help me with my decision

[Curly]

You get more velocity out of the 270WSM than the standard 270 Win.

The 300WM will have more velocity than the 300WSM.

I agree.........no such thing as too dead. 

I'd go with 300WM..........except that those lightweight rifles you're looking at will likely kick quite a bit (even with the 270WSM).  Nothing wrong with the 270 Win for you use, but why not just get the Tikka or A-bolt in 30-06.?  That is what I'd go with if I were you...........30-06.

How much more either way?

270WSM 130gr - 3,300 fps
270 Win 130gr - 3,000 fps

300WM and 300WSM are practically identical, but I just remember looking up ballistics years ago when I was trying to decide on a rifle and I decided on the WM partly because of more velocity.  300WM holds more powder, but the fat case of the WSM is more efficient so you can get almost identical velocity with less powder.

[Gringo31]

I always find myself going back to this table...

http://www.chuckhawks.com/rifle_trajectory_table.htm

The extra recoil, cost ammo etc..............is it worth 10-20 yards of flatter shooting at 300 yards?

[carpsniperg2]

Ouch 2 of my fave Cal's Hard to pick, I would probably have to say the 300 win mag myself. I love my 270wsm and it is a flat shooting sob. But like the bigger "weight" bullets in the 300win for larger game. Both have ammo that can be found at most sporting goods stores. Not a whole bunch of price difference in the loaded ammo as well. "if buying the same type and brand"

[ckr]

Go with the 300 win mag.  I have a Tikka  in this caliber and it will stop any animal you will come across.  The recoil is not as bad as people say.  If you hand load, you can go anywhere from a 100 grain up to a 220.  Very versatile.  Good luck

[HighCountryHunter88]

im leaning heavly for the 300 win, anyone have any 300's in newer models that they'd recomend? im in college so i dont have a million dollars to spend but  wouldnt mind saving a little more to get in the $800 to 1000$ range. im not really interested in anything less money than the tikka i really really like them but ive heard that the recoil on the 300s is more than other models due to weight?  , i dont like the vangards or ventures ect.

[Rob]

300 WSM has a bit less recoil than the 300 WM.  As far as trajectory, the 300 WM does not really pull ahead significantly until you get out past 300 or 400 yards which is beyond where most hunters want to be shooting.  And if you are a long range guy, then there are probably better options than either a 300 WSM or a 300 WM. 

In the table below, the 300 WSM has about 97% of the recoil velocity and about 92% of the recoil energy for the 300 WM which in my book is about the same, except note that the table is based on a 300 WSM that is 1/4 of a pound lighter.  In a rifle of the same weight, you probably start to notice the difference.

I suppose that brings up another point, the 300 WSM uses a shorter action so in theory the same rifle would be a bit lighter which is nice when you are in the field (but negates the recoil bene's)

They are basically the same though.  a real upsell for the 300 WM is that the ammo is easier to find and generally cheaper.

[carvermoe]

300 wsm tikka love mine

[Rob]

I pulled this info off the shooting times website:

Same 180 grain bullets, similar MV.

at 300 Yards, the 300 WM is shooting about .6 inches flatter than the WSM.  That extends to about 4 inches when you get to 500 yds.

[700xcr]

I have the Remington 700xcr in 270wsm. Shooting factory Winchester 150gr. Power Points I chronographed at 3200fps. with 1/2" groups at 100yds. It hits hard and very accurate. It has accounted for 6 mule deer so far from ranges 85yds. to 550yds so far. Only thing I have done with the rifle is adjusted to trigger down to 2Ibs. and installed a Wyatt's single stack magazine.

[hoyt2002]

I figured this one would get interesting. The 300 wsm vs. 300 wm debate. I really don't think you could go wrong with ether one really. Lots of good points for both.  

[Rob]

I really don't think you could go wrong with ether one really. Lots of good points for both.  

I say get one of each! 

I don't have a horse in this race, they are both great firearms.

[bobcat]

i want a gun that i can absolutly knock down what i aim it at and not gona knock me down. im looking at tikka for 270wsm and either a rem xcr or browning a bolt for 300 win. what do you guys think i should do?

30-06

[C-Money]

i want a gun that i can absolutly knock down what i aim it at and not gona knock me down. im looking at tikka for 270wsm and either a rem xcr or browning a bolt for 300 win. what do you guys think i should do?

30-06

Hard to beat the 30-06 for what you are wanting to do. The 270wsm will work just fine, as will the 300wm. If you are not recoil sensitive, go for the 300. The 30-06 would be a great choice though. Guy Eastman shot his bull in Nevada last year at 400 and some odd yards with his 270wsm, that bull did'ent go far.

[Curly]

i want a gun that i can absolutly knock down what i aim it at and not gona knock me down. im looking at tikka for 270wsm and either a rem xcr or browning a bolt for 300 win. what do you guys think i should do?

30-06

   That's what I said, too.  Sounds like 30-06 would be perfect for what he is going to want the rifle to do.

[Rob]

I always tell people if they want one rifle for North America, get a 30.06 Springfield.
If they want two rifles, get a 270 WM, and either a 300 WM or a 338 WM.  
If they want three rifles, add a 22.250 or 223 to that list.

A guy with a 22.250, a 270 WM and a 338 WM can kill anything on the planet effectively and legally except for the big DG like Buff or elephant...  And Ammo will be affordable and easily available as they need it.