Iclimb
Well-Known Member
Like I said his trophy room has game from Africa to Alaska in it. Numerous elk, moose, bear etc. (since they were the animals listed). Out to 500 yds. You'd prolly want to step up to the 7 mag at longer distances!
-
If you are being asked to change your password, and unsure how to do it, follow these instructions. Click here
300. wsm vs. 7mm rem mag.
- Thread starter matt_3479
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Like I said his trophy room has game from Africa to Alaska in it. Numerous elk, moose, bear etc. (since they were the animals listed). Out to 500 yds. You'd prolly want to step up to the 7 mag at longer distances!
Iclimb
Well-Known Member
I think that is probably the law in most states. It is here in Idaho too. But, you have to make a reasonable effort to do so. Just because your elk runs into some timber isn't going to be the factor in getting fined for retrieval efforts! There is a broader sense of the law! To address the second part of the statement I live in elk country, I "have some experience in it". I agree that the range factor absolutely must be addressed that's a fact, lots of people get on here and ask questions because google points them this direction and 400 yds to them is probably beyond their ability (not to say the original author applies)
I believe the original question involved keeping the 7RM vs. getting a 300wsm. I pointed towards the 280 to point out that lots of "big game" has been taken with less and shot placement is going to be the biggest factor. I think it is so funny to read all the posts that talk about needing .30 cal ultra mags to take elk, when in fact they are probably suffering due to the fact they are scared to shoot them.
A hunter that has prepared to the point of being able to competently harvest large game at 600 to 1000 yds is no longer going to be afraid to shoot his rifle. He'll probably have a muzzle brake installed to reduce recoil by the time he's practiced and proficient at long range targets or game. So for long range hunters, who tend to practice with their rifles more than closer range/woods hunters in order to stay proficient, the fear of recoil has most often been resolved one way or another. Otherwise, they wouldn't have become proficient at the longer yardages.
MontanaRifleman
Well-Known Member
It's all about improving the odds fellas. That's why I moved up. Both rifles can get the job done. One can get it done a little better.
As Tyler mentioned, this IS Long Range Hunting and when we talk about hunting, we do so with that as the big picture. This forum is different than 24 hr Campfire and I'm not knocking 24 hr campfire. It's just different. On average, the chamberings used and talked about here are larger because we shoot and hunt farther. A 7 mag shoots farther than a 280 and an STW shoots farther than a 7 mag. A 30 cal makes a bigger hole than a 7 and a 338 makes a bigger hole than a 30. You get it.
With smaller game, cal selection is not a huge deal, but never the less, you will see more deer bang flop shooting them with a 300 WSM vs a 240 WBY. The reason is, or should be obvious. Not saying don't shoot deer with a 240 WBY or 243... just saying the bigger gun is gonna nock'em down quicker.
Shot placement and caliber are two completely different subjects. Saying that shot placement is or can be dependent on cartridge size is a weak and flawed argument. Most of the LR shooters/hunters I know have muzzle brakes on their rifles. I don't think I've see a pic of one of Kirby's rifles yet without a brake on it. I have been to several shoots with other members of the forum and 9 out of 10 rifles wear brakes, even the smaller cals. I shot a 300 RUM for a few years without a brake, with no problem other than I could not see down range hits. Shot placement is about good shooting techniques, not cal selection. There are many many members here with BIG guns that shoot very accurately. Recoil can be managed by good technique and proper equipment. And BTW, the 7 mag does not kick a whole lot less than a 300 WSM.
If you choose to hunt with a 7 mag, then fine. What chaps my *** is when folks say the 7 mag is as potent as a 300 mag or better yet, "can out pound a 300 mag". Absolutely ridiculous. And these folks are trying to influence others by making these ridiculous claims. That's what chaps me. I have never seen anyone yet back that up with ballistic numbers, yet it continues to be spread.
Back to improving the odds. If you go hunting elk for 4 seasons and bag a nice bull each year with your 7 mag, and drop him quick, you will think very highly of your rifle. If on the 5th year, you shoot one and he runs off into some rugged country miles from the truck, you will go out and buy a bigger a rifle for next years hunt. One or two successful experiences do not paint an overall picture.
