7mm Rem. Mag vs 300 Win. Mag

[MudRunner2005]

I too feel the 195 Berger will change things. Thus the reason I stated "with todays available mass produced bullets" I also feel I have a decent understanding of what the comparison 7mm Rem, 7-300 win and 300 Win mag. is about.

Also like I said before I do like them all. But I shoot what I do for a reason. Because I have took them to the distance side by side time and time again. I do plan to revisit the 7-300 again soon. Might even spin the barrel off my 300 win and screw a 7-300 tube on to do some more testing. I will take advantage of the extra case capacity of the 300 win case. I really don't care if it is a 7mm or 30 cal. I do care about which has less drift and drop. I feel with the bigger offerings either will do what we should be doing with a 7 or a 30 so I will go for ease of bullet placement.

But for the sake of debate, if they are so close to the same, what would happen if you necked up a 7 REM to 30 Cal? Ballistically the same as the 300 win? I think not.

But when some start to toss a 300 gr 338 into the comparison. Well I guess you just need to see what I have over and over. That would be a dust cloud coming off a rock at 1500 yards compared to fist sized chunks. Or elk just hunch and stand there for a while before dropping apposed to dropping on top their tracks.

Jeff

Jeff, you know I'm not debating on KE and pure raw power...But I am talking about on paper. I know you use what you do, for your own reasons. Remember, I'm not saying either is better, just pointing out that ballistically (on paper) pushing both bullets to the same velocities, the drops and drift should be pretty similar based on the bullets design, BC's, and bullet length.

 

[MudRunner2005]

Run the numbers that Jeff provided ...



... and let's say it takes 1500 FT-LBS (unwritten rule) to humanely kill an elk. However, your only shot at a monarch elk of a lifetime is standing broadside at 1000 yards, which one would you rather have? gun)gun)gun)

It's not a comparrison (on my end) as to which is better...But you seem so jaded by your .300WM love and 7mm hatred, to acknowledge that both bullets, ballistically proven, are not that far apart. I'm comparing bullet for bullet at equal velocities, not in KE on impact or raw power on impact...I'm talking about drop and drift.

I guess I'm trying to have a different conversation than everyone else...I'm not trying to have a junk measuring contest between calibers...Just a comparison between bullets...Just bullets...At similar velocities, regadless of what size case is pushing it...

But for arguement's sake, we'll say the .300WM is king no matter what bullet you shoot out of it. And also Savage, Tikka, Mossberg, or any other gun is better than a Remington 700. Happy now?

 

[FEENIX]

It's not a comparrison (on my end) as to which is better...But you seem so jaded by your .300WM love and 7mm hatred, to acknowledge that both bullets, ballistically proven, are not that far apart. I'm comparing bullet for bullet at equal velocities, not in KE on impact or raw power on impact...I'm talking about drop and drift.

I guess I'm trying to have a different conversation than everyone else...I'm not trying to have a junk measuring contest between calibers...Just a comparison between bullets...Just bullets...At similar velocities, regadless of what size case is pushing it...

But for arguement's sake, we'll say the .300WM is king no matter what bullet you shoot out of it. And also Savage, Tikka, Mossberg, or any other gun is better than a Remington 700. Happy now?

You're the one that is full of hatred every time it does not go your way. I never said any hatred of the 7MMs and you ASSume you're the only one that owns them or Remingtons.

Paraphrasing another member's comment "this is not always about you Bud", having said that, "grow up and stop making a fool of yourself". You seem to claim and know everything and you're not open to any criticism, constructive or otherwise.

One thing I learned early on in this site is that, there is always someone far better than I am with more experience than I am ... most of which are always willing and able to help and share their hands on experience and thus I look up to them. By the way, you're not one of them.lightbulb

Cheers!

 

[gohring3006]

Jeff, you know I'm not debating on KE and pure raw power...But I am talking about on paper. I know you use what you do, for your own reasons. Remember, I'm not saying either is better, just pointing out that ballistically (on paper) pushing both bullets to the same velocities, the drops and drift should be pretty similar based on the bullets design, BC's, and bullet length.

