What caliber 7mm Rem Mag or 300 Win Mag

[cross]

OK Long Time Long Ranger, you've fallen off your meds and I can't let it stand alone. Some kid might run into your previous post and believe it. If you're talking extreme ranges (>1k) I'll not argue that the 7mm's probably aren't the tool for the job, although, I don't think that a 300 Winchester is either.

"The 7mm remington is not even in the same league as the 300 winchester at long range large big game."-LTLR

- To say that the 7mm Remington Magnum is not in the same league as a 300 Winchester is like saying that a Honda Accord is not even in the same league as a Toyota Camry. I would challenge that **** few shots that can be accomplished with a 300 Winchester can't be made with a 7mm Remington Magnum and it's very difficult to pick out a place on an elk where you can tell me that a 300 Winchester will kill it and a 7mm Remington won't.

"The 7mm remington does not shoot the 180 and 200 grain bullets fast enough to make it a super long range rifle on elk size game. It can do it with a perfect shot but why not get a cartridge better suited for the purpose."-LTLR

- **** few shots are perfect and yet 1000's of elk per year are killed with 7mm Remington's, not all of them are perfect shots.

"The 300 winchester can shoot quality big game bullets with BC's in the .6's at 3200 fps."-LTLR

- It takes an exceptional 300 Winchester to push a 180 gr. bullet to 3200 fps and unless you're speaking of the Cutting Edge Bullets, nobody else sells a 0.6 BC bullet that a 300 Winchester is even going to get close to 3200 fps.

"That is why for long range hunting the 264, 30 and 338 calibers have an edge on the other calibers. Good quality premium hunting bullets with high BC's give these calibers an edge."-LTLR

- You purposely skipped over the 7mm, which has plenty of the high BC bullets in its caliber to praise both sides of it. When it comes to the 30's, the Cutting Edge bullets do seem to have something to offer, but 30 caliber in general doesn't offer much, if any advantage when it comes to ballistic coefficients. I won't argue that the 338's have high BCs. 338's are beasts. Very few people can withstand multiple shots with a big 30 without a muzzlebreak and even fewer can withstand many of the big 338's without a muzzlebreak. Muzzlebreaks bring their own troubles. Some kick up dirt and most of them make your ears ring for hours. Big 7's will kill elk at long ranges (<1k) without a muzzlebreak.

Cross

 

[Long Time Long Ranger]

The 300 winchester will shoot a 177 grain GS bullet with a .638 BC 3200 fps. I have two that will in a 26" barrel. A 7mm remington can not compete with that with a premium big game bullet that I am aware of. The 300 winchester has the velocity at long range to drive this bullet through an elk and kill it at angles the 7mm may not because there are no high bc premium hunting bullets available for the 7mm remington that it can drive fast enough to do so. The 168 berger and 162 amax are about the best thing ballistically in 7mm remington for it's kill range and they do not get near the 300 winchester with the 177 GS bullet. Neither are designed to drive through bone and tough muscle of a large bull elk at angle. Fragmenting bullets do not do this. The 300 winchester with available bullets is in a league beyond the 7mm remington when it comes to long range elk hunting. It will kill elk with shots the 7mm remington can't.

1000's of elk are killed with the 7mm remington each year. Unfortunately bears eat many of them because they are lost to the hunter. The 7mm remington is not a good performer on elk at long range when you do not have a good broadside shot and a good shooter capable of a high shoulder shot. Double lung shots are even risky with the 7mm remington at long range because the bullets that get you there will either splatter on a rib or pencil hole through without enough velocity for expansion and the elk runs for miles. At average distances most hunters take elk you can use a good quality premium hunting bullet and make a good elk rifle.

I have over twenty 7mm rifles in many cartridges and I want to know where these super long range premium hunting bullets are in 7mm. I need them. Like I said for caribou, deer and antelope I use the bergers and amax. But for long range elk I have none that I can depend on that will not fragment. bottom line the 7mm remington is not a good choice for long range elk. Like I said it will kill one under the right circumstances but the odds are not good. I hope to goodness kids and everyone else is reading this and understands clearly the 7mm remington is not a good choice for long range elk. If you plan to do so please get an elk rifle or shoot your 7mm remington within a fair range for this cartridge using premium quality hunting bullets.

