Have not been on the Hunting side for a while (have been staying on the fishing side), hope everyone is doing Great.
Was wondering does anyone have much experience with the newer 7mm WSM (short mag) and how you think it compares to my
Win mod 70 .270
Am thinking about keeping my .270, but am considering adding the 7mm WSM, mostly for longer shots in western mtns for Elk. I have seen the .300 WSM in action, and looked great at Elk, but think it’s too heavy for me.
and thoughts?
thanks,
Jack 
Jack,
I have a 7mm Remington Magnum and have compared it to other rounds like the 7mm WSM or the 270 WSM. If I were you I would be looking at a 270 WSM. Getting a 7mm WSM ballistically does not get you any advantage over a regular 7mm Remington magnum. The 270 WSM is one of the few calibers that actually has a ballistic advantage over the standard caliber of its own.
I picked a bullet type and grain weight that was very similar and did a comparision on the Federal web site. Take a look and see what you think. I think you will like the 270 WSM.
I have a couple .270win and a .270WSM and a .300WSM and hands down the .300 WSM is the superior cartridge. If your looking for a truly all round big game rifle, thats the way to go. You’ll have a broader choice of bullets to match anything from antelope to elk and everything in between.
My daughter shoots a .270WSM and every deer (8 in all) have been dropped in their tracks. No mule kick, no twitch, no tracking involved. They literally collapse from the shot.
Ben is right on the money Jack!
That .270 will kill any Elk out there to over 300 yards…if you want to up power, I would go with the 300 WSM in a new Mod 70 Featherweight… 
Jack-
Happy New Year
“As crazy as it might be, I’d call a Western Elk outfitter and ask of all that’s out there, what would he use?”, or at least their choices.
Everyone has their personal favorites, but really, how many of us have hunted in the West, much less for Elk, ask I would. I’ve hunted Muley’s out there and my .243 and .270 are plenty…
Quite frankly, your Win.270 with a 150gr BTSP inside 300 yards will drop an Elk. After all, your .270 is a necked down 30-06, therefore shoots faster and flatter, but gives up the heavier 165 and 180gr bullets(which will mess up a bunch of meat). Shot placement is everything. So to go get one of the WSM’s, ask yourself what your really gaining, and is it worth it?
As with all high speed large game rounds, bullet construction plays a major role in terminal ballistic performance. If the gun is accurate enough for its intended purpose, what will make or break it is what the bullet does when it strikes its intended target. High velocity—extremely high in this case— wsm cartridges have a set of problems all their own. If a bullet intended to perform perfectly in a lower velocity cartridge of the same caliber ex:(such as .308 Winchester, or .30-06 Springfield) is used in the .300 WSM, the result is fragmentation and a shallow cavity; i.e. essentially a massive surface crater with poor penetration. To counter this, many are using the all copper bullets, like those made by Barnes and Hornady. Others are getting in line.
For the 7mm WSM which is based on the .300 WSM case necked down to handle .284″ bullets, Winchester claims a muzzle velocity (MV) of 3,225 ft/s with a 140 grain bullet for their 7mm WSM cartridge; the claimed muzzle energy (ME) is 3,233 ft. lbs. With a 160 grain bullet the Winchester figures are 2990 ft/s and 3176 ft. lbs. at the muzzle. The lighter, shorter 7mm bullets are preferred in these short case magnums.
Ballistics can get a bit confusing. So can flinching when pulling the trigger knowing the recoil with anything Magnum 
Also, some rifles like a certain load, and if you reload, you can work up a very accurate load. Off the shelf, you will need to look at least a few to know what the rifle likes, and then, can that load do the job your asking it to do?
Now if that didn’t confuse you enough, If I love my Win .270 and had a 140 or 150gr load the gun really liked, I’d take it Elk hunting!
(sorry Jack, that got long)
My thoughts are that there’s been a massive arms race escalation over the past 20 years. Weather this is because of the introduction of the “short magnums” or if the short magnums are a product of it is a matter for much debate.
The bottom line is that suddenly many species like whitetails, mulies, and elk that we were once perfectly content to (quite successfully, in my experience) hunt with cartridges like the .270, .30-06, and .308 have now become impossible to take with anything less than a 7 MM WSM or a .300 WSM.
As a perfect illustration, just last week I had a gun counter guy at Gander Mountain tell me, in all seriousness, that a .300 Win Mag was “generally considered a little light for elk”. He said the a .338 to be a minimum. I tried not to, but I couldn’t contain a laugh. I told him not to tell the last 50 years of dead elk that the .300 was too light because the .300 was about the heaviest thing anybody used for the last century or longer. I can’t dismiss, however, the fact that this kind of thinking isn’t just one gun counter kid that doesn’t know what he’s talking about. There are many, many hunters out there who have been convinced over the last 20 years that a .30-06 is just a little light to take a whitetail.
