325 WSM...2 opposing views....what is your vote??
I came across 2 almost diametrically opposed views on the new "almost" medium bore Short Magnum Cartridge.
In the first article (Link http://www.realguns.com/archives/138.htm), "The Iliad, the Odyssey...and the 325 WSM ", Joe D'Alessandro from Realguns.com, likes the cartridge a lot and he considers it almost more useful than a 338 Win Mag.
The final summary from the article:
====================================================
I like the 325 WSM a lot. I have firearms with more punch, but I think this is about all that is needed for North America, within any ranges I would consider. I'm guessing even the 150 grain loads would be excellent for deer and similar, 195 or 200 for most anything else including big pigs, black bear, elk, etc. The tough 200 grain loads and 220 grain loads I would guess to be more than adequate for larger bear. If I needed something bigger for North America or elsewhere, I would skip the 338 Winchester Magnum, which doesn't really handle heavy bullets, and use my 338-378 Weatherby that does. Yup, impressive all around rifle and cartridge.
======================================================
In the second article from Chuck Hawks, "The .325 WSM" the good CHuck basically calls the cartridge "a rather limited design" (and he claims that the Winchester technicians admitted that)
Link: http://www.chuckhawks.com/325wsm.htm
An excerpt from the article:
====================================================
It is becoming apparent that, for technical reasons (i.e. case shape), the much-ballyhooed Winchester Short Magnum is a rather limited design. Winchester tried, and failed, to neck it down to make a viable .25 caliber magnum (thus the introduction of the .25 WSSM instead of a .25 WSM), and failed again when they tried to neck it up to .33, the smallest of the medium bore calibers. Winchester technicians have admitted that the WSM case was optimized for .30 caliber bullets, and that its efficiency falls off rapidly as the caliber is decreased or increased. Evidently the utility of the WSM case lies between .27 caliber and .31 caliber, period. That said, the .325 WSM is a satisfactory cartridge for hunting non-dangerous CXP2 and CXP3 class game, animals from the size of deer and antelope to elk and moose, as long as the shooter can tolerate the substantial recoil
=======================================================
What is your opinion??
I can comment only on one thing....D'Alessandro evidently doesn't know much the 338 Win Mag when he says "I would skip the 338 Winchester Magnum, which doesn't really handle heavy bullets[/B], and use my 338-378 Weatherby that does. Yup, impressive all around rifle and cartridge."
Obviously he is not aware of the several 250 gr. .338 loads available out there and a couple of 300 grainers (Woodleigh bullets) from Double Tap and Corbon.
I did check the Hodgdon Data and, loaded to their max specs, the 338 has a decent edge over the 325 with the same bullet weight in term of velocity....for example both loaded with a 200 gr. pill, the good old 338 has a ~150 fps advantage over the 325 WSM.
The 325 stops at 220 gr, the 338 goes all the way to 300...I find hard to believe D'alessandro doesn't know that...his article did strike me as a bit "suspiciously" commercial...
He kinda of contradicts himself when he says:
So he admits the Winchester 338 offering could be loaded down for "product positioning" reasons and he kinda of gloss over the fact Hornady sells a 338 Win Mag load 225 gr. at 2950 fps (replicable by handloading)
So, what's your take??
I came across 2 almost diametrically opposed views on the new "almost" medium bore Short Magnum Cartridge.
In the first article (Link http://www.realguns.com/archives/138.htm), "The Iliad, the Odyssey...and the 325 WSM ", Joe D'Alessandro from Realguns.com, likes the cartridge a lot and he considers it almost more useful than a 338 Win Mag.
The final summary from the article:
====================================================
I like the 325 WSM a lot. I have firearms with more punch, but I think this is about all that is needed for North America, within any ranges I would consider. I'm guessing even the 150 grain loads would be excellent for deer and similar, 195 or 200 for most anything else including big pigs, black bear, elk, etc. The tough 200 grain loads and 220 grain loads I would guess to be more than adequate for larger bear. If I needed something bigger for North America or elsewhere, I would skip the 338 Winchester Magnum, which doesn't really handle heavy bullets, and use my 338-378 Weatherby that does. Yup, impressive all around rifle and cartridge.
======================================================
In the second article from Chuck Hawks, "The .325 WSM" the good CHuck basically calls the cartridge "a rather limited design" (and he claims that the Winchester technicians admitted that)
Link: http://www.chuckhawks.com/325wsm.htm
An excerpt from the article:
====================================================
It is becoming apparent that, for technical reasons (i.e. case shape), the much-ballyhooed Winchester Short Magnum is a rather limited design. Winchester tried, and failed, to neck it down to make a viable .25 caliber magnum (thus the introduction of the .25 WSSM instead of a .25 WSM), and failed again when they tried to neck it up to .33, the smallest of the medium bore calibers. Winchester technicians have admitted that the WSM case was optimized for .30 caliber bullets, and that its efficiency falls off rapidly as the caliber is decreased or increased. Evidently the utility of the WSM case lies between .27 caliber and .31 caliber, period. That said, the .325 WSM is a satisfactory cartridge for hunting non-dangerous CXP2 and CXP3 class game, animals from the size of deer and antelope to elk and moose, as long as the shooter can tolerate the substantial recoil
=======================================================
What is your opinion??
I can comment only on one thing....D'Alessandro evidently doesn't know much the 338 Win Mag when he says "I would skip the 338 Winchester Magnum, which doesn't really handle heavy bullets[/B], and use my 338-378 Weatherby that does. Yup, impressive all around rifle and cartridge."
Obviously he is not aware of the several 250 gr. .338 loads available out there and a couple of 300 grainers (Woodleigh bullets) from Double Tap and Corbon.
I did check the Hodgdon Data and, loaded to their max specs, the 338 has a decent edge over the 325 with the same bullet weight in term of velocity....for example both loaded with a 200 gr. pill, the good old 338 has a ~150 fps advantage over the 325 WSM.
The 325 stops at 220 gr, the 338 goes all the way to 300...I find hard to believe D'alessandro doesn't know that...his article did strike me as a bit "suspiciously" commercial...
He kinda of contradicts himself when he says:
So he admits the Winchester 338 offering could be loaded down for "product positioning" reasons and he kinda of gloss over the fact Hornady sells a 338 Win Mag load 225 gr. at 2950 fps (replicable by handloading)
So, what's your take??
Last edited:
