Hornady says NO to the .300WSM

[gmcguy]

Its new, people think newer is always better, they can brag its more efficient with lighter bullets and make it sound better . Its a good round, but so is the 300 winmag.

 

[sdkidaho]

That wasn't it for me - it being new I mean. I haven't looked at rifles since the early 90's so I had no idea how long it had been around. I asked here about a 30.06 and was told about the .300 WSM. Better performance than the 30.06 and not as punishing as the .300 Mag.

I do not own one yet, but that is my plan as I buy and or build a gun - .300 WSM. I like Hornady's ammo and what they've been doing with some of their loads, so that is what spurred me to looking at their ammo for the WSM's. I believe fully that they are in bed with Ruger and so that probably has more to do with it than anything else I would guess.

 

[bigngreen]

I believe fully that they are in bed with Ruger and so that probably has more to do with it than anything else I would guess.

+1 on that, I think you hit the nail. It really turns me off to Ruger and Hornady.

 

[Chas1]

I don't think there's anything wrong with 2 companies being in bed with each other so long as the customer/s benefit from that arrangement. Companies hitch there wagons all the time.

 

[D.ID]

+1 on that, I think you hit the nail. It really turns me off to Ruger and Hornady.

+1 I have had a bad taste in my mouth regarding ruger from clear back to there no civilian full-cap philosophy so any one hitching there wagon to ruger is providing me incentive to consider there competition. Which in hornady's case is not a desirable thought because I'm rather fond of hornady and there products. Ruger on the other hand= there semi auto center fire rifles are or where horrible, I have owned there hand guns but never found one that was comfortable in my hand and there is to much quality competition to even consider there rifles.......... I do like there 10-22 but even that in factory form leaves something to be desired and I probably won't buy another when mine gives it up. Sorry ruger fans it's just one guy's opinion................ One guy that never forgets people that turned on him when it mattered. You want forgiveness talk to god not to me.

 

[LewisH]

+1 I have had a bad taste in my mouth regarding ruger from clear back to their no civilian full-cap philosophy so any one hitching their wagon to ruger is providing me incentive to consider their competition. Which in hornady's case is not a desirable thought because I'm rather fond of hornady and their products. Ruger on the other hand= their semi auto center fire rifles are or were horrible, I have owned their hand guns but never found one that was comfortable in my hand and there is to much quality competition to even consider their rifles.......... I do like their 10-22 but even that in factory form leaves something to be desired and I probably won't buy another when mine gives it up. Sorry ruger fans it's just one guy's opinion................ One guy that never forgets people that turned on him when it mattered. You want forgiveness talk to god not to me.

There, better.

 

[loaders_loft]

how would an RCM feed better inherently, than a wsm?

My 7wsm feeds "inherently" well in my model 70 action.

 

[sdkidaho]

I responded to their email with this:

Does the .300 RCM suffer from the feed problems as well?

Their response:

We haven't had any issues with feeding this round. Thanks

Interesting how the one load they don't manufacture has issues (their claim) and the one they do manufacture doesn't have any.

Hmm... seems a bit biased to me.

 

[sdkidaho]

My reply:

Thanks, I appreciate you taking the time to respond.

Are there any other gun manufacturers that have any of their rifles chambered in the RCM or is it Ruger only that carries these calibers? The two loads (the .300 RCM and WSM) are so close in comparison that I'm considering the RCM, but I'm not necessarily sure I want a Ruger.

I really like Hornady ammunition but I really like the .300 WSM as well, but the .300 RCM may be a good replacement. Just not sure about the Ruger side of it.

Thanks again for your time.

Their response:

I'm sorry to say at this time it is only being made by Ruger.

Of course I knew the answer, just curious what they'd say.

Oh well...

 

[Kevin Thomas]

An interesting thread! At the risk of airing some dirty laundry, I may shed some light on this by simply mentioning that sales and marketing is often driven by producing something "new" as opposed to something "better." This includes something with your (the manufacturer's) name on it instead of the competitions. Ruger has been particularly bad about this, to the point of outright comedy at times. Some years back they began chambering some of their semi-auto pistols in 40 cal. Anyone familiar with the history knows this is a cartridge that was developed primarily by Smith & Wesson, and is correctly dubbed the "40 S&W." No big deal, but that's what ID's the cartridge. Ruger, on the other hand, just couldn't bring themselves to stamp the "S&W" on the barrel to identify the chambering. Instead, they stamped their guns with "40 ACP", a mythical, non-existent cartridge dreamed up by them to avoid the dreaded "S&W" moniker. Incidentally, "ACP" stands for "Automatic Colt Pistol" as in the 45 ACP and 38 ACP, the development of both of which Colt was intimately involved. This whole Ruger/WSM situation sounds like a repeat of the "not-invented-here" syndrome that drove the earlier incident.

Nothing wrong with the WSM, and I'd be hard pressed to come up with any reasons to recommend anything similar that Ruger is pushing right now. Frankly, if I were to put money on on which one you'll be able to buy factory ammo for from your local Walmart 10 years down the road, it'd be the WSM, hands down.

Kevin Thomas
Lapua USA

 

[wbates13]

I have to agree with most of the folks the thread. I have a Browning 300 WSM that I absolutely love. I am sure there are some financial reasons behind Hornady's decision, but don't let them tell you there are issues with the round. If you look at the ballistics the 300 WSM performs better than the 300 MAG. The 300 WSM is an Excellent round.

 

[BBISSON]

I have two 300WSM rifles one in a Ruger 77MKII. Before they got sued over it had one in 270WSM also that was stolen. Both fed very well. Also have a Winchester Coyote light in 300WSM and like it as well. I have loaded Barnes TSX,TTSX,LRX bullets for all of them with excellent results and awesome groups. We also have two 6.5 Creedmoor's that I load Barnes for as well. The Barnes crew will help you with load data or go to their web site. They have some great loads listed.gun)

 

[FEENIX]

I have a Savage 11 FCNS in .300 WSM and it does not have any feeding issues.

Nearly 7 years later, Hornady stayed true with their word for not manufacturing .300 WSM brass and .300 WSM ammo. It seems like they only sell loaded ammo in cartridges they manufacture.

 

[WHITEBULL]

I work for a manufacturing company. I get the being in bed thing. From a financial stand point, it makes a lot of sense. I also know that we are always looking for ways to accommodate demand. If there is very little demand for a certain product, sometimes it makes sense to eliminate that product so you can focus your sales and manufacturing on products that move.
When you really like a certain rifle, and you cannot find quality ammo, then it makes sense to reload. If not, then buy another caliber that has a large selection of available ammo.
BTW, your response from the manufacture is pretty typical. PC, BS.