[Spoon]

Right now I am in the process of building a rifle and it took me forever to come up with the caliber I wanted to shoot. I knew I would pick a 30 cal rifle and I wanted something with better balistics than 308. I went with 300wsm and there is no turning back now, but I have heard that there have been accuracy problems with the normal 300. Some people say it is due to the belt on the case. I have also heard that it is due to and excesive gap between the bullet and the lands. I was just wandering what anybody's thoughts were on that and the 300 short mag.

Personally, I think it is due to flinch from the recoil that some people just can not avoid.

 

[Mulga]

Howdy

its a barrel burner

someone else here mentioned that the shoulger angle and size will pose feeding problems

Bench rest shooters here in Australia are experimenting with it and haven't had great success yet.

 

[Jeff_850]

Personally, I think it is due to flinch from the recoil that some people just can not avoid.

i agree with that that, it was the same thing i was thinking before i read it heh
from what i have herd those who dont flinch find the .300 Win Mag to be very accurate
but its going to have a much shorter barrel life than the .308 Win, possibly by as much as 50%

 

[mele]

The 300 WSM can be very accurate, thats one of the things it has going for it. Fat & Short case, no belt. Accuracy has been good. The .300 Win Mag can also be good, but it takes more work. The belt prevents the round from being chambered using the shoulders, which in terms prevents the rifle manufacturers from spacing the barrels close to the chamber to get the bullets closer to the lands and grooves. Small things, but they add up.

the prototype SC1 is chambered in .300 Win Mag, and I achieved .5 MOA

MEL

 

[Spoon]

Well .5 moa is good enough for me. I guess experimenting with the 300wsm will be fun. Thanks for the input.

 

[Jeff_850]

i think Tac Ops guarentees 1/4 MOA out of thier rifles, they have an Alpha 66 and Bravo 66 which are .300 Win Mag