1:8" for 300WM: Is this too fast?

[FEENIX]

Both you and Rose are right to a point. Im old and think Rose is more right. All this marketing has been good for business, but not entirely true. Let me explain why i think this is so. The creed is a pergect example. They market it as having 300 magnum power. Use the right example bullets and energy only and they prove it. Those of us that are older all know about the old Taylor knockout formula, which takes bore dia and bullet weight into account. It is a much better guide to killing ability than energy. Use that and the difference is dramatic. So there is some kool aide there. The 28 nosler i have is nothing more than a 7stw on a shorter fatter case. I bit and built one. I could go on forever, but you get my point.

As I said, people need to synthesize the information being presented.

 

[Orange Dust]

As I said, people need to synthesize the information being presented.

But if you are new to this, or young, how could you? Goes back to the old days when folks got killed trying to "shock" a lion with a 30 magnum. This is history repeating itself.

 

[Orange Dust]

There is another trade off. Increasing twist spins the buller faster. This requires energy. Some of the energy that was being used in the powder charge for velocity is used to increase spin. Enough to matter? Up to the owner.

 

[FEENIX]

But if you are new to this, or young, how could you? Goes back to the old days when folks got killed trying to "shock" a lion with a 30 magnum. This is history repeating itself.

If you cannot synthesize then keep trying until you are comfortable with your decision making process and the consequences associated with it.

 

[Orange Dust]

If you cannot synthesize then keep trying until you are comfortable with your decision making process and the consequences associated with it.

That's why I worry. Today's schools are becoming very good at teaching children not to!

 

[FEENIX]

That's why I worry. Today's schools are becoming very good at teaching children not to!

Sad but true.

 

[Muddyboots]

Hello all,

I'm eyeing the X-Bolt Stalker LR in 300WM for my hunting rifle. It has a 26" barrel with a 1:8" twist. I'm looking to shoot around the 200g mark with Accubonds. However, I'm curious... is this too fast of a twist for 200s? If not, what's the lightest/heaviest I could shoot without under/over stabilizing

Simple answer for the OP: Yes 1:8 will work fine with 200 gr AB's and be nice to have for mono style bullets. The 1:8 may affect lighter than 180 gr to some degree depending entirely upon the bullet itself. The 300WM shines much brighter with 200 gr+ bullets.

 

[David Emerson]

Both you and Rose are right to a point. Im old and think Rose is more right. All this marketing has been good for business, but not entirely true. Let me explain why i think this is so. The creed is a pergect example. They market it as having 300 magnum power. Use the right example bullets and energy only and they prove it. Those of us that are older all know about the old Taylor knockout formula, which takes bore dia and bullet weight into account. It is a much better guide to killing ability than energy. Use that and the difference is dramatic. So there is some kool aide there. The 28 nosler i have is nothing more than a 7stw on a shorter fatter case. I bit and built one. I could go on forever, but you get my point.

Let,s compare apples to apples.A creed have 300 magnum power? BS I have always said if you want a 300 to perform 200 gr bullets. The magnum then will far outpower it at long range.

 

[Orange Dust]

Let,s compare apples to apples.A creed have 300 magnum power? BS I have always said if you want a 300 to perform 200 gr bullets. The magnum then will far outpower it at long range.

I agree completely. If you use taylors formula, which is closer to right the 300 stomps it in the ground which was my point.

 

[David Emerson]

I agree completely. If you use taylors formula, which is closer to right the 300 stomps it in the ground which was my point.

I have customers ask me. What do you think about the creed? I tell them not much. If all you are going to do is paper and steel and dial it is awesome. But for hunting? Not enough horsepower. A 140@2700. Yawn. Newer 260 Remington.

 

[FEENIX]

Simple answer for the OP: Yes 1:8 will work fine with 200 gr AB's and be nice to have for mono style bullets. The 1:8 may affect lighter than 180 gr to some degree depending entirely upon the bullet itself. The 300WM shines much brighter with 200 gr+ bullets.

Yep and thanks for bringing it back on course for the OP.

 

[WildRose]

Again, end-users need to synthesize what is being presented. What other people call a fad others call it progress. Over a hundred years ago, our venerable .30-06 (1906) also was a fad and the even earlier, the nostalgic 6.5x55 Swede (1894) across the pond. Today, they still excess and still going strong. Introduced 11 years ago, the 6.5 CM (2008) labeled hyped or a fad today. Hornady's success with 6.5 did not happen overnight but it revolutionized excellent marketing research, strategy, and implementation; a collaborative effort with other gun and shooting related companies and pioneers; and overwhelming shelf support of their product. Hornady's marketing team is envy (or hated by competitors depending on perspective) by most companies. The 6.5 CM renewed interest in the hunting/shooting world esp. first-time end-users. Yes, I own all three chamberings noted above.

Having plenty of choices and having the freedom to choose is awesome. It boils down to personal preference and intended use. I for one is thankful that there are companies that are taking the risk for us to provide us alternatives/options, esp. small businesses such as our very own LRH members Hammer Bullets, Sherman Wildcats, etc. I'd rather have these so-called fads available for me than not.

Choices, choices, choices ... it's what makes America great, let's embrace it and move forward! Cheers!

No, neither the 06 nor the Swede were ever "fads".

Both were originally developed and released as military rounds/rifles and when soldiers came home it's what they were well trained and familiar with. That had been the trend in firearms for about three hundred years until US advertising companies and magazines decided to start creating fads in the firearms industry for their own profit.

The were both also vastly superior to the rounds/rifles they replaced.

 

[bbckfh]

The reviews for that rifle are pretty awful so I'd put a lot of thought into it before coughing up a grand for them.

Can't say I agree or that's been my experience.

 

[FEENIX]

No, neither the 06 nor the Swede were ever "fads".

Both were originally developed and released as military rounds/rifles and when soldiers came home it's what they were well trained and familiar with. That had been the trend in firearms for about three hundred years until US advertising companies and magazines decided to start creating fads in the firearms industry for their own profit.

The were both also vastly superior to the rounds/rifles they replaced.

You're quoting its military history as it was designed, not its initial introduction or availability for civilian use. They might be vastly superior to the rounds/rifles they replaced but sometimes the military changes things for a different purpose. For instance, the .30-06 (7.62x63mm) stayed in service for over 5 decades in their machine guns and was replaced by 7.62x51mm (1954).

Fads, trends, or craze are a matter of perspective and it is cyclical just like global warming (or whatever the social media calls it nowadays) that has been continuously evolving for thousands/millions of years, diets, fashion, etc ... heck, even movie remakes.

To the OP, my sincere apologies for being part of complicating your simple question unnecessarily. Moving right along ... I hope. Cheers!