1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Remington 700 in .300 WinMag?

Discussion in 'Rifle Country' started by Marko Kloos, Mar 27, 2003.

  1. Marko Kloos

    Marko Kloos Moderator Emeritus

    I looked at a Remington 700 in .300 Winchester Magnum at the store today. This one has black synthetic furniture, a skinny lightweight barrel, and a Bushnell 3-9x40 scope on top of it.

    I like the idea of adding a long-range boomer to the battery, but it seems like that light rifle in that particular caliber would punch your fillings loose.

    What does the .300 WinMag offer over the .308 to offset the higher ammo cost and the lack of surplus ammo?

    Does anyone have that particular model and want to comment on accuracy and recoil?
  2. TangSafetyM77

    TangSafetyM77 Well-Known Member

    I bought a Remington 700 stainless in the black synthetic stock 2 years ago for an Alaskan caribou hunt. The barrel on mine seems pretty beefy, but its a sporter barrel, not a heavy barrel. Before I bought this rifle, a .270 was the biggest boomer I had. I had to shoot this thing for a year to get used to the recoil. After getting scoped a couple of times, I finally acclimated myself to the recoil.
    I tweaked the trigger down to about 2.5 lbs. Just adjusted the factory trigger, and it is very crisp. This is a sub-moa rifle when I don't flinch. I still don't shoot more than about 6 rounds in a a single sitting from the bench. I took 2 caribou with the rifle, one around 200 yards, and the other at a hair over 300.
    I can't tell you much about ammo cost compared to the 308, but 300 WM is expensive. I don't reload yet, so I tried all kinds of premium ammo. Luckliy, plain ole Remington green box 180 grn core-lokts is what this rifle loves. It's only $18/box rather than $30-35 for the premium fodder. The bullets performed well for me on the 'bous in Alaska.
  3. dakotasin

    dakotasin Well-Known Member

    i don't think the recoil wouldn't be anything you couldn't get used to.

    if you take the time to hone your skills w/ the 300 win mag, it offers a lot of extra whoop-hiney over the 308 at distance. the problem is, of course, learning to harness all that.

    my first magnum (7 mm rem mag) used to intimidate me. once i got over the mental block, it seemed as though i entered a whole new world as far as shooting went. the 7 mm taught me tons in the way of handling recoil...

    get it, enjoy it, and be not afraid of recoil! :D
  4. redneck2

    redneck2 Well-Known Member

    I have a little experience...

    I have a 7 Mag Sendero with a heavy barrel. It also has a scope and bi-pod, so they add weight.

    Also had a roomie with a Ruger M77 7 Mag. Actually had less recoil than I expected. I dunno if I'd shoot 20 in a row all the time, but I could if I really had to. I'm not a big guy at all.

    If you get the 7 Mag, I'd think about adding a Decelerator pad. Man, if you haven't used one they make a WORLD of difference.

    The performance difference of a 7 vs. 308 should be noticeable at all ranges, but at 300-400 yards it should be significantly better
  5. Soap

    Soap Well-Known Member

    Recoil out of a standard weight .300WM isn't bad at all if you follow the HCWDITOT method of recoil control ;)
  6. cratz2

    cratz2 Well-Known Member

    There are many reasons to have a 300 Win Mag over a 308 but there's also plenty of reasons to stick with the 308, esp in a lighter weight rifle. I'll let others cover the pros and cons.

    On the issue of recoil: First, I'm built about like you from your pictures and I don't like punishing recoil at all. I think the 700ADL will weigh about 8.5-9 lbs with a scope. The 300 Win Mag recoils roughly about 50% more than a 308, 270 or 7mm Rem Mag. I have all three of those and the main 300 I have experience with is a very light weight custom job. It kicks a lot! If I went from a 308 to that 300, I'd probably never shoot it enough to get truly proficient enough with it to chose it over the 308.

