7mm Mag and 300 Win Mag
- Thread starter viking499
- Start date
- Status
loadedround
Member
One uses a .284 diameter bullet and the other uses a .308 bullet.
I dont own either one but 7mm RM has a better ballistic coefficient bullet design. If i have to pick the two the 7mm Mag is the one. But for those who love the .30 cal in all things the 300 WM cant be beat. Its the big daddy dubbed as the 1000 yd gun. Old timer 30 06 is the 500 yd rifle .
MachIVshooter
Member
What are you asking exactly?
Simply put, the .300 WM and 7mm RM are not in the same class. .300 is a good bit more potent, but also consumes more powder, generates more recoil and requires a magnum length action.
The appeal of 7mm RM is a cartridge that doesn't recoil much more than a .30-06, will fit in any standard length action and outperforms pretty much everything else that will fit in said action. It is a very well-balanced cartridge that is more than adequate for any big game animal in the US.
Simply put, the .300 WM and 7mm RM are not in the same class. .300 is a good bit more potent, but also consumes more powder, generates more recoil and requires a magnum length action.
The appeal of 7mm RM is a cartridge that doesn't recoil much more than a .30-06, will fit in any standard length action and outperforms pretty much everything else that will fit in said action. It is a very well-balanced cartridge that is more than adequate for any big game animal in the US.
Other than bullet weight, there really is nothing to recommend the .300. The 7mm has better BC bullets available and can send them faster meaning less bullet drop (longer point blank zero, less sensitive to ranging errors at longer ranges) and less wind drift. Both of these are important for long range shooting. The terminal differences aren't that significant. An animal will never know the difference. The .300 holds more powder but the difference in bore diameter means that once you get into similar sectional densities, the 7mm is the faster cartridge and with like sectional densities and bullet construction, velocity determines bullet terminal performance. The 7mm has more. They are very much in the same class of cartridge.
The lighter bullets in the 7mm mean that your shoulder will notice the difference.
Rifle selection is essentially the same. Pretty much every rifle of suitable action length is available in both chamberings.
The lighter bullets in the 7mm mean that your shoulder will notice the difference.
Rifle selection is essentially the same. Pretty much every rifle of suitable action length is available in both chamberings.
Last edited:
I ve been torn between the two as well. Always been a .30 cal loyal guy. I love my M 1 garands. Maybe if i have to invest in a magnum the 7 mm is my choice. I was watching long range hunting by Gunwerks of Wyoming and they swear by the 7mm RM. THey are perfectionist in ballistic coefficient when distance is at play. Although i dont intend to shoot game 200 yds or more bec i like it closer, the 7mm RM would be perfect as it is a straight shooter. Recoil a little step up to the .3006 . What s not to like.
http://www.gunwerks.com/
http://www.gunwerks.com/
Still Shooting
Member
I went through this personal debate about a year ago, and ended up finding a Savage 7mmWSM new, at a great price (it has been discontinued). But I did so because I cen send the gun back to Savage and have a .300WSM barrel installed for a cost of $240. When it comes back to me (with original barrel returned as well), I can buy a barrel nut wrench and 2 chamber guages, and I am set up to change barrels in about 20 minutes. -Best of both worlds, as I see it.
If I were doing the same thing today, I'd likely get a Savage in .300WSM and pick up an E.R. Shaw (or other) drop-in barrel chambered for 7mm WSM.
If I were doing the same thing today, I'd likely get a Savage in .300WSM and pick up an E.R. Shaw (or other) drop-in barrel chambered for 7mm WSM.
dprice3844444
member
if your hunting out in the boonies,and need ammo,300 win mag is more likely to be found.if your mechanically inclined,you can get a savage that uses the barrel nut and interchange the barrels yourself, and just use 1 action.best of both worlds if undecided.if you load for any of the other 30 cals,you can save money and time by buying,like say 175 smk or 168 gr,and using in both.
texas chase
Member
Well said. The 7 mag has been a long time favorite of mine but not for hunting. I dont need a mag where i hunt but for long range shooting... Wow. The 7 mag is excellent!
