Short Magnum Facts

[onehorse]

Here are the short magnum stats as listed in the Barnes Reloading Manual and how they compare to the standard caliber stats in the same manual.
Caliber Bullet Weight Fastest Velocity Shown
.270 Win. 130 grains 3211 f/s (59.5 gr. powder)
.270 WSM 130 3260 (74.0 gr. powder)
7mm Rem. Magnum 140 3152 (73.5 gr. powder)
7mm WSM 140 3171 (68.5 gr. powder)
.300 Win. Magnum 150 3345 (79.0 gr. powder)
.300 WSM 150 3321 (70.5 gr. powder)
.300 Win. Magnum 180 3036 (72.5 gr. powder)
.300 WSM 180 3036 (69.5 gr. powder)

As can be seen, the 270 WSM delivers only 49 more f/s but it needs 14.5 more grains of powder to achieve this.
The 7mm WSM actually beats the 7mm Rem. magnum by 19 f/s and needs 5 grains LESS powder to do so.
The .300 Win. Magnum 150 gr. bullet beats the .300 WSM 150 grainer by only 23 f/s, but requires 8.5 gr. of powder to do that.
The .300 Win. Magnum and .300 WSM tie at 3036 f/s with 180 gr. bullets, but the shorty use 3 grains less powder.
To my way of thinking, the 270 WSM (and I own one) is nowhere near as efficient as the .270 Win.
The .300 shorty, (and I own one of these) because it uses less powder than the .300 and almost matches (150 gr.) and matches (180 gr.) the bigger case .300 in velocity, is a pretty efficient round.
The 7mm WSM seems to be the most efficient, beating it's big brother in velocity and using less powder to do it. (I WISH I owned one of these!)

[Karl.Luhr]

That was a very informative post OneHorse. To bad I am such a wimp when it comes to any magnums. Keep up the good work. The magnums you listed are capable of wonderful performance. I personally don't have a need for the performance they offer above what the 30-06 provides me.

Karl

[Scorpion8]

Good info, but not enough convincing of a sales job by the major OEMs. Anybody jump on Remington's SAUM-series? Can't find them at my LGS. There are ten or twelve offerings of 7mmRemMag and two of 7mmWSM at the LGS. I've got a 7mmRemMag, that's all I need in this discussion.

[daddus1]

Onehorse,
Do you have any information about information??? involving not using the short mag rounds on dangerous game or is that just some background noise someone created ??
daddus

[onehorse]

Originally Posted by daddus1

Onehorse,
Do you have any information about information??? involving not using the short mag rounds on dangerous game or is that just some background noise someone created ??
daddus

The only thing I've heard about shorties that might be a problem in hunting dangerous game is reported feeding problems. I have never had any trouble with mine, nor have I met anyone who has. As for terminal performance, if the shot is well-placed, the caliber, velocity and construction of the bullet are what matters - the length and/or shape of the case are non-factors. For example, a bear wouldn't be able to tell the difference between being hit by that 180 gr. bullet whether it came from the long .300 Win. Magnum case or the short .300 WSM case because it would be just as dead, just as fast.

[Hunting Man]

After the post by onehorse, I'm more convinced that the new short mags will never achieve long term noteriaty simply because they just don't do a whole lot more than the long bullets do. A couple of grains more or less and a couple of FPS just isn't much to brag about. I know a shorter bullet for short actions but come-on this is simply much to do about nothing really outstandingly great. There will always be those who want something new and I'm usually at the front of the line but in this case???? My son wants a 325 wsm in a Browning X-bolt, I just don't know. Working at Dick's Sporting he can purchase one at 40% off. As stated above, the game animal won't know the difference. Stack one of the 270 wsm against a 270 Weatherby mag maybe that would be a fair comparison?