    For some reason, unlike almost every other American rifleperson, I have an aversion to the 30 caliber. I prefer the 25-06 and 270 to the 30-06 and the 243, 260 and 7mm-08 to the 308. There's nothing wrong with killing an animal just a little bit deader but I just don't believe that the 30 is the optimal caliber. I prefer the 7mm Rem to the 300 Win as for the popular magnums. In rifles of equal weights and comparing the standard bullet weights and velocities, the 300 kicks about 50 more. This is a noticable difference. I can't imagine any animals within 500 miles of you or me that th 300 will drop instantly but the 7mm will let get away with equal shot placements.

    Ammo costs, either factory or reloads, are going to be about equal. If you need penetration, the 7mm should generally edge out the 300 and heavy bullets are available. if you want minimal meat damage, no problem. If you want expansion, you can certainly get that. If you want solids, you can have those as well. Bullets are available to the handloader from 100 Gr to 180 Gr and to the factory shooter from at least 140 to 175 Gr and that covers pretty much everything in North America and a whole lot in Africa. It is noticably less recoil, a bit flatter trajectory and a well proven game-taking ability.

    Between the 7 and the 300, I might feel a bit more comfortable with the 300 if specifically going out to look for big bears. Actually, I'd feel even more comfortable with a 45-70 but you get the point.

    Edit: I think I just talked myself out of selling mine. :p
  7. Omaha-BeenGlockin

    Omaha-BeenGlockin Well-Known Member

    If you get it---do yourself a favor and dump that Bushnell and get a scope with some proper eye relief.

    Otherwise I can envision a half moon meat cut in the middle of your forehead------lol.
  8. hardcorehunter5

    hardcorehunter5 Well-Known Member

    300 win mag

    hey Lendringer,

    I just thought that it would be somewhat important to make sure you get the facts straight. Some of the recoil data that has been written on this post is slightly inaccurate. The 300 WM does not has twice as much recoil as a 7mm. The 7mm has 24.3lbs of recoil and the 300wm has 27.2lbs. Now the .308 has 14.8lbs. I don't understand how some of the replies went off on a tangent about the 7mm. The difference between the 300wm and .308 is simple. The 300 wm has twice the recoil as the .308. At three hundred yards the .308 has 1700 ft.lbs of energy and the 300wm has 2100ft.lbs. So what does all this mean the 300wm will be more efficient and destroying tissue at long ranges on large game. That does not mean the .308 is not able to do the same. Put on paper everything will work. The truth is that paper is not true hunting situtation. You are not always going to get that broadside shot and everything be perfect. If you want to shoot alot, have it be fun and extremely accurate then go with the .308. If you need something to kill big game with tons of bullet options and that is accurate then .300 wm. Or you can do like I try and get one of each. The recoil and ft.lb data came from NRA firearms fact book and ballted/tioga engineering. Good luck!! Either choice will be great fun.
  9. cratz2

    cratz2 Well-Known Member

    hardcorehunter5, I just read the entire thread twice and I'l be darned if I can see where anyone said the 300 had twice as much recoil as a 7mm. You aren't suggesting I said that, are you?

    And regardless of where you read them, you can just quote recoil figures like that, it's pretty silly to even try. Different bullet weights, different velocities, different rifle and scope weights all play a major factor not to mention the fact that different recoil pads are going to transmit different amounts of felt recoil to the shooter.

    Using actual equations, rather that just spouting numbers from a book:

    308 168 Gr @ 2650 fps in a 9lb rifle has about 15 ft/lbs of recoil
    7mm 150 Gr @ 3100fps in a 9lb rifle has about 18 ft/lbs of recoil
    300 175 Gr @ 3000 fps in a 9lb rifle has about 25 ft/lbs of recoil
  10. cratz2

    cratz2 Well-Known Member

    To the original post, I have a 700ADL synthetic in 270. I've put 40 rounds through it at a sitting and wasn't to scared of the recoil. :p But I must say that between the 308 and 300 Win Mag, ballistically, every advantage goes to the 300 but if it's your first larger than 22 rifle, and you aren't planning on hunting in Canada, Alaska or Montana, I think there is more to recommend the 308. Less recoil meaning it should be more managable right off, cheaper ammo esp if you don't reload. If you just want to grab a box of FMJ, you can get it for $8 around here. Cheapest I ever see 300 Win Mag in town is about $15 per box for Remington at Meijer.