I think this will answer most of your quoting me.

Now for the ones that think this thread is silly or funny.

I live in the best trophy elk unit in Wyoming. I have lived in several western states and hunted and guided for elk for nearly 40 years seeing 100's shot. As residents we get to draw this tag on average about 3-4 times in twenty years. It makes me mad as he!! to see all these nonresidents and inexperienced resident hunters bringing their 7mm remingtons out here with their 168 Berger bullets thinking they can kill an elk as far as they can see it because they saw it on TV and other inexperienced people tell them it is great on forums. On many occasions these people have got into this premium area and killed several bulls with this set up and may or may not have found one to carry home with them. Through the years I have known of many numbers of elk wounded and lost to the 7mm trying to go long range on elk where it does not belong. I tried to say this nicely in my previous post. It is not silly or funny to me to see year after year all these bulls lost to hunters who are not prepared with the proper equipment or knowledge to shoot elk. Elk are lost to all calibers but the problem is exponential with the smaller calibers. Maybe we could draw tags with much greater regularity if we didn't have so much wounding loss with people trying to shoot elk long range without the proper equipment.

It is just not funny to me losing these big bulls and yes there is quite a difference when shooting elk with a large caliber rifle. If you can't stand the recoil then get the proper bullet and shoot your 7mm remington within the ranges where those bullets are effective and you can place the bullet dead on where it should go. Like I said before large bull elk can go a long way with a marginal hit with a small caliber rifle. Large caliber heavy bullets can give you a much better chance of retrieving your elk. Whether it is a marginal hit or having to drive it through tough muscle and bone on an angle the 7mm remington can not handle long range.

I have killed elk with the 7mm's and about every other caliber. I have many friends and guided many that kill elk every year with lesser cartridges than the 7mm remington. Magnum rifles are not even necessary to kill elk effectively. I can take a 308 winchester and kill elk effectively. All this assumes the proper bullet is used and the shots kept within the proper distances and angles these rifles are capable. That is my point and again the 7mm remington is not a long range elk rifle when there are to many good ones available. I know it is popular and sponsors on here use it and tv shows are made using it. With the right situation it will kill an elk as dead as anything at long range. But in the process many elk will also be lost to it and die never being found that would have been retrieved with a better choice for long range elk.

I am not on here to make people mad and I respect everyones opinion. But I am going to state what I have learned through many years of long range elk hunting to help anyone coming into the sport make the proper choice for the animals they plan to hunt long range.

 

[Long Time Long Ranger]

I am not into getting into an argument on the internet. I said what I did for a reason concerning my experiences with the 7mm remington. The problem I have found is there is a high wounding loss percentage because to many people are trying to make the cartridge something it is not. The problem is not that it isn't a good cartridge because it is a good cartridge within what it is designed to do. Just do not force it into situations it is not good at.

 

[MontanaRifleman]

LTLR, just to clarify,it's statements like this in this debate that I think are silly, and by silly, I don't mean funny, I mean babble.

There is nothing a 300 win mag can kill that a 7mm rem mag cant. It just has a lot more recoil.

To suggest that the 7 RM is the equivilent or better to the 300 WM is IMO, ridiculous.

Now I have hunted many years with the 7mm and it was a great gun... killed everything I shot with one shot. But I only ever shot one elk with it. A very nice, 6x6 large bodied bull. 15 yds with a 160 NP... the bull leaped up, spun around, took a leap downhill and piled up. So that experience doesn't even really relate to LR.

Having said that, I know the difference between a large bull elk and a deer and as long as I have a 300 Mag (WM, WSM, RUM, etc), I will always pick that over a 7 for elk hunting at any range.

I am not saying that a 7 RM is not capable of hunting elk with. I am saying the 300 mags are more capable and greatly increase the odds of a successful outcome. You are not the only guide that I have heard to say that they've seen a number of bulls shot with a 7RM run off. If the 7 was the only rifle I had to hunt a bull elk with, I have and I would use it, but I would be picky about my shot and use a bullet I know would give me good reliable expansion and penetration and not push it beyond it's effective range.

