Misplaced Pages

Talk:.325 Winchester Short Magnum

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the .325 Winchester Short Magnum article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
This article is rated C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconFirearms Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Firearms, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of firearms on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FirearmsWikipedia:WikiProject FirearmsTemplate:WikiProject FirearmsFirearms
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Dead link

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 12:36, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Dead link 2

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 12:36, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Submitted for move request also added to firearm project's move category

The proper (Official) name of the cartridge is .325 Winchester Short Magnum. The short hand version of the name is .325 WSM. Currently the article bears the short hand version of the name with the Officially named page redirecting to this short-hand named page. The article should be moved to the .325 Winchester Short Magnum page while the .325 WSM should redirect to this the .325 Winchester Short Magnum page. DeusImperator (talk) 22:13, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:.243 WSSM which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RM bot 04:30, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:.243 Winchester Super Short Magnum which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RM bot 05:15, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Use of CIP dimensions instead of SAAMI dimensions

Since this is a North American cartridge it is more germane to use SAAMI dimensions. The CIP ΔL issue though it exists is again not germane to the discussion of this cartridge, at least to my knowledge is not chambered in firearm action types that are affected by this issue. Use SAAMI dimensions for cartridges originating from Canada and the United States. CIP for cartridges originating in Austria, Belgium, Chile, Czech Republic, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Russia, Slovakia, Spain and the UK. Since most firearm sales are make in SAAMI countries the use of SAAMI recommendations at least for cartridges originating in the US and Canada should be the convention. Since, Canada and the US are common law countries, the SAAMI recommendation carry the force of law, without the need to stipulate by enacted law. This de facto standard has be adjudicated in court in Canada and the US. Since CIP is by governed and enforced by treaty to which they are not party to, Canada and the United States do not recognize CIP mandates or recommendations with some exception. Furthermore, the use of CIP values are not as straightforward as the CIP dimensions, unless was constitutes (as in treatment) L2, L3 etc are known to the person there will be ambiguity, whereas the SAAMI values have no ambiguity. DeusImperator (talk) 00:00, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

?? What is the table supposed to tell me

I see numbers in the table and have no idea what it means. Am I missing something? It is not about pressures, what is it? DeusImperator (talk) 00:07, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

You can see the achievable muzzle velocities in % of several 8 mm cartridges comapred to the 8 x57 IS/7.92x57mm Mauser that is arbitrary set at 100%. You can see that adding case capacity does not proportionally add achievable muzzle velocity and that the .325 WSM fares comparatively well when loaded with lighter bullets.--Francis Flinch (talk) 10:25, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

thick-skinned and heavy-shouldered big game animals found from Alaska to Africa

Really? Who writes this stuff? The 8mm is a small bore rifle cartridge, It is not intended for thick skinned dangerous game in Africa (elephant, rhino or African cape buffalo). There are no CXP4 rated loads for this cartridge - I have seen CXP2 ad CXP3. I roll my own 200 and 220 ammunition for this cartridge... I would not use this even on African thin skined dangerous game (lion) may be leopard. Just because Roy Weatherby went around shooting at cape buffalo with the .257 Wby Mag does not make the .257 Wby a dangerous game cartridge or just because WMD Bell poached several hundred elephant with a 7x57 does not make it the 7x57 an "elephant gun". This is a cartridge that cannot handle even a 220 gr bullet well. No such claims regarding the 8mm RMag cartridge are made regarding thick skinned dangerous game even though it was a more capable cartridge which handles the 220 gr and higher far better than the .325 WSM. The general consensus is that that heavy bodied game begin with the medium bore cartridges - that is the .338 and larger which can handle heavily constructed bullets with high SD for penetration. Some familiarity with the subject matter should be a prerequisite before contributing. It does not matter if there is such a quote and it can be cited - there are several quotes that say the medium game. DeusImperator (talk) 07:16, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Instead of whining and complaining about it. Just fix it. That's how Misplaced Pages works. --Zackmann08 (talk) 02:28, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Table Removed and renamed the section

This article is about the cartridge. What is the performance of this cartridge? Not one of "let me go compare it to ..." - who knows what else. The 325 WSM is loaded with a proprietary blend of powders while the Remington and RWS are generally not. Inevitability, the comparison with other cartridge will come up, but that is undertaken in the context of the 325 WSM - the subject of the article.

Cartridge Design: Parent Case .300 WSM the .300 Remington Ultra Mag? What?

The .300 WSM is a unique cartridge developed by Browning and was not derived from the Remington. "Early in 1999 Browning approached Winchester with the idea for the WSM line." The citation on this point refers to the Dakota line, which has 0.010" larger rim/base, so there is no direct lineage there, either. Where did you get this stuff? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.222.113.189 (talk) 22:04, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

300WSM based on 300SAUM

I don't exactly see how this is supposedly possible considering that the 300WSM was released a year before the 300SAUM. I'm not sure how to best edit that section accordingly. Also just because the designs are similar doesn't imply they are a parent case. 

SarcasticShooter (talk) 20:17, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Also, in the 300WSM article it is said that it was released in 2001, in this is it is claimed in 2000. SarcasticShooter (talk) 20:21, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Categories: