7mm or 300 win mag
Hi guys, I will be purchasing a new rifle as soon as I can figure out which one I need. I mainly hunt deer, moose and elk.
I know that both caliber are flat shooting and also know that a 300 win mag kik a lot more. here's my question, should I buy a 7mm or a 300 win mag ? THANKS To all that responded, I made up my mind , my son and I wil be purchasing a 7 mm Thanks again |
Go with a 300 just based on the wider selection of bullet weights. 7mm work fine for the animals listed but the 300 can do anything the 7mm can do but only better.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
The other good choice would be the 270 Winchester, if recoil is any concern. The popularity of this cartridge is very well deserved as well. Ron |
I shoot a 7mm Rem Mag and it's louder and kicks at least as hard as my brother's .300 WM. With a 165gr Game King it also packs more punch way out there, a BC of over .6! All the same, for one gun only in bigger game hunting, it's hard to go wrong with the .300 for bullet selection alone. I love my 7 but it was the GUN I chose more than the caliber - Tikka Premier grade, rare and extremely smooth and accurate.
|
300 all the way, recoil is basically the same. the gun has more to do with the recoil than the caliber. bigger bullet, bigger hole= more blood. also gives you the option to step up to the 200 - 220 bullets for moose, most are close shots anyway. my 2 cents
|
300 The only thing I can say is over the course of 25 years I have had 3 friends that were all die hard 7 fans nothing good to say about the 300. One now shoots the 300 RUM the other 300 win and the other 300 WSM :huh: I never say anything to them I either dig out my 300 win or my 300 wsm or confuse them all with the 25-06 :D What ever works just enjoy your new rifle hope its right for you.
|
Quote:
exactly, no matter what you pick, shoot it lots and get good with it. |
I have both the 300 Win and the 7mm Rem Mag...the 300 definetely kicks more, my rifles weigh within two ounces with the 300 being heavier...I haven't used the 300 in 4 seasons now. The 300 might have slightly more energy at some ranges but they are both way more than you need anyway.....I've been carrying a 7-08 and now I'm getting a lightweight 30-06 put together....but if you're stuck on the 7mm Rem Mag or 300 Winny, I can't help you.....
Just for interest compare the trajectory and energy of a 160gr 7mm bullet leaving the muzzle at say 3000 and a 180gr 30 caliber leaving the muzzle at 3100....assuming both bullets have the same nose and heel profiles....which has a flatter trajectory and more energy at 400 yards? |
7mm would be my choice between the 2. I shoot a 300 WSM which has the best of both worlds. Lower recoil. Big time results.
R |
I just went to Hornady's website and the numbers might surprise a lot of you.
Now , I realize this is one ammo company and a two load comparison but get this.. 7mm 162gr at 2940fps...energy @ 400 yards....1822 ft lbs..trajectory minus 19.50" 300 Win 180 at 2960fps...energy @ 400 yards...1823 ft lbs..trajectory minus 20.50"..... looks like a dead heat....:) I can see my 300 getting rebarreled to 257 Wtby...or maybe 7STW.... |
Quote:
from what ive read and the guys i know who drive one now back to the question at hand: between those two, id go 300winmag, although rom did pointout some excellent points with the 300wsm. (I have just recently adopted a 300wsm, its just a couple of weeks old now. It was alone and scared all sitting on the gunstore rack, what else could I do!!) |
I have used both these calibers and you will not see much difference on game. You will see more difference with fit of the gun for your recoil tolerance. I would say find a gun that fits nice and get whatever caliber they have it in. If they have both go 300 Win mag. No replacement for displacement:D
|
Quote:
Without looking it up, my expectation would be that the this could be quite close. The velocity of the 7mm will be higher and the trajectory will be better. The BC is a toss up and will depend on the specific bullet used. That will be the determining factor on which has more down range energy. So energy a toss up and flatter goes to the 7mm. If you load the 300 to give the same flat trajectory you will pay in recoil. Ron |
Foot lbs and trajectory aside there has to be something said for frontal area of a bullet. Moose are glass houses but elk are a different story. I will take a larger diameter bullet for elk any day and twice on Sunday. I know I will here back about all the elk shot with the small caliber rifles but this is just what I`ve experienced over the years. If you can shoot it take the 300 otherwise it ain`t worth the paper the registration will be written on. Whatever you chose I`ll see you in the elk woods with my 338 winny on my shoulder. Frontal area makes a big difference.