We use the term max effective range a lot and generally refer to it as the min expansion velocity of a particular bullet. IMO, we should also keep in mind the the size of the bullet, it's terminal characteristics and the size and toughness of the animal. We can probably get a 115 gr 6mm Berger 1000 yds down range at over 1800 fps, but that doesn't mean we should shoot a bull elk with it at that range.

Most rifle and bullet combos under the the medium 338's are hard pressed to reach 1000 yds @ 1800 fps, including the 7 RM and 300 WM or WSM's. In some particular rifles, loads and bullets 1K can be achieved @ 1800 fps plus, but I certainly would be very picky about taking a shot @ that range with one of those chamberings. Conditions would have to be perfect.

 

[MontanaRifleman]

- You purposely skipped over the 7mm, which has plenty of the high BC bullets in its caliber to praise both sides of it. When it comes to the 30's, the Cutting Edge bullets do seem to have something to offer, but 30 caliber in general doesn't offer much, if any advantage when it comes to ballistic coefficients. I won't argue that the 338's have high BCs. 338's are beasts. Very few people can withstand multiple shots with a big 30 without a muzzlebreak and even fewer can withstand many of the big 338's without a muzzlebreak. Muzzlebreaks bring their own troubles. Some kick up dirt and most of them make your ears ring for hours. Big 7's will kill elk at long ranges (<1k) without a muzzlebreak.

Cross

Cross, the 7RM is what is, nothing more, nothing less, and it is not a 300 mag. It just dumbfounds me that so many people think the 7mm is some kind of magic pill.

Let's examine some facts of life.

First fact... the 308 is a larger cal than the 284 which means it make a bigger hole and causes more destruction.

Second fact... the 300 mags have more case capacity the the 7 RM and push heavier bullets at greater velocities.

Third fact... there are not plenty of high BC bullets readily available in the 7mm. There are a few. The Bergers and JLK's which are the same thing, and the A-max... all highly frangible bullets with a large spectrum of terminal results. there are also the wildcats that are usually hard to come by, but there are wildcat 30's also. The GS 177 and CE 180's are good BC bullets with good velocity potential in the 308 cal. So if you want to pick for the 7, you can also pick for the 30.

My 300 WSM will out distance any 7 RM with 2" less barrel.

On muzzle brakes and recoil..., I shoot a 300 RUM without a muzzle brake and I can shoot it all day long on the bench using a slip-on recoil pad. The slip-on can be removed if desired for hunting and you will never notice it. Recoil and muzzle breaks are no argument.

I'm not a 7RM hater. As I've stated several times in this thread, I've done a lot of hunting with the 7 and for many years it was my go to rifle and it's a great cartridge. But it is what it is and nothing more... and it is not a 300 Mag.

 

[cross]

I still call B.S.!

I can't tell the difference between elk shot with a 338 Win and a 7mm Rem, much less a 300 Winchester. I can't imagine that the first time an elk gets away from my 7mm, I'm going to move to a 300 Winchester. Nay man! Nay! If a 7 Rem won't do then it will be replaced with a big 338 (Ultra or Edge).

The 300 Win is a bigger, more powerful rifle, but the difference is much more marginal that you're trying to sell. If the 177 GS is required to make the 300 Win into this Super-rifle then hardly anyone else is getting the majority of the good out of their 300's are they? I know of no one who uses them except yourself. Most people are limping along with their 180 Accubonds or some sort of cup and cores with lower BCs.

Nope. I'm not buying. Elk shot with a 300 Win just hump up, walk 20 yards, fall over and die just like they do with 7mm Rems and 338 Winchesters. When shot in the chest, elk can't tell the difference.

 

[Jumpalot]

+1
I'm selling my 300 WM for all the reasons you stated. I just had a 7 mag built and if I feel that I need more power, then I'll grab my Edge. Of course, If I remember correctly, LTLR thinks that an Edge is marginal for a 1000 yd. elk rifle and that we should all step up to a BIG 338. If Elk are walking off after being shot with a 7 Mag, then the shooter either made a bad shot or used the wrong bullet for the job.

I still call B.S.!

