7mm WSM v.s. 270 WSM

[Mike_W]

Well after much contemplation I think I have settled on a browning x-bolt for several reasons. Sub MOA out of the box, magazine, feather trigger, dura touch synthetic stock, weight and fit/feel to myself.

Now I am trying to settle on a caliber. I curretly have a 270 win and 300 win mag, I know another rifle is not nessasary but I want one:tongue2:.

I have been trying to deside between a 7mm WSM and a 270 WSM.

I want a gun that will be flat shooting and be able to punch out at least 150 grains. From what I've seen these two cartridges are basically the same case except a larger .284" bullet and a .277" bullet .....maybe the 7mm WSM has a every so slightly larger case.

Looking breifly over BC's the .284" bullet at 160 grains is .531 to a .480 150grain in the .277" bullet shooting at basically the same velocity. Therefore the 160 7mm should shoot flatter that a 150 270.

i think I am leaning towards the 7mm but wanted to get some members opinions on these cartriges and also the rifle of choice.

I will be handloading FYI.

Thanks,
Mike

[Scott N]

I own a 270 WSM and love it. That being said, since you handload, there are far more 7mm bullets available to handloaders than there are for the 270s. If you were limited to factory ammo I would probably say go for the 270 WSM because the 7mm WSM didn't seem to catch on as well as the 270 and 300 WSMs, and I don't think factory ammo is as readily available as it is for the 270 WSM. Being a handloader gives you a lot more bullet weight selections for the 7mm than for the 270.

Since you already own a 270 Win (a WSM doesn't offer that much over the standard 270), I'd say go with the 7mm.

[MK2750]

I own a 270 WSM and love it. That being said, since you handload, there are far more 7mm bullets available to handloaders than there are for the 270s. If you were limited to factory ammo I would probably say go for the 270 WSM because the 7mm WSM didn't seem to catch on as well as the 270 and 300 WSMs, and I don't think factory ammo is as readily available as it is for the 270 WSM. Being a handloader gives you a lot more bullet weight selections for the 7mm than for the 270.

Since you already own a 270 Win (a WSM doesn't offer that much over the standard 270), I'd say go with the 7mm.


X2 on this unless you want to sell at some point. The 270 WSM seems to be a lot more popular and has already developed a following.

I was considering the same rifle in 300 WSM until I saw it is availiable in 280 Rem and am also now undecided.

[Cal]

Why a wsm? I dont get the hype about fat little cases, the 7mm rem mag would split the difference between the two calibers that you own quite nicely. Feeds better, handles a wide range of bullets better, ammo costs less and is easyer to find

[Leverboy]

Your splitting hairs and quibbling over ballistics between two cartridges that wouldn't amount to any practical difference in the field. Two many redundant cartridges amounts to too many people masterbating over ballistics charts.

[Scott N]

Your splitting hairs and quibbling over ballistics between two cartridges that wouldn't amount to any practical difference in the field. Two many redundant cartridges amounts to too many people masterbating over ballistics charts.

I can't argue with your logic, but a guy can never have too many rifles! :)

[Leverboy]

Exactly, i would go with the caliber thats offered in the rifle that you desire. if both calibers come in the same rifle you want, then you have another problem!!!!!:D

[surface2feather]

I own an A bolt 7WSM, and I really like it so far. It has a decent kick to it but is very manageable. I can shoot 2" groups at 100 yards without a problem but have only achieved a few 1" groups at that distance. That being said I haven't shot that much in the past so there are certainly shooter ous there who can achieve better. As far as factory ammo goes I have only found 140-160 gr bullets made by 3 or 4 manufacturers, if your reloading you can of course get a much larger variation. I haven't been able to do much long range shooting, but out to 300 yards the gun shoots very flat. I have mine sighted in at 100 yards about 1 3/4 high, which puts it on the bullseye at 50 yards and in the neighbourhood of the bullse at 250 yards. :)

[7RUM]

I can't argue with your logic, but a guy can never have too many rifles! :)

Get them both. You can never have too many rifles. :innocent:

[RUM]

X2 on this unless you want to sell at some point. The 270 WSM seems to be a lot more popular and has already developed a following.

x3, and the above is a good point aswell. Likely be easier to sell a 270WSM than a 7mmWSM which makes no sense to me, but that's the way it is! I have had both and prefer the 7WSM simply for the reason of more bullet options. Other than that, as stated, there is no real difference between the 2. Both are fantastic calibers that can be used for anything you will hunt on this continent, although I think there are better options out there for the big bears!

