Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > Guns & Ammo Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-23-2008, 08:43 PM
Typical Typical is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 345
Default 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

Last edited by Typical; 01-27-2008 at 08:05 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-23-2008, 08:46 PM
JohninAB's Avatar
JohninAB JohninAB is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West Central Alberta
Posts: 4,975
Default

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.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-23-2008, 09:20 PM
stubblejumper
Deactivated
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
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.
Reply With Quote
Having used various 7mm cartridges as well as several .308 based cartridges,I never found any game animal that I couldn't cleanly kill with a 140gr to 180gr bullet.As such,I see no advantage to having any other bullet weights available.The big 300 magnums do hit a bit harder,but the 7mm magnums will easily take deer,moose or elk.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-23-2008, 10:08 PM
Ron AKA Ron AKA is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Gone
Posts: 96
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Typical View Post
I mainly hunt deer, moose and elk. Here's my question, should I buy a 7mm or a 300 win mag ?
The 7mm RM is definitely a better choice than the 300 WM for the game you list. The 30 caliber bullets offer no advantages, and as you suspect has a heavier recoil. You may be aware of this, but the brass size is the same on both cartridges. The 7mm RM however has a better ballistic coeficient in the useful bullet weights, due to the smaller caliber.

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
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-23-2008, 11:36 PM
sbtennex's Avatar
sbtennex sbtennex is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: West Central Alberta
Posts: 576
Default

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.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-24-2008, 06:20 AM
bingo1010's Avatar
bingo1010 bingo1010 is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: where the wind always blows
Posts: 853
Default

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
__________________
God Hates a Coward
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-24-2008, 06:40 AM
Donny Bear's Avatar
Donny Bear Donny Bear is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Red Deer / West Lake
Posts: 3,625
Default

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 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 What ever works just enjoy your new rifle hope its right for you.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-24-2008, 06:58 AM
bingo1010's Avatar
bingo1010 bingo1010 is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: where the wind always blows
Posts: 853
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Donny Bear View Post
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 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 What ever works just enjoy your new rifle hope its right for you.

exactly, no matter what you pick, shoot it lots and get good with it.
__________________
God Hates a Coward
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-24-2008, 06:41 PM
rembo rembo is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Sherwood Park, AB
Posts: 705
Default

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?
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-24-2008, 06:45 PM
ROM ROM is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 19
Default

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
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 01-24-2008, 06:53 PM
rembo rembo is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Sherwood Park, AB
Posts: 705
Default

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....
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 01-24-2008, 07:53 PM
roger's Avatar
roger roger is online now
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: wmu 222, member #197
Posts: 3,921
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rembo;
I can see my 300 getting rebarreled to 257 Wtby...or maybe 7STW....
get the best of both worlds....how about a 257stw, blazing fast and relatively stable reloadings.
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!!)
__________________
weatherby fans clik here....
http://www.outdoorsmenforum.ca/group.php?groupid=31
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 01-24-2008, 09:04 PM
PoppaW's Avatar
PoppaW PoppaW is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Peace River, Alberta
Posts: 1,519
Default

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
__________________
Everybody is allowed an opinion, even if it's wrong.

WOODY
CSSA NFAMember
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 01-24-2008, 09:19 PM
Ron AKA Ron AKA is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Gone
Posts: 96
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rembo View Post
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?
First, thanks for your refreshingly frank and accurate comments about these cartridges. I appreciate those who know what they have, and are honest about it.

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
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 01-24-2008, 09:22 PM
Outcast's Avatar
Outcast Outcast is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Cochrane,Alberta
Posts: 300
Default

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.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 01-24-2008, 09:33 PM
Ron AKA Ron AKA is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Gone
Posts: 96
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PoppaW View Post
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
I have no disagreement about the fit, but between these two cartridges in the same mfg and model, they will be identical. The only difference is the size of the hole in the barrel. They both use the same case.