I can't tell the difference between elk shot with a 338 Win and a 7mm Rem, much less a 300 Winchester. I can't imagine that the first time an elk gets away from my 7mm, I'm going to move to a 300 Winchester. Nay man! Nay! If a 7 Rem won't do then it will be replaced with a big 338 (Ultra or Edge).

The 300 Win is a bigger, more powerful rifle, but the difference is much more marginal that you're trying to sell. If the 177 GS is required to make the 300 Win into this Super-rifle then hardly anyone else is getting the majority of the good out of their 300's are they? I know of no one who uses them except yourself. Most people are limping along with their 180 Accubonds or some sort of cup and cores with lower BCs.

Nope. I'm not buying. Elk shot with a 300 Win just hump up, walk 20 yards, fall over and die just like they do with 7mm Rems and 338 Winchesters. When shot in the chest, elk can't tell the difference.

 

[Long Time Long Ranger]

I never said a 338 edge is marginal for 1000 yard elk. It is a very good choice. I knew it would be a good one to beat my 340 wby when I first got the prints for it from remington in 1998 and immediately started doing the 338-300 RUM. If you are splitting hairs there are better ones like the big 338's if a guy is going to spend a lot of money to build one. It will give you better odds at hitting the elk long range because the bullet will stay in the kill zone for a longer distance. But a 300 grain bullet out of an edge will kill elk further than a guy could hit one. Anywhere in the torso and the elk is one sick puppy and will walk a short distance and die or be there for a finishing shot after stalking closer. With a smaller caliber he can go for miles.

Everyone including me and particularly Len value all opinions you want to share on this public website. But do not attack me personally.

I shared my opinions from many years experiences with all the calibers shooting elk. I started out shooting elk at long range with the 7mm-300 wby in the 70's. It is 200+ fps faster than a 7mm remington. It can drive the heavy 7mm bullets fast enough to get out there pretty good. I found out the 7mm caliber in general is not good for long range elk because the elk must be positioned properly in the open and the shot must be perfect. A high BC better constructed larger caliber bullet eliminates quite a bit of wounding loss. Fact, no BS to it. Let people read your opinion of the cartridges and not your opinion of me. Then let others make their decision.

 

[Jumpalot]

My point was if you plan on shooting much over 1000 yards you need to look at a big 338.

I guess I misunderstood this statement. If you think I'm attacking you personally, it wasn't meant to be that way. I just think that you are making some very bold statements.

1000's of elk are killed with the 7mm remington each year. Unfortunately bears eat many of them because they are lost to the hunter.

I'm not sure I buy that bears eat more elk shot with the 7 mag than any other cartridge.
I agree that you should not try to make a cartridge do something beyond its capabilities.
I also agree with cross that there just isn't that much of a difference between the 7 mag and the 300 mag. I've shot plenty of elk with my 300 mag out to 625 yds. I think that's about as far as I'd want to shoot one with a 7 mag or 300 mag. That's why I built an Edge. I didn't think that changing to a 177 GS bullet would make enough of a difference to make me consider shooting an elk at 1000 yds.
Basically it boils down to using the right tools to do the job. And then it's up to the hunter to to make a good decision about taking the shot and then making the shot.

 

[cornstalker]

Maybe when y'all figure this out you can explain to me why I dropped an elk DRT with a .284 Winchester and a 145 Speer Grand Slam at 425 yards, yet on the same trip watched an elk get hammered through the shoulders with a .340 Weatherby Mag at 250 ish yards, (sorry, don't know what the bullet weight was but it was a factory load), that got up and nearly ran off a cliff. It got dropped on the run 50 yards from the cliff edge by a 7mm RM.


Autopsy revealed that the shot from the .340 should have been it.

I still haven't been able to wrap my head around all that....

It makes me wonder if elk have a different understanding of terminal ballistics.

 

[cross]

Long Time Long Ranger,

I too should not have made the statement about you being off your meds, or any other statements that may have been directed at you instead of your statements. I apologize if I stepped over the line. It's never polite to speak of politics or religion. I fear that elk hunting might conjure up similar feelings.

