7mm vs 300 wm.

[soundwaves]

Soundwaves, if you are asking which is the best all around hunting rifle between these two it is the 300 winchester by far. You must compare realistic velocities with good quality hunting bullets when doing a comparison.

maybe by far for you. it could be more powerfull but if that was the issue every one would buy a 50 cal. !!!! for you the 300 and for me the 7. its a matter of choice. thay both ate conciderd the top 2 hunting rounds around the world with the 30-06

 

[Long Time Long Ranger]

I am telling you fact which one is the best, no opinions. The 7mm rem mag does not even belong in the discussion with the 300 magnums. The 7mm rem mag is a fine cartridge but it is not a 300 magnum and can not do the things a 300 magnum can do. In your opinion if the 7mm rem mag fits you best then have fun with it. But don't argue with fact and try to say it will do what a 300 magnum will do because it will not.

 

[Camshaft]

I am telling you fact which one is the best, no opinions. The 7mm rem mag does not even belong in the discussion with the 300 magnums. The 7mm rem mag is a fine cartridge but it is not a 300 magnum and can not do the things a 300 magnum can do. In your opinion if the 7mm rem mag fits you best then have fun with it. But don't argue with fact and try to say it will do what a 300 magnum will do because it will not.

I have to agree here. The 7mm rem magazine is a great round. But I would say it is barely even a magnum. If you want to comare a 7 to the big 300s I would say you need to start with the wsm at a minimum and preferably the stw for a fair comparison.

 

[436]

Let's say; we worked with both calibers using one of the best BC bullets in each caliber, at the same velocity and see what we have.

7mm Remington Mag
.300 Winchester Mag.

7mm Mag
Range(yd) Clicks ¼ moa
--------- ------
0 0
100 0
200 6
300 15
400 25
500 36
600 48
700 61
800 76
900 91
1000 108

Click chart generated for .284 (7MM) 180-GR Match Target VLD
Muzzle Velocity = 2850 ft/sec, BC = 0.659

.284 (7MM) 180-GR Match Target VLD, 2850 ft/sec at muzzle, 100.0 yds zeroed.

Range (yds) 0.0 100.0 200.0 300.0 400.0 500.0 600.0 700.0 800.0 900.0 1000.0
------------------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Bullet Height (in) -1.50 0.00 -3.25 -11.82 -26.24 -47.21 -75.56 -112.26 -158.13 -214.42 -282.65

Wind Drift @10.0 mph 0.00 0.48 2.00 4.67 8.48 13.54 20.00 28.01 37.56 48.83 61.99
Wind Drift @15.0 mph 0.00 0.73 3.00 7.01 12.71 20.30 30.00 42.02 56.34 73.24 92.99
Wind Drift @20.0 mph 0.00 0.97 4.00 9.35 16.95 27.07 40.00 56.02 75.12 97.65 123.99

Note: Wind is at 90° to the bullet path.

.300 Mag
Range(yd) Clicks ¼ moa
--------- ------
0 0
100 0
200 6
300 15
400 25
500 36
600 49
700 62
800 77
900 93
1000 110

Click chart generated for .308 210-GR Match Hunting VLD
Muzzle Velocity = 2850 ft/sec, BC = 0.631

.308 210-GR Match Hunting VLD, 2850 ft/sec at muzzle, 100.0 yds zeroed.

Range (yds) 0.0 100.0 200.0 300.0 400.0 500.0 600.0 700.0 800.0 900.0 1000.0
------------------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Bullet Height (in) -1.50 0.00 -3.27 -11.92 -26.49 -47.76 -76.59 -114.05 -160.97 -218.86 -289.25

Wind Drift @10.0 mph 0.00 0.51 2.10 4.90 8.88 14.21 21.04 29.50 39.59 51.56 65.55
Wind Drift @15.0 mph 0.00 0.76 3.14 7.35 13.32 21.32 31.55 44.25 59.39 77.35 98.33
Wind Drift @20.0 mph 0.00 1.01 4.19 9.79 17.77 28.43 42.07 59.01 79.18 103.13 131.11

Note: Wind is at 90° to the bullet path.


Man'…, I've got to tell you, this looks like a horse race… two very fine cartridges. I'd think both cartridges loaded too there optimum levels, well'.., there's no clear winner with any bullet weight.

436

 

[Camshaft]

Can you also post the energy levels for these charts?

 

[MontanaRifleman]

436,

The difference is what a 308 cal 210 gr bullet will do to the animal vs what a 284 cal 180 gr bullet will do. Will the animal know the difference? Maybe, maybe not... it depends on the animal and the shot. All esle being equal, the larger bullet will cause more destruction.

I think I would prefer the 308 210 on a large boar at long range. Could the 284 180 gr do the job? Probably... but It's always nice to have a margin.

