325 WSM

[Amphibious]

I run a win extreme weather with 160gr TTSX No feed problems. Easy enough to get components for and versatile Not a bad calibre.

Can you talk a bit more on the 160ttsx? Considering trying them out.

 

[264]

Can you talk a bit more on the 160ttsx? Considering trying them out.

I originally went with them as I wanted a flat shooting load for Tahr in NZ. Combo of 160 TTSx at 3100fps.
Used the load before going on scrubbers , boar, brumbies , buff and sambar hide. Impressed by its performance I've stayed with it.
Majority of game I chase is suited to it and the occasional buff its still capable, if you pick your shots.
Didn't connect with anything in NZ.
Cheers Mick
good boar with 160TTSX

recovered from boar above opposite shoulder in fighting pad

few pigs with 325WSM

Tom with 325WSM great boar

jaw and projectile from boar above 25m chest shot, recovered opposite side fighting pad

 

[Wishfulthinker580]

I originally went with them as I wanted a flat shooting load for Tahr in NZ. Combo of 160 TTSx at 3100fps.
Used the load before going on scrubbers , boar, brumbies , buff and sambar hide. Impressed by its performance I've stayed with it.
Majority of game I chase is suited to it and the occasional buff its still capable, if you pick your shots.
Didn't connect with anything in NZ.
Cheers Mick
good boar with 160TTSX

recovered from boar above opposite shoulder in fighting pad

few pigs with 325WSM

Tom with 325WSM great boar

jaw and projectile from boar above 25m chest shot, recovered opposite side fighting pad

Man it seems like those Aussie hogs always have good cutters

 

[ldmay375]

I really like the cartridge, still need to shoot something with it. But, too many cartridges and too little time. I actually have 3 rifles chambered in it.
I have 2 of the Kimber Montana’s. One is the very earliest production that fed Very rough. To Kimber’s credit, when I called them they said they would fix it within a week. Well, never sent it to them. The issue was the feed ramp was not the correct angle in some of the earliest production rifles. Anyways my gunsmith fixed, it feds smoothly now. The latter production one feds fine. The difference in the fed ramp was obvious went comparing them side by side.

When the gunsmith fixed the feeding issue, I had him cut and crown the barrel at 22”. It is fairly compact now. The expected velocity loss will not be an issue for intended distances.

The 3rd one is a Winchester Model 70, New Haven Classic stainless. It came with the featherweight walnut stock. I replaced that with a Bell & Carlson short action stock. It is currently being bedded. It feds very well.

I like the cartridge for what it is. I don’t get hung-up on the 338 Winchester or 300 magnum comparisons.
Obviously the 338 Winchester pushes a larger bullet faster from a larger cartridge. But the 325 WSM is no slouch and most of the rifles are a bit more compact. In my opinion a 200-220 grain 8mm bullet at a decent velocity covers a lot of game animals.
Hell, I like the 8x57 also. Though I do not own one.

 

[Rare Breed]

Not with the 325WSM, but I did own a 300WSM. And I consider it one of my weaker firearm decisions.

Looking back on it, the family of "short magnums" were an answer to a question no one asked. If you are asking if they perform. Yes they do, but what is actually gained?

It has been argued that a shorter action and therefor shorter bolt throw is faster than a standard action. In my actual practice between a short action and a magnum action, there was no discernible difference. What is really happening is that short and fat casing with a steep and long shoulder make feeding more problematic. My 300WSM did not have a hiccup when feeding, but it wasn't as slick as my 300WM. The only real benefit of a short action is being more rigid than a standard or magnum action and therefore (potentially) more accurate.

The other problem with the .30 caliber version was case capacity. I'm not sure if this would be a problem with the .325 or not, but the 300WSM couldn't shoot bullets above 200 grains at proper velocities because it lacked the case volume to do so. The bullet had to be seated too deep in the brass and took away powder space.

The 325WSM is most often compared to the 338WM so I will do the same. Bullet selection .325 vs .338 - It's not even close. There are infinite reloading bullet choices at .338 and only a couple at .325 caliber. Then there are the loaded ammo options with 338WM having about 4 times the options of the 325WSM. This would also play a part in the event of a luggage/ammo loss, when you need to resupply at a local store.

Yes, you can tell the way I'm leaning, however it's still a good cartridge and good for all manner of large game up to and including Eland and Lion. It's unlikely that any animal would be able to tell the difference between a 325WSM and 338WM for terminal performance with proper bullet placement for each. Personally I'm not a fan but that shouldn't stop anyone from buying a rifle in a cartridge they desire.

