Whelen for a pure Elk round. Too bad you can't find 8mm Rems in a CF action. That would be better yet IMO.

What kinda velocities were you getting from the .300 Win Mag?, I would assume at or over factory specs.

I was getting 3125 with a 180 grain bullet. Funny thing is accuracy was just excellent. When I first got into a magnum I built a 308 Norma Mag and got velocities in the 3150 fps reagion also.

When I move up I went to the 8mm Rem mag and though I've heard of folks getting 3100 with it I'm pushing a Seirra 220 grainer at 3080.

I agree 100% with you on the 300 WSM. If you go up to 200 or 220s, I'm told there is very little difference between it and an .30-06. But that one seems to have caught on quite well. I don't think the 7mm WSM is going anywhere in the market except in BR circles. The .270 and .325 make the most sense. They actually fill niches. The .270 weatherby has never been popular, but I am seeing a lot of .270 WSMs now. I also agree that the .325 is the most appealing to me. I'd have to do some head scratching to choose between it and a .35 Whelen for a pure Elk round. Too bad you can't find 8mm Rems in a CF action. That would be better yet IMO.
I, too, have been pretty impressed with the performance from the .325 WSM, but, overall, I chose the .338 Win Mag, because you can just do more.

{deleted for duplication of information}

I was getting 3125 with a 180 grain bullet. Funny thing is accuracy was just excellent. When I first got into a magnum I built a 308 Norma Mag and got velocities in the 3150 fps reagion also.

When I move up I went to the 8mm Rem mag and though I've heard of folks getting 3100 with it I'm pushing a Seirra 220 grainer at 3080.
Man, I remember the older Norma Mag, its almost non existent, anymore. Those are great velocities with a 180 Gr. bullet. You ever done any work with the .300 Weatherby?

The WSMs are a bit like modern auto engines. They are metered out to get the most efficiency possible out of a lower capacity, smaller frame. But the bottom line is, greater displacement, means greater upside in power. "You can't replace displacement". With around 9% less capacity, these newer mags will have a hard time beating their older cousins in raw power. Their bonus is - less powder mean lighter felt recoil since it is the weight of the power and bullet, that determines felt recoil the most. Some say short actions are stiffer and thus more accurate. I am basically neutral on this point. Some say they are faster. I can cycle my .30-06 bolts as fast as most can a lever gun, so I ain't buying the faster claim.

Man, I remember the older Norma Mag, its almost non existent, anymore. Those are great velocities with a 180 Gr. bullet. You ever done any work with the .300 Weatherby?

I've never found a 300 Weatherby that would actually do much better than the 300 Win mag in the real world. I built a couple without any freebore and they would do on the outside between 50 and 90 fps better. Not enough to justify the extra powder.

If you want real gains you have to go to the 300 Ultra-mag or the 30-378 Weatherby. My friends 300 Ultra-mag is getting 3380 fps over my chronograph with 180 grain factory loads and 3300 with his handloads.

If I were to buy a rifle chambered in one of the WSM, RSAUM, or any of the newer calibers being introduced I would than buy dies and enough reloading components so in a few years if it was discontinued I would still be able to shoot it! That is what I did when I bought a Marlin 1895 in .450 Marlin, granted this cartridge is still being supported , but only by Hornady.

I've never found a 300 Weatherby that would actually do much better than the 300 Win mag in the real world. I built a couple without any freebore and they would do on the outside between 50 and 90 fps better. Not enough to justify the extra powder.

If you want real gains you have to go to the 300 Ultra-mag or the 30-378 Weatherby. My friends 300 Ultra-mag is getting 3380 fps over my chronograph with 180 grain factory loads and 3300 with his handloads.
Ya know what? I haven't seen the .300 WBY Mag really outdo the .300 Win Mag, I would say they are darn near equal, with all variables the same. But, the .300 Win Mag has cheaper factory ammo, more plentiful factory ammo, and the .300 Win Mag is chambered in a lot more rifles.

The WSMs are a bit like modern auto engines. They are metered out to get the most efficiency possible out of a lower capacity, smaller frame. But the bottom line is, greater displacement, means greater upside in power. "You can't replace displacement". With around 9% less capacity, these newer mags will have a hard time beating their older cousins in raw power. Their bonus is - less powder mean lighter felt recoil since it is the weight of the power and bullet, that determines felt recoil the most. Some say short actions are stiffer and thus more accurate. I am basically neutral on this point. Some say they are faster. I can cycle my .30-06 bolts as fast as most can a lever gun, so I ain't buying the faster claim.
But, they add a little more variety to the shooter's diet, they are interesting cartridges, none the less.

The WSMs are a bit like modern auto engines. They are metered out to get the most efficiency possible out of a lower capacity, smaller frame. But the bottom line is, greater displacement, means greater upside in power. "You can't replace displacement". With around 9% less capacity, these newer mags will have a hard time beating their older cousins in raw power. Their bonus is - less powder mean lighter felt recoil since it is the weight of the power and bullet, that determines felt recoil the most. Some say short actions are stiffer and thus more accurate. I am basically neutral on this point. Some say they are faster. I can cycle my .30-06 bolts as fast as most can a lever gun, so I ain't buying the faster claim.

