Author Topic: .325 WSM (Read 3156 times)

tripod · « **Reply #30 on:** December 22, 2004, 08:08:10 AM »

Hi, I am a die hard fan of the .300 Win Mag. It has been perfectly effective on all game including elk & bear, with manageable recoil. These new rounds always stir interest including mine, after all I stepped up to the .300 from an 06 at one time. But this was shifting to a time tested caliber with ammo and supplies readily available. Always the first thing you see about a new caliber is the speed and horsepower, but I'm equally interested in the recoil measure and recoil velocity. With the .300 the animal gets more pounding than I do and I'd like to keep it that way.

Gregory · « **Reply #31 on:** December 23, 2004, 03:46:27 PM »

This month's American Rifleman has an article on the 325 WSM. They took it on a caribou hunt. I've never hunted anything bigger than deer, but I've heard caribou aren't that tough to knock over. So why didn't they pick something a bit tougher to test out this new cartridge? Maybe moose would have been a better test for something reported to be equivalent to a 338 Mag.

Donaldo · « **Reply #32 on:** December 25, 2004, 06:28:10 AM »

The new 325, ..... yep, it fills that gap that did not exist. But hey, they can't just keep on makin the same ole rifles each year. What are all them gun writers going to write about. I mean, how many articles can you do on a 30-06? That and a hot 22 CF is about all one really needs. But on the other hand......... need is not a part of this addiction.

longwinters · « **Reply #33 on:** December 25, 2004, 12:16:29 PM »

Will I buy one . . .nope. I have no use for it. But I am glad they keep making up new cartridges. Some guys will buy them for whatever their reasons and that is good. It keeps life interesting for me reading about it and on occasion seeing them in my favorite gun shops. I am probably kind of simple, but I even like just looking at the differences in the cartridges themselves right out of the box. Yep, I think it is just plain fun these new cartridges.

Long

stork · « **Reply #34 on:** December 25, 2004, 02:58:07 PM »

I second everything longwinters just said.

lgm270 · « **Reply #35 on:** December 28, 2004, 07:35:54 PM »

For most of my shooting career I had no use for the 8mm in any caliber. Then I acquired a closet full of 8mm Milsurp mausers and do a lot of shooting with the 8x57 because of the availablility of cheap mil surp ammo for less than 10 cents a shot. I can spend time shooting instead of loading.

I blew off the 8mm Rem Mag when it was introduced in 1977 because of insufficient bullets. If Nosler does not make a Partition bullet for it, I'm not interested. Well now Nosler makes a 200 Grain and Swift makes A-frames in 200 and 220 grains, and Barnes makes x-bullets in 180, 200 and 220 grain weights. Hawk makes a large variety of .323 bullets and Hornady now makes a great 190 Spire Point and Nosler has added a 180 grain Ballistic tip.

I would seriously consider the new 8mm round, but principally as an elk load with 220 grain bullets at about 2900 fps. It would be fund to play with, especially in a medium length (57mm-62mm) action so that you could seat the bullets out with the bullet base flush with the case neck.

Several years ago a guy necked a 350 Rem Mag down to .323 and blew out the shoulder to 40 degrees. With a 24" barrel he got 2,800 fps with a 200 grain Nosler partition and 2,700 with a 220 Grain Hornady Spire point. that's about 150 fps slower than the new Win .325 WSM, but still not too shabby. All in all, I like the new .325 WSM and wish it well.

Buckeye · « **Reply #36 on:** December 29, 2004, 02:43:24 AM »

I was really considering jumping on this new round. It sounds like a winner . Butt.... I'm going to hold out for a 358 WSM I think its gonna be next.
I'd just crap if I got a 325 WSM and then they rolled out the 358WSM !

Big Paulie · « **Reply #37 on:** December 29, 2004, 05:33:29 AM »

Regarding the 300 RUM, 180 grain load: Here is the point- Just how many foot pounds of energy do you need to kill an elk or a moose? More than 4,000 foot pounds! Geez, they must be drinking nuclear waste water to get that big. Our fathers (and the majority of hunters) kill them all with ease with the 300 Savage, the .308 and the 30-06!

Worried about getting attacked by a really big grizzly? You've probably got a hundred times more chance of being struck by lightning. You've probably got two hundred times more chance of getting killed in a car wreck while driving to hunting camp.

The 7mm Remington Mag and the 300 Winchester Mag (or short mag) give a hunter all of the extra flat shooting and harder hitting qualities that could ever be justified on any practical basis for hunting big game, with the possible exception of extremely large grizzly at very close range. If you are worried about this, carry a 35 Whelen.

As for the .325 mag, I give it 36 months. If anyone buys one, they had better buy two cases of factory loads to go with it. (If they can find that much in any store.)

Just my opinions.

Big Paulie

superhornet · « **Reply #38 on:** December 29, 2004, 07:52:52 AM »

A good write up in the American Rifleman Jan 2005 edition. At least the author was somewhat honest in letting the data on the range tests be published.........1.5-2" groups depending on what the ammo used was at 100 yards. Made a shot on a Bou at over 300 yards and proclaimed the rifle of course was "Old thunder and lightening sure Death" on any critter that it would be pointed at.......Just another caliber for those who need to have all the latest "Horns and whistles". Run out, be the first on your block to get one. 8mm?? Need one ?? Go out and find a REM 8mm Mag, there are plenty of them setting on shelfs --somewhere. If you can't make a 300 yard shot with a .270, .308, .280 or an old 30-06, by all means get an .325 WSM, maybe you'll get lucky.

Big Paulie · « **Reply #39 on:** December 29, 2004, 10:45:59 AM »

Hey Anthony,

If Winchester brings out the .325 WSM in the Model 70 Featherweight, it will almost be a toss-up as to which end of the rifle you would rather be on.

Big Paulie

OrangeWing · « **Reply #40 on:** December 29, 2004, 12:23:01 PM »

Ok, first the WSM325 is not going to sell very well. It might be a great cal. but there is very limited demand for that size. Second, I have shot a 300 ultra mag a lot & recoil is not that bad. I am shooting it in a Savage model 16 with a laminate stock. Weights a little over 8lbs. What I really like about the 300 ultra is when the need is there it can reach out and do it's job.

NH_Hunter · « **Reply #41 on:** January 06, 2005, 03:35:18 AM »

maybe remington should jump in and make a .338 RSAUM

NYH1 · « **Reply #42 on:** January 06, 2005, 07:15:19 AM »

Quote from: NH_Hunter

maybe remington should jump in and make a .338 RSAUM

Personally I think Remington should stick with their Remington Ultra Magnums (RUM) and they are "ultra" thats for sure. If someone is looking for a really long range cartridge and they can actually shoot a rifle at the ranges that the "RUMs" are capable of shooting, then a "RUM" might be the way to go.

I would be comfortable shooting 300 maybe 350 yards at a whitetail deer. For that my Remington model "700 Classic" in 280 Rem. will work just fine. For every guy like me that has a 280 Rem. there are ten more that have a 270 Win., 30-06 or a 7mm mag. or something they've had for years and aren't going to give them up.

I also think the Winchester WSM's are great cartridges as well. I might even get a new Remington model 700 in 300 WSM. If I didn't own a rifle like my 280 Rem. already and was looking to get a "all round" deer rifle I might look at one of the WSM's. Again probably a 300 WSM but the 270 WSM and 7mm WSM are just as good (maybe better having less recoil) for deer.

To make my point I think Remington has a good thing going with their "RUMs". Their "RSAUMs" seem to be dying. Winchester beat them to the punch and seems to have the "short mag." thing covered with their WSM's pretty well.