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

Last edited by Ron AKA; 01-24-2008 at 11:02 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 01-24-2008, 09:54 PM
Ron AKA Ron AKA is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Gone
Posts: 96
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Outcast View Post
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.
I hear what you are saying, but I'll venture my frank opinion that the frontal area of the bullet only impresses the buyer of the bullet/cartridge. One may think a sharp pointy bullet will penetrate deeper or worse still go right through the animal without doing much damage, while a round or flat nosed big diameter bullet will do much more damage. The reality is that sharp pointy bullets and especially the ones with boat tails, loose less energy getting to the target. Once they get there it is the design of the bullet (thickness of the metal around the lead, partition or not, etc.) that decides what damage it does, and how deep it penetrates. The real need for round nose or flat bullets is for the old 30-30's and the like that use tubular magazines which have the potential for nose to tail fornication if pointy bullets are used.

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

Last edited by Ron AKA; 01-24-2008 at 11:03 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 01-24-2008, 10:06 PM
stubblejumper
Deactivated
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Foot lbs and trajectory aside there has to be something said for frontal area of a bullet.
Frontal area only matters when talking about the frontal area of the expanded bullet,The unfired frontal area is only a factor when using non expanded bullets which are not legal for big game hunting in Alberta.The expanded frontal area varies far more with the particular bullet than with the unfired bullet diameter.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 01-24-2008, 11:00 PM
Ron AKA Ron AKA is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Gone
Posts: 96
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stubblejumper View Post
Frontal area only matters when talking about the frontal area of the expanded bullet,The unfired frontal area is only a factor when using non expanded bullets which are not legal for big game hunting in Alberta.The expanded frontal area varies far more with the particular bullet than with the unfired bullet diameter.
Agree, and well said,

Ron
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 01-25-2008, 06:57 AM
Outcast's Avatar
Outcast Outcast is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Cochrane,Alberta
Posts: 300
Default

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
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 01-25-2008, 07:14 AM
catnthehat's Avatar
catnthehat catnthehat is online now
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Ft. McMurray
Posts: 23,289
Default

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

Last edited by catnthehat; 01-25-2008 at 08:22 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 01-25-2008, 07:26 AM
Dick284's Avatar
Dick284 Dick284 is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Dreadful Valley
Posts: 8,470
Default

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.
__________________
There are no absolutes

Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 01-25-2008, 08:06 AM
Win94 Win94 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Spruce Grove, Ab
Posts: 417
Default

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.

Last edited by Win94; 01-25-2008 at 08:56 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 01-25-2008, 08:52 AM
PoppaW's Avatar
PoppaW PoppaW is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Peace River, Alberta
Posts: 1,519
Default

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.
__________________
Everybody is allowed an opinion, even if it's wrong.

WOODY
CSSA NFAMember
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 01-25-2008, 08:58 AM
nekred's Avatar
nekred nekred is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,298
Default

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!...

Last edited by nekred; 01-25-2008 at 09:03 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 01-25-2008, 09:18 AM
Waxy Waxy is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,250
Default

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
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 01-25-2008, 09:41 AM
Ron AKA Ron AKA is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Gone
Posts: 96
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PoppaW View Post
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.
Yes I understood what you were saying, but I do have to disagree that bore size is a big factor, and in fact I consider it a negative factor. Yes the 300 case is slightly longer, but it needs a bit extra powder because it has to use the less efficient larger diameter bullets. To get the same down range performace you have to burn more powder and endure more recoil. My view which is not popular with a few here, is that many hunters go out with a rifle that has too big a bore and too heavy a bullet.

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
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 01-25-2008, 10:06 AM
Dick284's Avatar
Dick284 Dick284 is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Dreadful Valley
Posts: 8,470
Default

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.
__________________
There are no absolutes


Last edited by Dick284; 01-25-2008 at 10:24 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 01-25-2008, 10:27 AM
LongDraw LongDraw is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,802
Default

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!
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 01-25-2008, 10:39 AM
chuck0039 chuck0039 is online now
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 951
Default

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.
__________________
Fire up the grill cause deer huntin ain't catch and release
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:15 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.