Which rifle to get?

[Guest Potshot21]

Just curious what people think of these two calibers.

I'm basically looking for a longer range rifle with good "takedown" power.

These both seem to be close ballistically, I'm just not sure about the Short Mag.

I'm currently leaning more towards the .338 win mag, just as it is probably more common of a round than the realtively new Short Mag.

So let me know some opinions on which you think is the best!

Thanks!

Potshot

[CharlieAlphaLimaEcho 0]

For selection of both rifle and bullet weight, the greater number of options is definitely in favour of the .338 win. mag. Your looking at approximately equal recoil for both in similarly weighted rifles and bullet grains, thought the ballistics of of the .338 is slightly better. Besides the lack of options available for .325 wsm ammunition, the cost is also much higher.

Ultimately, if cost is a big consideration, i would suggest the .338 win. mag., and if not, its really entirely up to you. See if you can find anyone who'll let you shoot both, and see which you prefer.

Cale

[Hurketthunter 65]

For selection of both rifle and bullet weight, the greater number of options is definitely in favour of the .338 win. mag. Your looking at approximately equal recoil for both in similarly weighted rifles and bullet grains, thought the ballistics of of the .338 is slightly better. Besides the lack of options available for .325 wsm ammunition, the cost is also much higher.

Ultimately, if cost is a big consideration, i would suggest the .338 win. mag., and if not, its really entirely up to you. See if you can find anyone who'll let you shoot both, and see which you prefer.

Cale

I would definitely go with the .338 if given the choice. Much wider range of bullet weights and styles available. I'd like to add tho that if you really want to reach out and touch something I'd go with a fast .30 cal. .300 win, .300 weatherby or any of the various ultramags. I only own the .300 mag but it gets the job done at long range very nicely. Just my opinion. Goodluck and enjoy your new rifle whichever you decide to get.

Hurketthunter

[CharlieAlphaLimaEcho 0]

What is it that your looking to hunt anyways? Like Hurkett said, the .300 win. mag. is plenty large enough to take any North American game. The only exception perhaps being brown bears, but even they can be taken with a well placed shot. With either of these guns your probably gonna be wanting to get a muzzle break, so a smaller calibre might be better. Just my two cents

[Guest Potshot21]

I'm planning on using it for large game, such as moose, bear, and quite possibly elk. I know that a smaller rifle can still perform quite well on these animals, but I'm really interested in having substantial knock-down power at longer ranges.

I just want to have a little extra confidence that the bullet will be able to do its job quickly and effeciently, even if the animal is quite far away.

I'm not saying I want a cannon so i can make ridiculous "hail mary" potshots at animals, but something that will stop them in their tracks and distances I have practiced and am comfortable with.

Also, has anyone ever used a 7mm STW?

I just found some ballisitic tables for it and it looks interesting...

[Travis Schallock 28]

338, but only because of availabilty, and versatiliy. There is nothing wrong with the 325 either though.

But depending on what you are shooting now, are you really upgrading any? You said you want something that is going to stop them in their tracks. Is that very realistic? IMO dropping anything in their tracks has much more to do with accuracy and bullet placement, not throwing a bigger piece of lead at them.

I grew up in BC and hunted everything you could from grizzly to whitetail. All I ever carried, is my 280 Ackley shooting high quality bullets. Very few people who live and hunt there shoot anything bigger than a 300, and the running joke is how everyone who came out there to hunt brought cannons they couldn't shoot accurately because of something they read, or thought they needed more power.

So my advice is if you allready have something in the 30-06 range, use good bullets, learn where it is going to shoot at all realistic ranges, then punch a hole in its lungs.

A 7mm STW(Shooting Times Western) is a 8mm Mauser necked down to take a 7mm bullet. I know a guy who has one and he loved it, you must use top notch ammo though because it is very fast, and bullets didn't allways hold up at short range.

[Pro fisherman-Stud Muffin 420]

STW is not really a moose gun with stopping power. bullets to small and too fast. its has speed but thats about it. i wouldn't be confident in double shoulder shots with any.284 caliber.

if you want a flat trajectory 30-378 is the way to go for moose.

but the 338 win mag is what you want . stw isnt any flatter than 338 when using heavier bullets. 338 is a game killer provided it hits something vital. and the 338 use a 7mm rem case necked up so it burns less powder than stw too

[Guest Beamer]

338, but only because of availabilty, and versatiliy. There is nothing wrong with the 325 either though.

But depending on what you are shooting now, are you really upgrading any? You said you want something that is going to stop them in their tracks. Is that very realistic? IMO dropping anything in their tracks has much more to do with accuracy and bullet placement, not throwing a bigger piece of lead at them.

I grew up in BC and hunted everything you could from grizzly to whitetail. All I ever carried, is my 280 Ackley shooting high quality bullets. Very few people who live and hunt there shoot anything bigger than a 300, and the running joke is how everyone who came out there to hunt brought cannons they couldn't shoot accurately because of something they read, or thought they needed more power.

So my advice is if you allready have something in the 30-06 range, use good bullets, learn where it is going to shoot at all realistic ranges, then punch a hole in its lungs.