 

[soundwaves]

I am telling you fact which one is the best, no opinions. The 7mm rem mag does not even belong in the discussion with the 300 magnums. The 7mm rem mag is a fine cartridge but it is not a 300 magnum and can not do the things a 300 magnum can do. In your opinion if the 7mm rem mag fits you best then have fun with it. But don't argue with fact and try to say it will do what a 300 magnum will do because it will not.

reed my first post!!!!! l never said the 7mm had more power. someone else said and l asked if it was true. so sorry that the round you like is sooo ugly

 

[436]

Sure here you go. I think all can get the idea out too 1k.

7mm Remington Mag
100 yards.... 2924 fpe
500 "........ 1886 fpe
1000 "........ 1047 fpe

.300 Winchester Mag
100 yards.... 3395 fpe
500 "........ 2146 fpe
1000 "........ 1158 fpe

checking the Taylor Index, the .300 Wm win's the number game but just by 2 or 3 points out to 500 yards; after that is really gets close.

MontanaRifleman;

Your correct as too killing of game; as for performs on paper and ballistic conversations over a beer; it's pretty much a coin flip as I read it. With said; the 7mm ain't out of the race yet. Side note: I'm not a big 7mm fan, I also lean more towards .30 calibers... But.. I've used a few 7mm's on game and they never disappointed me

Walter D.M. "Karamojo" Bell; shot many big animals with 7mm and 6.5mm he; like many others also felt those "long, heavy, small diameter bullets had something going for them. If that 7mm Remington Mag still has 7mm Mauser power factor {at hunting ranges} I'm pretty sure it can handle a large boar.


[FONT=&quot][/FONT] He shot exactly 1,011 elephants with a series of six Rigby-made 7x57mm (.275 Rigby) rifles with 173 grain military ammo.

[FONT=&quot][/FONT] He shot 300 elephants with a Mannlicher-Schoenauer 6.5x54mm carbine using the long 159 grain FMJ bullets.

Well; I wouldn't be afraid to use either, on pretty much anything in the North West…On the target range? Wow I'd have to think about that one; they both have some real advantages of there own.

436

 

[pyroducksx3]

There really is no argument that the 300 win mag using its heavier bullets will have similiar ballistics to the 7 mag and arrive with more energy. But at the same time it will have more recoil as well. I have a 7 rem mag and use the 150 gr range of bullets. I think as far as quality hunting bullets that will perform relaibly at all distances and velocities the 7 tops out at 160, the .30 bullets at around 200. Im looking for optimium recoil / bullet performance. I will shoot this combination more comfortably "which is important to me" than the heavier 200+ gr out of the 300 win mag. The seven tops out around 750-800 realistically and the 300 win mag using 200+ gr. bullets gives you a couple hundred more yards, maybe. The point is my seven is good way out there, more comfortable to shoot, comfortable to carry, and has adequete power in that range. If I plan on shooting past 800 I think there are better choices than the 300 win. At past 800 it would prefer to have a big 338 (RUM, edge, lapua) a heavier rifle (stock design would be much different than a sporter), 28-30" barrel, big optics, and a muzzlebreak. So for me I really see this as a need for more than one gun. For shooting out to my capabilities a 7 works fine. When I get better and want to increase my range past what the seven will do I will get a bigger gun. For a majority ,well actually all, of my hunting (inside 600 yards at this time) I want a gun that I can carry and shoot comfortably without a muzzlebreak. A gun that I will enjoy shooting so I will practice more and actually have fun doing it. The seven fits me. I will however not make any arguement against the fact that the 300 win mag is capable of similiar ballistics as the 7 rem mag and arriving with more energy, its true "a fact" so technically it is more capable or versitile than the 7 rem mag, there are just trade offs. I think I could be friends with 300 win mag shooters, even if they think they're better than me in the end we will both have dead animals way out there.

 

[soundwaves]

There really is no argument that the 300 win mag using its heavier bullets will have similiar ballistics to the 7 mag and arrive with more energy. But at the same time it will have more recoil as well. I have a 7 rem mag and use the 150 gr range of bullets. I think as far as quality hunting bullets that will perform relaibly at all distances and velocities the 7 tops out at 160, the .30 bullets at around 200. Im looking for optimium recoil / bullet performance. I will shoot this combination more comfortably "which is important to me" than the heavier 200+ gr out of the 300 win mag. The seven tops out around 750-800 realistically and the 300 win mag using 200+ gr. bullets gives you a couple hundred more yards, maybe. The point is my seven is good way out there, more comfortable to shoot, comfortable to carry, and has adequete power in that range. If I plan on shooting past 800 I think there are better choices than the 300 win. At past 800 it would prefer to have a big 338 (RUM, edge, lapua) a heavier rifle (stock design would be much different than a sporter), 28-30" barrel, big optics, and a muzzlebreak. So for me I really see this as a need for more than one gun. For shooting out to my capabilities a 7 works fine. When I get better and want to increase my range past what the seven will do I will get a bigger gun. For a majority ,well actually all, of my hunting (inside 600 yards at this time) I want a gun that I can carry and shoot comfortably without a muzzlebreak. A gun that I will enjoy shooting so I will practice more and actually have fun doing it. The seven fits me. I will however not make any arguement against the fact that the 300 win mag is capable of similiar ballistics as the 7 rem mag and arriving with more energy, its true "a fact" so technically it is more capable or versitile than the 7 rem mag, there are just trade offs. I think I could be friends with 300 win mag shooters, even if they think they're better than me in the end we will both have dead animals way out there.

