Jump to content

Talk:.300 Winchester Magnum

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by Cewbot (talk | contribs) at 08:27, 8 March 2024 (Maintain {{WPBS}}: 2 WikiProject templates. Remove 5 deprecated parameters: b1, b2, b3, b4, b5.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Suggested Addition

[edit]

The .300WinMag is sometimes refered to as a "belted magnum cartridge" due to the brass "belt" around the bottom of the casing for added rigidity against the tremendous pressures in the casing at ignition. This is worth noting in the description.

To my knowledge, this was one of the first (if not the first) cartridge to use this in mass production. The validity of something like that needs to be determined, but if it is in fact the first commercially produced belted catridge, that is worth noting, too.209.114.201.30 14:03, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, it's not the first. Probably that's one of the H&H magnums from the early 20th century. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 16:30, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not even close to being the first belted cartridge. The belted 400/375 Nitro Express was introduced by Holland and Holland in 1905, and it wasn't even the first! user Tarbe 14 April 2014. Ref "African Dangerous Game Cartridges" by Pierre van der Walt page 173. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.80.148.236 (talk) 01:51, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]


The belting has nothing to due with chamber pressure and all to do with headspacing. The belted magnum was designed to headspace on the belt rather than the shoulder of the case in the chamber, thus making the cartridge easier to extract. This was introduced on many dangerous game rounds since the african heat made extracting already hot cases a tremendous task. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.134.119.222 (talk) 23:38, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Photo of cartridge

[edit]

I just got a .300 WinMag rifle yesturday, and since that image of the .308 the two .300s got deleted today, I will take a photo of the ammunition and post it in this article. Why was that photo deleted? Unknown copyright? Bobbfwed 20:21, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Military use

[edit]

Various militaries definitely use the .300 Win Mag. Take a look at Sniper rifle, plus a quick google search shows lots of discussion. Arthurrh 22:57, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. —Thernlund (Talk | Contribs) 22:58, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how reliable this one is, but it's interesting. "A-191 Cartridge Development" Press release. Also look at "The TRGT Data book with .300 Winchester Magnum data" and "FBO DAILY ISSUE OF DECEMBER 17, 2004 FBO #1117 SOURCES SOUGHT" for Cartridge, 300 Winchester Magnum, DODIC A191 Arthurrh 00:56, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]


The A191 cartridge is discussed at the target link. The Product Improvement Program (PIP) has a goal of extending the range to 1500 yards and will promise affordable ammunition on existing platforms. Link: http://dtic.mil/ndia/2009infantrysmallarms/tuesdaysessioniii8524.pdf Glenn.R.Cummings (talk) 22:58, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008

[edit]

Article reassessed and graded as start class. Referencingand appropriate inline citation guidelines not met. --dashiellx (talk) 11:22, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Improvement

[edit]

This article could be greatly enhanced by the addition of a 'Design' section. This adds more structure, and also more content. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.35.135.136 (talk) 13:35, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DoneDeusImperator (talk) 04:29, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be a discrepancy in the 'Cartridge History' section regarding the case neck where it quotes "This caused the cartridge to have a neck shorter than the diameter of the bullet". Yet in the diagram "550px-300WinchesterMagnum02.png" under the 'Design & Specifications' section one can calculate the neck length to be 0.72" (3.34" - 2.62"). This is clearly larger than the diameter of the bullet (0.308")! What source states the neck is shorter than the diameter of the bullet? 

- You seem to have confused and compared the loaded, overall length of 3.34 inches with the empty/fired case length of 2.62 inches. The case body + shoulder length (or empty case, minus the neck) is 2.356 inches, which leaves a neck length of 0.264 (2.62 - 2.356) inches - well under the one caliber length of 0.308 inches. Sergeant82d (talk) 21:06, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Under the 'Criticism' section it again brings up the short neck as a potential problem "This prevents the case from having a good grip on the bullet. Under recoil such loosely held bullets in the magazine will be pushed back into the case. Also, if using a highly compressed load the cartridge might “grow” in length and may not be able to fit into the magazine. For these reasons bullets weighing over 200 gr (13 g) are not recommended". It uses reference #18 [1] to verify this claim, however, upon reading that reference, there is no mention of poor grip or cartridges growing. As can be seen in reference #3 (page 17) [2] and from the Hodgdon reloading data center [3], there are recommended loads for bullet weights of 210gr, 220gr, 240gr, and 250gr. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elee41 (talk • contribs) 09:00, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]


The neck of the 300 Win Mag is only .264 inches. Any SAAMI diagram will prove this. And yes, I just loaded some 300 Win Mags tonight with long 180gr Barnes TTSX bullets and 72 grains of IMR 4831 and the loads were highly compressed. I had to vibrate the cases to settle the powder to avoid too much powder compression. user Tarbe 4/14/2014 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.80.148.236 (talk) 01:57, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ [1]
  2. ^ [2]
  3. ^ [3]