[mulecrazy]

I too was in the same dilemma as you are. After looking at the ballistic charts and comparing increases over the originals. I found that the 7MM WSM is pretty close to the 7 rem mag in ballistics. The 270WSM however destroyed the 270 win. I found it actually had the same or close to the same energy as the 7mm WSM at the longer distances. As well if you look around for 270 bullets you can find them with ballistic coefficients of well over .500. For anyone who questions anyon who would shoot a WSM I would suggest giving it an honest trial. I love the short action, It is much quicker and easier to reload. I also believe that having the shorter action limits the overall weight of the gun as well. I have never had a gun feel as nice and comfortable to shoot as my Tikka T3 hunter. I :love: it.

[Lorne]

I bought a Sako 75 270WSM.It did not take me long to become a fan.I took a couple of decent deer with it.It is fast becoming my favourite deer rifle.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v235/Lorne209/muledeer.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v235/Lorne209/Lornesdeer.jpg

[WSM]

Good luck finding a 7mm WSM. I am also looking for a x-bolt 7mm WSM in a stainless and syn stock. I have been looking for one for about 5 months. I also have my name on hold with everybody that has ordered one from browning. So if you are looking for a gun this season that is going to come in play. If you find one in either caliber buy it. No second chances somebody else will be coming behind you and will buy it.

[twofifty]

Originally Posted by Leverboy
Your splitting hairs and quibbling over ballistics between two cartridges that wouldn't amount to any practical difference in the field. Two many redundant cartridges amounts to too many people masterbating over ballistics charts.


I can't argue with your logic, but a guy can never have too many rifles! :)

Mike_W, don'tcha sometimes wonder how many #1 Irons you actually need? Why not something different, like a medium bore or a fast 24 or 25 cal?

[Rocks]

Well after much contemplation I think I have settled on a browning x-bolt for several reasons. Sub MOA out of the box, magazine, feather trigger, dura touch synthetic stock, weight and fit/feel to myself.

Now I am trying to settle on a caliber. I curretly have a 270 win and 300 win mag, I know another rifle is not nessasary but I want one:tongue2:.

I have been trying to deside between a 7mm WSM and a 270 WSM.

I want a gun that will be flat shooting and be able to punch out at least 150 grains. From what I've seen these two cartridges are basically the same case except a larger .284" bullet and a .277" bullet .....maybe the 7mm WSM has a every so slightly larger case.

Looking breifly over BC's the .284" bullet at 160 grains is .531 to a .480 150grain in the .277" bullet shooting at basically the same velocity. Therefore the 160 7mm should shoot flatter that a 150 270.

i think I am leaning towards the 7mm but wanted to get some members opinions on these cartriges and also the rifle of choice.

I will be handloading FYI.

Thanks,
Mike

Go for the 270wsm. You're already loading for the 270, and the 7mm shorty won't give you anything more than what you've got. I've got a 270wsm and it kills everything I shoot at cleanly! You need something bigger and you've already got it in the 300...

[gramps73]

270 wsm all the way got and love it..
G

[Mike_W]

Well thanks for all the help and advice still confused as the census was a little on both sides.

Any thoughts on the rifle choice


Thanks
Mike

[falco]

Well thanks for all the help and advice still confused as the census was a little on both sides.

Any thoughts on the rifle choice


Thanks
Mike
I love my Tikka T3 lite in 270 wsm. It's my first tikka so I don't know if their all like this but it has a very nice trigger.

[mulecrazy]

The Tikka T3 has a really nice smooth action. I love mine. I went with the T3 Hunter as I didn't like the feel of their sythetic stock. I would suggest heading to a good gun shop with a lot of variety and feel a few in your hands. Everyone likes the feel a little different.

[Tundra Monkey]

I'm gonna agree with Scott on this one.

You handload so 7mm all the way.

tm

[Battery]

I have a remmington 270 and my dad shoots a sako 7mm, personally i prefer the 270 but when i shoot the 7mm i love it too, sako is a really good make. i shot a remmington 7mm and will never shoot it again.

[harv3589]

Sako 85 in a 270WSM, you won't regret it....great caliber and an outstanding rifle maker.

