magnum vs. short magnum

[rdsii64]

My marksmanship experience is confined to non magnum caliber firearms so if this sounds stupid I apologize in advance. First if somone is worried about recoil I am of the opinion that a magnun caliber firearm is the wrong choice. With that said, can a short-magum truely equal the performance of its long action counterpart with less recoil when shooting the same bullet. so we have a reference to compare lets assume we are talking about the .300 winchester magnum and the .300 winchester short magnum.

I would much rather shoot a .30-06 and not deal with excess recoil but I am just currious if the claims are true.

 

[winmag]

Hmmmmmm...........right about now someones gettin out thier fancy recoil calculating formula, and getting warmed up. That someone is not me.
But take a 180 gr BTSP fpr example
.300 win mag takes between 66.9gr -to-77.5gr to reach 2900fps, depending on the powder you use.
.300 WSM takes between 62.2gr -to-76.5gr to reach 2900fps, depending on the powder you use.
WSM takes a tiny bit less powder to achieve the same result. Maybe its just a psychologicle thing with a shorter case, but the ones Ive shot seem to recoil just a bit less. Maybe Im weird, but theres a noticable difference even if ever so slight IMO. Then again my cousin has a ''blankity-blankin'' Savage 110 in 30-06 that kicks WAY, WAY harder than ANY 300mag or 338mag Ive EVER shot! and Ive shot quite a few.

 

[LouBoyd]

can a short-magum truely equal the performance of its long action counterpart with less recoil when shooting the same bullet. so we have a reference to compare lets assume we are talking about the .300 winchester magnum and the .300 winchester short magnum.

The 300 Win Mag has 95 grains case capacity at 4300 atmospheres. the 300 WSM has 81.3 grains case capacity at 4450 BAR.

95* 4.3 = 408.5
81.3 *4.45 = 361.8

Within SAAMI specs the WSM cannot drive the same bullet as fast as the 300 WM.
If loaded to the same velocity the 300 WSM may have a little less recoil because the smaller case at higher pressure will have a little less powder mass and powder mass adds to recoil. However with the same barrel the WSM rifle may be a bit lighter if it has a shorter action which will add to the recoil. Without knowing all of the details of the rifes and the loads used (which will be different) the higher recoil could be with either rifle.

In my opinion most of the advantages of the 300 WSM are lost because the manufacturers insist on putting them in their short action rifles. I've purchased several 300 WMs and no 300 WSMs even when both were available. My decision was always based on the fact that the 300 WM in a long action gave more space for long heavy bullets than the WSM in a short action. If Winchester sold the 300 WSM with a medium length (3.4") action like the pre-64's I'd buy it, but not in a 2.8 to 2.9" short magazine.

 

[warthog97]

Yes, the 300 WSM can match the 300 Winny. I know the Winny fans will jump on and talk about longer barrels, but I'm sure a WSM would also benefit from a longer barrel. So, here is how I look at it, with my 300 WSM I get 300 Winny performance in a shorter action and a shorter barrel.
I don't think the physical properties of the 300 WSM equal less recoil. The few grains less powder seems like it should be off set by the lighter gun (shorter action, barrel, stock...) However, i have a 300 WSM with less apparent recoil than my older Rem 760 in 30-06. I think the reason is that the newer Kimber has a better stock design, it recoils straight into my shoulder without cheek slap. By the way, I have a newer Savage in 30-06 that is a pussycat in the recoil department. They have a decent recoil pad but they don't make a big deal about it. My Savage came from the factory with a tag on it claiming that the 30-06 would recoil more like a 243. Don't know about that since I don't have a 243, but it did shoot nice off the bench. Again, stock design. I'd suggest you try a few peoples guns just to see what stocks work for you.

-bnw

 

[Autorotate19]

Im basing my opinion off of nothing scientific but Iv shot the .270wsm, 7mm rsaum, 300wsm, and the .325 wsm. Out of all of them I honestly thought the .270 wsm kicked the hardest. Now all of these rifles were different kinds, weights, etc.. I honestly think that they kick harder than the normal mags even considering the difference in rifles. It seems like a sharper quicker kick than the normal mags. I do agree with Lou, most are lighter, shorter etc.. so any advantage is lost due to the rifle design. This is probably all my imagination though.....

 

[MontanaRifleman]

There are a lot of factors that affect felt recoil but if you try to compare apples to apples, ie., same weight rifle, same stock, same recoil pad, etc., I don't think there will be a wholelot of differnce in recoil, driving the same bullet out of the same size and caliber barrel.... but there might be a little.... My go to rifle used to be a 7mm RM and my go to load was 160 N Partitons @ 3000 fps. Shooting 180 gr factory loads @ 3000 fps out of my 300 WSM was a little more recoil, but not much. I have heard the (never shot an unbraked one) that a 300 WM kicks a lot more than a 7 RM. I know my 300 RUM kicks a heck of a lot more than a 300 WSM and the RUM is 2 lbs heavier than the WSM. It uses 50% more powder to drive a bullet 200 fps faster (about 6% faster) but the recoil is a whole lot more than 6% greater.

Also, on average, the 300 WM will give a little more velocity than a 300 WSM. That being said, with RL17 my chrony tells mne that I can push a 180 E-Tip 2 3193 fps out of my 300 WSM in a 24 3/8" barrel and I have seen or heard anywhere where a 300 WM will push a 180 bullet at that speed in that length of barrel with any powder. Not saying it cant do it, I just have never heard or read of it. and that 's with 67.5 gr of powder which is about 5-10 grs less than a typical 300 WM max load.

Bottomline, the 7 mags and bigger are going to kick fairly good, and the bigger you go, the more they will kick. I have found a way to deal with it and it is just not a factor for me.

-Mark

 

[LouBoyd]

Yes, the 300 WSM can match the 300 Winny. I know the Winny fans will jump on and talk about longer barrels, but I'm sure a WSM would also benefit from a longer barrel. So, here is how I look at it, with my 300 WSM I get 300 Winny performance in a shorter action and a shorter barrel.

It seems more reasonable to say that you get 300 WSM performance from a 300 Win Mag with a short barrel and no performance with a 300 Win Mag in a short action. There's really no reason to compare them. They're different cartridges and are each at their best with different barrels, different bullets, different powders, and different uses.

One is not "better" than the other until you've defined how it's to be used.

You can say that of a 22 pocket pistol versus a 50 BMG machine gun too.

 

[mphstigerfan]

I shoot a 300wsm and think the recoil is surprisingly mild. this is coming from a fairly heavy rifle but it is considerably less than a lighter 30-06 I used to own. I do have my doubts about there being less felt recoil than a win mag however. if you are shooting more than walking you might want to try a mag or short mag in a heavy rifle. you might be suprised at how pleasant they actually are. for example, I once shot 20 rounds from a model 700 that was pretty light and ended up with a bruised shoulder. I recently put about 30 through a 300 wsm and the last round was as pleasant as the first. the 300 is a winchester model 70 coyote that weighs about 8 1/2 lbs. and still sports the extremely thin factory recoil pad and a muzzle brake could reduce it even more. In the same rifle I'm sure there's a big difference but in the right rifle I've seen small men put lots of rounds down range with no ill effects. if you want to extend your range don't write off the magnums due to recoil alone. there are many ways to make that extremely managable. probably a good bit milder than your 30-06.

 

[Chas1]

IMHO I would put recoil aside and pick which one of the 2 cartridges that best meets your primary needs and then second can I bring recoil down to what I feel is a manageable level. I can't see where there's much of a recoil difference between the 2.

 

[baldhunter]

I'm shooting ten more grains of powder in my 300 Win Mag than my 300WSM.My 300WSM has a short throat and I have to seat the bullets deeper,so this also uses up powder space.My 300 Win Mag on the other hand,has a very long throat and I have to seat the bullets out much farther and this also increases powder capacity.So the question "Are they equal?"I say "No".The 300 WSM is the most efficient of the two,but the 300 Win Mag is going to beat it,especially with heavier weight bullets.As far as recoil goes,if I'm shooting ten more grains of powder in the same type of rifle,I'm going to notice it and I do.I feel they are what they are,like the 308 is not a 30-06.What I noticed is,I load the same powder charge in my 300WSM with 165gr bullets that I load for my 7mag with 150gr bullets and I load the same charge in my 300 Win. Mag with 165gr bullets that I load for my 7STW with 150gr bullets.

 

[James Patton]

I shot my cow elk on Monday with my 300WSM. Didn't notice any recoil! The shot was a bit north of 300yds. with a 180 gr. Win. power point advertised at 2960fps from a 24" barrel. My barrel is 22" so I probably lost some steam but the elk didn't seem to notice the difference. When I opened her up her lungs looked like a pile of jelly. I could see by the blood splatter, she only moved 7 feet after being hit. She "sat" back on her rump and rolled over; never moved again.
I'm very happy with my choice of the 300WSM. I like it's efficiency and flat shooting characteristics.
Just my two cents!