RevGeo
Member
Back in the '70s I, like thousands of other shooters, was a big 7mm RM fan. I had a Mod 70 with a 3x9 Weaver and burned a whole lot of H4831 sending 175gr Speer spitzers across the deserts and plains of New Mexico. I thought then (and think now, actually) that the big 7 was the finest long range cartridge for deer, elk, antelope and the like ever made. I shot a lot of game with that rifle and it never let me down.
I always loaded the heavy bullets because in my estimation that's where the advantage of the mag over the other 7mms really comes out.
In a well stocked rifle I can't tell the difference in recoil between the 7 mag and the 30-06.
My then-brother in law had a Mod 70 in .300 WM and we used to argue endlessly over the relative (pun unintended) superiorty of our chosen rounds.
He shot 180gr factory stuff exclusively while I handloaded everything (still do, don't know about him). We hunted together every year for a long time and shot a lot of mulies and a few elk with those rifles. At all ranges I just couldn't tell any difference in the end results; we'd hit a deer and it would become dead. We would trade off once in a while and I could definitely tell the increase in recoil with the .300 WM, but that was the only difference I could ascertain.
If there was a practical difference in trajectory between the two rounds I sure could never tell. We both sighted in at 3" high at 100 yards and held dead on out to 400 yards or so. I could see no reason to shoot the .300 mag with a bullet that weighed only 5gr more than what I was shooting out of the 7 mag. I used to tell my bro-in-law about the 7's better BC, SD, flatter trajectory, blah, blah - he'd tell me that the .300 had more power, had a wider range of bullet weights, would kill a T-Rex at 1000 yards, blah, blah - but in the field there was no difference that either of us could tell. But we'd never admit that to each other unless we were sober.
I sold that gun when I divorced by bro-in-law's sister and moved to the Pacific NW. Living where I do now I have no need for a super long distance rifle and don't own one. An '06 does everything anybody could ask, around here. Besides, super high velocity is over rated in my opinion. In my old age I have come to really appreciate the 7x57, 30-40 Krag and the .300 Savage - excellent rounds chambered in beautiful rifles.
So there's my tale of the two cartridges under discussion. In my experience there really is no practical difference between the 7mm RM and the .300 WM. One shoots a little flatter, one has a little more power, one kicks a little harder, one has better availability of ammo... whatever.
It's a matter of which rifle/cartridge combo a person likes for no really good reason. But we don't need a really good reason for choosing a given cartridge. I wish I could say the same about brothers-in-law.
I always loaded the heavy bullets because in my estimation that's where the advantage of the mag over the other 7mms really comes out.
In a well stocked rifle I can't tell the difference in recoil between the 7 mag and the 30-06.
My then-brother in law had a Mod 70 in .300 WM and we used to argue endlessly over the relative (pun unintended) superiorty of our chosen rounds.
He shot 180gr factory stuff exclusively while I handloaded everything (still do, don't know about him). We hunted together every year for a long time and shot a lot of mulies and a few elk with those rifles. At all ranges I just couldn't tell any difference in the end results; we'd hit a deer and it would become dead. We would trade off once in a while and I could definitely tell the increase in recoil with the .300 WM, but that was the only difference I could ascertain.
If there was a practical difference in trajectory between the two rounds I sure could never tell. We both sighted in at 3" high at 100 yards and held dead on out to 400 yards or so. I could see no reason to shoot the .300 mag with a bullet that weighed only 5gr more than what I was shooting out of the 7 mag. I used to tell my bro-in-law about the 7's better BC, SD, flatter trajectory, blah, blah - he'd tell me that the .300 had more power, had a wider range of bullet weights, would kill a T-Rex at 1000 yards, blah, blah - but in the field there was no difference that either of us could tell. But we'd never admit that to each other unless we were sober.
I sold that gun when I divorced by bro-in-law's sister and moved to the Pacific NW. Living where I do now I have no need for a super long distance rifle and don't own one. An '06 does everything anybody could ask, around here. Besides, super high velocity is over rated in my opinion. In my old age I have come to really appreciate the 7x57, 30-40 Krag and the .300 Savage - excellent rounds chambered in beautiful rifles.
So there's my tale of the two cartridges under discussion. In my experience there really is no practical difference between the 7mm RM and the .300 WM. One shoots a little flatter, one has a little more power, one kicks a little harder, one has better availability of ammo... whatever.