A 7mm STW(Shooting Times Western) is a 8mm Mauser necked down to take a 7mm bullet. I know a guy who has one and he loved it, you must use top notch ammo though because it is very fast, and bullets didn't allways hold up at short range.

Actually the 7mm STW is a Remington 8mm magnum case necked down to 7mm or .284. The 8mm Mauser is significantly smaller case, the 325 WSM is 8mm/.323 and bullet choice range from 125 to 250 grain, the Remington 8mm Magnum never caught on due to the popularity of the Winchester .338 Magnum. Either gun will kill what ever you shoot with it and it would boil down to persoanl choice. I recently changed from a Browning Bar in 300 WM to a new Browning Bar Short trac in 270 WSM dropped a full three pounds in rifle weight.

Beamer

[Travis Schallock 28]

Actually the 7mm STW is a Remington 8mm magnum case necked down to 7mm or .284. The 8mm Mauser is significantly smaller case, the 325 WSM is 8mm/.323 and bullet choice range from 125 to 250 grain, the Remington 8mm Magnum never caught on due to the popularity of the Winchester .338 Magnum. Either gun will kill what ever you shoot with it and it would boil down to persoanl choice. I recently changed from a Browning Bar in 300 WM to a new Browning Bar Short trac in 270 WSM dropped a full three pounds in rifle weight.

Beamer

Your right about the STW, for some reason I thought it was the mauser. The only real difference between the various magnums and short magnums is that the short can be built on a short action, which saves weight, but adds recoil. For anyone who has hunted high country, those few pounds make a huge difference.

So I guess if your main purpose of buying a new rifle was to go hunting out west where you would likely be hunting high elevations, the 325 may be a better rifle. It is the equal to a 338, but easier to carry all day. As long as the recoil is ok for you.

However, IMO you are much better suited something smaller,(308,284,277) that you can shoot comfortably, then a bigger bore that you are not as comfortable with.

[Guest Potshot21]

I'm very mindful of weight with every rifle I own. And simply for that reason I think I'll be lookin at the WSM. But now I'm weighing the advantages of the .325 wsm over the .300 wsm.

It looks like the .300 wsm has better ballistics, and I would assume there would be a larger selection of bullets to choose from, especially since I'm getting into handloading!

Any opinions on these two calibers?

Thanks guys!

Potshot

[fishman1 164]

i own a 300wsm, bought it several years ago. have used it in africa as well as ontario. it is a great cartridge. plus, the ammo is readily available. when was the last time, or the first time you have seen 325wsm cartridges on the shelf? i went with this cartridge for that reason and have not been disappointed.

[James01 223]

I'm very mindful of weight with every rifle I own. And simply for that reason I think I'll be lookin at the WSM. But now I'm weighing the advantages of the .325 wsm over the .300 wsm.

It looks like the .300 wsm has better ballistics, and I would assume there would be a larger selection of bullets to choose from, especially since I'm getting into handloading!

Any opinions on these two calibers?

Thanks guys!

Potshot

Actually Potshot, if you're going to be loading, there are a number of options for the .325WSM. As mentioned above, the .325 is an 8mm, and in 8mm there are a number of bullet weights available. My brother just purchased a Browning X-bolt Stainless Stalker in .325WSM, and it is a very nice, light, and compact rifle. And because he loads he wasn't overly worried about available bullet weights - nor about the lack of rounds on store shelves.

The biggest worry I have about the .325WSM (I am considering getting one myself... but, because of sibling rivalry I may have to go up to a .340WBY ) is that they haven't caught on like Winchester had hoped, so the 325's days may be numbered. But because he loads my brother wasn't overly concerned about this either. Is this wise, I don't know... but what I do know is that up until he purchased his .325WSM he was hunting with a 7X61 Sharpe & Hart, which has been obsolete years - he simply loaded his own cartridges.

A .325WSM is supposed to equal the hitting power of a .338WM and match or surpass the ballistics of a .300WM (and no, the .338's ballistics do not surpass or even equal the .300's); combine this with an advertised lower recoil than either the .300 or .338, and the compact nature of rifles chambered in WSM rounds, and it seems to be almost a perfect gun for North American game... and all but the largest species worldwide.

But, to get back to my original point... if you are going to be reloading, then the "selection of bullets" isn't quite the problem it would be if you were buying off the shelf. In terms of the .325WSM vs. the .300WSM, go with whatever you really want, because in the end you'll likely regret it if you don't. Both appear to be impressive calibers, and both are more than sufficient for anything in these parts.

My brother is coming into town in a few weeks, and I believe he is bringing his new toy... errr, I mean rifle. So, I will have the chance to shoot a .325WSM, and I have owned a .300 WM. I will let you know my impressions of the .325WSM vs. what I remember of the .300WM. This may be the definitive moment for my personal debate between a .325WSM and a .340WBY - or perhaps the .300WBY.

p.s. The biggest difference between the .300WSM and the .325WSM is that they excel at different bullet weights. The .325WSM will likely be at its best with a slightly heavier bullet than the .300WSM would, whereas the .300WSM will be in its groove with something in the 180-200 grain range. I know you can purchase 8mm bullets in 250 grain, and if you're interested in loading something as big as this I would suggest the .325WSM. In the end, both are quite capable of making Moose, Bear, and Deer quite dead.