7mm mag vs. 300 win mag

[werew]

meichele,
I dont and haven't detected a significant difference between the 7mm STW and the 7mm REM, then again i only consider a significant difference being 200-250 fps with the same wt. & dia. bullet. Me personally, if I wanted MORE velocity & a little more performance than a 7mm REM i'd go with a 7x300 before considering a 7mm STW.

RE: 7mm VS 300wm, again, "its personal preference". Mine is the 7mm Rem hands down, although I am a fan of the 300wm also.

This is based on my belief & experiences that practice brings one closer to perfection.

The 7mm REM's recoil is much easier to tolerate when shooting 25-100 rounds a day. Another factor is the degree of accuracy between the 2 calibers. I'm NOT saying the 300wm caliber isn't accurate, they definately ARE accurate! I'm moreso saying that the smaller the caliber is (to a degree), the EASIER it is to shoot tighter groups and with more consistency.

Again, this is just MY 2 cents, my opinion which is based on experience.

Another thing, and I MIGHT be wrong about this but i'm almost POSITIVE that the 300wm burns barrels faster than the 7mm REM. I've witnessed and read on several occasions that accuracy starts to suffer with the 300wm after 1,000-1,200 rounds. There are a lot of technicalities that could be debated with this statement(depends upon: barrel-type, ammo used, cleaning methods and frequency of cleanings), but on a general consensus the 300wm wears out faster.

Bullet selection is wider for the 300wm, but ask yourself, "with the .284 bullet selection available, is there a bullet to fit each task you want to fulfill?" Deer, elk, antelope, caribou and groundhogs... 7mm REM Mag fits the bill nicely.

P.S.,
I don't mean to start a "flame" with the 300wm fans. It's a great caliber, long-range-wise, accuracy-wise, energy-wise. I'll always own 1.... or 2

 

[Nighthawk]

Smaller calibers are more accurate at shorter distances because they "stabalize" quicker. I'd opt for the .300 anyway if I were shooting farther.

 

[Brent]

Smaller calibers are more accurate at shorter distances because they "stabalize" quicker.

I do not agree.

I like the 30, but I don't particularly care for the super short neck on the 300 WM, which is said to contribute to its higher rate of throat erosion.

 

[Michael Eichele]

werew,

First off, welcome aboard!

I dont dispute most of what you say. Even I mentioned in my first post on this subject that this would depend more on personal preferance than anything else. I also dont doubt the 284's ability to kill even big elk. Its just that my personal choice would be a bullet closer to 200 grains at similar velocities as the 7mm RM. But IMO I still feel the 7mm STW has a noticable performance gain over the 7mm RM. Once again, its personal preferance. The 7 STW and the 300 WBY case are nearly identical as far as case capacity, it will depend on if one or the other was improved or not. If ya really want a screamer, concider the 7mm RUM. The draw back is an even shorter life than the 7mm RM which is around 1000-1300 rounds.

Regards

 

[Nighthawk]

I have heard of more matches being won with the .300WM than with the 7mm. The .30 Wolf has a short neck as well and seems to be diong pretty good at barrel life considering its capacity, very accurate too.

[ 05-25-2004: Message edited by: Nighthawk ]

 

[dirtking358]

little twist: Im reading off of the remington web site: The 7mm remington short action ultra mag has more velocity AND energy at 500 yards with a 140 grain slug than the 300 saum with a 150 grain bullet. I know to an extent this is a numbers excercise, but if the cartrige size between the two is the same i guess id rather shoot a necked down 300 than a necked up 7mm. I am aware of cartridge selection, price and recoil. How does the wsm 7 and 300 fare in this showdown?