Well here's a question for y'all

[Larryjk]

wrenchman, Just how much shorter is a short action, for say the 300 WSM , than an action for the 30-06? I know they are a little shorter than some of the "long actions' for the magnums based on the H&H cartridge. I think a lot of the short action craze is a lot of hype put out by gun writers "who would never tell us a whopper". I have had both and have never noticed any difference when I was actually shooting them. There may be about an ounce difference in weight, but that is all. Not much difference.

[PJgunner]

Well, JMHO but of I already had a .300 Win. mag. I probably would not bother getting a .300WSM. However, I have done some work with two rifles in .300 WSM and frankly, I like it.
The first was a standard Winchester M70 Classic (pre-64 style) that a new kid to shooting was wanting to sight in. Now that rifle has a bit of weight to it and although it was his first centerfire high power rifle, he shot darn good groups with the gun from the bench. He then let me shoot a few rounds (5) and the group was solid one inch. FWIW, his groupss were in the 1.25 to
1.50" range. Not too shabby for a newbie.
My second run with a .300 WSM was my ex-son-in-law's M70 classic Featherweight, a much lighter rifle than the Classic standard model. he was not a reloader when he bought it so he left the rifle with me to work up loads for him. I gues by the time I was through, I'd put maybe 200 to 250 rounds through the gun from the bench and frankly, the recoil was not all that bad. We had the gun glass bedded and a decent trigger job done on the gun and groups (5 shot) run in the 1.0" to 1.25" range.
If I were in the fame of mind to buy another .300 mag. of any kind. I'd look real close at one of those Featherweights for several reasons. One, at 8,000 feet MSL, rifle weight seem to climb exponentially, especially if you're on the wrong side of 60 years old. (I'm nearly 72) Second, it's a hell of a lot lighter than my 26" McMillan stocked Winchester M70 in .300 Win. Mag. and even lighter than my three Ruger #1 rifles in .300 Win. Mag. So would I buy one? Maybe, if the price was right. I own one early Kimber rifle, a medium weight barrelled .223 and if someone offered me a Kimber in .300 WSM that was as described, I'd be all over it like stink from a skunk although I'd much rather have the featherweight.
Paul B.

[Rapier]

Skeet,
you decided wisely. I do believe that Kimber is built on a Montana 1999 action which is about as fine as frog hair. I own two 300 WSMs that I built on the 1999. Stick some VN 560 under a 168 and I get sub .50 at 3,200 fps with either gun. The Kimber should be right on the same money. Suggest you shoot the gun before you trade it. I sure would hate to see you trade it and find out it was the best shooter you ever owned.... The 300 WSM will shoot if set up right and most who own both say is more accurate than the 300 WM, gun for gun.
Ed

[skeet]

I still have the Kimber..Saw another today for sale..For a fair amount more than I paid..It also is perty. But I sure don't need two. I didn't trade the Kimber for the Rem 257 and the Colt 22..but I did get 'em..for a really nice Win 70 from 1956..shot 11 rounds... Tryin to figure out what I am gonna do with it though.. Bullits is spensive ain't they?? I sold my 300 Win Mag(Ruger 77) fer a fair profit so don't have too much in the Kimber. Now..what scope to put on it?.. I was thinkin of one of the Bushnell Elite 6500s in 2 1/2 x 16..whatcha all think..I've used Leupolds etc etc etc and the Elites seem to work as well as any for me..I do want a good 'un...somethin that will handle a bit more recoil. I also have a Leupold VX II 3X9 and a couple of older Redfield widefield 3x9 rangefinders I could use..

[Rapier]

Skeet,
I like at least a 12x on my Mag guns, they are really designed for distance and can be used for such if need be. My 300 WSMs both have 4x16s on them. I think the make of scope is more personal preference. I have seen a few not so expensive scopes outshine some very expensive scopes. Myself, I do not like the Leupold reticle and no longer own anything Leupold, but a Leupold/Gilmore 2 MOA dot that Leupold bought out. Go for it, put the Elite on the gun and let her buck.
Ed

[skeet]

Scopes...I also have a VX III 4.5 x 14 LR 30 mm scope I could put on.. But it has the Boone & Crockett Reticle..kinda busy type but all in all a good scope. I do like Leupold but have no use for all the overpriced European types...Heck the Leupolds are spensive enough...and I already have it...I just wanted to try one of the Elite 6500s

[Rapier]

if you want to try the Elite and do not do so you will wonder forever. Put it on the gun, what is the worst that can happen, you do not like it.... Then you get to put another scope on and shoot some more.

Go to your favorite supplier, order a 300 WSM die set, the shell holder and two of the big blue WSM, MTM style 50 rd boxes... yep special box. Get a can of VN-560 and some Hornady 168 BTHP Match. Load 74 grs of 560 and set off about .003 to .010 then if you do not like the result send her down the line. Oh, if you want to try 180s, use 72 gr of 560, for just over 3,000 fps.

There was a guy on the net selling WSM once fired Win nickel brass. The brass comes from the Winchester gun factory and was used in test firing brand new rifles. It is cheap and about as good as it gets for once fired. Just do a FL resize and you are in business. Oh, typical Win, they beat the brass into proper length so you need to deburr and champher.
Ed