Why aren't short/s.short magnum cartriges more popular?

T

two-two-three

New member
Hi all! I have been thinking of putting a custom tube on one of my savages and contemplating on the chambering for some time now. It is gonna be either a .224 or .243 bore and should be able to launch some heavier for the caliber projectiles which probably warrants the 1:8 twist rate. I keep on stumbling though which particular case I should have it rimmed for. Looks like I 'm split between either a 22-250/243 AI or one of the newer fatter cases. I keep on checking the latter ones at the reloading store that I visit and I like them visually but, from what I see at least, there aren't a lot of rifles built for those. Am I simply not seeing them or there are some downsides to the newer crop short/super short magnum rounds? I read somewhere before that brass is much thicker and harder to work with for one. Anything else I should be aware of that may steer me away from them toward the older cases that I mentioned? Thanks.
 
One of the main problems that have made them unpopular is that lack of good brass.

You NEVER see them used in matches of any kind.

Even as hunting rounds, they have been a disappointment.
 
Just last week there was someone saying how the .300 WSM has won matches. Might even have been on here. But he went on to rave how much better the WSM is than any of the other 300 cartridges.

I've noticed there seems to be a group that believes you have to have a short action rifle shooting short or WSM cartridges and the only bullet to use for everything is a match bullet with the highest BC you can find.

Never became a fan of the WSM myself. It was to new and I wanted to see it catch on before I tried it. But I'm also one of those people that like long action rifles too.
 
Big difference in the WSM & the WSSM. The brass for the WSM case is not nearly as thick & you can find some that is decent.

The WSSM is THICK, hard as a rock & pretty much crap (ask me how I know & if you want some I have several for sale). The case has been a complete flop so no further interest for other companies to start making brass (tooling way to expensive for little sales).

Run far, far, far away from the wssm rechambering if you want no regrets about your bulid.

And if your ARE talking about the WSM case... that's way too much packy for a .224 or .243 bore.
 
i know of a couple people that have moved to the 300WSM just to get away from the belted case. Doesn't seem to be the case with the 7mag though..

people around here hold their 7mags in special regard. saying ANYTHING slightly derogatory about them, and you might as well just head outside and start rolling up your sleeves... lol

I would like to have a 25wssm in a AR platform. but yeah, brass is not easy to come by and I have heard quite a few people say enough bad about it for me to knock it down a few pegs on my want list. Maybe after i scratch this socom itch. lol.

and it does look like the 300WSM scored a F Class win this year
http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2013/02/match-winning-rifle-shiraz-balolias-300-wsm-f-open-rig/
 
Last edited:
Often wondered the same thing. I don't really have use right now for a magnum anything, but would definitely lean towards a shorty mag if I was so inclined due to several perhaps debatable, but in my eyes, beneficial factors - short action gun a bit lighter and easier to handle as a mt gun, supposedly matches LA mag counterpart's ballistics without quite so much powder and recoil, and does away with that useless, in-the-way belt and replaces it with powder capacity. I see no negatives myself, but if I was into shooting such a gun a LOT more at long ranges, and had a custom gun that I could notice the difference in, then I can see where the brass quality issues may have an influence. I guess as a newbie at anything "magnum", I don't see the advantage for a reloader to the belted, conventional magnum over their shorter counterparts. I have seen guys on this site and others with exceptional results from 300 WSM/SAUM's, 7 WSM/SAUM's, 6.5 WSM/SAUM's, etc.
 
Originally Posted By: Mike B
".... supposedly matches LA mag counterpart's ballistics without quite so much powder and recoil, and does away with that useless, in-the-way belt and replaces it with powder capacity."



It is a myth - no cartridge will give you the same velocity with less powder.

And recoil is a function of weight of gun, and weight and velocity of bullet.

There are no free lunches.
 
That's not true. I always find free raisinetes when I'm hunting.

The super shorts just don't offer enough or any real improvement over the standard caliber imo. I know they were pitched as a major improvement when they first came out but don't live up to the hype.
 



It is just re-inventing the wheel. Rifle companies think they have to do something new to sell rifles and ammo. They should spend the R&D money on building better rifles. Some people just want the newest thing. Then, in five years you can not find brass.
 
Originally Posted By: Mike B- short action gun a bit lighter and easier to handle as a mt gun, supposedly matches LA mag counterpart's ballistics without quite so much powder and recoil, and does away with that useless, in-the-way belt and replaces it with powder capacity.

This is the other part of the short action craze I don't understand either. Does anyone know how much shorter a short action is over a long action? How much weight savings can there be?
 
Originally Posted By: joedOriginally Posted By: Mike B- short action gun a bit lighter and easier to handle as a mt gun, supposedly matches LA mag counterpart's ballistics without quite so much powder and recoil, and does away with that useless, in-the-way belt and replaces it with powder capacity.