Mud, you mentioned that "deer are like small elk" and to me that comes across as there is little difference between the 2. I will say that there is a big difference between a 100 lb whitetail and a 900 lb bull elk. I've killed both and when you walk up to a big bull down on the ground, it makes you think.
Yup Tyler, guess I am a glutton. Sometimes I wake up the next morning and ask myself, did I really jump into that?
As Tyler mentioned, this IS Long Range Hunting and when we talk about hunting, we do so with that as the big picture. This forum is different than 24 hr Campfire and I'm not knocking 24 hr campfire. It's just different. On average, the chamberings used and talked about here are larger because we shoot and hunt farther. A 7 mag shoots farther than a 280 and an STW shoots farther than a 7 mag. A 30 cal makes a bigger hole than a 7 and a 338 makes a bigger hole than a 30. You get it.
With smaller game, cal selection is not a huge deal, but never the less, you will see more deer bang flop shooting them with a 300 WSM vs a 240 WBY. The reason is, or should be obvious. Not saying don't shoot deer with a 240 WBY or 243... just saying the bigger gun is gonna nock'em down quicker.
Shot placement and caliber are two completely different subjects. Saying that shot placement is or can be dependent on cartridge size is a weak and flawed argument. Most of the LR shooters/hunters I know have muzzle brakes on their rifles. I don't think I've see a pic of one of Kirby's rifles yet without a brake on it. I have been to several shoots with other members of the forum and 9 out of 10 rifles wear brakes, even the smaller cals. I shot a 300 RUM for a few years without a brake, with no problem other than I could not see down range hits. Shot placement is about good shooting techniques, not cal selection. There are many many members here with BIG guns that shoot very accurately. Recoil can be managed by good technique and proper equipment. And BTW, the 7 mag does not kick a whole lot less than a 300 WSM.
If you choose to hunt with a 7 mag, then fine. What chaps my *** is when folks say the 7 mag is as potent as a 300 mag or better yet, "can out pound a 300 mag". Absolutely ridiculous. And these folks are trying to influence others by making these ridiculous claims. That's what chaps me. I have never seen anyone yet back that up with ballistic numbers, yet it continues to be spread.
Back to improving the odds. If you go hunting elk for 4 seasons and bag a nice bull each year with your 7 mag, and drop him quick, you will think very highly of your rifle. If on the 5th year, you shoot one and he runs off into some rugged country miles from the truck, you will go out and buy a bigger a rifle for next years hunt. One or two successful experiences do not paint an overall picture.
Mud, you mentioned that "deer are like small elk" and to me that comes across as there is little difference between the 2. I will say that there is a big difference between a 100 lb whitetail and a 900 lb bull elk. I've killed both and when you walk up to a big bull down on the ground, it makes you think.
Yup Tyler, guess I am a glutton. Sometimes I wake up the next morning and ask myself, did I really jump into that?
Last edited:
Iclimb
Well-Known Member
True, An unfortunate fact is lots of people buy their 338 ultra mag put a Leopold or nightforce scope on and think they're a long-range Hunter. Proficiency and range are relative. Which is unfortunate. Same goes in the bow hunting community. Our animals deserve better!
MudRunner2005
Well-Known Member
I know who you're talking about and that isn't me. And as .284 fan, I agree, that statement was kind of rediculous. I was waiting to see proof of that as well. Because common sense will tell you a 7RM vs a 300 RUM, that the 300 RUM is gonna hit ALOT harder.It's all about improving the odds fellas. That's why I moved up. Both rifles can get the job done. One can get it done a little better.
As Tyler mentioned, this IS Long Range Hunting and when we talk about hunting, we do so with that as the big picture. This forum is different than 24 hr Campfire and I'm not knocking 24 hr campfire. It's just different. On average, the chamberings used and talked about here are larger because we shoot and hunt farther. A 7 mag shoots farther than a 280 and an STW shoots farther than a 7 mag. A 30 cal makes a bigger hole than a 7 and a 338 makes a bigger hole than a 30. You get it.