    As for faults with the rifle, it will come with a bad trigger but can be adjusted to get a decent pull with a bit of tinkering or you could get a for real trigger job and it will be very good. The stock is pretty flimsy, not as bad as the synthetic stock on a Savage in my opinion, but you'll probably have to be careful to not hold it towards the very end of the stock or else you're likely to get some pressure against the barrel. Nothing you can't work with. And as was said, the Bushnell that comes with the combo is pretty cheesy but it'll get you shootin' right off. If you're really wanting to shoot 'way out there' instead of being able to shoot way out there, you'll probably want to replace it even if with a older Weaver.

  11. Will Fennell

    Will Fennell Well-Known Member

    An easy way to look at it....

    Here is an easy way to look at the difference between the .308 and the .300 Win Mag.

    I Happend to be at the range yesterday with both my .308 M70 and my .300 Win M70. I was shooting 150 gr WW FAILSAFE's in both rifles. I sighted in both rifles @ 2" high @ 100 yards. At 200 the .300 was dead on, and the .308 was 3" low........@ 300 yards, the .300 was 3" low, and the .308 was 13" low. Charts show that the disparity gets MUCH worse, very fast.

    A side note, my groups were about the same with both. While @300, any little thing can really cause a "flyer" that really makes you look bad, I eventually shot a group with each rifle that everything felt "right". With both rifles I finally got 3 shot groups just over 3" @ 300 yards. Yeah, I went home happy<G>.

    The answer is in the velocity....we are talking the EXACT same projectiles.....150 gr FAILSAFES, but the .308 gets it at about 2800 fps out of my 22'' M70, and the .300 pumps it out @ 3325 fps out of the 26" M70 tube.

    As shown by cratz above, that is why the .300 kicks quite a bit more.

    So what does the does the .300 offer over the .308? About an additional 150 yards of practical range:)

    For that you pay with extra noise, recoil, and more expensive ammo.;)
  12. hardcorehunter5

    hardcorehunter5 Well-Known Member


    Hey Cratz,

    I apologize for the miss qoute. I was trying to give the difference of the .308 and 300wm with factory ammo. Of course there are varibles in recoil. That is a give in. We all know the true fact is the .308 has less kick then the 300wm. We also know that the 300wm has more effective range. I was not trying to be offensive with my response. I am glad that you did make a post about the differences between the .308 and 300wm, and not something about the 7mm which was not hte question. Just because I quote The NRA doesn't mean they are wrong or that I didn't do some calculations of my own. I will agree with you that the &mm is just as effective on game as the 300wm and is more pleasant to shoot to a degree. The only draw cratz is the lack of real heavy weight bullets. No hard feelings my friend. We are all he for the good fellowship and exchange of knowledge.
  13. cratz2

    cratz2 Well-Known Member

    No problem at all HC (can I call you HC? :p) , I was just wanting to make sure lendringser had considered another possibility.

    And considering long range trajectories, the larger case of the 300 allows you to use heavier bullets for even flatter trajectories with an even bigger wallop to the shooter of course.

    For me, I'll stick with the 308 and the 7mm. Actually, I still prefer the 25-06 and the 6.5x55. Less recoil recoil that any other cartridge mentioned and enough energy and penetration (with the proper bullets, of course) to kill a lot of game out to 300 yards - longer of a shot than I would take with my current skill level. And plenty of enegry to punch cleanly through the toughest paper out to 1,000 meters.
  14. hardcorehunter5

    hardcorehunter5 Well-Known Member

    HEy cratz 25-06

    Hey Cratz,

    I have been thinking of a 25-06. The only problem is lack of keft-hand bolts in that caliber. I know I can get one in a custom job or single shot, but I don't know if it is going ot be a caliber that I like. How long have you been shooting that round and what do you think of it. I like the thought of having something that sounds to be accurate and a little on the rare side. what I ahve that is somewhat close to that performance is a .270. So give me your thoughts.

    Thanks HC
  15. cratz2

    cratz2 Well-Known Member

    Just so we don't hijack the thread, let's start a new one.


Share This Page