Stop using Google and comparing things on "paper",and actually shoot long range and you'll see the difference....

How is it you have a answer for everything and never ask a question? I think I know....Gooogle....
I see the folks that have way more experience than me and never doubt there answers to my questions. Why would you doubt the guys who actually shoot Elk at long range compared to someone who shoots small southern deer at 200 yards with magnum cartridges.

 

[Clark]

David Tubb is great at wind doping and trajectory and competed in palma matches with 2150 fps 250 gr SMK from a 308.
I am terrible at wind doping and trajectory and shoot ruminants with 3400 fps 140 gr NBT from a 7mmRM.

There is an analogy in motorcycles. Pros do best with high revving peaky engines that they are always shifting. The best lap times for rank amateur will be with a slow broad torque band engine.

In 2014 with a new rifle, I sorted out the drop chart, shot three groups and rated myself to hunt out to 500 yards:

1) 1.0" 3 shot group at 100 yards = 1.0 moa
2) 3.6" 3 shot group at 450 yards = 0.8 moa
3) 7.2" 3 shot group at 550 yards = 1.3 moa

If I fired 1,000 rounds at long range per year, I probably would move up to one of my 300 win mag rifles, but the 7mm really shoots flat out to 500.

 

[Lefty7mmstw]

I'm of the opinion that both the 7mm's and the 30's have their place in the world, and to pee in someone's coffee for liking one over the other is a bit childish, to say the least. I own three thirty cal. rifles and two 7m's, and I'll likely own all three for many years. At present the thirty cal's have a slight advantage, but the 195 may tip the scales back to neutral. We shall see if the 195 ever comes out.

 

[FEENIX]

I'm of the opinion that both the 7mm's and the 30's have their place in the world, and to pee in someone's coffee for liking one over the other is a bit childish, to say the least. I own three thirty cal. rifles and two 7m's, and I'll likely own all three for many years. At present the thirty cal's have a slight advantage, but the 195 may tip the scales back to neutral. We shall see if the 195 ever comes out.

Liking one over the other is one thing as established early on, not accepting the truth like you do and as others have presented both on paper and real world applications/results is another story.

 

[chuckhammer]

I just see the apples to oranges analogy here. A 215 gr .308 bullet is simply longer for caliber than a 180gr .284. Simple math using (gr/284) derives a .284 bullet at 198gr to compare apples to apples. Obviously Berger has not made the longer .284 available so us 7mm homers will have to wait and concede for now.

The physically accurate way to compare bullet sectional density across calibers is mass/sectional area rather than mass/caliber.

For example:
180 grains / (.284"^2) = 2231.7 grains/sq.in.
215 grains / (.308"^2) = 2266.4 grains/sq.in.

In other words, a 7mm bullet weighing 182.8 grains would have identical sectional density to a 30-cal 215 per the below calculation.

2266.4 grains/sq.in. * (.284"^2) = 182.8 grains


Regarding the topic at hand, it is both the increased case capacity (9 gr H2O) and the availability of higher-BC bullets that give the 300WM that windage advantage over 7RM. However, for us wildcatters, an improved 7-300WM shooting 180 Hybrids at 3200 fps just edges out the 300WM with a 230 Hybrid at 2900 fps for the same amount of powder. More so once the 195 Hybrid hits the streets.

That's assuming you can get a 230 Hybrid to hit 2900 fps from a 28" bbl 300WM.

 

[Clark]

I'm of the opinion that both the 7mm's and the 30's have their place in the world, and to pee in someone's coffee for liking one over the other is a bit childish, to say the least. I own three thirty cal. rifles and two 7m's, and I'll likely own all three for many years. At present the thirty cal's have a slight advantage, but the 195 may tip the scales back to neutral. We shall see if the 195 ever comes out.