 

[Long Time Long Ranger]

Cornstalker, I to have seen some strange things happen. One or even a few experiences are not enough to draw a statistical opinion. I have only seen a few hundred elk killed which is certainly not enough for a scientific decision but from what I have seen I gave my opinion. I can assure you the 340 wby over several instances is way more elk rifle than the other two all things being equal. Like I said any legal firearm will kill elk with the proper bullets and within the cartridge limits.

Jumpalot I do not feel like you were attacking me. That first quote in the overall context is explaining what I was saying in another thread and got quite a few questions on. So that whole thread I put in there explains why I use the big 338's I do. In no way am I saying the others are not good. I was just explaining why I use the lighter bullets in the mid size 338's because they are better for me at the ranges I shoot those cartridges. If I go over 1000 yards I switch to a big 338 that gives me better odds at a long range hit because I am in the kill zone for nearly 25% longer as the bullet drops through it. In my arsenal it just leaves no place for the 338-300 RUM with 300 grain bullets. If I wanted to I could kill an elk as far as anybody with my 338-300's. I just play the better odds because I have them in the rack. I hunt hard and when I get my chance I make sure everything is in my favor I can get.

As far as the bear quote I didn't say more animals were lost to the 7mm rem mag than anything else. I said many of them are lost because to many people are trying to stretch the 7mm rem mag beyond it's capabilities and losing way to much game hurting us all as long range hunters.

Now for the skinny on my reason for saying all the things I did.

With all of the media hype of the 7mm rem mag shooting 168 bergers the past few years there are way to many people out there now slinging bullets long range thinking they have gods greatest gift to the world and they do not. They are wounding and losing quite a large number of elk which hurts us all. I have seen this more and more every year and can name several circumstances this year alone where guys in the elk unit I live in lost several bulls shooting this set up. There is a high wounding loss percentage trying to kill elk long range with a 7mm rem mag. Particularly with high fragmenting bullets like the berger and amax.

In the hands of a top shot that knows what he is doing it can be done if he is willing to wait for the right opportunity and is a top shot that can make the high shoulder shot every time. For over 40 years I have found that hunters talk is much better than their aim and many animals are lost to poor shooting. This is the problem with the fine 7mm remington cartridge. Not the cartridge but the idea that has been and continues to be portrayed that it is a top long range elk rifle which it definitely is not. People watching media need to understand why things are portrayed a particular way in that media and it has to do with what brings it to all of us. That is advertising dollars.

I can make a video and TV show to make people believe whatever I want about any cartridge or bow because I am an exceptional shot with both and could make people swear the 308 winchester is the world beater of all time for long range elk. As accurate as my 308 winchesters are I could whack elk after elk dead right there at 800 yards if I wanted because I can. And prove to everyone in any media it is the best. I do not believe it is the best and would not do that. I am trying hard to get the average guy from buying a 7mm rem mag for long range elk hunting because it is not a good choice unless you are very experienced and know exactly what you are doing and willing to wait for the perfect shot. Every elk hunter I know want the best to bring an elk out of the woods when they see it. That means close shots in timber at bad angles to long range shots in any position. The 7mm rem mag while a very good elk rifle within it's capability is limited in some critical circumstances an average hunter may see on an avergae elk hunt. I do not like to be limited as hard as it is to get a shot at a nice bull.

 

[Jumpalot]

LTLR,
I hear what you are saying about media (TV shows) showing long range shots and talking about how easy it is. It makes the average Joe think that he can buy a rifle and just go out make long shots. Heck, 7-8 years ago, I thought the same thing. Boy, was I ever wrong. I found out that I needed to spend a lot of time behind the trigger and practice.
I believe that even more dangerous is the whole "Ultra Mag" craze. Everytime I walk into a gun shop, I see someone looking at an "Ultra Mag" and saying "Man, now I can go out and shoot deer and elk at 800 yds." "This gun will really reach out and touch something." Later, I'll see them at the range closing their eyes, yanking the trigger and barely able to hit a paper plate.
I love my 300 Win. Mag., and I've killed a lot of animals with it. But, I don't think it will do anything that a 7 mag can't do for what I will use them for. If it's big and far I'll be shooting the Edge.
Going back to what the OP originally asked for, a 1200 yd. deer rifle, I wouldn't use my 7 mag or 300 mag. I'd go straight to my Edge.