It's a matter of which rifle/cartridge combo a person likes for no really good reason. But we don't need a really good reason for choosing a given cartridge. I wish I could say the same about brothers-in-law.
hardluk1
member
viking499 There is nothing in north america short of a grizzly that a 7mm rem mag can't handle effectivly with a bullets from 139gr to 175gr with factory ammo. When rifle weight is the same between the 7mm and 300 mag you will notice a large difference in recoil with the 300 being harder on the shoulder. I have used the 7mm re mag for whitetail deer ,a few hogs mule deer and elk with no problems. Just a good well rounded cartidge. With bullet designs out today it is more important to pick the right bullet for the job than the heavier caliber of the 300 and the 300 win mag still still not enough for most grizzly hunts or guides.
The 7 mag will shoot VERY aerodynamic 160 gr bullets at 3000-3100 fps. A 300 Win Mag will shoot much less aerodynamic 180 gr bullets at 3000-3100 fps. To equal the aerodynamics of the 7mm bullets a 300 mag would have to step up to a 210-250 gr bullet, but shoot them much slower.
At ranges out to 400 yards or so the 300 has a slight edge in energy. Both have nearly identical trajectories, but at roughly 400 yards the less aerodynamic bullets 30 cal bullets have slowed and are now about 100 fps slower than the 7mm bullets. At ranges farther than 400 yards the 7 mags will have an advantage in both energy and trajectory.
The 300 can use heavier bullets that are an advantage on the largest animals at closer ranges. The 7 mag is the better long range round, and recoils considerably less.
At ranges out to 400 yards or so the 300 has a slight edge in energy. Both have nearly identical trajectories, but at roughly 400 yards the less aerodynamic bullets 30 cal bullets have slowed and are now about 100 fps slower than the 7mm bullets. At ranges farther than 400 yards the 7 mags will have an advantage in both energy and trajectory.
The 300 can use heavier bullets that are an advantage on the largest animals at closer ranges. The 7 mag is the better long range round, and recoils considerably less.
There's a whole lot of bad gouge in this thread.
7mm Rem Mag and 300 Win Mag will both fit in standard actions.
Some 7mm bullets have higher BCs than some 30 caliber bullets.
.30-06, 7mm Rem Mag, and 300 Win Mag are all capable 1000 yard cartridges.
I recommend fact checking before posting on the internet. I'm sure that'll happen right after slow drivers get out of the left lane for good.
7mm Rem Mag and 300 Win Mag will both fit in standard actions.
Some 7mm bullets have higher BCs than some 30 caliber bullets.
.30-06, 7mm Rem Mag, and 300 Win Mag are all capable 1000 yard cartridges.
I recommend fact checking before posting on the internet. I'm sure that'll happen right after slow drivers get out of the left lane for good.
Most 7mm bullets have better BC's than the vast majority of .308 cal bullets, and within the same range of bullet (TTSX, Partition, A-Frame, etc...), the 7mm offering has a higher BC every time unless you're comparing the heaviest .308 to the lightest 7mm and then it's really close. If the sectional densities are close, the 7mm will have a higher BC. That's good gouge. All you have to do is thumb through a bullet manufacturer's literature to confirm it.
MachIVshooter
Member
Actually, in most places, the reverse is true. 7mm RM is right with .270 Win and .30-06 for most available in the Western states.
That said, I've always found this argument stupid. Who doesn't bring ammo with them???
Yeah, if it's a Rem. 700 with the same action length for both long and magnum cartridges. Not all rifles are that way, though. Kimber, for example, does have 3 different action lengths, and the .300 WM is half way between standard and true magnum length:
7mm Rem Mag, .300 Win Mag, 8mm rem Mag.
It's kinda like the Mauser cartridges; Too short for one action, so has to be housed in the one that's unnecessarily long.
I own and use both. One thing to remember if your shooting factory is cost, the 7mm is often (but not always) a bit cheaper for the same type of load. Recoil is about the only real world difference most of us will see. The .300 is capable of launching much heavier bullets, but most are not designed for hunting, not that i actualy use hunting bullets in either of my rifles.
