Which .270 WSM??

[Lawdog]

oldelkhunter,

Barrel burner? I have heard it all. How can for instance a 300 wsm with less powder same bore as a 300 win mag burn out barrels faster when it holds less powder? I just love this hearsay

The .300 WSM has a case capacity that is only about 9 grains less than the .300 Win. Mag.  FACT not hearsay.

And as 'Patriot_1776' stated the .300 WSM operates at a much higher operating pressure than the .300 Win. Mag.  FACT again not hearsay.

7magWoodsman,

Your first post;

So do you honestly think that a hunter "that doesn't have the experience to wait for the right shot, within the right range" should even be hunting elk anyway??

Your second post;

Do you think ANYONE that has a TOTAL lack of EXPERIENCE should be HUNTING ANY ANIMAL "alone" in the wilderness, "IF" they are WILLING to shoot OUTSIDE of their COMFORT ZONE just because they MIGHT be able to hit NEAR the kill zone??
"IF" you do think they should, do you still believe the "MAGNUM" will help them kill the critter anyway?? Do you think an inexperienced shooter can keep from flinching, "read" the wind, and "judge" the distance to shoot ANY ANIMAL without the POSSIBILITY of WOUNDING the critter, even with a "MAGNUM"?

Of course no young inexperienced hunter should be hunting ALONE(the word missing from your first post) but although I WAS with my granddaughter I wasn’t exactly beside her.  I was about 100 feet to her left, well close enough to back her up if needed.

Question by question from your “first” post.

So do you honestly think that a hunter "that doesn't have the experience to wait for the right shot, within the right range" should even be hunting elk anyway??

You make it sound that “only” experienced hunters should be hunting elk.(this is how I took it)  But how does one get the experience necessary?  By learning from those with the experience not only at home(or wherever) but in the field by watching and doing.

or hunting period if they are accustomed to shooting outside "their" comfort zone???

This part I ignored because I don’t believe anyone said anything about shooting at distances greater that they have practiced.

So I guess you could say I “didn’t get your point” or what you were driving at.  But you didn’t get what I was trying to say either.  That a .270 WSM will drive a the same bullet deeper on those “quartering” shots than a standard .270 Win. will on an animal the size of an elk.  We are talking about shots within the persons practiced range.  Wasn’t talking about recoil, flinching or anything else.  Just that a hunter has a better chance of getting a bullet into the vitals on quartering shots with a “magnum” than a standard cartridge.  Small groups and tight lines to you.  Lawdog
 

[7magWoodsman]

I don’t believe anyone said anything about shooting at distances greater that they have practiced.

but for someone that doesn’t have the experience to wait for the right shot, within the right range.

This statement is what caught my attention in the first place.

I guess we both said things using words that could be interpreted different ways, no wonder they say the english language is the hardest to learn.

Stay Safe. Happy Hunting/Shooting.  

[oldelkhunter]

The .300 WSM has a case capacity that is only about 9 grains less than the .300 Win. Mag. FACT not hearsay.

And as 'Patriot_1776' stated the .300 WSM operates at a much higher operating pressure than the .300 Win. Mag. FACT again not hearsay.

   I have looked at rifles that are overbore and the 300 win mag is fine in that department . Maybe the 300 win mag operates at less pressure in factory ammo but I am sure both hand loaded up will be exactly the same or in the same ballpark. Not enough to make one iota of difference in velocity or effect on game. Only problem I see with a WSM is bolt thrust. I had 2 of them and probably a half dozen 300 win mags and I can tell you I will never buy another 300 win mag again.

[Patriot_1776]

Lawdog:
 

Just that a hunter has a better chance of getting a bullet into the vitals on quartering shots with a “magnum” than a standard cartridge.

That is probably 50% of what constitutes "getting a bullet to the vitals" ballistically speaking.  The other 50% is to remember that normal bullets (Speer Hot-Core, Ballistic tip, etc.) that are driven at higher velocities than what are produced by standard calibers do break up more readily on impact.  When using a magnum combined with taking a quartering shot, I'd rather have something like a Barnes X, Fail-Safe, or even a Trophy Bonded.  More so if I am hunting to fill the freezer; rapid bullet breakup can destroy alot of meat.  Elks are pretty tough animals to break I've heard.  But other than that, the other bullets should be left for other lighter built species.  BTW, I have not had the pleasure to hunt anything larger than squirrels at the moment.  These points I have made are from reading and hearing other hunter's experiences.  But in my personal opinion, I would always recommend Barnes X bullets for those "Magnum Hunters" out there.  Patriot

[goose7856]

you are sort of correct on your assumption..........barnes bullets ar not the only ones that can hold up........actually I think the Interbond (made by hornady), the Swift Scirocco and A-frame, and the Accubond by Nosler will all have simliar/better results than a barnes x bullet.  I like the new bullets i just mentioned b/c they have the plastic tip that allows them to fly straighter, and meore costant, and they are a "bonded" bullet meaning they shouldnt "blow up"..........buty all in all your assumption is cottect patriot