325 WSM

[WAB]

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.

You got a full dose of the R8 cool-aid!

 

[BeeMaa]

You got a full dose of the R8 cool-aid!

For quite a while now...LOL.

 

[ldmay375]

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.

LOL , I have to say, no to one more. Though the shorter overall length does have appeal.
The WSM interest, was only a curiosity until the 8mm version. Everyone was anticipating Winchester to introduce a .338 version. Disappointment was rampant when it was an 8mm instead, except for me.

As the previous posted Swift loads show, the 325 WSM is no weakling. Of course, if one does not like 8mm’s, one can keep their eyes closed .
I do find it somewhat amusing, one would have thought that the introduction of the WSM cartridges was an assault on some peoples’ grandmothers.

The 22-1/4” Kimber Montana with stainless Talley bases and screw lock rings, Zeiss 1.5-6x42mm weighs 7 lbs 4 ounces.
The 24” with same bases/rings and a Swarovski 1.7-10x42mm weighs 7 lbs 9 ounces.
The Winchester M70 with 24” barrel is at the gunsmith for stock bedding. It will have the same bases & rings. I have not decided on the scope.

 

[WAB]

LOL , I have to say, no to one more. Though the shorter overall length does have appeal.
The WSM interest, was only a curiosity until the 8mm version. Everyone was anticipating Winchester to introduce a .338 version. Disappointment was rampant when it was an 8mm instead, except for me.

As the previous posted Swift loads show, the 325 WSM is no weakling. Of course, if one does not like 8mm’s, one can keep their eyes closed .
I do find it somewhat amusing, one would have thought that the introduction of the WSM cartridges was an assault on some peoples’ grandmothers.

The 22-1/4” Kimber Montana with stainless Talley bases and screw lock rings, Zeiss 1.5-6x42mm weighs 7 lbs 4 ounces.
The 24” with same bases/rings and a Swarovski 1.7-10x42mm weighs 7 lbs 9 ounces.
The Winchester M70 with 24” barrel is at the gunsmith for stock bedding. It will have the same bases & rings. I have not decided on the scope.

I must say, the more I use mine the more I like it.

 

[Vinootz]

Great cartridge. But then again, I love any rifle I own-lol. 8mm is the top of small bore. It is not medium bore. My ABolt and Kimber 325wsm are very lightweight thumpers. A 200 grain 8mm projectile moving 2800fps gives close to 2000 ft lbs of energy around 500 yards. How bad could that be? Actually, that’s pretty awesome ballistics. The 325wsm will effectively kill any animal on the planet. Also, there’s enough good quality hunting bullets available for reloaders. After all, how much selection do you really need?
Overall, it’s an awesome cartridge. When I read comments about negligible differences I laugh. Happy New Year all!

 

[cperso]

Great cartridge. But then again, I love any rifle I own-lol. 8mm is the top of small bore. It is not medium bore. My ABolt and Kimber 325wsm are very lightweight thumpers. A 200 grain 8mm projectile moving 2800fps gives close to 2000 ft lbs of energy around 500 yards. How bad could that be? Actually, that’s pretty awesome ballistics. The 325wsm will effectively kill any animal on the planet. Also, there’s enough good quality hunting bullets available for reloaders. After all, how much selection do you really need?
Overall, it’s an awesome cartridge. When I read comments about negligible differences I laugh. Happy New Year all!

Totally agree, the 325wsm is a hammer...Dont knock it until you try it.

 

[ZG47]

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

Muzzle blast is the bigger concern. I would go with 600mm (23.6") as a minimum. I got the odd whinge when I used my 600mm barreled. 30-06 with M1 ammo BUT people with 26" barreled M17s do not seem to get the same level of complaints when using full power ammo.
Whatever works for you, when sighting in, will be the best option in my opinion. Long barrels can be an issue when debussing from a Land Rover or other small vehicle BUT when hunting ... sighting telescopes and slings catching on bushes and vines are the real, as opposed to imaginary issues.

 

[WAB]

Even though I like my .325, I do understand the comments on the value of adding a new cartridge that basically duplicates the ballistics of an existing cartridge, in this case the 8x68.

If designing a new rifle I would be sorely tempted to go with the 8x68. The magazine capacity restriction of the short mags always irritates me.

 

[sestoppelman]

We all have our favorites. Below is a pic of 70 grs of ball powder in several cases.
l-r is the

8x64, .35 Whelen, 9.3x62, .325 WSM, .338 Win, and .375 Mag

All things being equal the case with the largest capacity wins assuming similar diameter, bullet weight etc., and at equal pressures. If you're gonna run one round up to max, gotta run them all to max, and not their stated max but a given max for all rounds, regardless SAAMI, same barrel length etc.

As we can see the .325, 338 mag and .375 hold considerably more powder than the other 3 standard rounds, and thus when loaded to max will outperform the smaller, albeit more efficient rounds, but in the end boiler room is what matters.