[blackpheasant]

Just picked up a new .270 WSM Browning A bolt with VX 3 3.5-10-50 had her out on the weekend for sight in and was WOWED! I love this gun already, November can't come soon enough, recoil no problem, grouping was awesome.

[Cal]

the 270 wsm did not "destroy" the 270 win intill they started tuning the 270win the loads down. It was a bit better for sure but the only way I would say that the 270 wsm "destroyed" the 270 win was that they had to tune down the 270 win loads in order to sell the wsm. Thats just my theory on why they did it but I dont know why else it was done. the 270 win was always loaded in modern hunting actions so them doing it out of concern for the public's saftety makes no sense. They havnt tuned down the 30-06 and there are more sketchy old guns in that caliber than most other cartridges.

[BigChrome]

have a browning X bolt 270wsm mag love it just sold my 7mm to buy this gun wont being going back to the 7mm 270 wsm shoots flat :cool: equiped with Leupold 3X9X50
good groopin, within 1 Inch basically all the good stuff you hear is true

[sbtennex]

7mm. More bullet selection, wider range of weights and heavier if you need. Extra case capacity equals more oomph. Better SD and a 7WSM is on my list too, even though I have a 7mmRM and a 7mm-08. I'll probably build one though - got me eye on a 26" Broughton barrel and I'm GOING to have one that'll shoot 6" groups at 1000 yards. 7mmWSM is the best of the bunch, IMO.

[catnthehat]

Well thanks for all the help and advice still confused as the census was a little on both sides.

Any thoughts on the rifle choice


Thanks
Mike
Well, I can maybe help you there.
The 7WSM is not nearly so popular as the 270.
The 270 is generally considered the best of the WSM line because of its velocity gain over the standard 270WIN.
Its ammo availability is testament to its popularity as well.
I like it because there is lots of 270WSM brass to neck down to 6.5!!:D
Cat

[Dick284]

Come on lets debate the .275 Rigby vs. the 7x57.;)

Or maybe the 7mm Remington Express vs 280 Remington.:innocent:

And when we are done that we will have a lively debate about the merits of one brand of pick up truck versus another.:evilgrin:

OUCH, I just bit my tongue.:lol:

[EagleEye54]

The 270 WSM is the only WSM that makes any ballistic improvement over the tried and truth existing models. But I'd still buy a 270 WIN or 7mm Mag over any WSM. Don't like 'em and never will. Oh and yes, I have tried them.

Since you already have the bases covered with your big game rifles, why not a varmint rig instead? You can have a whole lot more fun for a longer time (all year) with a varmint rifle. :cool:

[The Bit Runner.]

I just had a 270swm built at corlanes in dawson creek,Pacnor bbl and a mpi stock,browning a bolt,25" bbl with a range finder burris scope on it,Flutes and all the other good stuff that goes with it,Sure looks nice,havent even shot it yet and ive had it 6 months,something tells me im working to DAM much.:mad2:Everything in i think i got 3400 into that rifle,it better be a 1 hole gun for that price.

[378 Wthrby]

Why a wsm? I dont get the hype about fat little cases, the 7mm rem mag would split the difference between the two calibers that you own quite nicely. Feeds better, handles a wide range of bullets better, ammo costs less and is easyer to find

X2

[blackpheasant]

The 270 WSM is the only WSM that makes any ballistic improvement over the tried and truth existing models. But I'd still buy a 270 WIN or 7mm Mag over any WSM. Don't like 'em and never will. Oh and yes, I have tried them.

Since you already have the bases covered with your big game rifles, why not a varmint rig instead? You can have a whole lot more fun for a longer time (all year) with a varmint rifle. Or how about a serious bench shooter like the Remington XCR Tactical in 308? I have one and I'll tell you, shoot one and you'll see why they are so popular. Mount a big mother expensive scope, like an S & B or a Zeiss and have at it. There is nothing like shooting .3 MOA at 300+ yards. The bonus is this puppy can be used for big game as well. :cool:

So what don't you like about short mags ? I purchased a browning A bolt in .270 WSM last week just finished filling my WT and MD tags with it, and I love this gun already lots of knockdown power even at long range, went with the new winchester XP3 bullets in 150 grain this combo is more than adequate on deer, ammo seems to available everywhere. My other favorite gun is a 30-06 I like the shorter action with the short mag and I think the short mag has less recoil the my odd 6, I don't know why guys don't like the short mags less recoil alone sold me.

[EagleEye54]

I tried a 300 WSM a few years back and wasn't impressed. The fat case did not feed very well at all and that almost cost me a buck. Although it is usually a one shot event, I was not comfortable with having 1 round less in the magazine either. The recoil was a tiny bit less than my 300 WM but the amount was not noteworthy. Besides, any newer Remington model with an R3 recoil pad gets you 25-30% less felt recoil than any other brand I know of. I actually prefer a longer action...my favorite big game round is a 270 WIN, closely followed by the 30-06.

I consider the WSM as a marketing campaign to sell guns with something we didn't need. We have short action rounds for those that need or want and don't need more. So call me old school but I'll stick with the tried and true. If you are happy with a WSM then be happy. Just not my keetle of fish. A 270 WIN, 30-06, 7MAG or 308 will fill the freezer just fine without the fanfare and hype.

[catnthehat]

I don't think the jamming issue is a big deal at all, because I have seen CRF rifles in all different calibers jam, PF rifle actions jam, but all the WSM calibers I have used DID NOT!!:sick:
I really think it is the way the action is tuned more than the caliber.
Cat

[Selkirk]

-

[catnthehat]

You must realize triggerfinger, that people like different stuff sometimes, otherwise we'd all be still shooting the first cartridge ever designed!!:lol:
I commented on the differences between the 7WSM and the 270WSM, because those were the two asked about.

I own more different rifles in different calibers and cartridges than a lot of people have even shot in their life times, and like them all, all have little quirks and advantages.
The WSM line and SAUM line were designed by someone for someone who thought they needed them, for sure, but that does not mean a person shouldn't buy one because a 308 will do it as well!
Cat

[Selkirk]

.

[MountainTi]

Why a wsm? I dont get the hype about fat little cases, the 7mm rem mag would split the difference between the two calibers that you own quite nicely. Feeds better, handles a wide range of bullets better, ammo costs less and is easyer to find

Why a WSM? Shorter action required, resulting in a stiffer action and a dcrease in weight. So far sounds good to me. How about the greater surface area of powder in close proximity to the primer resulting in a more effecient burn of the powder? As for not feeding as well, not sure what brand of rifle you've been playing with, but I've yet to see a problem with the WSM and feeding issues. One downfall is mag capacity is usually 1 less than say a .270 Win. so just gotta learn to shoot straighter the first time :)

[blackpheasant]

Hey Cat :wave:

You must realize; that my comments were 'not' directed at you, or any other individual ... they were only intended as part of the discussion and directed at the 'general' shooting public. You, your name, or your post was not mentioned. You may have mis-read my post (#35) ... when you get a chance, please give it another read. I was merely expressing my opinion and the opinion of many others.

To add to my post (#35);There is a growing trend in some companies to have new shooting/hunting products developed by their 'Marketing' Departments rather than their 'Technical' Departments. The WSM's are a classic example of this trend.

As 'Leverboy' and many others have already commented; " . . . There are too many redundant cartridges out there already (even without the WSM's) . . . and too many people spend too much time xxxxxxxxx over ballistic charts".

Nuf said ;)



Thats all really good but as a consumer I welcome more choice and variety, as technology advances these companies make improvements sounds good to me.

[Cordur]

I love my 270WSM and I bought it because I didn't have a 270Win yet. Figured if I were going to buy a 270 it might as well be the newer one and it's popularity has certainly panned out.

As for the Tikas, I was under the impression that they were all built on a long action, even the for the short cases. Sako makes a shorter action as far as I know. Or am I misinformed and they were always built on a short action or did they change this as some point?

The other thing to think about with the 270WSM is that every ballistics chart I've looked at shows that you will need a 24" barrel as a minimum to get an appreciable gain in velocity over the 270Win. Something to really keep in mind.

As for feeding issues, there were some when the line was first released. My Winchester Featherweight shaved a bit of brass of the case every time I fed one into the chamber. The angle it was being pushed at the sharp edge of the chamber was causing this. I fed some aluminum dummy rounds through the chamber a few hundred times and the problem is now solved. Made for a hard push to chamber a round until it was smoothed out.

