7mm Rem Mag vs .308 Win vs .300 Win Mag


PDA






LkWinnipesaukee
October 3, 2006, 04:58 PM
What are the differences in ballistics and costs between the 3?

I'm looking at Remington 700's, want it to be chambered in one of the three. I plan to do some long range (as far as I can) plinking, but eventually modify the gun and get into competition.

--Confused--


Thanks,
Lkwinni

If you enjoyed reading about "7mm Rem Mag vs .308 Win vs .300 Win Mag" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
ArmedBear
October 3, 2006, 05:38 PM
.308 or .30-06 would be good choices.

Unless you're hunting BIG game long-range, all you get from a Magnum is a sore shoulder and an empty wallet.

.308 will get you a short action, which is nice if you want a small, light gun, but otherwise doesn't matter, and it's readily available for cheap. .30-06 allows more flexibility if you want to cook up some handloads, since it has a bigger case, and it's also available for cheap. "Cheap", though, is relative to .300 or 7mm magnums.

For plinking, a .223 is probably a better choice than all of the above. Low recoil, low price, ready availability of match ammo in various bullet weights, as well as surplus and reman practice ammo. Shoots flat enough, and if you don't need the energy of a big bore round, it will hit targets many hundreds of yards away with no trouble.

Run some numbers: http://www.remington.com/products/ammunition/ballistics/

See this: http://www.chuckhawks.com/rifle_trajectory_table.htm

You'll see that the .223 doesn't shoot quite as flat as a .30-06, but it's not far off. For long-distance shooting, you'll be doing something to compensate for the drop anyway, whether it's 5" or 8" at 300 yards. Either you'll have a reticle to do it, or you'll turn the scope knob a certain number of clicks.

You CAN shoot 300 yards with a good .22LR, no problem, if you know the bullet drop. Good .22LR means $1000 plus the scope, though. IMO .223 is a decent compromise between the low price of a .22 and the long, flat trajectory of an expensive centerfire.

Just some food for thought.

I have a .30-06, and I'm thinking about getting a .223 boltie for practice.

On the other hand, a .22LR barrel outlasts any of the above, by a LOT.:) Low velocity has its advantages.

Rem700SD
October 3, 2006, 06:06 PM
Do you plan to hunt with it? How many rounds do you intend to put through it? Do you you reload?
.308 ammo is the easiest to acquire, w/ the most variety of factory loads, followed by .300, with 7mm coming in last. The 7mm will have the flattest trajectory of the three, with the .308 having a rainbow trajectory by comparison. The 7mm and the .300 have the same parent case, and the recoil will be "significant".
As price, take a look at some internet ammo websites for perspective. I just bought a case(500) of .308 match for about $400 shipped. The same case for a .300 would cost around $550. I'm not sure there is a factory "match" load for the 7mm. If you get into reloading, your cost per round goes down, and your load offerings improve. However, the magnum calibers can be reloaded less often due to more case wear(5 loads or so for .300 max))
Think carefully on what you want to do with this gun. Look up the regulations for the competitions you would like to get into.
Assuming that the vast majority of your shooting will be from a bench at less than 400M, I'd get the heaviest model of .308 I could(reduces recoil), and I would seriously consider a .223.

LkWinnipesaukee
October 3, 2006, 06:12 PM
I've been saving some money for an AR15 in 5.56/223, and a .22LR as well.:) This will be my long range wooden-stocked baby:D

Zak Smith
October 3, 2006, 06:15 PM
For your first long-range (500-1000 yard) rifle, buy a servicable 308 WIN and an appropriate scope.

Rem700SD
October 3, 2006, 06:20 PM
Exactly what ranges are we talking about? If you want serious plinkage beyond 1000m, then think .338 Lapua. You'll have to reload, but take a look at the Armalite AR-30 in .338. It'll run you twice as much as a 700P, plus extra for your first batch of ammo, but after that it's all the same. People I know swear by them, and the recoil is light(it has a serious muzzle break)

Past 500 yards the 308 runs out of oomph. You can still hear the steel plates gong, but it just pokes holes in 2L soda bottles(filled w/ water). The .300 still blows them apart.

Zak Smith
October 3, 2006, 06:32 PM
308 is just fine for long-range "plinking" and target shooting, yes, to 1000.

A magnum as a first long-range rifle is a good way to develop a flinch, and never shoot it enough due to cost and recoil to get good.

For killing things I agree a 300 or 338LM is preferrable, but by the time most have the skill to make 90% first-round hits at 1000, they already know the answer to the caliber question.

Jim Watson
October 3, 2006, 06:35 PM
Agree with Zak.

A heavy .308 is a fine target rifle. No doubt you will want to put a scope on it. So look up F-Class shooting; the range depends on what is available up to 1000 yards, scope sight and bipod support allowed.

MTMilitiaman
October 3, 2006, 07:17 PM
I agree that if this is to be your first centerfire rifle, a magnum is a good way to take to fun out of it for you. Some beginners can step right in to the magnums, but most are probably better advised to take it slow. I would recommend the .308 if you haven't shot anything larger. Once you get accustomed to the .308, you can dabble in the exciting world of magnums and decide if you want to get a big brother for your .308. For deer, and even elk at moderate range, the .308 is all you need, and it is cheaper to feed and easier to find match ammo and components for.