Good post BDII. I myself have found that claims such as shorter bolt throw for follow up shots or more better accuracy are lost on the fact that we are talking about hunting rifles, not competition rifles. Weight savings is another that I'm not buying either. I think on average when I looked at something in bolt guns such as a 308 Win compared to a 270 Win, the difference varied from manufacturer but on average was 4 ounces.

Good post BDII. I myself have found that claims such as shorter bolt throw for follow up shots or more better accuracy are lost on the fact that we are talking about hunting rifles, not competition rifles. Weight savings is another that I'm not buying either. I think on average when I looked at something in bolt guns such as a 308 Win compared to a 270 Win, the difference varied from manufacturer but on average was 4 ounces.
But, like I said, new cartridges just give people more things to do, plus, I think its exciting, to see how new cartridges perform, compared to existing ones, I am very intrigued by the new .308 Marlin Express, I think that will be a great little caliber in a good handling gun such as the Marlin.

I do hope the 300 WSM sticks around, although I got enough brass to last a couple lifetimes.

I've found it to be very accurate in my Win 70. This could be that the tooling for this cartridge was new and tolerances were tight...as compared to older chamberings.

I get a few hundred fps bump over my 30-06 w/ 200 grain bullets. SUre, it's nothing earthshaking, but wildcatters go to a lot more trouble (like AI'ing) for even less gain. I wanted it for elk hunting...to shoot a little heavier bullet than the 180's I run in my 30-06...and shoot a little faster.

I have an open country mule deer hunt coming up next fall, so I'll work up some 165/168 grain loads. It should shoot flat enough to match my abilities to hit the target.

I do hope the 300 WSM sticks around, although I got enough brass to last a couple lifetimes.

I've found it to be very accurate in my Win 70. This could be that the tooling for this cartridge was new and tolerances were tight...as compared to older chamberings.

I get a few hundred fps bump over my 30-06 w/ 200 grain bullets. SUre, it's nothing earthshaking, but wildcatters go to a lot more trouble (like AI'ing) for even less gain. I wanted it for elk hunting...to shoot a little heavier bullet than the 180's I run in my 30-06...and shoot a little faster.

I have an open country mule deer hunt coming up next fall, so I'll work up some 165/168 grain loads. It should shoot flat enough to match my abilities to hit the target.
I believe that the Ackley Improved cartridges are more trouble than they are worth, the gains are minimal, at best, I just don't see the need for the AI's, never have, never will.

But, like I said, new cartridges just give people more things to do, plus, I think its exciting, to see how new cartridges perform, compared to existing ones, I am very intrigued by the new .308 Marlin Express, I think that will be a great little caliber in a good handling gun such as the Marlin.

I agree with you. T/C is coming out with a new .308 round for their Icon. It apparently uses Hornady's Light Mag technology to get 3000 FPS from a short action firing 150 grain slugs. Seems like the old .308 could have done that with some tweaking. Personally, I'd just get a .30-06. Been some interesting rounds out in recent years though. The .260, 7mm Waters, .454 Casull, the WSMs, the .338 Federal (which seems like a sweethearet round), the .17LRM and the .204. Heck, I'm an old fashion .30-06 guy, but I'd like to have one of each of those!

When I move up I went to the 8mm Rem mag and though I've heard of folks getting 3100 with it I'm pushing a Seirra 220 grainer at 3080.

I'd be interested to hear the receipe for these results.

I have a big 8 and the best I've ever gotten from it was low/mid 2900's with the 220.

But, like I said, new cartridges just give people more things to do, plus, I think its exciting, to see how new cartridges perform, compared to existing ones, I am very intrigued by the new .308 Marlin Express, I think that will be a great little caliber in a good handling gun such as the Marlin.

I agree I'm all for new developments, and wouldn't mind a 325 or a 338 Federal myself. But I think that some of the "advantages" given for a short vs long action are overrated.

I believe that the Ackley Improved cartridges are more trouble than they are worth, the gains are minimal, at best, I just don't see the need for the AI's, never have, never will.

I agree with that also. My feeling it that they've for the most part outlived their usefulness. Back in the day when there were limited powders and cartridges, it was beneficial to squeeze extra performance out of a cartridge. Now with so many choices IMO, it's hard to justify AIing most cartridges as you can just get something with more power if you desire. Why AI a 280 Rem when you can get a 7mm mag? Or AI a 30-06 (or 308) when there are numerous 300 mags.

I agree I'm all for new developments, and wouldn't mind a 325 or a 338 Federal myself. But I think that some of the "advantages" given for a short vs long action are overrated.



I agree with that also. My feeling it that they've for the most part outlived their usefulness. Back in the day when there were limited powders and cartridges, it was beneficial to squeeze extra performance out of a cartridge. Now with so many choices IMO, it's hard to justify AIing most cartridges as you can just get something with more power if you desire. Why AI a 280 Rem when you can get a 7mm mag? Or AI a 30-06 (or 308) when there are numerous 300 mags.
I agree with everything you said, the thing about the short mags is, they are trying to fix a problem that isn't their, I have killed game animals with short and long action rifles, the length of the bolt has no bearing on how fast you can get off a shot, and the lighter rifle issue is just, well, bs. And, the Ackley Improveds, anymore, just are not needed, I guy can go out and a get a 7mm Mag for under $400 all day, why waste the time and money on a .280AI?

It seems to me alot of you like velocity and energy. Which most do, but nobody seems to talk about Lazzeroni. Ballistically I can't find many that out perform them, take the 7.21 (.284) Firehawk 140 Nosler Part. is 3580 fps and 3985 ft. lb. at the muzzle. I myself have a .308 Warbird that is 3680 fps and 4512 ft-lb and love it but I would like to try the 6.53 Scramjet or the 8.59 Titan but the .425 Meteor seems a little much for me. If anyone has used any of the other please let me know what you think of them. In the end, the more the better when it comes to variety.

Your right about these fine cartridges not being discussed much. Partly I think because of the cost of his rifles perhaps. I do understand Savage was chambering at least one of his cartridges.

What bullet are you shooting in the 308 Warbird?

I've used both the 150 and 180 but I prefer the 150 both are Nosler Part. I do have 100 rnds of 200 gr. Swift A-fr. but have'nt given them a try yet.

When I first started out with the 308 Norma I was interested in maximum velocity and loaded 150's. Found that meat destruction was terrible and went to the 180's.

I was hunting up Rapid river off the Little Salmon river here in Idaho and jumped a bunch of mule deer. We had a two deer season at the time so I shot a little doe trotting up the hill at about a hundred yards in a line of five or six does.

When the gun came back down the does were still trotting up the hill. I had tried for a neck shot and thought I had missed. My hunting partner whom was right behind me said "you got him".

When we found her about 15 yards below the steep trail I found that I had hit her low in the back of the head with a Sierra 150 grain spitzer.

All that was left of her head was her ears and neck. Everything else was gone. One more shot just behind the front shoulders with the same bullet bloodshot one whole front quarter of a nice buck the next year. After that I went to the 180 grain bullets in the 300 magnums.

Ah, but a AI case outperforms the standard cases in velocity and bolt thrust. In addition, the fireformed cases which chamber on the shoulder fit like a glove in the chamber and result in longer case life with less trimming. Besides - anyone can own a standard chambering. :p

Those Lazzeroni cartridges, are amazing, they are just top notch performers, but, they are very expensive to own and shoot. The rifles are expensive enough, not to mention components, but, I haven't seen any thing that can outdo em.

When I first started out with the 308 Norma I was interested in maximum velocity and loaded 150's. Found that meat destruction was terrible and went to the 180's.

I was hunting up Rapid river off the Little Salmon river here in Idaho and jumped a bunch of mule deer. We had a two deer season at the time so I shot a little doe trotting up the hill at about a hundred yards in a line of five or six does.

When the gun came back down the does were still trotting up the hill. I had tried for a neck shot and thought I had missed. My hunting partner whom was right behind me said "you got him".

When we found her about 15 yards below the steep trail I found that I had hit her low in the back of the head with a Sierra 150 grain spitzer.

All that was left of her head was her ears and neck. Everything else was gone. One more shot just behind the front shoulders with the same bullet bloodshot one whole front quarter of a nice buck the next year. After that I went to the 180 grain bullets in the 300 magnums.
I have found the 180 Gr. bullets, do excellent internal damage, without the big splatter of the 150 grs, I am refering to standard Soft Point ammo, BTW.

I can see a consensus developing that I have to play contrarian with. I went through Gunsite’s 270 class with an M14 and won the shoot-off at the end, but weight of that rifle was no help. What gave me the winning edge was the speed with which the gas system operated the bolt, and nobody in the class had even begun to approach Jeff Cooper’s speed with a bolt at the time, or I don’t believe I’d have won. People with longer cartridges, to work the bolt fast, had to be taught to tip the rifle slightly to the side to get a round loaded without dismounting the rifle. Otherwise they would poke themselves in their glasses. I later lugged an even heavier (with bipod) tac rifle through the PR1 class, also winning the shoot-off at the end, but this time operating a bolt, and, again, weight and speed mattered and it would have been easier with less weight and more bolt speed on my part. Fortunately the action was .308 length, because having to do the head dodge would have sunk me.

At The Sconce, Cooper liked to demonstrate the bolt when it wasn’t expected, like a magic trick, except there was no trick involved; just developed technique. The first time I saw him do it was in his armory. He was taking a bead at the corner of the ceiling with the .375 Scout predecessor he had taken his lion with, snapped the trigger and ran the bolt. I had never seen, or, more accurately, heard anything like it. Say the word “clickityclack” really, really fast to the point your tongue is tripping over the syllables. Practice it several times first, and will just about get to the speed Cooper had with that bolt, opening it, going to full counterbattery, then locking it back up. By the time I saw him with the first “Dragoon” at another visit, the shorter bolt throw had just about removed the time it took to say the last syllable. It had got just short enough that virtually no forearm movement was involved. Hand and wrist alone could do it.