|
Quote:
On the "no replacement for displacement", I agree but suspect we differ on what displacement is in a rifle. My view is that displacement (compared to engine cubic inches) in a cartridge is the case volume. It is not the bore size. The bore size in the analogy compares to the piston size. So my view is the displacement is the same for these two cartridges, and is the same for the 264 WM, 7mm RM, 300 WM, and the 338 WM as they all use the same case except for the neck diameter. The difference comes in with the ballistics. The 7mm for the same energy will provide a flatter trajectory and for the same down range energy, less recoil. That said, probably both are more than enough for North American game, and the reason I suggested the 270 as an alternative to the 7mm RM. Yes, there are short small bore magnums and such, but compare them to the good old 270 and see how much difference there really is. Ron |
Quote:
On the diameter of the bullet consider this. A moose or elk may have in the order of a 30 inch chest. On a proportional basis what is the difference between a .308" bullet and a .284" (7mm)? It is 0.044", or on a proportional basis compared to the 30" target that one is trying to damage, .044/30X100= 0.15%. Does the moose/elk notice? I think not. It is the energy at impact that has the potential to do the job. The placement of the bullet determines whether it can or cannot. The design of the bullet then determines whether it finally does or does not. In my opinionated view the bore size has nothing to do with it. That said, it carries a lot of weight in the discussion over a cool one around the hunting campfire... Ron |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Ron |
i will agree that the frontal area of a bullet would make the most differance with solids. However this is my opinion based on the elk I've shot with various cartridges (270 Win, 30-06, 7WSM, 300 Ultramag and 338 winmag). I've also witnessed numerous elk shot with various cartridges In the class that the original post asks about.
Whichever cartridge he decides on he will be well armed in the bush for the quarry discussed. Push comes to shove though and I will take the Larger caliber every time. Pick either caliber in a gun that fits you and you won't go wrong. "If the 45-70 and the 7mm rem mag had a baby, and you grained it in good shape, it would grow up to be the 338 Winchester Magnum." David Bradshaw |
I really think it is a personal choice, neither one would be better than the other in the field.
Both have lots of residual energy, come in a meriad of models of rifles, and both are proven preformers. No difference than debating the .270/280 thing. Cat |
I've really enjoyed reading this post.
So what's next debating the merits of this pick up truck over the next, or what? A fellow wanting to make an informed decision for himself would have endeavoured to make arrangements to go and shoot a couple rifles in each caliber to see what he likes. But for the most part, that point was totally missed. I'm sure there are from at least this thread alone, a half dozen rifles in each caliber owned amungst those who replied. Not a single fellow offered to meet with this fellow so he could try it out first hand, and see what was within his boundaries of tollerence. Now not currently owning either caliber, I am unable to offer up my time and a few rounds of ammo. If he wanted to try a .284Win, and a 300WSM, I could offer, but he's made his boudaries known. |
If the big bears were on the menu, the .300mag would be a bit of edge i would i think. For deer, moose and elk your splittin hairs. Either one will do the job fairly equally.
|
Ron AKA, my comment on displacement refers to the bigger bore which will give you bigger bullets. And in this case the 7mm case is smaller so the reloader can get a lot more power from the 300 as the shoulder is farther forward than the 7mm. Shoot the 180gr accubond and it will shoot flatter and farther than most hunters are capable. The same can be said of the 7mm but it will have a bit less power. If it were up to me I would be recomending 7mm wby and 300 wby. these were the original improved powerhouses anyway, and from my experience seem to be more accurate. But back to the thread go with the 300 Win.
|
Has anyone thought of over kill?