The 7mm line certainly offers more flexibility in loading. This would probably be the reason I'd go with that. Except I like to have my rifles sighted in for one particular round and don't change them up when I've got something that works. A 130gr TSX out of the 270WSM is enough medicine for anything walking in North America that I can imagine.

Personally I like the suggestion of the Sako 85. Damn nice rifle and doubt anyone has bought one and thought it was the wrong choice.

[catnthehat]

Hey Cat :wave:

You must realize; that my comments were 'not' directed at you, or any other individual ... they were only intended as part of the discussion and directed at the 'general' shooting public. You, your name, or your post was not mentioned. You may have mis-read my post (#35) ... when you get a chance, please give it another read. I was merely expressing my opinion and the opinion of many others.

To add to my post (#35);There is a growing trend in some companies to have new shooting/hunting products developed by their 'Marketing' Departments rather than their 'Technical' Departments. The WSM's are a classic example of this trend.

As 'Leverboy' and many others have already commented; " . . . There are too many redundant cartridges out there already (even without the WSM's) . . . and too many people spend too much time xxxxxxxxx over ballistic charts".

Nuf said ;)


I do realize that Triggerfinger!:)
I didn't think your post was directed at me, but only commented because many times people get caught up in the hype of something, be it a new cartridge or a new rifle.
I know many guys that bought new stuff because they thought it was better than their old gear, when in essence it was only different.

I don't think the WSM's are redundant however, but I do think there are some cartridges that are.....
Cat

[Cal]

To me it seems like alot of rifles made today are too light anyways. I would be hesitant to buy any rifle in the calibers talked about that is lighter than 7 lbs (without scope). I even prefer my 22's to weigh at least that much. The need for a longer barrel to get much balistic advantage over a standard long action cartrige would diminish the weight advantage anyways. I dont care much about the loss of magazine capacity. One advantage is that with a gun that can hold 4-5 shells I feel confident I need not cary along extra shells on a day trip. Even if I miss a deer throughout the course of a day and take two shots at a deer later on I will have a kill shot left should I need it. In reality though I'v never needed anywhere close to my magazine capacity.

[RUM]

As most of you have seen, I usually don't take this 'blunt' of an approach in my forum responses, but in this case I'm rather passionate about this subject. This isn't an attempt to 'rain' on anyone's parade (this thread) ... please don't take this reply that way. I'm just presenting a different school of thought.

I'm shopping for a new rifle as well, but I flat-out refuse to even consider any of the WSM's. I'm just totally convinced, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the WSM's are 98% marketing hype, "flavor of the day" products.

I think we all need to put our magnifying glasses down, get our heads out of the ballistic charts, and take a 'real-world' reality check.



Your opinion is yours to have, no problems there, but I really can't see why you feel so passionate about disliking the WSM's. They are all good cartridges that will provide good company hunting on this continent. Can they do something leaps and bounds above any other catridge, no, but they can hold their own when comparing them to other calibers commonly used for hunting in North America. Like Cat said, nobody is saying that a 308 can't fill the freezer anymore, but not everyone wants to shoot a 308 for whatever reason they choose.
In my humble opinion, a real world reality check would be for people to get over the arguement that the WSM's are just the new thing and a marketing hype. Instead, accept the fact they they are just as capable as a number of tried and tested calibers with a little different flavor. If you don't want one, don't get one, but there is nothing wrong with any of the WSM calibers.

[wayne]

Good posts RUM and Cat. The only thing wrong with the WSM line-up is that they have not yet added the 257WSM -which I think was a marketting mistake. They are not really new anymore - almost 10 years old. Never had an issue with feeding cartridges through 3 bolt guns and a semi-auto short mag I have owned. Short action does not necessarily mean a short mag is a lightweight gun, though they are available in lightweight, just not for me. My latest addition - a Model 70 Coyote in 7WSM weighs nine pounds with bases and rings attached. A 140 grain 7WSM Ballistic Silvertip is the fastest bullet in the WSM factory loadings, even faster than a 130 grain Ballistic Silvertip 270 WSM bullet - probably due to greater case capacity. The 270 has never turned my crank in long, or short action - 7WSM all the way, though I still own a 300WSM too and will for a long time. Cat is right - the 308 and 30.06 have been around long enough to be ignored by many.