Cooper was a great believer in the “hammer” in modern pistol technique and saw no reason one would not want to use it with a rifle in a close-up encounter with dangerous game. When he shot the lion, Cooper told us his party had just entered a clearing about 35 feet across at the same moment the lion did so from not quite across the other side. He snapped the rifle in and found, at that distance, even his low power, long eye relief scope had too much magnification. The lion completely filled the field of view. He caught just a glimpse of a tooth to use as an aiming point at the same time as his other eye saw the tail shoot up, starting the pounce. He fired, worked the bolt and fired again. Most of his party claimed to have heard just one shot.

You may argue that follow-up shot wasn’t needed. We’ll never know, but it seems to me it would have been foolish to chance under the circumstance. In any event, something light enough that you can still bring it up fast after carrying it at the guard for a time without a break, then operate fast without dismounting or changing its position on your shoulder in any way, is an advantage. If terminal ballistics were the only consideration in choosing a rifle, we’d all be on steroids so we could lug our Barretts everywhere.

In 1978 I moved on to the Remington 8mm mag with the Sierra 220 grain spitzer boattail they designed for this cartridge.

I like a front shoulder shot on elk, especially where there is a chance for them to run to the bottom of frying pan canyon.

I've had some good kills and usually not a lot of meat damage. My hunting partner calls this rifle my two step cause that's about as far as I've ever had an elk go shot thru the front shoulders. This load of a 220 grain 8mm bullet at just under 3100 fps has killed elk out to 350 yards with no problems. In Alaska it did a good job on the big bears, moose and cariboo.

I've no doubt that any of the good 30 magnums would have worked just as well, but I do like the 32 caliber. If Reminton hadn't come out with the 8mm mag I'd probably be shooting a 340 Weatherby.

In 1978 I moved on to the Remington 8mm mag with the Sierra 220 grain spitzer boattail they designed for this cartridge.

I like a front shoulder shot on elk, especially where there is a chance for them to run to the bottom of frying pan canyon.

I've had some good kills and usually not a lot of meat damage. My hunting partner calls this rifle my two step cause that's about as far as I've ever had an elk go shot thru the front shoulders. This load of a 220 grain 8mm bullet at just under 3100 fps has killed elk out to 350 yards with no problems. In Alaska it did a good job on the big bears, moose and cariboo.

I've no doubt that any of the good 30 magnums would have worked just as well, but I do like the 32 caliber. If Reminton hadn't come out with the 8mm mag I'd probably be shooting a 340 Weatherby.
I had a 340 in the Weatherby Mark V Accumark, it like to have to beat me to death, after a long range session, but, it shot very well, and hit like a mack truck, I sold it, because I wanted to "downgrade" to the .338 Win Mag.

Sorry to hear that. I've had one of my 8's magna-ported and recoil levels dropped to the 30-06 level. If I was to build or buy one of the big boomers again it would be ported or have one of the new high performance brakes installed.

When I'm at the range I always use a lead sled and have pact strap on recoil pads for the grand daughters.

I've always like the Weatherby cartridges, but found that the stocks were not my cup of tea as far as recoil forces were concerned.

The 338 Win mag is a great cartridge also, but to be honest I wanted something that would shoot with the same energy to longer ranges. Funny thing the longest game shot I ever made was with a light Ruger 77 in 30-06 in Alaska on a Dahl Sheep at just over 650 yards. Go figure.

I don't know why it is, but it seems that so many times when the discussion has to do with the WSM's or WSSM's, there's not so much negativity, but rather animosity towards them. Quite often, you'll have at least one person outright hoping beyond hope that they'll go away. You can also always count on several of the "it don't do nuth'n that (fill in the blank) don't do" responses. I don't understand this, particularly when somewhere else these same people will be extolling the virtues of some oddball cartridge that happens to excite them, even though it truly doesn't do anything different than dozens of other cartridges out there. Doing the AI treatment to practically any cartidge developed within the last 75 to 80 years is one of those things I don't think is worth the expense, but, I guess its your money, do what you want. Sometimes, not being one of the herd is enough reason for having something.

I guess for some people, if you already have a .22, a .30-06, and a 12 ga, you could probably hunt anything you want in North America. I guess you could make the same argument that if you have a screw driver, a Crescent wrench, and a hammer, you could fix anything around the house too. If that's what you want, fine. I'm just glad I don't have to.

I have a Winchester M70 Coyote in 243 WSSM that is probably my favorite rifle. It's certainly lived up to my expectations for it, and then some! I could say the same thing for my M70 Featherweight in 300 WSM, and my A-Bolt Stainless Stalker in 270 WSM. How long will the WSSM's be around? Who knows? Probably not long enough to earn the respect they deserve. How long will the 270 WSM, 300 WSM, and 325 WSM be around? Probably longer than all of us...

I don't know why it is, but it seems that so many times when the discussion has to do with the WSM's or WSSM's, there's not so much negativity, but rather animosity towards them. Quite often, you'll have at least one person outright hoping beyond hope that they'll go away. You can also always count on several of the "it don't do nuth'n that (fill in the blank) don't do" responses. I don't understand this, particularly when somewhere else these same people will be extolling the virtues of some oddball cartridge that happens to excite them, even though it truly doesn't do anything different than dozens of other cartridges out there. Doing the AI treatment to practically any cartidge developed within the last 75 to 80 years is one of those things I don't think is worth the expense, but, I guess its your money, do what you want. Sometimes, not being one of the herd is enough reason for having something.

I guess for some people, if you already have a .22, a .30-06, and a 12 ga, you could probably hunt anything you want in North America. I guess you could make the same argument that if you have a screw driver, a Crescent wrench, and a hammer, you could fix anything around the house too. If that's what you want, fine. I'm just glad I don't have to.

I have a Winchester M70 Coyote in 243 WSSM that is probably my favorite rifle. It's certainly lived up to my expectations for it, and then some! I could say the same thing for my M70 Featherweight in 300 WSM, and my A-Bolt Stainless Stalker in 270 WSM. How long will the WSSM's be around? Who knows? Probably not long enough to earn the respect they deserve. How long will the 270 WSM, 300 WSM, and 325 WSM be around? Probably longer than all of us...


Good thoughts Gunslinger2005 and I have to agree with you. Everyone has their favorites and most all of them will do the job their designed to do. I've come to doubt that within accepted ranges most animals could tell you the difference between what killed them.

Though I've never owned many Winchesters I think the little Featherwieghts were probably some of the nicest looking rifles ever to come off a factory line. I've never cared for the stock finish on the A-bolts, but their functioning is flawless and the metal work absoloutly great.

I shoot coyotes with a standard 243 loaded with 55 grain Noslers at just under 4000 fps. You might want to try those bullets in your WSSM if your varmit hunting. Don't expect to harvest the hides though.

My favorites now are an old Ruger #1B in 243, the beautiful little Remington Mountian rifle in 280 Remington and the little CZ 527 in 204 Ruger. It sounds like you've got a great battery of hunting rifles that do exactly what you want them to do. Life just does not get much better does it.

I think calling someone a moron or what have you, because of the cartridge they choose to shoot, is a little childish, but, I see it every year at elk camp, grown men calling each other names, its kinda funny, actually.

You will note the moron calling individual has had his posts deleted and has been banned for 30 days. If such reoccures, it will be a permanent ban.

You will note the moron calling individual has had his posts deleted and has been banned for 30 days. If such reoccures, it will be a permanent ban.
Some people take shooting a little too personal.:)

Some people take shooting a little too personal.:)

Ain't that the truth! And it ruins a great board. One of the things I have noticed on this board that differs from other message boards (I am also a college football nut and read college boards every day) is that differing opinions are welcomed. Kudos to the mods for doing a great job of keeping it civil.

Back on topic, I still don't like the WSSMs!....lol

Ain't that the truth! And it ruins a great board. One of the things I have noticed on this board that differs from other message boards (I am also a college football nut and read college boards every day) is that differing opinions are welcomed. Kudos to the mods for doing a great job of keeping it civil.

Back on topic, I still don't like the WSSMs!....lol
I'm not too fond of the WSSM's or the WSM's, because, IMHO, they offer no advantages over the cartridges they are trying to replace, but, I'm not gonna jump a guy if he likes them.

. . . but, I'm not gonna jump a guy if he likes them.

Good plan. He might be armed. ;)

I'm not too fond of the WSSM's or the WSM's, because, IMHO, they offer no advantages over the cartridges they are trying to replace.

I'd go along with that to an extent: .223WSSM - .22-250, .25 WSSM - .25-06, 300 and 7mm WSM - 7mmRem and .300 Win. I can't see much difference there. But there are a couple cool nich rounds - the .325WSM, the .270WSM, the .243 WSSM. Those would seem to fit a need to me. I know there's Weatherby's and such that do the same, but I think those three are probably good rounds.

I'd go along with that to an extent: .223WSSM - .22-250, .25 WSSM - .25-06, 300 and 7mm WSM - 7mmRem and .300 Win. I can't see much difference there. But there are a couple cool nich rounds - the .325WSM, the .270WSM, the .243 WSSM. Those would seem to fit a need to me. I know there's Weatherby's and such that do the same, but I think those three are probably good rounds.
I actually like the .270 WSM, because it bests the .270, plus, we did kinda need a good .270 cal magnum besides the .270 WBY.

I actually like the .270 WSM, because it bests the .270, plus, we did kinda need a good .270 cal magnum besides the .270 WBY.

I just traded my M70 featherweight 223 wssm for the Coytoe Lite in 22-250. I couldn't get the wssm to shoot so I gave up and got the "Nifty 22-250" and I'm not looking back.