This is a general question that comes down to the specifics, so to Jack I’d ask:
– When you say “. . . considering adding the 7mm WSM, mostly for longer shots. . .” how long is a longer shot to you?
You’d be surprised how people can have very different ideas about what constitutes a long shot.
– The next question is what groups are you currently able to shoot at this “long” distance with your .270?
In general my experience is that the vast majority of hunters have no idea where or how well their rifle shoots at distances beyond even 100 yards, much less beyond 300 yards. My point is that before you solve a problem buy buying a new rifle, do you know if you even have a problem?
If you can put 5 shots on a paper plate target at 300 with your current .270, I’d have to ask what, exactly, do you expect a magnum to do for you?
If you have no idea what your groups look like at 300, I’d ask the same question and suggest you find out before proceeding.
– Have you ever shot magnum cartridges before?
Now the next part of this question is tricky, so just answer honestly to yourself. If yes, did the recoil bother you?
The temptation for most will be to man up and claim that they can take a punch from any magnum and that flinching is for sissies and girlie men. I’ve seen the real story play out at the gun club many times before in looking at magnum shooters’ scattered groups on targets that just scream “flinch”. Many shooters cannot effectively adjust to the pounding that a magnum delivers, especially with today’s emphasis on ultra-light “mountain rifles”.
The bottom line is this: Do you REALLY have a problem with the .270 and is a magnum REALLY likely to solve it?
Grouse
Quote:
My thoughts are that there’s been a massive arms race escalation over the past 20 years. Weather this is because of the introduction of the “short magnums” or if the short magnumss are a product of it is a matter for much debate.
The bottom line is that suddenly many species like whitetails, mulies, and elk that we were once perfectly content to (quite successfully, in my experience) hunt with cartridges like the .270, .30-06, and .308 have now become impossible to take with anything less than a 7 MM WSM or a .300 WSM.
As a perfect illustration, just last week I had a gun counter guy at Gander Mountain tell me, in all seriousness, that a .300 Win Mag was “generally considered a little light for elk”. He said the a .338 to be a minimum. I tried not to, but I couldn’t contain a laugh. I told him not to tell the last 50 years of dead elk that the .300 was too light because the .300 was about the heaviest thing anybody used for the last century or longer. I can’t dismiss, however, the fact that this kind of thinking isn’t just one gun counter kid that doesn’t know what he’s talking about. There are many, many hunters out there who have been convinced over the last 20 years that a .30-06 is just a little light to take a whitetail.
This is a general question that comes down to the specifics, so to Jack I’d ask:
– When you say “. . . considering adding the 7mm WSM, mostly for longer shots. . .” how long is a longer shot to you?
You’d be surprised how people can have very different ideas about what constitutes a long shot.
– The next question is what groups are you currently able to shoot at this “long” distance with your .270?
In general my experience is that the vast majority of hunters have no idea where or how well their rifle shoots at distances beyond even 100 yards, much less beyond 300 yards. My point is that before you solve a problem buy buying a new rifle, do you know if you even have a problem?
If you can put 5 shots on a paper plate target at 300 with your current .270, I’d have to ask what, exactly, do you expect a magnum to do for you?
If you have no idea what your groups look like at 300, I’d ask the same question and suggest you find out before proceeding.
– Have you ever shot magnum cartridges before?
Now the next part of this question is tricky, so just answer honestly to yourself. If yes, did the recoil bother you?
The temptation for most will be to man up and claim that they can take a punch from any magnum and that flinching is for sissies and girlie men. I’ve seen the real story play out at the gun club many times before in looking at magnum shooters’ scattered groups on targets that just scream “flinch”. Many shooters cannot effectively adjust to the pounding that a magnum delivers, especially with today’s emphasis on ultra-light “mountain rifles”.
The bottom line is this: Do you REALLY have a problem with the .270 and is a magnum REALLY likely to solve it?
Grouse
Nice post. Makes sense.
I know a guy that just bought a 325 WSM. He can only buy ammo online and of course super expensive. He hunts deer in Winconsin. I told him he was nuts.
Quote:
Nice post.
I know a guy that just bought a 325 WSM. He can only buy ammo online and of course super expensive. He hunts deer in Winconsin. I told him he was nuts.
I think his argument for the 325 WSM would be that when he shoots a deer, it’s at least 20% more dead than if you were to shoot the same deer with a .270. 
Yeah, it all makes sense if you do the math. That is assuming, of course, that he doesn’t flinch and miss the deer entirely.
I’m not against the short mags*. I simply think that before someone uses them to solve a problem, they should first know if they even HAVE a problem. In many cases the short mag is a solution in search of a problem that never really existed.
*With two exceptions: I’m against the .223 WSSM and the .25 WSSM. Those are just dumb.
Grouse
The day my ought-six is not enough for a deer…… 
Thank-you guys for the great discussion, that’s what I was looking for, to keep me thinking and comparing.
Much appreciated.
Jack
Yo, Jack,
Please let us know what you choose to do.out brother…
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
