Hornady says NO to the .300WSM

Discussion in 'Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics' started by sdkidaho, Dec 30, 2009.

  1. sdkidaho

    sdkidaho Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    312
    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2009
    I emailed and asked if they carried any .300WSM ammunition:

    Their reply:

    So is that true? There is inherent feeding problems, and increased manufacturing costs?
     
  2. MontanaRifleman

    MontanaRifleman Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    6,068
    Joined:
    May 21, 2008
    My Sako 300 WSM cycles as smooth as butter. Feeding problems are a lack of design.
     

  3. Aldon

    Aldon Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    718
    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2009
    The Royalty part is definitely true.

    There are occasional complaints as to feeding but not enough to kill the cartridge.

    I had one and had no issue and liked it a bit better than the 300mag.

    I had no feeding issues either.

    Only time will tell if it has the legs to stand the test of time but I would bet it does...
     
  4. snowpro440

    snowpro440 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    438
    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2008
    My Browning Eclipse in 300 wsm feeds great an shoots really great to 1K yards....no problem here:D
     
  5. BIG MO

    BIG MO Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    142
    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2009
    Between myself and friends we probably have 8 WSM's. No feeding problems reported. I consider it a non-issue with this cartridge in a well designed action.
     
  6. ovastafford

    ovastafford Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    938
    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2009
    I wonder which actions they don't feed in???
     
  7. gmcguy

    gmcguy Member

    Messages:
    19
    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2007
    Translation. Hornady is buddy buds with ruger and would rather make new mostly redundant cartridges instead of supporting other calibers. Dont get me wrong, I like hornady a lot. But i scratch my head when I look at the creedmoor and the new ruger compact magnums. Seems to me if they had just supported the 260 and the wsm's they would have been better off. However, im not a marketing major :)
     
  8. ncpreacherboy1

    ncpreacherboy1 Member

    Messages:
    16
    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2008
    would reloading not better, or at least duplicate, the numbers that the Superformance ammo is claiming?
     
  9. grit

    grit Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,375
    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    The short fatties can have feed issues. However, there are very simple solutions. The WSM's are superb performers and here to stay.
     
  10. D.ID

    D.ID Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    838
    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2008
    +1 here to stay for the 300 at least, love ours, no feeding issues.....My Tikka, my Uncle's winchester both run great and my next rifle will be the savage lo pro varmint in 300 wsm. The royalties issue is what it is but it's to bad they can't work it out, Hornady will miss out on that market.
     
  11. BBISSON

    BBISSON Member

    Messages:
    15
    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2008
    I have a Ruger in 300 WSM and had a Ruger in 270WSM (till it was stolen) both fed real well. To replace the Ruger we bought a Remington Model 7 in 270WSM for the wife it feeds real well also. I also have a load worked up for the 300WSM with a Barnes 180TSX that has proven itself in 3 different rifles.
     
  12. Tang

    Tang Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    305
    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2008

    I just dont get why they didnt make a .300 and .338 based off of the full length .375 Ruger case.
     
  13. MontanaRifleman

    MontanaRifleman Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    6,068
    Joined:
    May 21, 2008
    I agree. They would be very good cartridges, as well as the 7mm version.

    Mark
     
  14. D.ID

    D.ID Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    838
    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2008
    ok I have to ask what is the marketing theory of these redundant cartridges like the the 375 ruger or 300 wsm ? Admittedly I think the wsm is silly and redundant, I did not own either a wsm or a 300wm and needed one. the difference is minimal and I would not claim either had any significant advantage when shooting 180 grain bullets. Obviously I went with the wsm primarily because the elk season was upon me and I didn't want to scope my L1a1 at that time, I decided I wanted a tikka and ran off to find one and the wsm popped up first. I LOVE MINE DON'T GET ME WRONG but I never understood what winchester gained by reproducing there own mag with a little tweak.............. Did the introduction of the wsm spur sales of 300 mags from people who would not have bought a long action 300 and the ammunition to shoot it?.......... royalties , didn't they get royalties on the long 300?........ gun rags advertising magnum performance when they didn't already, don't think I have seen one that didn't ramble about an old magnum in one of there advertisers new rifles as much as a new mag from one of there advertisers in whoevers rifle................... short action/ rimless vs long action /rimmed ........so what? anyone have a theory from a marketing perspective?