By the way, I've been told by the local gun dealer that Winchester didn't make any of the Coyote Lites in 223 wssm. There was another thread asking about that.

Welcome to the forum 6.5RemMag. Rules are simple, be nice and join in.

From what I've read both Winchester and Browning have had some feeding problems with the WSSM's. Of course Winchesters problems are over and Browning seems to have licked most of theirs.

I spent a lot of years chucking bullets downrange with the 22-250. I finally went to the 243 and now have one of the new CZ 527's in 204 Ruger. Light enough recoil to see the bullets hits in the scope and just as flat or flatter than the 22-250, plus a hoot to shoot.

Got to say one thing I've killed a lot of coyotes with the 22-250 and the one big advantage it has over the 204 is it carries more energy to yotes than the little 32, 39 and 40 grain 204 bullets.

I suggest that the origin of the animosity toward SMs can be found in the statement, "..no advantage over the rounds they are trying to replace." They are not trying to replace anything. They are different.

Don't quite understand the why of it. Going into Gander Mtn. or ProBass they (salesmen) talk of just as good as 22-250, or equalls 300 Win Mag. And say how fast a shorter action is over the standard length. How mush better the wssm ctgs. are. Then they turn around to a customer buying a shotgun, telling them they NEED to get this 3 1/2 inch super mag 12ga. auto, pump or what ever.
But at the range the wssm's are nice but, everyone takes notice when I pull out the 375 H&H magnum. It takes a backseat to no one. One of the few cals. that can shoot thru a 1956 Buick length wise! Or 5 ft. of railroad ties. Just my .02
TF

Welcome to the forum 6.5RemMag. Rules are simple, be nice and join in.

Thanks for the welcome, the pleasure is all mine.

In my opinion, the short mags are interesting and if that's what floats your boat, good for all. Shoot what you like and tell us about it. I thought the 223 wssm would fill a nice gap in my colection-I went from a .22 to 6.5-needed to fill that void. I was thinking of shooting crows so I figured the 243 to be a bit excessive which is why I chose the 22-250 but there's always enough room for something else...By the way, the 6.5 Rem mag is a scarce model 700 BDL, not the 673 or 600/60. A beautiful gun that shoots very well.

Seems to me if all the talk we heard about the WSM's having the advantage over the older standard and true magnum length cartridges from them being shorter and stiffer actions thus being more "inherently accurate", the WSSM's would be setting the benchrest tournament circles on their ear by now.

Guess not.

Aren't some of the issues with the short magnums due to Rick Jameson's patent?

The Outdoor Wire of February 2, 2006, reported a situation of well-known gun writer Rick Jamison (John R. Jamison) which reads, in part:

"Jamison's offering a legal settlement in avoidance of a lawsuit. According to these letters, Winchester purloined Jamison's intellectual property in their short magnums. He sued, winning a decision in a Missouri court (his state of residence). Winchester, the letter states, settled the claim as has fellow short-magnum rifle manufacturer Browning and Olin Winchester ammunition. In the heretofore unreported letters, Jamison is reportedly seeking a monetary "cure" from each manufacturer, in addition to an ongoing royalty for the sale of each rifle in the contested calibers."

Sources indicate that there was a confidential, out of court settlement. Apparently, the tiff arises from a string of patents issued to Mr. Jamison, the first patent #5,826,361 granted on October 27, 1998 from application #818440 of March 17, 1997.

Whether the Jamison patent infringement has caused any issues or whether he is just receiving royalties for his work, is something that has been settled. I think any manufacturer has dropped the WSM or WSSM line because of the Jamison settlement. It would be speculative to state they aren't being marketed as hard as they would have been, because we will never know. USRAC would have tanked regardless. The settlement terms will never be released and those that know what those terms are bound by the terms of the agreement from talking about them. Whether another manufacturer pays Olin or Winchester the full sum or pays part to them and part Jamison is moot, I suspect, but I'm speculating! :D

In the end, if the product sells it $ell$, if it doesn't then it dies. Marketing plays a part, but I suspect Winchester not being able to support its own ammunition through sales of its own firearms may be a larger hinderance than any settlement reached with Jamison.

If the cartridge design was a paradigm shift as some reported, then it would have sold regardless of marketing or home firearm support, especially with the benchrest crowd. Same with the Remington Etronix. I don't just think the products have lived up to theory or hype. Or maybe the human element can't take advantage of the subtle mechanical improvements.

BTW,
The Jamison - Winchester Settlement has been discussed here as well.
http://www.shootersforum.com/showthread.htm?t=30995

This thread provides a summary plus a link to another forum to a post made by Dr. Ken Howell, who was part of the case. In the link, there is a lot of bantering about, some pro and some con for Jamison and a lot of frustrations by fellow shooters. Reader Beware.

I have three .300wsm's and two .270 wsm's. Love 'em. Never owned a magnum before but hated the belted cartridges. Jumped at the opportunity when the wsm's came out. I also have a .223 wssm and .25 wssm. Don't plan on shooting those. May be worth something in a few years.