In this little exercise the .325 held 84 grs, the .338 held 88.5 grs, the .375 held 97.5 grs and the 9.3 held 75.5 grs. The 8x64 and .35 Whelen usually hold nearly the same depending on brand of case, but less than the others.
Powder was not tapped in more than needed to clear the funnel and tube.

 

[OLB]

I have a 325WSM in a Kimber Montana with a 3x9 Kahles on it. Very light and handy and kills Elk like a hammer. Just like my 350RM, 9.3x62 or my 9.3x64. There all Great. EnjoyEm

 

[MS 9x56]

Have any body had any experience with the 325 WSM ?

It is just a belted magnum 8mm.

 

[Luederitz]

It is just a belted magnum 8mm.

The 325 WSM case is not belted...

 

[hawkeyesatx]

I don’t doubt that the .325 WSM, or .338 WM hold more powder. But, with that being said, more powder means more felt free recoil. Newton’s law of physics, for everything there is an equal and opposite reaction. I’m not one that likes having odious amounts of recoil that loosens my fillings.
I much more prefer having a cartridge that gives me a push, like my 9.3x62, or normal loaded .375 H&H, instead of a mule kick like the .300 to .338 mags give you.
Not to mention I can equal or exceed the amount of energy created by said magnums, without dealing with the abuse from one, by just using my 9.3x62.


Hawk

 

[WAB]

I don’t disagree with you but I must say that my .325 has less felt recoil than my 9.3x62. Neither are significant in my mind. To be fair, the 325 is heavier with a synthetic stock.

 

[BeeMaa]

I don’t disagree with you but I must say that my .325 has less felt recoil than my 9.3x62. Neither are significant in my mind. To be fair, the 325 is heavier with a synthetic stock.

Tough to compare rifles like that. Different fit, different weight along with the different caliber make it too far out there to make an accurate assessment without the aid of scientific equipment. However, I would say that between the 325WSM and 9.3x62, there isn't a whole lot of difference. Especially for someone accustomed to shooting mid and large caliber rifles.

 

[sestoppelman]

So many variables. My model 70 .338 Alaskan kicks way less than my 9.3x62 with light glass stock, way less. Stock design, type of pad, LOP, rifle weight, all play a part in felt recoil. Not to mention the weight of the shooter, technique etc.
Always cracks me up when little light guys whine about recoil, when in fact the heavier bigger guys get whacked harder, more resistance to the recoil.

 

[ZG47]

So many variables. My model 70 .338 Alaskan kicks way less than my 9.3x62 with light glass stock, way less. Stock design, type of pad, LOP, rifle weight, all play a part in felt recoil. Not to mention the weight of the shooter, technique etc.
Always cracks me up when little light guys whine about recoil, when in fact the heavier bigger guys get whacked harder, more resistance to the recoil.

I can think of a certain lady who held a dangerous game rifle ready whilst her husband was filming said game!

 

[hawkeyesatx]

So many variables. My model 70 .338 Alaskan kicks way less than my 9.3x62 with light glass stock, way less. Stock design, type of pad, LOP, rifle weight, all play a part in felt recoil. Not to mention the weight of the shooter, technique etc.
Always cracks me up when little light guys whine about recoil, when in fact the heavier bigger guys get whacked harder, more resistance to the recoil.

You are so very correct when you say stock dimensions are a huge variable.
Comb drop, butt stock width, barrel length all are part of that equation.
I had an old Ruger M77 red pad in .300 Win Mag, with a 2 inch drop in the comb, and a slim butt pad. That thing ate my lunch when I fired it! I felt like I was being hit by Mike Tyson.
Now, switch a few months and I sold that rifle to buy a Weatherby Vanguard in .300 Weatherby. It had the Roy Weatherby Monte Carlo stock, and that was almost enjoyable to shoot. It had a thick butt, and my cheek weld to the stock was amazing.
Having a too short of barrel increases recoil, too.

Hawk

 

[sestoppelman]

You are so very correct when you say stock dimensions are a huge variable.
Comb drop, butt stock width, barrel length all are part of that equation.
I had an old Ruger M77 red pad in .300 Win Mag, with a 2 inch drop in the comb, and a slim butt pad. That thing ate my lunch when I fired it! I felt like I was being hit by Mike Tyson.
Now, switch a few months and I sold that rifle to buy a Weatherby Vanguard in .300 Weatherby. It had the Roy Weatherby Monte Carlo stock, and that was almost enjoyable to shoot. It had a thick butt, and my cheek weld to the stock was amazing.
Having a too short of barrel increases recoil, too.

Hawk

"Having a too short of barrel increases recoil, too"
Not sure how other than the weight of the barrel being less. Muzzle blast is increased but that is not actual recoil.

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

It is just a belted magnum 8mm.

@MS 9x56
Don't you mean a beltless 8mm rem mag.
Hello bells Josephine even the Whelen loaded properly is better than those fire breathing monsters
Bob