With smaller game, cal selection is not a huge deal, but never the less, you will see more deer bang flop shooting them with a 300 WSM vs a 240 WBY. The reason is, or should be obvious. Not saying don't shoot deer with a 240 WBY or 243... just saying the bigger gun is gonna nock'em down quicker.
Shot placement and caliber are too completely different subjects. Saying that shot placement is or can be dependent on cartridge size is a weak and flawed argument. Most of the LR shooters/hunters I know have muzzle brakes on their rifles. I don't think I've see a pic of one of Kirby's rifles yet without a brake on it. I have been to several shoots with other members of the forum and 9 out of 10 rifles wear brakes, even the smaller cals. I shot a 300 RUM for a few years without a brake, with no problem other than I could not see down range hits. Shot placement is about good shooting techniques, not cal selection. There are many many members here with BIG guns that shoot very accurately. Recoil can be managed by good technique and proper equipment. And BTW, the 7 mag does not kick a whole lot less than a 300 WSM.
If you choose to hunt with a 7 mag, then fine. What chaps my *** is when folks say the 7 mag is as potent as a 300 mag or better yet, "can out pound a 300 mag". Absolutely ridiculous. And these folks are trying to influence others by making these ridiculous claims. That's what chaps me. I have never seen anyone yet back that up with ballistic numbers, yet it continues to be spread.
Back to improving the odds. If you go hunting elk for 4 seasons and bag a nice bull each year with your 7 mag, and drop him quick, you will think very highly of your rifle. If on the 5th year, you shoot one and he runs off into some rugged country miles from the truck, you will go out and buy a bigger a rifle for next years hunt. One or two successful experiences do not paint an overall picture.
Mud, you mentioned that "deer are like small elk" and to me that comes across as there is little difference between the 2. I will say that there is a big difference between a 100 lb whitetail and a 900 lb bull elk. I've killed both and when you walk up to a big bull down on the ground, it makes you think.
Yup Tyler, guess I am a glutton. Sometimes I wake up the next morning and ask myself, did I really jump into that?
Oh no, I know how big elk get...I know weight-wise there's a HUGE difference. I was simply talking about anatomically, as far as shape and vitals location, etc...
Also, most whitetail bucks are around the 150-300 lb range, most legal does (no spots) tend to be 85-150 lbs range.
But I understand where you were coming from thinking about what I was saying. It's all good, now we're on the same page.
MudRunner2005
Well-Known Member
Hey now...I've been bowhunting since I was 12, and killed alot of deer with guns and bows. I disagree with bowhunting being "inhumane". A good clean double-lung is just as effective as a double-lung with a rifle.
I've only had 1 deer run off that I never retrieved, and I was 14 and bowhunting. It was because my sight had gotten knocked off, and I didn't know it. We searched through some of the thickest nasties thorny briar-patches you can imagine, tracked blood for a while. We did find it a couple days later on the back-side of the pine thicket when we saw the buzzards circling. That is the ONLY deer I've ever shot and not recovered. And yes, I felt like crap about it, but it was something I couldn't help. It happened, many many years ago, and I have made ****-sure it hasn't happened since.
Iclimb
Well-Known Member
Sorry, I wasn't running down archery hunting at all. You're talking to a bow hunter. I was trying to say that there are a lot of bow hunters who aren't what I consider proficient. Too many go to cabela's, buy the cheapest bow package they have, and go hunt... Lacking the necessary skills to take the tough shots let alone the self control to turn the wrong shot down!
MudRunner2005
Well-Known Member
I gotcha...And yes, I agree. Alot of idiots out there in the woods with guns and bows. I used to sell stuff to them at the outdoors store. Back then I just smiled and nodded my head.
Now I call people out for stupidity, because life's too short to deal with BS.
Iclimb
Well-Known Member
All that being said I think we all agree the 7mm is better right...