EDIT - The 300WSM I owned was a Savage 16 Bear Hunter and was incredibly accurate, shooting 1.5" groups at 200 yards with factory ammo. The rifle was sold about a year after I bought it, only having been fired about 60 times and never hunted with.

I have to completely agree with your assessment given I have the identical 300WSM you had. It is my NA deer gun and has the same accuracy you quote above. If I had to do it again I would have bought a 300WM

 

[RTG]

I did own a 300WSM. And I consider it one of my weaker firearm decisions.

Ditto.

I am not as critical as most on the 325. I see a big advantage in both the 300wsm and 325wsm because the short action saves weight. I the 325wsm in a Browning BLR would be wonderful - and saves a full pound over the 300 win mag.

325 BLR is 6 pounds 12 oz. That would be brutal. Browning‘s stock design isn’t friendly on recoil to begin with. Add the high recoil velocity of the WSM… well, use a mouth guard.

That’s no criticism. I foolishly went down the same path already. Decided I needed a light weight, compact, mountain gun. Picked the Browning in 300 WSM. Absolutely brutal. Felt like Bruce Lee kicked me in the cheek with every shot. Big Bores have never made me flinch, but this thing did.

 

[cperso]

Ditto.


325 BLR is 6 pounds 12 oz. That would be brutal. Browning‘s stock design isn’t friendly on recoil to begin with. Add the high recoil velocity of the WSM… well, use a mouth guard.
View attachment 442392

That’s no criticism. I foolishly went down the same path already. Decided I needed a light weight, compact, mountain gun. Picked the Browning in 300 WSM. Absolutely brutal. Felt like Bruce Lee kicked me in the cheek with every shot. Big Bores have never made me flinch, but this thing did.

I own two Browning ABolt rifles in 300wsm and 325wsm and find the recoil very manageable . Taken hundreds of head of game with both rifles in Australia and plains game up to Eland in Africa.

 

[ldmay375]

I own two Browning ABolt rifles in 300wsm and 325wsm and find the recoil very manageable . Taken hundreds of head of game with both rifles in Australia and plains game up to Eland in Africa.

Good to hear you having been making good use of those rifles.

The Kimber Montana with 22-1/4” barrel, Talley stainless bases and rings, with a 1.5-6x42 Zeiss Victory weighs 7 pounds and almost 5 ounces.
I think the barrel reduction lost about 3 ounces from the 24”. At any rate the 24” recoil was not bad. There is a bit of muzzle rise when shooting from the bench.

 

[ChrisG]

I would say it is right up there with the .358 winchester in terms of cartridge popularity. Which I am not saying is a bad thing. I love the .358. If I recall, it reasonably duplicates the ballistics of a .300 Win mag, without the higher ballistic coeffcient (not a huge deal at all in my book). With a good 8mm bullet, I would say it will make a great round for anything in North America and Africa excluding heavy dangerous game.

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

I would say it is right up there with the .358 winchester in terms of cartridge popularity. Which I am not saying is a bad thing. I love the .358. If I recall, it reasonably duplicates the ballistics of a .300 Win mag, without the higher ballistic coeffcient (not a huge deal at all in my book). With a good 8mm bullet, I would say it will make a great round for anything in North America and Africa excluding heavy dangerous game.

@ChrisG.
I don't want to be the bearer of bad news mate but, the 358 Winchester as good as it is can never match the 300wm.
On the other hand a properly loaded 35 Whelen will will run rings around the 300wm and even dare I say will match the 338WM.
I am a 35 anything loony
Bob

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

I would say it is right up there with the .358 winchester in terms of cartridge popularity. Which I am not saying is a bad thing. I love the .358. If I recall, it reasonably duplicates the ballistics of a .300 Win mag, without the higher ballistic coeffcient (not a huge deal at all in my book). With a good 8mm bullet, I would say it will make a great round for anything in North America and Africa excluding heavy dangerous game.