Also they both work out of a standard 06 lenght action, but some actions leave the .300 well short of the lands then loaded to magazine lenght, my savage 110 is an example. The 7mm was a much better fit in that rifle. My 700 has a h&h lenght action and the 7mm loaded to touch has about .3" left of mag space, id prefer they were reversed.
Lol MachIV Ive known folks to travel with only a gun because flying with ammo can be a real hassle, tho id guess thats more of an issue here.
Also they both work out of a standard 06 lenght action, but some actions leave the .300 well short of the lands then loaded to magazine lenght, my savage 110 is an example. The 7mm was a much better fit in that rifle. My 700 has a h&h lenght action and the 7mm loaded to touch has about .3" left of mag space, id prefer they were reversed.
Lol MachIV Ive known folks to travel with only a gun because flying with ammo can be a real hassle, tho id guess thats more of an issue here.
bobnob
Member
The main reason I can think of to pick the 300 over the 7mm is if you needed to load bigger heavier bullets for likes of buffalo, scrub bulls or even camels and wild horses. The same could apply in the African hunting environment.
About the biggest thing in my area are big pigs and if I go for a bit of a drive, Red Deer. The 7mm would more than suffice for that game, but my 270 does all the 7mm mag does in the context of those game animals up to about 500y or a bit further if you are good enough.
About the biggest thing in my area are big pigs and if I go for a bit of a drive, Red Deer. The 7mm would more than suffice for that game, but my 270 does all the 7mm mag does in the context of those game animals up to about 500y or a bit further if you are good enough.
The SAAMI max OAL for .300WM is exactly the same as for the .30-06. It was done that way on purpose.
Heres my load that I shoot from my 7mm.
162grn Amax (.625 advertized BC), and a heavy dose of Retumbo for 3100ish from a 26" barrel.
My .300 load is a 180grn SST (.480 Advertized, but it IS a hunting bullet), 68grn of h4350 for just shy of 3000 from a 24" barrel.
I had loads for some other powders that broke 3100, but they were inaccurate, or possibly just hard to shoot accurately from an gun that weight a bit less then 8lbs.
Ive never used 220s in my .300 as 180 stick about as far down in the neck as i like. Id guess youd get about 2800-2850 with a top load in a 26" barrel from a 220 SMK. BCs run .629 (also advertized), and recoil from a 9lb or less hunting rifle would be on the heavy side. In a dedicated long range rig that weighed enough to dampen recoil a bit more it would likely be fine. Were i able to load all the way out, i think id step up to the 230 berger hybrid, or 225 hornady bthp.
162grn Amax (.625 advertized BC), and a heavy dose of Retumbo for 3100ish from a 26" barrel.
My .300 load is a 180grn SST (.480 Advertized, but it IS a hunting bullet), 68grn of h4350 for just shy of 3000 from a 24" barrel.
I had loads for some other powders that broke 3100, but they were inaccurate, or possibly just hard to shoot accurately from an gun that weight a bit less then 8lbs.
Ive never used 220s in my .300 as 180 stick about as far down in the neck as i like. Id guess youd get about 2800-2850 with a top load in a 26" barrel from a 220 SMK. BCs run .629 (also advertized), and recoil from a 9lb or less hunting rifle would be on the heavy side. In a dedicated long range rig that weighed enough to dampen recoil a bit more it would likely be fine. Were i able to load all the way out, i think id step up to the 230 berger hybrid, or 225 hornady bthp.
Last edited:
If that price is right, you like the rifle, and you realize your not getting all that much more then your 7mm can offer in terms of killing power, then no reason not to get it. I use and like both of my rifles, but this is more due to the rifles them selves and less to the rounds they chamber. The Savage in .300 is great for stalking because its a couple inches shorter then my Remington 700 7mm and about 3lbs lighter. The 7mm is more fun to dink with and easier to shoot accurately. Im more confident at making hits at range with the 7mm, and would stop shooting the .300 sooner because of that.
Kachok
Member
7mm Rem Mag makes for a better long ranged rifle, in fact very few compete with it, hence the US Secret Service counter sniper teams use them. The 300 Win Mag is better for large game within realistic ranges thanks to it's larger caliber, and heavier bullets. Recoil is a bit more on the 300, but they are both in the same recoil class with hefty bullets. With either one I perfer to bring a lead sled to work up handloads thats for sure.
- Status