MudRunner2005
Well-Known Member
All that being said I think we all agree the 7mm is better right...
To a point. I think once you get bigger than the STW the begatives start to outweigh the positives. So to me, the 7 RUM is worthless, being that I already have an STW that is only 80-100 fps slower, but will have almost twice the barrel life.
D
Deleted member 25294
Guest
It's all about improving the odds fellas. That's why I moved up. Both rifles can get the job done. One can get it done a little better.
As Tyler mentioned, this IS Long Range Hunting and when we talk about hunting, we do so with that as the big picture. This forum is different than 24 hr Campfire and I'm not knocking 24 hr campfire. It's just different. On average, the chamberings used and talked about here are larger because we shoot and hunt farther. A 7 mag shoots farther than a 280 and an STW shoots farther than a 7 mag. A 30 cal makes a bigger hole than a 7 and a 338 makes a bigger hole than a 30. You get it.
With smaller game, cal selection is not a huge deal, but never the less, you will see more deer bang flop shooting them with a 300 WSM vs a 240 WBY. The reason is, or should be obvious. Not saying don't shoot deer with a 240 WBY or 243... just saying the bigger gun is gonna nock'em down quicker.
Shot placement and caliber are two completely different subjects. Saying that shot placement is or can be dependent on cartridge size is a weak and flawed argument. Most of the LR shooters/hunters I know have muzzle brakes on their rifles. I don't think I've see a pic of one of Kirby's rifles yet without a brake on it. I have been to several shoots with other members of the forum and 9 out of 10 rifles wear brakes, even the smaller cals. I shot a 300 RUM for a few years without a brake, with no problem other than I could not see down range hits. Shot placement is about good shooting techniques, not cal selection. There are many many members here with BIG guns that shoot very accurately. Recoil can be managed by good technique and proper equipment. And BTW, the 7 mag does not kick a whole lot less than a 300 WSM.
If you choose to hunt with a 7 mag, then fine. What chaps my *** is when folks say the 7 mag is as potent as a 300 mag or better yet, "can out pound a 300 mag". Absolutely ridiculous. And these folks are trying to influence others by making these ridiculous claims. That's what chaps me. I have never seen anyone yet back that up with ballistic numbers, yet it continues to be spread.
Back to improving the odds. If you go hunting elk for 4 seasons and bag a nice bull each year with your 7 mag, and drop him quick, you will think very highly of your rifle. If on the 5th year, you shoot one and he runs off into some rugged country miles from the truck, you will go out and buy a bigger a rifle for next years hunt. One or two successful experiences do not paint an overall picture.
Mud, you mentioned that "deer are like small elk" and to me that comes across as there is little difference between the 2. I will say that there is a big difference between a 100 lb whitetail and a 900 lb bull elk. I've killed both and when you walk up to a big bull down on the ground, it makes you think.
Yup Tyler, guess I am a glutton. Sometimes I wake up the next morning and ask myself, did I really jump into that?
Oh man this is great! An oldie but a goodie..
The 195's weren't around at the time but run the numbers today with the 300wsm shooting a 215 Berger, and a 7mm shooting a 195...
there is virtually no difference other than less wind drift with the 195, and slightly better penetration with a bullet that weighs 20 grains more.
The argument of displacement between .308 and .284 just cracks me up!
Does .o24" really create that much bigger of a wound channel??
I'll argue wound channel size is influenced more by velocity at impact which creates expansion, than by diameter before expansion.
We can play with numbers and velocities from all sorts of configurations between the 7's and 300's.
As others have said what really matters is shot placement, and if a person shoots the begeezes out of a lighter recoiling 7mm, then my bet is that person will by much much much more lethal than a guy who is getting punished while practicing with hard recoiling heavy .300 loads.
Of course a guy could build a heavy .300 to lighten the recoil, but that creates all sorts of other disadvantages.
For example I've killed my last three bulls from 200 to 940 yards with my 6.5 saum, not because it hits harder than my magnum..
but because it's super light and I usually take it way back there where the elk are.