 

[NZ Longranger]

Man, these caliber debates! They just seem to be the topic that gets people really heated up!
I'm sitting here on a wet day working on the next issue and these emails keep popping up from LRH.com telling me there's new posts on this thread, and I can't help but get distracted and have to go and have a look at them!

LTLR, you have made some pretty definitive statements claiming the 6.5 and 30 amongst others are far better than the 7mm's at long range for big game. Others have come back and said that there's not that much difference between them and you're over stating the case. You base your argument on the 300WM over the 7mm RM on the 30 cal 177 GS and the 180 CE bullets, over the 7mm 170 CE. You state the BC of the 177 GS as .638, but if you look at their website its only that at 3300 fps, and drops to .589, and yet you're starting them even slower at 3200 fps. Therefore your average BC isn't going to be anywhere near .638, presuming that's an accurate BC from GS in the first place. Now I do believe Dan's average BC's on his CE's, and he rates his 180gn 30 cal at .600, and his 170gn 7mm at .620 average. Use realistic MV numbers for the 7mmRM and 300WM for these two and run the ballistics and you'll come up with sod all of a difference. The 30 cal has 24 thousands of an inch in diameter and 10 grains of bullet weight on its side, but I don't think you can claim that makes one way better than the other – that's just not credible!
As to the 6.5 example, you have the 130gn Scirocco at a BC of .571 which you've said previously makes the 264WM far better than the 7mmRM, and say there are no premium high BC bullets available for the 7mm. Firstly the BC of the 6.5 Scirocco doesn't come out that high for me, and I have yet to find one of our fast 6.5's that will shoot them accurately. We have had more success getting the 150gn 7mm to shoot any day than the 6.5mm, but maybe we've just been unlucky? CE make 130, 160 and 170 grains in 7mm, with a higher BC's than the 130gn Scirocco yet they don't seem to rate a mention this time unlike in the 30 cal example? The CE bullets and the tangental ogives like the Nosler AB's and Barnes TTSX's are far easier to get to shoot in most rifles than the likes of the Sciroccos in our experience, and in all these the 7mm's have better BC's than the 6.5's
You state poor bullet performance (mainly over expansion) is what's letting the 7mmRM down at 1000 yards plus, but I'm afraid I would have to disagree. In my experience of shooting many big game animals at long range, beyond 1000 yards its poor placement that lets you down, and secondly under expansion from too hard of a bullet. I have yet to see the bullet of choice in 7mm, something like a 180 Berger or 175 SMK, over expand at 1000 yards plus even on the shoulder bone of a big Red stag which is similar in size to an Elk. As for flattening on a rib bone at this range – that I just struggle to believe.

At closer ranges it's a different story – bullet performance becomes more important, and there the 7mm will beat the 6.5 for the same reasons you say the 30 cal beats the 7mm. But at the ranges talked about here, 1000 yards plus (1200 was the original question) where I believe bullet placement is more important, the higher BC verses velocity potential puts the 7mm's right up there if not slightly ahead of the 30 and 6.5's. This is due to the better chance of hitting where you want to, as Bryan Litz says. Personally I don't believe either the 7mmRM or 300WM should be used on Red stag/Elk sized game at 1200 yards – that is where the 338's come into their own. We limit these smaller calibers to 800 yards or thereabouts on the big stuff.
You have now explained the problem with hunters getting unrealistic expectations from watching the TV shows and running out and trying to shoot beyond their calibers capabilities, which I fully understand is very frustrating and damaging to our sport. But the real culprit here isn't the caliber, it's the fact they are shooting beyond their capabilities due to the TV show hype and this would happen no matter the caliber. These sort of "new to the sport" inexperienced hunters may be proportionally using more 7mm's due to the TV show, but the caliber isn't the problem, its their inexperience and false beliefs in what they and their equipment is capable of causing them to make poor hits in the first place I would say is the problem.
When you use what seems to be selectively chosen examples to make forcefully put statements to back up your opinion, you are likely to get emotional responses back in my experience!
Greg