.300 Wby vs. .300 Ultra Mag


PDA






Arkel23
November 15, 2009, 04:18 PM
I own a .300 Weatherby, one of my friends own a .300 Win mag, and another a .300 Remington Ultra Mag. If I'm not mistaken alot of us that aren't hand loaders get our ballistics from Wikipedia correct? Now I've seen many forums edging the Ultra mag over the Weatherby mag, and Wikipedia has even said it is more powerful. I've been thinking about this maybe 2 months, it just never came to my mind, THE 300 WEATHERBY AND 300 REMINGTON ULTRA MAG ARE BASICALLY THE SAME EXACT cartridge. The only difference is the Ultra has no belt and the Weatherby does. Here is my reason for saying this, Weatherby records their ballistics from a 26'' barrel, and Remington a 24'', take off 2'' and you take off 45-60 fps. Let's say the Ultra has a 180 gr at 3,060 fps with a 24'' barrel, and Weatherby has 180 gr at 3,120 fps with a 26'' barrel, cut the 2 inches and you have the same gun. Has anyone else noticed this besides me? Sorry for the long read, I may have left something out if it looks like I have plz say so.

If you enjoyed reading about ".300 Wby vs. .300 Ultra Mag" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
saturno_v
November 15, 2009, 05:11 PM
A bit of clarifying here.

First trust Wikipedia with a grain of salt.....in every regard not only firearms

Having said that, the 300 RUM is a higher performance cartridge compared to the 300 Wby...not much but definitely it has the edge.
Of the 3, the 300 Win Mag is at the bottom the pile...however the RUM and the Wby need longer barrels (minimum 26") to take full advantage of their superior ballistics.

If you want to read about the full capabilities of the 3 cartridges (and test barrel length for the various loads and different bullet weight) check the Hodgdon Reloads Data center here:

http://data.hodgdon.com/cartridge_load.asp

Or the VihtaVuori Reload Data Tables here:

http://www.lapua.com/fileadmin/user_upload/esitteet/VihtavuoriInternationalReloguide2009.pdf

In a 24" pipe, the 300 Win Mag and the 300 Wby are almost ballistic twins, with a longer barrel the Wby pulls ahead more

The 300 RUM, in turn, is outperformed by the 30-378 Wheatherby Magnum

One aspect to consider is that the 300 RUM is a very new cartridge and we do not know yet if is going to stick around for long....there is a slight chance that you may end up 10-15 years down the road with a rifle where the ammunition is almost impossible to find and/or outrageously expensive, however Remington is being smart about it and it is selling rifles chambered for the its super 300 Magnum at very competitive prices (for example compared to the almost equivalent 30-378) to create demand and gain staying power....we will see...

Overall, talking about hunting, there is nothing that the 300 magnums and super magnums can do that a 30-06 can't do more cheaply and with less suffering for your shoulder and ears....you gain just a bit of flatter trajectory and point blank range.

Punching paper (or killing BGs...but I do not think this is what you are interested in doing...) at extreme range is where the 300 Magnums really shine, however in that kind of application the platform (read: Rifle) and the optics are more important than the cartridge itself...

What I mean is don't assume that you buy your cheap Remington 700 300 RUM package deal at Cabela's for $549 and you can start punching paper accurately at 1000+ yards...is not going to happen....

Arkel23
November 15, 2009, 05:20 PM
I wasn't saying I trust wikipedia, I was say most people that aren't handloaders get their info form there, I should clear that up.

saturno_v
November 15, 2009, 05:25 PM
As I suggested before, a good source of info about the ballistic performance are the ammo manufacturers web sites and the Hodgdon and VihtaVuori online reloading centers

Arkel23
November 15, 2009, 05:28 PM
I have been to Hodgdon, but I haven't heard of VihtaVuori.

Runningman
November 15, 2009, 09:23 PM
In a 24" pipe, the 300 Win Mag and the 300 Wby are almost ballistic twins, with a longer barrel the Wby pulls ahead more
Got to disagree with that statement. I've owned a Remington 700 300 Win Mag with a 24" barrel and own a Remington 700 in 300 WBY both with 24" barrels.

I have chronographed both on the same day with factory ammunition. Results were more than I expected. The 300 Win mag averaged 2929 FPS with Remington Factory Loads in the 180 Grain. The 300 WBY averaged 3091 FPS with Remington 180 grain factory loads. For a difference of 162 FPS. The difference was even greater using Federal 180 Partition factory loads in the 300 Win Mag as they only averaged 2841 FPS.

Sure you can close the gap some on a 300 Win mag with well developed handloads. But typical 300 Win mag factory loads don't seem to clock anywhere near what they are supposed to out of 24" barrels. That is my experience.

THE 300 WEATHERBY AND 300 REMINGTON ULTRA MAG ARE BASICALLY THE SAME EXACT cartridge. The only difference is the Ultra has no belt and the Weatherby does. That is my take. Roy Weatherby did a good job of designing his 300 WBY back in the 1940s. Far ahead of its time. :)
FWIW here is some more of my chronograph results on factory loaded 300 mags.

The 300 Weatherby 180 grain factory load averaged 3186 FPS out of my Japan made Mark V with a 26" barrel.

A coworkers 300 RUM in a stainless 700 SPS with a 26" barrel averaged 3177 FPS with the Remington 180 grain Scirocco factory load.

My Weatherby Mark V Accumark with a 26" barrel in 30-378 averaged 3416 FPS in the Weatherby 180 grain Barnes X factory load.

saturno_v
November 16, 2009, 12:00 AM
Runningman

162 fps spread between the two are almost within the average normal difference between two different rifles in the same caliber.

However, what I meant to say is that in a 24" pipe the 300 Win Mag and the 300 Wby are not totally the same up to the single ft/lb but can be very close up to within 100-300 ft/lb gap
That little of a difference in a 3500 ft/lb cartridge class means almost ballistic equivalence IMHO.

In a 26" barrel that difference become significantly higher.

t165
November 16, 2009, 12:51 AM
There are far too many variables to make a blanket endorsement concerning superior ballistics unless the phrase "all else being equal" is the common denominator. Even different lots of factory ammunition will show differences in velocity when the same load is being used. Of the (4) magnum 30's mentioned the 30-378 has more "potential" when it comes to velocity with any given bullet weight. Next is the 300 RUM, then the 300 Weatherby, and last is the 300 Winchester. I feel uncomfortable using the word "last" in the same sentence with the 300 Winchester. The 300 Winchester is a fine cartridge and certainly "first" when it comes to popularity. All else being equal it simply comes down to powder capacity. Before some short magnum champion says anything remember I qualified my statements with "all else being equal". That means case design along with barrel length, pressure, bullet design, free bore, powder burn rate, ...ect! I remember reading an article many years ago where Rick Jamison did a test between the 300 Winchester and 300 Weatherby with different rifles and factory loads. The 300 Winchester beat the 300 Weatherby with certain loads shooting equal bullet weights. To my way of thinking if you need more gun than a 300 Winchester you should look for more bullet weight than what is available in the 30 caliber class. The extra range of even the monsterous 30-378 is not as much as many think and even then only a select few can really justify shooting at such a vast distance. By the way I own a 300 RUM but I would not feel handicapped if had a 300 Winchester. Just my humble opinion...I have too much free time on my hands and this gives me something to do. :)

saturno_v
November 16, 2009, 01:08 AM
To my way of thinking if you need more gun than a 300 Winchester you should look for more bullet weight than what is available in the 30 caliber class.

+1 t165, I agree completely.


I already had a 30-06 rifle (24" barrel) and when I wanted something more powerful and effective all around, a "step up" in performance class, I went directly to the 338 Win Mag skipping the 300 magnums.

Maverick223
November 16, 2009, 01:24 AM
To my way of thinking if you need more gun than a 300 Winchester you should look for more bullet weight than what is available in the 30 caliber class.Absodangumlootly, if you need greater performance than a 300WM then you should look into .338+ calibers with a case capacity equal to or greater than the 300WM. The first ones that come to mind are .338WM (hits hard), .375H&H (hits really hard), and .338LM (hits really hard at stuff far away).

:)

Arkel23
November 16, 2009, 06:11 PM
But everybody will say that if they had the same exact bullet type and case manufacturer and powder, they would be very identical only separated by a few fps.

Maverick223
November 16, 2009, 06:41 PM
I just want to amend my previous statement (Post No. 10)...I don't think there is anything wrong with the .300Wby, the .300RUM, or even the .30-378Wby; I just don't think there is a need for any of the above if you already have a .300WM (or a need for the .300WM if you have one of the above).

:)

If you enjoyed reading about ".300 Wby vs. .300 Ultra Mag" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!