[catnthehat]

Vet doubtful that you will ever see the 257WSM now Wayne - Rick Jamison saw to that!:mad3:

I have a few friends would did up 257 WSM wildcats, and like playing with them , they are pretty quick little numbers!
As far as lightweight gores, byt 6.5WSM wildcat weighs in at about 12lb.s or a little better - a 30" heavy barrel is responsible for that!:lol:
Cat

[Selkirk]

"Well after much contemplation I think I have settled on a browning x-bolt . . . I have been trying to deside between a 7mm WSM and a 270 WSM . . . I want a gun that will be flat shooting and be able to punch out at least 150 grains . . . I think I am leaning towards the 7mm but wanted to get some members opinions on these cartriges and also the rifle of choice . . ."
.


G'day Mike :wave:

My responses to your two main questions . . .

Rifle:
From what I've seen, Browning's new X-Bolt appears to be one sweet rifle [ http://www.browning.com/products/catalog/firearms/detail.asp?value=023B&cat_id=035&type_id=208 ]. I'm shopping for a new rifle as well, and the X-Bolt is right on top of my short-list. I like the fit & finish, the overall feel, smooth bolt with 60 deg. lift, rotory mag., free floating barrel, adjustible 'Feather' trigger, the Inflex recoil pad, etc., etc.. I don't think you can go wrong with the X-Bolt.

Cartridge:
As far as which WSM to go with ... in reading through your thread, I think the results are fairly conclusive now, and I would tend agree with them. Because you reload, go with the 7mm WSM, unless you're concerned about the resale issue.

Once you've made your purchase and have it all set up, let us know how it works for you ... we'll be watching for your next thread :)

Good Shooting!

Dean

[Ice Fishing Maniac]

Well thanks for all the help and advice still confused as the census was a little on both sides.

Any thoughts on the rifle choice


Thanks
Mike

Well I guess selling you my Sako m75 Greywolf 338-06AI is out of the question now!!! :lol:

I personally would go with the 270WSM. I have been very impressed with this caliber with 140gr Accubonds on big game. I have two in the Tikka T3 LS models. I personally am not a Browning fan nor a 7mmRM fan. But since you have a 270 and a 300WM, maybe ithe 270WSM or 7mmWSM are not the ones you want.

GO with some wildcat caliber since you are going to reload-be different like I did.

Later Mike

[Dick284]

Funniest thing is all the dissing of the WSM's sounds all to familiar to all the dissing the 2.5" belted magnums got back in their infancy years.

Hmm, look where they sit now.

You fellers should at least make some arguments which are new, because all that you are spouting now, was all heard back in the mid 50's early 60's.

[Mike_W]

Wow thought this thread went to sleep a while ago check in today and wow.

Thanks for all the insight everyone.

Darren I will still take that -06 off you!!!

[sharpejimbo]

This is a custom 7mm wsm that shoots sub min. savage action, mcmillan a3,brux 30" tubhttp://i710.photobucket.com/albums/ww104/sharpejimbo/th_IMG_0382.jpg (http://s710.photobucket.com/albums/ww104/sharpejimbo/?action=view&current=IMG_0382.jpg)e nightforce 8-32

[sheepguide]

I have a browning X-Bolt in the .270wsm and wouldnt trade it for anything out there. I looked at every reloading manual i could find and talked to alot of guys about rifles and found this catridge will shoot with the best of them. As far as the ballistics go look them up for yourself and make your own decision on that. ( I was a hard core .300 fan and will never own another after seeing what this cal. does) As far as a rifle goes the Browning in a short mag is about as fast a bolt action rifle as you can get. It has a shorter bolt throw than any other rifle and mine is acurate as any rifle ive seen and ive shot alot of different guns.

[Canuck44]

I'd get a 7mm rem mag, you allready have a 277 and 308 calibre and a 284 would fit nicely in between. In my opinion the 7mm rem mag is the 284 to get.

[TJHAY]

I love the short action, It is much quicker and easier to reload. I also believe that having the shorter action limits the overall weight of the gun as well. I have never had a gun feel as nice and comfortable to shoot as my Tikka T3 hunter. I :love: it.