thats the spirit

HEYL KİNG 7...HEYL KİNG 7... LONG LİVE THE KİNG

I LİKE THE PEOPLE WHO LİKE THE 7 MAG

 

[Long Time Long Ranger]

436, Your data is flawed. If you push the 7mm rem mag you can get the 2850 fps you listed with the 180 grain bullet. If you push the 300 winny to the same pressure with the 210 it gets right at 3000 fps. Input this correct data and see what the numbers show. Then input the 300 winchester with the 177 grain .638 BC quality hunting bullet at 3250 fps and see how the 300 winchester looks. Again, you are comparing apples and oranges with two completely different cartridges for which there is no comparison. Both are good cartridges for different applications. The 7mm rem is a good light rifle for deer and antelope. The 300 winchester can get you into larger animals at greater distances.

I have over twenty 7mm's of all kinds and have taken animals beyond 1000 yards with them. I learned back in the 70's when I went to large animals at long range choose a larger caliber. Small ones will kill stuff but the larger calibers do it better. The 7mm rem mag is not a long range hunting rifle for anything beyond deer size animals. If a guy wants to do such a thing he needs to get the proper rifle. Back in the 70's I was a guru on ballistics, now forty years later I am a guru on how to kill stuff best. Don't let TV shows making perfect high shoulder shots and editing out the rest form your opinion. If I could get that shot every time I doubt I would use anything over a 6.5-284. Unfortunately hunting is not always about animals in a perfect setting in a perfect world. My gun has to make the shot in any conditions at any shot angle. There is where the difference is.

Personally I see no reason to own a 7mm rem mag. I have two right now that never get shot. I have three 7mm cartridges based off the improved 280 and '06 cases that do everything the 7mm rem mag will do with less powder, noise and recoil. If I want a magnum 7mm I have six 7mm STW's and a 7mm-300 wby mag that far outdistance the little 7mm remington. I just can't find a use for my 7mm rem mags. They shoot great right with my improved stuff off the 280 case and when I want a magnum I have the STW's and weatherby. The rem mag just gets lost in no mans land.

 

[pyroducksx3]

I actually agree with most of what long time long ranger said, at least with the 06 improved cases doing everything the 7 mag can do. I think the 7 rem mag is more ideal for deer size game but still effective on elk out to 600 yards. If I was looking at going over 700 yards on elk I would probably skip .30 cal with exception to the .300 RUM or some .30 cal wildcats and go to a 338 RUM or better. I was actually looking to do a 280 AI but came across a 7 rem deal that was too good to pass up. I think the 7-300 is interesting but for me just not worth the case prep, getting new dies and so forth for maybe 150 fps. The stw will get better performance but then Im getting out of comfortable recoil and looking at a muzzle break. If I was really looking to step up in performance I would look at the 7 RUM but again this has it limitations as well, reduced barrel life, recoil, huge powder consumption and again if I want more than 800 yards Im going to a 338. In the end I think the 7 Rem Mag fits well, I wish the 7-300 or "mashburn" had been made the standard all those years ago instead of the rem mag but it wasnt. So I'll stick with great brass available with little prep, great dies, and great performance in the 7 rem mag.

 

[bigngreen]

WHAT! You guys mean the 7 mag really doesn't blow the doors of the 300 RUM, but I've carefully compared them using Bergers in the 7 mag and Partitions in the 300

 

[436]

LTLR,
You may well be right, if you look at it the way you've describe it; I understand the .300 Win Mag with a load of… oh say'.., 80gr of H1000 and a 210gr bullet should or could reach 2900 fps to 3000 fps depending on rifle barrel and other extenuating factors. On my first post you'll see where I used the words "at the same velocity" just trying to get an idea of optimum BC performance out of each bullet in a realist hunting rifle length.
So my numbers aren't "flawed" I'm just not approaching the question the same way you are.

I don't think it's arguable that your number are wrong, only that if your going to make a optimum bullet comparison for the sake of a conversation, we need too fly them at the same velocity and see if there is a credible argument as to that optimum bullet weight and BC for the calibers.

I'm sure someone could chime in and say, their using a 30 plus inch barrel on their 7mm Remington Mag, with a 180gr. and skew the numbers again.
By the way you didn't mention what barrel length you were obtaining 3250 fps out of.

I do agree in principal as to your apples and oranges analogy in the discussion... They are both in their own league, that's why their two different calibers and case designs.

As I said in my post, I like the .30 calibers…. But to have a clear cut advantage in any rifle caliber… I think 500 fps is the key.. just my .02
Take care.
436