In 1994 the internet was mostly knowledgeable conservative nerd engineers with manners.
The pendulum has swung as far away from that as it could.
Think of them as 2 year olds with ego issues, and it is easier to not be bothered.

 

[MudRunner2005]

The physically accurate way to compare bullet sectional density across calibers is mass/sectional area rather than mass/caliber.

For example:
180 grains / (.284"^2) = 2231.7 grains/sq.in.
215 grains / (.308"^2) = 2266.4 grains/sq.in.

In other words, a 7mm bullet weighing 182.8 grains would have identical sectional density to a 30-cal 215 per the below calculation.

2266.4 grains/sq.in. * (.284"^2) = 182.8 grains


Regarding the topic at hand, it is both the increased case capacity (9 gr H2O) and the availability of higher-BC bullets that give the 300WM that windage advantage over 7RM. However, for us wildcatters, an improved 7-300WM shooting 180 Hybrids at 3200 fps just edges out the 300WM with a 230 Hybrid at 2900 fps for the same amount of powder. More so once the 195 Hybrid hits the streets.

That's assuming you can get a 230 Hybrid to hit 2900 fps from a 28" bbl 300WM.

So that means that this whole time, when I was comparing bullet vs bullet (NOT caliber vs caliber), I was correct that they are almost identical (other than BC because of the heavier weight of the 215). That's good to know.

Thanks for the scientific comparison.

 

[chuckhammer]

So that means that this whole time, when I was comparing bullet vs bullet (NOT caliber vs caliber), I was correct that they are almost identical (other than BC because of the heavier weight of the 215). That's good to know.

Thanks for the scientific comparison.

Sure thing.

The BC formula also includes the equally important "Coefficient of Form," or "Form Factor" as it is commonly referred:

BC = M / (D^2 * FF)
where:
M = bullet mass (grains/7000)
D = bullet diameter (inches)
FF = Form Factor (per the corresponding G-model)

Stated differently, it's Sectional Density divided by Form Factor. That means caliber and mass matter just as much as "sleekness," generically speaking.

 

[FEENIX]

With all due respect, the OP asked for overall performance of the chamberings in question, not just the SD of a bullet.

SD stays the same for all bullets of the same weight in the same caliber (.280 Rem, 7MM Mag, etc), shape does not affect SD.

However, it is a very important consideration because it has a significant effect on penetration, esp. when high BC bullet is propelled accordingly and generate the required KE to humanely harvest an animal.

Having said that, that's why I went with .270 AI launching 175 Matrix over my original plan of .280 AI with 168/180.

Cheers!

 

[davkrat]

Bottom line both are more than adequate for deer out to 700 yards. You have to significantly increase the size/toughness of the animal or the range to be able to say once trounces the other.

 

[MudRunner2005]

Bottom line both are more than adequate for deer out to 700 yards. You have to significantly increase the size/toughness of the animal or the range to be able to say once trounces the other.

I think that even then, you still won't hardly notice a difference. A well-placed kill shot from either will harvest the animal. I think once you get to a certain animal size/thickness/toughness (adding yardage into the mix, as well) you need to step up to something more formidable for your game.

But to compare nearly apples-to-apples in 7mm vs .30 caliber, the 7mm RM vs .300 WM, and the 7mm STW vs .300 Ackley... Using 180's in the 7mm's and 215's in the .30 calibers, you can effectively take similar game at similar distances with either set of calibers when compared to one another, respectively.

This is just my opinion.

I own 5 .30 caliber rifles... .308 Win, .30-30 Win, .30-06 AI, .300 WM, and .300 Ackley. I am clearly not opposed to .30 caliber weapons. I also have more 7mm rifles than that, in a variety of chamberings, as well... 7mm-08, 7mmRM (multiples), and 7mm STW (multiples). And I will be adding a .280 AI sooner or later.

So, as you can see, my bias towards one or the other is only swayed by my personal preference. I like both calibers. But my allegiences lean towards the 7mm's if I had to pick one over the other. Not because I feel it is better, but because that is simply my preference. Everyone has one.