B Class Rating

[edit]

I undertook a re-write of this article. However, the B class rating was for the prior guise. Can someone take a look at the article and check it against the B Class rating if it still applies. Please note were cites will be required. Thanks. DeusImperator (talk) 04:52, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Hornady Reloading Manual is now (Dec 2017) up to the 10th edition, which is available here: Hornady 10th Edition Reloading Manual Sergeant82d (talk) 21:14, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Bear Rifle" section

[edit]

I've removed the section referring to .300 Win Mag as a "bear rifle" caliber, as not only was it not supported by the offered source (which was referring to .338) but it contained a bunch of irrelevant bear info. I also have not found a single reliable source stating that the .300 Win Mag is a recommended bear hunting caliber, and most informal sources state that the .338 is the recommended bear caliber. Perhaps someone else can find something, but in the meantime I'm nixing it. 206.28.38.227 (talk) 21:10, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have a reference as well as having 50 years of experience in choosing the correct caliber for a purpose. The .300 Win Mag is sufficient for ANY North American game animals. One of the largest Kodiak's ever taken, was killed with a .30-06. As a general principle, hunters are moving to more powerful guns, when they should be learning to shoot better. Digitallymade (talk) 20:14, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Exaggerate Recoil

[edit]

I have changed the reference to the 300 Winchester having 40% higher recoil than the 30-06. This seemed illogical to me and it is not cited that I could see. Based on the recoil table I cited, a 30-06 with a 8 lb rifle firing a 165 gr bullet at 2900 fps has 20.1 ft lbs of recoil. A 300 Winchester with the same weight rifle firing the same bullet at 3110 fps had 26.2 ft lbs of recoil. This is a 30% increase. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.24.227.242 (talk) 22:45, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on .300 Winchester Magnum. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:44, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Action

[edit]

The .300 Win Mag is a LONG action rifle cartridge. Digitallymade (talk) 19:58, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on .300 Winchester Magnum. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:43, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification

[edit]

From the article: "...as it can deliver better long range performance with better bullet weight..."

Just what is "better bullet weight?" Heavier? Lighter? Is it a ratio between ballistic coefficient and weight? Or is it just "better" because? 2601:283:C000:1C:655F:4567:D53C:B7D3 (talk) 07:46, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The section about ballistic performance

[edit]

.300 Winchester Magnum#Performance doesn't just lack the sources for ballistic data, but the numbers presented for the SXP300WM (added in 2010 by DeusImperator) differ from one I found in https://cartridgecollectors.org/content/catalogs/WINCHESTER-WESTERN/W-W-1963%20-%20Retail%20Catalog.pdf Since the original author has been inactive for a year, someone could get some catalogs from, e. g., [4] and refill the table from scratch with the help of these and other reliable sources. Ain92 (talk) 10:00, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Correct Caliber Designation

[edit]

The unit or designation of measure is Caliber. Caliber is a unit "based" on inches and/or millimeter (mm). When using the designation of caliber it is not represented directly as a measurement of inches. Refer to the definition of caliber. Caliber is expressed in hundredths or thousands of an inch depending on the number of digits. When referring to cartridges, bullets or chambers the units or designation used is caliber. This would be expressed without any leading decimal. Example: 22 LR is the 22 caliber Long Rifle cartridge. It may be approximately 0.22 inches in diameter; however, the Caliber is 22.

Leaving the decimal out of imperial specifications is intentional. It is not common language to say "Point 22 LR" or "Dot 22 LR", the common phrase is "Twenty Two LR". It is also easy to miss read or not see markings with a leading dot, thus another reason the unit of caliber is used.

This page is for specifications in caliber, This is what is used in the industry. Expressing it incorrectly as for example .45 caliber would translate a measurement in inches of 0.45/100 equaling 0.0045 inches. Another example .223 Rem. If this is a caliber unit it would translate to 0.223 thousandths (0.223/1000), which would equate to 0.000223 inches. for empirical units caliber designation never has a decimal place. Metric calibers are also often but not exclusively written and used without a decimal (i.e. Caliber 762).

The title of these pages should be updated as well as the content to avoid confusion for people learning or understanding the correct terms.

Further information on the correct way to specify values and units. Values and the units used are separated by a space. Example 7 mm is correct, 7mm is not correct. Correct case of letters (upper, lower) is also important, mm = millimeters, MM who knows that that would be. Another example (5.56 x 45 mm). Both 5.46 and 45 are in mm (millimeters), note the spacing around the x and between the number (value) and the units (mm).

216.160.0.104 (talk) 21:09, 2 May 2022 (UTC)Scimernet[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:.300_Winchester_Magnum&oldid=1212524417"