I have seen a moose shot with a 300 win mag at 60 yards in the boiler room and both font shoulders were displaced from the inflation of the body cavity due to pressure created from hydrostatic shock (300 bullet did not exit) In many ways I see we are comparing a Mckintosh apple to a Granny Smith Apple.... They are still apples and both will do the job. If Muzzle energy is similar, recoil will be similar due to Newton's law "for every force applied there will be an equal and opposite force" When it comes to recoil we are very poor judges. When bench shooting on a target with a rifle that someone says kicks like a horse... It kicks like a bee-stung mule.... Yet we can take the same Thundersticken Loudenboomer and not feel a thing when aiming at a trophy buck. 300 has a bit more muzzle energy so will kick a little more but if you increase weight of rifle perceived recoile goes down along with a properly designed stock. the more in line with barrel shoulder is the less recoil will be felt and noticed due to less muzzle jump which breaks shoulder weld and puts recoil force on a narrower space... thereby increasing perceived recoil. So you can make perceived recoil on both rifles very similar if you add weight to 300 or a muzzle brake!.... In the end you have to compare the pill. A 300 is designed to place a 180-200 grain pill downrange and a 7mm about a 165 grain pill downrang In my experience 7mm is touchy to bullet weight for accuracy. There is some good info here but in the end this is the difference and it comes down to personal preference. Both bullets perform very similarly. Penetration is combination of weight and frontal area if you use same bullet material and design. 7mm is lighter but smaller diameter than 300 so it balances out. Now back to the overkill. the 300 is a good long range rifle that will kill any North American game over 300 yards. but at distances under 100 yards I have seen it is overkill. 7mm has less overkill but will still drop an elk at 300 yards (assuming proper bullet placement in all cases) In my opinion 300 is a bit too big for deer, 7mm is the Max i would use for deer. Are you buying a long range elk rifle that will be used occasionally on deer or a deer rifle occasionally used on elk. (Moose are big babies) Decide what your effective range is with any rifle and what will be the most likely distance you will be shooting game at to aid in your decision. In the end it will come down to you. Try them both out and see what you can be most accurate with. Here is a 7mm story. 40 or so years ago before i was a twinkle in my daddy's eye he went to go buy a brand new 30-06 to replace the old faithful 303. The guy behind the counter brought out a Remington 700 in 7mm in a Monte Carlo stock and showed it to my dad and told him all about it. dad looked at it and said it was very nice and he would buy it if the shop had it in Left Hand. (trying to exit gracefully) The guy pulled out an identical twin in Left Hand. Dad bought it. I have seen that rifle only ever miss once in my whole life. It was magic. When the trigger was pulled something died. My Dad has the nickname "One Shot" The only time he missed was on a 120 yard coyote... I got in so much trouble for not backing him up... i did not bother as it was a chip shot... I learned a lesson that everyine can miss. That rifle has countless moose to its credit... one in particular I remember was a 450 yard shot on a cow moose. elk, bears, deer coyotes wolves etc. have all fallen with one shot from that rifle. When the old rifle finally was wearing out.. He went and bought another 7mm identical and I snuck into his closet and sent the old girl out to get refurbished and presented to him again on his 60th birthday. The new one went back into the closet and the old one is with him once more still dropping animals with a single shot. Anyways Have fun!... |
There's some really good info here. I enjoyed reading this thread.
A good friend of mine and I always banter back and forth on this subject, he's a .300WIN guy, I'm a 7MM Rem Mag guy. I think I would agree that for real long range shooting, especially if the target is Elk, the .300 has the edge. For everything else, I'll take the 7MM hands down. My reasons - The 7MM has far less recoil. That may be perception or due to the rifles themselves, but I have never enjoyed firing a .300WIN. I actually think that most people, likely myself included, are not good enough marksmen to accurately shoot this caliber. The combination of the recoil and the over-confidence it seems to give people have resulted in a few misses or wounded animals in my experience. I really like how fast and flat the 7MM is. I realize the same can be said of the .300WIN depending on the ammunition, so it's more a comparison to the other calibres out there. The biggest one for me, and it was touched on here, is that to my mind, the .300WIN is simply overkill for the majority of hunting that I do. I rarely shoot over 200 yds, with most deer being in the 100-150 yd range. When I am taking those long shots, out to 300yds or so, it's generally on an Antelope. In my experience, the .300WIN at close ranges just does way too much damage to the animal. Even the 7MM is overkill for the most part, but IMHO, a better compromise. So, I'm biased, but I would recommend the 7MM Rem Mag. Just about everyone I hunt with uses this caliber, so it's proven itself to me. Excellent quality factory ammunition is also readily available for it, and at a reasonable price. Great discussion so far. Waxy |