My personal favorite is the 7mm Rem Mag. It has recoil comparible to a .30-06 in a similar weight rifle--maybe a little sharper, but if you can handle the 06, the 7mm should be no problem for you. I find it to be noticeably less than the .300 for some reason. I can shoot 50 rounds through my M700BDL in an afternoon and be a little sore, but nothing that makes me flinch. My bro behind his .300 Win will be flinching by 40 rounds, and he is actually the more recoil tolerant of us. The 7mm has excellent match bullets from Sierra and Berger which blow most of the .30 cal BCs out of the water, and it can push these bullets at respectible velocities. Even in hunting bullets, the 7mm has some very sleek choices, the 160 gr Accubonds I am using, for example. In short, I find the 7mm Rem Mag to be an excellent all around hunting cartridge with a lot of potential in the long range competition scene as well. It is versitile, flat shooting, has reasonable recoil, and with the effeciency of its projectiles, offers downrange energy rivaling many of the .300 Win loads.

The .300 Win is a good cartridge. It has an awesome selection of projectiles to suit just about any application. It too is pretty flat and can pack a wallop way out there. Unfortunately, I find this wallop applies noticeably more to the shooter than the 7mm, and personally don't think the advantage in killing power is worth it at any range. IMO, if you want something appreciably more potent than the 7mm Rem, you'll be better advised to skip the .300s and go straight to the .338 bore.

vmfrantz
October 3, 2006, 07:37 PM
I'd look at the 308 first. If you are serious about shooting competiton, you will shoot a lot of practice. I never had a magnum but some people say the 7mm mag starts to loose moa around 2500 or 3000 rounds. Maybe some one else with more experince with the magnums could help on that. The same person told me that the 308 barrle would last 8000 to 10000 rounds. Some one else can correct me though. It is only what I heard. Something for you to look into.

rangerruck
October 4, 2006, 04:39 AM
I just cant justify the up jump cost in ammo, while losing bbl life, for the couple hundred fps increase to go to 7 mag or 300 mag, stay with the 308.

swingcatt
October 4, 2006, 09:29 AM
Another vote for the .308. Unless you are looking to achieve the extra energy that one of the larger cartridges will give, the extra cost and recoil just isn't worth it. Holes in creatures, bigger is better, and ultimately more humane - holes in paper, stay as low as you can, and you can stay on the range longer and still squeeze the wife when you get home. SC

04SilverSCFX4
October 4, 2006, 04:49 PM
Just to get some flames goin'...

308 makes a great purse gun

7mag if youre a bit sensitive

300 win mag if you like to let em hang

All joking aside, they will all terminate most North American game so you can justify any of them.

bigcim
October 10, 2006, 11:12 PM
i have a 7 mag and love it, it stays very flat and if you relaod you can make it do a lot of things

MCgunner
October 10, 2006, 11:38 PM
I have a 7 mag and a .308 and the big 7 is a friggin' cannon. I've developed both rifles to sub 1moa, more'n good enough for hunting. The 7 is flatter shooting not only because of the higher velocities, but better BCs in 7mm bullets. 7mm and 6.5mm shoot great bullet BCs which means higher retained velocity at any given range and flatter shooting by a good margin. I've never owned a 300, but it has to be pretty close to the exterior ballistics of the 7, though I still like the BCs of 7mm bullets better. These magnums mean less time in flight which, along with better BCs means less wind drift as well as drop. That's important in competition.

For long range shooting, either get the 300 or the 7 is my suggestion. Both are super accurate in Remington rifles. I don't use my 7 much anymore, mostly deer hunt and I absolutely LOVE my Remington M7 in .308. One thing about .308, it is an inherently accurate caliber. Even the M7's soda straw barrel is capable of 1 MOA with it at least for the first three shots. It is a fantastic short action caliber and I've fallen in love with both the cartridge as a hunting cartridge to hunting ranges and the little light, handy delivery system and mine's a stainless model, quite rugged little rifle. But, if you're primarily interested in long range targets, the 7 or the 300 are flatter shooting rifles. The 300 does have quite a reputation for accuracy, too, and is quite popular in long range rifle matches.

I don't think you can go wrong with any of these calibers for accuracy, actually.

BTW, you ask about costs? I assume you mean ammo? If you're going to be even half way serious about long range competition, get into reloading. You likely won't win with factory ammo if you plan on doing any high level competition. Successful shooters fire carefully hand crafted match grade ammo.

You didn't mention hunting at all, but I'll just say here, the big 7 is one heck of a powerful round and the destruction it does on a poor little Texas deer has to be seen to be believed. With a good bullet like a 150 Sierra game king, it's awesome what all that energy does to a thorax. The 300 has even more energy. You can take anything that walks this continent with those big cannons and the right bullet. Seems WAY overkill on deer. They carry a lot of energy WAY out there.

If you are recoil sensative, consider the 7 mag. It has little more recoil than a .30-06 and has much better ballistics out at long range. The .300 will put a good whop on your shoulder by comparison.

I like that big cannon on paper, but my rifle is heavy and long and the cartridge is overly powerful for most of my needs. As a hunting tool, the little M7 in .308 is perfect for MY needs.

If you enjoyed reading about "7mm Rem Mag vs .308 Win vs .300 Win Mag" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!