I have a couple .25 wssms, really like the round although it can't do anything a 25-06 can do.

I like the WSSM because it makes me think of a PPC. I cartridge that will go forever in target and benchrest. I don't know for sure who said it, but the quote "An accurate firearm is an interesting firearm" comes to mind. If they are nothing else, they are interesting.

I think it may have been "Only accurate firearms are interesting" or something like that. I think it was Col. Townsend Whelen.

The 223 and 25 WSSMs are discontinued. The 25 can't beat the 25/06, and the 223 can't beat the 22-250 or the 220 swift, although the swift is pretty much discontinued as well.

I've got a 223wssm featherweight,didn't buy it because of the round, I've always liked the featherweight model 70. For $500 nib I thought I couldn't go wrong. Its been shot 16 times with factory ammo and 8 of the pieces of brass split. Not sure if its the gun or ammo. I'm leaning towards ammo, fit and finish of the gun is very nice, sure would like to keep it. It was shooting just under 2'' at 100 yds. I'll eventually get some federal brass and some dies and start loading, the win brass seems way to thick. I wish I would have spent the extra 3 hundred and got one in a 243. Dave

Not sure WHY the animosity comes in to this discussion. I figure, to each his own. I'm not interested in any of the short mags but other guys might be and that's fine. Now, if they have to sell something interesting to fund the acquisition of a new WSSM and I find it on the used rack and it's interesting to me, well, we both win.

:D

Just happy to help out.

243Dave,

If you can do a chamber casting you can learn whether the chamber neck area is too wide? You can also stick a small-hole gage down in the chamber and expand it until it just kisses the neck portion and withdraw it and measure it with a micrometer to get that dimension.

Most often, however, splitting is due to improperly annealed brass. What you might consider doing is getting an inexpensive inertial bullet puller and pulling the bullets from that ammo. You can then decap the brass (carefully and slowly) and anneal the necks yourself and reassemble the loads.

As a practical matter, it can be difficult to keep live primers intact through removal, depending on the original fit. If you find you need new ones, you can't trust the original charge with a different primer, so you would then need to reduce the charge and work it back up toward the original level, watching for pressure signs. That will cost you five rounds or six rounds to do.

The Federal headstamped brass is made by Winchester, just so you know.

The only problem that I have with the WSSMs is the simple fact that they offer no real advantage, and now their owners will soon be relegated to reloading to get ammo.

Nick, I just may take your advice, pull some bullets,and anneal some brass. But first I'll probably just buy a different box of ammo and shoot a few and see what happens,less work. Matt, I appreciate the heads-up on the federal brass. At first I thought you didn't know what you were talking about, but after a quick search, you were right.:DThanks fellas! Dave

yea... most people don't believe me... but it happens in a lot of brands... they don't have enough machines to make all the brass at the same time, so many companies outsource their products. This is exactly why you can hear somebody say they bought X brand of .44 Mag brass and it was junk, but the .45 Colt Stuff was excellent.

Speaking of brass, a recent handloader issue did a test with different makes of brass to see if any was any more accurate in a 223 Rem. Makes were weighed and interestingly, the expensive stuff such as Norma was no more accurate than the cheaper stuff such as Remington (which actually gave the best accuracy), even though weight variations were more with Remington. Left me with the impression of unless you're doing benchrest, whey get the expensive stuff? Even then, how much difference would it make?

It depends how they tested it? Weight variance matters a lot less than neck and web runout, IME. The early 60's test of bullet tilt published in the NRA's Handloading book was at 600 yards with 829 rounds (IIRC) of measured M72 ammo. I've seen many commercial cases, especially Winchester .308, with enough difference in neck wall thickness from one side to the other to produce the levels of off-axis bullet alignment that the NRA test found increased 600 yard group size by an m.o.a. A lot of times the level of error won't show up until long range, where error significance grows disproportionately, or, as you say, in benchrest.

I got to speak with the 1953 winner of the Wimbledon cup (1000 yards) which he fired with .30-06. He used cases he'd selected as producing best accuracy by trial and error. Obviously it made a difference he could see, or he would not have been able to select them. With today's tools, you can guarantee you've got good cases in advance, and buying Norma and Lapua will usually get them for you out of the box.

P.S. Another thing that affects testing is the number of sources of error producing the test groups. Statistically, each source of random error, if it were taken in isolation, would cause a certain increase in group size from a perfect one-hole group. Random Group size is proportional to the area it covers. That area grows with the square of its radius. As a result, statistically, the total error is equal to the square root of the sum of the squares of the individual error radii. Thus, if you have 5 sources of error each of which by itself would produce a half inch group in a gun that otherwize would produce a one-holer, the total group size is 1.12 inches, and not 2.5 inches, which is what you would get if you simply multiplied half an inch by 5. 4 of those sources would combine to produce an error of 1.00 inch, so the last source produced an error of not quite 1/8 inch, even though it would produce an error of 1/2 inch by itself.

My point is that if their testing started with enough sources of error to produce groups of an inch or more, it would be very easy for them not to see the error produced by the brass until they had fired thirty or more rounds of each load from a machine rest. And then it still might seem small. Especially if the case change in isolation only produced, say, a 1/4 m.o.a. difference, in which situation, happening to get a change of exactly 1/16" out of an inch on a target is difficult without firing lots of rounds. Thirty is a statistician's rule of thumb for the minimum number of random samples needed to produce a symmetric bell curve around an average (mean) value. Most shooting-related testing your read about doesn't begin to produce statistically significant results, which is one reason many results seem contrary to others that could actually be resolved with large enough samples.

To add to the test problem, some things are individual, and shooting components are among them. Unless the article's author opted for a standard load instead of going to the trouble of working up the most accurate possible load with each case brand individually, that, too, could mask improvements.

Obviously, errors that are hard to segregate out are not going to matter much to a hunter or casual shooter. A top match shooter, though, will be very grateful if a small fraction in group improvement gives him an occasional point or two or the occasional scratch X, instead of a 10. Matches these days are frequently won or lost by single points or the number of X's.

I can't remember a lot of details, it was in the April issue and titled "The Effects of Brass on 223 Accuracy" by Charles Petty. It was part of a series showing what differences in seating depth, primers and brass had on accuracy in the 223.

In this part, brass measurements were taken including weight, neck thickness and pocket depths. They were also 100 yard groups using five 5 shot groups. Remington brass had the smallest average and the single smallest group while Lapua had the largest average. I am by no means implying this is all encompassing for all calibers and brass, but it is an interesting read. Thought I could find it online but all I found was this:

http://www.riflemagazine.com/magazine/PDF/hl252partial.pdf

Wolfe doesn't leave their on-line subscription copies up for very long. You have to go in and save a copy while you can. Otherwise it vanishes.

The 25 round sample size is pretty good compared with most magazine testing. At least Petty is trying. The next question is whether he worked the load up for best accuracy in each case brand separately? Lots of times the water volume or the degree of neck annealing will be different enough to change the bullet barrel time between case brands. That can move the loads in and out of sweet spots for the rifle's barrel harmonics. Also, I've noticed in the past that Remington .45 ACP brass was springier than some other brands, and tended to return to shape more after coming out of the sizing die. I haven't noticed that in their .30-06 or .308 brass, but unless Petty was neck-sizing-only, if he did get springy .223 cases, it could make for a better chamber fit by the reloaded Remington. So many variables, so little range time.

Do you recall what the gun was?

I've never found a 300 Weatherby that would actually do much better than the 300 Win mag in the real world. I built a couple without any freebore and they would do on the outside between 50 and 90 fps better. Not enough to justify the extra powder.

If you want real gains you have to go to the 300 Ultra-mag or the 30-378 Weatherby. My friends 300 Ultra-mag is getting 3380 fps over my chronograph with 180 grain factory loads and 3300 with his handloads.

I have owned and shot both the 300Win mag and the 300Wby mag and my two 300win mag 26" barrels never got close the my four 300Wby's in velocity. I was using RL-22 and got 3272fps over my chrony with a 180gr TSX. That is the load I use now in my 300Wby Mark V Custom. It is also my most accurate of all my 30 mags I have owned. Here is that round at 100yds and then at 200yds.
http://i170.photobucket.com/albums/u245/mhsp68/IMG_5533.jpg

http://i170.photobucket.com/albums/u245/mhsp68/scope.jpg

Here is the 300Wby I shot the above mentioned load with.
http://i170.photobucket.com/albums/u245/mhsp68/IMG_6463.jpg

Wolfe doesn't leave their on-line subscription copies up for very long. You have to go in and save a copy while you can. Otherwise it vanishes.

The 25 round sample size is pretty good compared with most magazine testing. At least Petty is trying. The next question is whether he worked the load up for best accuracy in each case brand separately? Lots of times the water volume or the degree of neck annealing will be different enough to change the bullet barrel time between case brands. That can move the loads in and out of sweet spots for the rifle's barrel harmonics. Also, I've noticed in the past that Remington .45 ACP brass was springier than some other brands, and tended to return to shape more after coming out of the sizing die. I haven't noticed that in their .30-06 or .308 brass, but unless Petty was neck-sizing-only, if he did get springy .223 cases, it could make for a better chamber fit by the reloaded Remington. So many variables, so little range time.

Do you recall what the gun was?

I dug out the issue for a few extra details.

All loads were put together in new brass that was full lenth sized and primed with Remington benchrest primers. All had the same powder charge of 24.0 grns of Reloader 10x using a Pact digital scale. Bullet was the 52 grn Hornady A-max seated to a depth of 1.889". Redding benchrest dies were used. Interestingly he also took the Remington brass and uniformed the pockets after the first five 5 shot groups and was really no difference (actually 0.098" larger). The rifle used was a Cooper Phoenix with a Leupold VX-III 8.5 x 25 scope. FYI brass makes tested were: Remington, Winchester, Nosler, Lapua, and Norma.

they were never needed in the first place, just some engineers way of trying to hype a new product and to boost sales.