Quote:
In another thread I posted some cartridges that met the assumed need for 1750-1950 ft-lbs of energy at 300 yards. I sorted this short list with the flattest shooting cartridge first, and the poorest last. Here they are: Cartridge, Bullet Wt, 300 yd vel, muzzle vel, 300 yd vel 7mm RM, 140, 2490, 3133, 1927 7mm RSAUM, 140, 2490, 3133, 1927 7mm STW, 140, 2467, 3436, 1892 280 Rem, 140, 2437, 2797, 1846 300 WM, 150, 2384, 3605, 1893 300 WSM, 150, 2364, 3671, 1861 300 RSAUM, 150, 2359, 3410, 1854 30-06, 150, 2298, 2820, 1758 35 Whelen, 250, 1823, 3197, 1844 375 H&H Mag, 270, 1780, 4338, 1900 Notice that this ends up being essentially in order of bore size and bullet size, with the big bores/heavy bullets the poorest. I also agree with the last couple of posts that the 300 is probably overkill and perhaps even the 7mm is as well. The advantage of the 7mm is that it can be more easily loaded down to more reasonable energy levels for smaller game. But it could be asked why even a 7mm, when the 270 is very good, and if one insists on going off the beaten track to get something different, then the 280 Remington. I also posted a second list of the more modest energy levels, sorted by the same criteria as the other list: Cartridge, Bullet Wt, 300 Yd Vel, Muzzle Eng, 300 Yd Eng 270 WSM , 130, 2444, 3114, 1724 270 Win, 130, 2442, 2702, 1721 260 Rem, 120, 2334, 2392, 1560 264 WM, 140, 2326, 2854, 1682 7mm-08, 140, 2314, 2542, 1664 280 Rem, 140, 2309, 2797, 1657 300 RUM, 150, 2270, 2820, 1716 30-06, 150, 2270, 2820, 1716 308 Win., 150, 2219, 2648, 1640 7mm RM, 160, 2212, 2987, 1739 308 Win., 180, 1974, 2743, 1557 350 RM, 200, 1921, 3419, 1639 Ron |
You know numbers are really nice but how do you know for a fact that these calibers do what the factories claim?
For the most part what I've found is the 7mm Rem Mag, has some real issues living up to it's billing, while the 300 Win Mag although variations exist, for the most part comes very close to published figures. Does that take away from the game getting ability of either? No Does it make cut and pasted tables from theoretical velocities reliable? A far bigger NO Any real world accounts posted here shows that your are hard pressed to find any practical diffrence between the two calibers in the field. I go back to my first post in here. Get to the range with guys who own these calibers and find out for yourself what you would prefer. |
I built a 7mm Rem Mag and have done lots of load development with it. I am shooting a 175 grain bullet at 3000 fps, with better than average accuracy. The recoil is very manageable without a muzzle brake, shot off of a rest.
If you plan to shoot bullets from 140-175 grain go with the 7mm RM. If you plan to shoot bullets OVER 180 grains go with the 300 WM. Heck, if you plan to shoot 140 grain bullets go with the 7mm-08! The 300 WM only outshines the 7mm RM with the heavy bullets (200 +) when you get over 400 yards. Between the two I would go with the 7mmRM because of recoil ( I am a wuss!) Bottom line is the more powder you are burning the more INNEFICIENT a rifle cartridge becomes, and this is amplified with light bullets! 7mm-08, shoot 140's 7mm RM, shoot 165-175's 300 WM, shoot 200-210's Download one of the ballistic programs and see for yourself, is it worth pounding your shoulder and developing a nasty flinch over MAYBE 150 fps, when this only gains you SLIGHTLY more foot/pounds of energy and maybe 1/2" trajectory at 300 yards? 7mm-08 is the most underrated cartridge out there that will handle MOST big game in North America. I shoot a 140 grain TSX @ 2980FPS! It will flatten any elk or moose out there and has very little recoil. It has become my go-to gun! The 7mmRM only gets walked at the range now! |
I hunt with a 300 win mag and never hunted with a 7mm. I love the 300 works great on every animal i have hunted. I keep hearing the same thing about the recoil on the 300. My 300 doesn't kick, infact when I shoot my 280 remington it kicks harder than my 300 does. I think it comes down to personal prefrence more than anything.
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:44 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.