I bought the T3 composite/stainless in the 270 WSM. Couldnt agree more about the feel of the gun and the benefit of the short action. I had never hunted with a bolt before this gun and was worried about working the action quickly... last fall I was hunting whitetail in Ontario and got a shot at an 8 pnt buck opening morning. First shot caught some brush and missed... buck took off running, but was able to easily cycle and dropped the deer within 20 yards of the first shot...

hunting buddies didnt think it was me shooting b/c it sounded like a semi...

great gun! definitely a WSM and a T3 fan !

If you do much travelling and hunting you might want to go with the 270wsm... might be hard to find 7mm wsm shells in the middle of nowhere, if the airline happens to loose your bag that has your ammo in it :S

[whitetail Junkie]

Your splitting hairs and quibbling over ballistics between two cartridges that wouldn't amount to any practical difference in the field. Two many redundant cartridges amounts to too many people masterbating over ballistics charts.

:lol::lol::lol::lol:

[Ivo]

Anyone here care to argue why the 7wsm is one of the new "Go To" rounds for F-class guys these days? And don't give me the flavour of the week response because I've never heard of anyone shooting competitive F-class with a .270wsm.
As for a hunting calibre either will do you fine, the 7mm will give you a few more options for bullet weight(larger game and better BCs for long range). The long range issue is not a concern to you since you are buying a Browning sporter weight rifle.
As a dedicated hunting rig a .270wsm may be a better bet just because of availability of ammo.
Ivo

[4570]

[QUOTE=EagleEye54;216891]The 270 WSM is the only WSM that makes any ballistic improvement over the tried and truth existing models.

Wrong:tongue2:

Consider IMR 4350 powder and a 180 g bullet and look here...
http://data.hodgdon.com/main_menu.asp

The 300 win mag uses 71.0 g to get 2974 fps

The 300 wsm mag uses 65.0 g to get 2991 fps


Masturbating over almost meaningless ballistics, yes it is.
So enough, I am packing up a few revolvers and heading to the range.:)

[elkhunter11]

Consider IMR 4350 powder and a 180 g bullet and look here...
http://data.hodgdon.com/main_menu.asp

The 300 win mag uses 71.0 g to get 2974 fps

The 300 wsm mag uses 65.0 g to get 2991 fps

Take a look at the Nosler data(6th edition),the 300WM produces about 80fps more velocity with 180gr bullets,than the 300WSM,despite the 300WM barrel being 2" shorter.With equal length barrels,the advantage for the 300WM would increase.For some reason they used a 24" barrel on the 300WM,and a 26" barrel for the 300WSM.

[foothillsman]

The 300 wm has more jam than the 300 wsm(not worth considering). Each grain of a specific powder contains a specific amount of energy. So, more powder behind a specified weight and make of bullet will produce more velocity, if pressures remain equal. No magic occurs.

What the short mags do so well is, the powders burn efficiently, and this creates a lower standard deviation and extreme spread. No extra velocity shows up for free. The other thing which it has going for it, is that, when you're laying prone shooting, it's easier not to disturb your position while cycling the bolt of your rifle.

As for a where the short mag craze started from, I remember that the merits of the PPC cartridges were really being touted. Eventually there was pressure put on manufacturers to put out powerful hunting cartridges similar to the PPC. Eventually they showed up and became very good sellers. Pressures in the PPC tended to be high, so when bullet speed to powder weight was considered, everyone thought that the efficient cartridge produced more speed per grain of powder at normal pressures. This was partially responsible for the ideas that you got velocity for free.

Mike W, as for whether to choose the 270wsm vs 7mmwsm look at what you posted. Looking breifly over BC's the .284" bullet at 160 grains is .531 to a .480 150grain in the .277" bullet shooting Note the differences in diameter. It's .007 inch difference in diameter between the two. If you really think about how small the difference is between the bullet diameters, you will appreciate how small the difference between the two cartridges really are.
The 270 wsm and 7mm wsm basically is a reinvention of the 7mm remington mag. As for comparing the two, make sure that the bullet's sectional density as well as bullet construcion / type is identical to get an accurate picture.

The only reason the 270wsm is doing better is the name "270" which is in the cartridge's name. If you reload , go 7mm, if you don't, choose 270.

[noneck180]

This thread started 1 year 1/2 ago,,, someone must have been searching :lol::lol:

[whitetail Junkie]

This thread started 1 year 1/2 ago,,, someone must have been searching :lol::lol:

I was researching the 7mm wsm.when this popped up on the net.?