This is the other part of the short action craze I don't understand either. Does anyone know how much shorter a short action is over a long action? How much weight savings can there be?

I don't know the weights or diff in them, but if a guy is building a Mtn R for a sheep/goat hunt , every ounce saved is a plus.

If it was to be a project of mine it would be .308 based not a WSM/WSSM.

My Kimber Montana in 300WSM was a shooter ,however.
 
Originally Posted By: CatShooterOriginally Posted By: Mike B
".... supposedly matches LA mag counterpart's ballistics without quite so much powder and recoil, and does away with that useless, in-the-way belt and replaces it with powder capacity."



It is a myth - no cartridge will give you the same velocity with less powder.

And recoil is a function of weight of gun, and weight and velocity of bullet.

There are no free lunches.

Having had some basic physics, I wondered about that claim, but thought I had seen where some folks "substantiated" it.

Not being a fan or otherwise of belted magnums, I just see them as the way that "magnums" should've maybe been invented in the first place. As I gather on the history of the belts, they were invented to place a point of positive headspacing on the original "magnum, the 375 H&H, due to a very gradual case taper and narrow shoulder? Serves no purpose now, and wastes powder capacity in the magazine. And I recall having has some sort of issues with it when reloading some 7 RM's for a buddy years ago. Either way, I see the short mag's as a logical improvement and progression in case design eliminating things that have no use, and sometimes are in the way, but are still there. Call me non-traditional on this.

As far as good brass, someone just needs to produce it. Looks like a capitalistic opportunity. Guess there'd be a reason no one's jumped on it yet, huh?!?! LOL!!! Why would Win brass be so bad in this caliber when they seem to produce decent brass for other cal's??
 

The belt does not waste powder capacity, and does add strength to the web area.

It was designed to take the place of the rim on English double rifles, which did not extract rimless cartridges well at that time - and it does that well to this day.
 
Cost of ammo
no big gain over the standard cartridges
crappy brass
loss of barrel life
How many reason do you want?
 
Originally Posted By: NdIndyThat's not true. I always find free raisinetes when I'm hunting.

That's only because of the large pronghorn population in your hunting area.
grin.gif


FWIW, I much prefer my .300 WSM to the .300 Win Mag I had a while back. It seems much more manageable, but that's likely a function of stock design or other tangible feature.
 
A previous hunting buddy had a 25 WSSM, worked just fine on deer, so did my 308. He always had to plan well ahead for ammo, and then only had one choice or 2.

Most hunters aren't 'gun nuts' or 'rife loonies', that 30-06 they had for years works just fine. Much different that a reloading gun guy, who just wants to try something different. Many of the less common chamberings work just fine. My favorite the last bunch of years has been my 284 Winchester.

If a guy is going to buy a gun to use several times a year, and doesn't reload, I'd suggest a common 308 over an oddball round.
 
I beg to differ with the suggestion that there is "no free lunch". That was a proposition that was presented to me in an undergraduate thermodynamics class years ago and I accepted it at the time. However, MSNBC, NBC, ABC, CBS and PBS has them on display everyday. Problem is it's free to them, but it costs me plenty.
 
Last edited:
I really enjoyed my 243wssm but I did have some feeding issues. I really like it. I wish I could have talked myself into keeping it. I'll run bolt action for a big game rifle though.
 
My GA Precision rifle in 7wsm is a real shooter with 180 Berger hybrids. I bet 7mm-300wsm would be great too. Better brass available in 300wsm case. If that's too big maybe 6mm creedmoor. George builds awesome rifles!!
 

I sure wish the 300 WSM wasn't popular.
cursing.gif
I have
been waiting for a Winchester M70(new FN made) Extreme Weather
300 WSM for many months. I am next in line for one ordered
at the last SHOT show, by our local Scheels store. I have been
searching on-line for this one as well, and "Out of Stock" has
been the results.

I won a Howa 1500 in 300 WSM a number of years ago, and would
probably not purchased one, but since I won it, I started
some load development, and was impressed. I have worked
with several 300 WMs, and for a number of reasons, all
efforts have produced poor to average results. This 300 WSM
was EASY to find accurate loads for, if working with bullets
at or under 180 gr. I traded the Howa because the bolt
was not locked, in any safety position, for a Savage 11, also
in 300 WSM. It shot the same loads the Howa shot sub-MOA,
also sub-MOA...
thumbup1.gif
I am not sure what I will do
with this rifle, when I finally get the M70. It is too
accurate to part with easily. I have a son looking for a
new deer rifle. He may get it.

IMHO, the 300 WSM and the 270 WSM are here to stay, but I
agree we need a good brass maker to start producing better
WSM brass.

Squeeze
 
Back
Top