@ChrisG
As this thread is about the 325wsm, the Whelen can be loaded to surpass it as well. No flies on a 35 with a 250gr @2,700fps or a 225 @2,900fps.
Bob

 

[ChrisG]

@ChrisG
As this thread is about the 325wsm, the Whelen can be loaded to surpass it as well. No flies on a 35 with a 250gr @2,700fps or a 225 @2,900fps.
Bob

Haha no I was referring to the .325 WSM. It does a reasonable job of matching the 300 Win Mag. No, the .358 winchester's nearest eqivalent would probably be a .30-06 without the ballistic coefficient, but with a bigger, heavier bullet (depending on loading)

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

Haha no I was referring to the .325 WSM. It does a reasonable job of matching the 300 Win Mag. No, the .358 winchester's nearest eqivalent would probably be a .30-06 without the ballistic coefficient, but with a bigger, heavier bullet (depending on loading)

@ChrisG
Mate forget the 300 and 325 and go straight for the Whelen better all round and packs a punch a fair ways out. Good bullet selection as well 125 grains to 310 grains.
Loaded with trailers for mild to cfe223 for wild reach out and hit them.
Bob

 

[hawkeyesatx]

Nothing wrong with the 35 Whelen. It does it’s job extremely well.
The .325 WSM is a decent cartridge, but trying to find ammo for it now is a hit or miss. Mostly a miss.

I would honestly look at getting a 9.3x62mm. You can hand load it just like Bob does his 35 Whelen, and the old gal magically comes to life, and will surpass a 338 WM in power, and tread right on the heels of the .375 H&H Mag.
You can even stretch it’s legs to 400 - 500 yds, because the trajectory is like that of the .308 Winchester. Not to mention that it can be as accurate as the .308 Winchester, too! Zip a 286 gr bullet along at 2500 fps, and amazing things start to happen. Plus, you can get 5 in a magazine, compared to just 3.
Look at the Ballistic Coefficients and Sectional Density of the 9.3 bullets, and you’ll see they’re just a hair less than the 338 cal projectiles.
My choice, which I have both, 180 gr up to 250 gr bullets, 35 Whelen!
270 gr up to 320 gr bullets, 9.3x62mm!
You can’t go wrong with both.

Hawk

 

[ldmay375]

I consider the 8mm the smallest of the medium bores. No particular reason, but for 300 yard / meter and less shots I would prefer it to .308 caliber cartridges for any game that they are deemed suitable for.
I guess I am an 8mm fan. The 325 WSM seems to me to be a pretty good one.

From others’ experiences it seems fairly easy achieving 2950 FPS with the Barnes 200 grain TSX, from a 24” barrel.
I have some factory DoubleTap, 200 grain loads that claim 2070 fps. I have not chronographed them, but they definitely group well in the 2 rifles that I have shot them in.
I have plenty of the 200 TSX and plenty of brass. A substantial quantity of brass was purchased when I bought the first rifle.
I have a few 200 grain A-Frames that I want to try for the hell of it.

This discussion had me reviewing the reloading manuals. 8mm, 220 grain A-Frames are not common in the places that I shop, even in normal supply times. But, they caught my eye again in the reloading manual. And I happen to have the top powders listed. Internet search was on. Actually found some !!
I would guess there would not be much on game difference between the 220 A-Frame and the 200 grain TSX. But for those that want an over 200 grain bullet, the 220 grain A-Frame seems to be it. Per the current Swift manual 2800-2850 fps is possible with several loads.

 

[ldmay375]

Swift manual, 325 WSM, 200 & 220 grain A-Frame loads.
Sectional Density for the 8mm:
200 gr = .274
220 gr = .301

 

[ldmay375]

In reference to the Barnes 200 grain TSX, 2nd post up ((#55), that velocity should have read 2970 FPS for DoubleTap factory load, Not 2070.

 

[Luederitz]

Which barrel length would you recommend for the 325 WSM if you want to use 200 grs bullets?

 

[ldmay375]

I think it is personal preference. I have not chronographed the 22-1/4 “ and 24” rifles that I have. It will probably be April or May before I do.
I expect 25-30 fps per inch velocity loss per inch of barrel from 24” to 22”. Which is not a concern to me.
The 24” should have the slight velocity advantage and a little less noise to the ears.

I plan to continue shooting the 200 grain TSX in both barrel lengths. I will eventually try the 220 grain A-Frame.
The 22” seems a little more compact. It should be a little less hassle in a ground blind.

 

[BeeMaa]

I think it is personal preference. I have not chronographed the 22-1/4 “ and 24” rifles that I have. It will probably be April or May before I do.
I expect 25-30 fps per inch velocity loss per inch of barrel from 24” to 22”. Which is not a concern to me.
The 24” should have the slight velocity advantage and a little less noise to the ears.

I plan to continue shooting the 200 grain TSX in both barrel lengths. I will eventually try the 220 grain A-Frame.
The 22” seems a little more compact. It should be a little less hassle in a ground blind.

You need one more 325WSM...a Blaser R8.

That would give you a 25.5" barrel that handled like it was a 22", because the magazine sits on top of the trigger group shortening the OAL of the rifle by about 4". Perfect for a ground blind or a spot and stalk.