[fordtruckin]

Well thanks for all the help and advice still confused as the census was a little on both sides.

Any thoughts on the rifle choice


Thanks
Mike

Depends on how much you wanting to pay. You can get Weatherby Vanguards for as little as $400. Sportsmans Den in Red Deer had a Browning Mountain Ti in 270 and 7mm WSM. They were running around $1600. Nice rifles! at less than 6 pounds wouldn't be that bad to carry all day, and with that Dura-Touch finish you shouldn't have to worry bout the stock lookin like crap after a couple seasons.

But it all comes down to what fits you. I don't care what anyone says about any firearm. Find something that shoulders well, points well, carrys well for YOU. Just cause it fits them doesnt mean it will fit you, and if it doesn't fit you well you won't want to shoot it and you just blew your $$.

[4570]

Take a look at the Nosler data(6th edition),the 300WM produces about 80fps more velocity with 180gr bullets,than the 300WSM,despite the 300WM barrel being 2" shorter.With equal length barrels,the advantage for the 300WM would increase.For some reason they used a 24" barrel on the 300WM,and a 26" barrel for the 300WSM.

Elk I am sure your data is as you say...
Says here 300 WSM uses less powder that 300 win for the practically same velocity.
http://www.nosler.com/index.php?p=15&b=30cal&s=349

300 Win Short Magnum
180gr Ballistic Tip®, AccuBond® & Partition®

Powder: IMR4350
Charge Weight (in grains) Muzzle Velocity (fps) Load Density
65.0 3024 fps 92%



300 Winchester
180gr Ballistic Tip®, AccuBond® & Partition®

Powder: IMR4350
Charge Weight (in grains) Muzzle Velocity (fps) Load Density
70.0* 3130 fps 91%

[elkhunter11]

Elk I am sure your data is as you say...
Says here 300 WSM uses less powder that 300 win for the practically same velocity.

The Nosler manual has many more loads listed than the Nosler site,and it shows the barrel lengths used.Given equal barrel lengths,the 300WM does produce over 100fps more than the 300WSM,but yes,it does use more powder to obtain that velocity.

[Rockmcdock]

The one perhaps significant difference is in long range accuracy due to the impressive BC of the 7mm wsm. For this reason, benchresters have been lauding the virtues of the 7mm wsm; its ability to cope with wind give it a notable advantage over the .270 wsm, from what I have read. Hunters don't typically need that kind of consistent accuracy, but why not have at your disposal every advantage if it is available to you? Someone above mentioned that of the three wsms, the 7mm is the best of the bunch. Accuracy wise, this seems to be the case, and since shot placement is more important in hunting than energy, the hunter seeking to obtain the best cartridge for deer, elk and moose may actually be at a slight advantage if he/she was to go with the 7mm wsm vs. the .270 wsm or .300wsm. Is the advantage a significant advantage? No. Is there a slight advantage if shot placement is more important than energy? Yes, because the 7mm wsm's ballistics at long range are slightly better than the .270wsm and better than all but the quite heavy .300 wsms (e.g., 210 grains). Hunters don't always choose a cartridge just because it is ballistically the best. Availability of factory loads certainly affects choices. Hunting where encounters with Grizzlies are likely may mean someone will opt for the heavier choices available in the .300 wsm. But if a choice is being made chiefly on an accuracy basis, with energy being the next important issue, the 7mm wsm would typically win out over the .270, the .270 wsm, the 7mm rem mag, the .300 win mag, and the .300 wsm. See 6mmbr.com and read the article "7mm Cartridge Guide."

[7mm-08]

I bought the T3 composite/stainless in the 270 WSM. Couldnt agree more about the feel of the gun and the benefit of the short action. I had never hunted with a bolt before this gun and was worried about working the action quickly... last fall I was hunting whitetail in Ontario and got a shot at an 8 pnt buck opening morning. First shot caught some brush and missed... buck took off running, but was able to easily cycle and dropped the deer within 20 yards of the first shot...

hunting buddies didnt think it was me shooting b/c it sounded like a semi...

great gun! definitely a WSM and a T3 fan !

If you do much travelling and hunting you might want to go with the 270wsm... might be hard to find 7mm wsm shells in the middle of nowhere, if the airline happens to loose your bag that has your ammo in it :S

I thought Tikka's were all built on long actions?:thinking-006: