Which is better for all around north american hunting? Seems like either would be a good choice but does one have a clear advantage?
7mm mag vs 300 win mag
- Thread starter CYANIDEGENOCIDE
- Start date
- Status
7mm Mag has better long-distance ballistics and is easier on the shoulder.
300 Mag carries more energy within all but very long-range distances and can handle heavier bullets.
Both are powerful rounds appropriate for shooting anything except very large dangerous game. Bambi (and Smokey the Bear as well) will go down in a hurry with a well-placed shot from either of them.
300 Mag carries more energy within all but very long-range distances and can handle heavier bullets.
Both are powerful rounds appropriate for shooting anything except very large dangerous game. Bambi (and Smokey the Bear as well) will go down in a hurry with a well-placed shot from either of them.
I owned both in Win model 70 Black Shadow and finally sold the 300.
Both were very accurate out to ranges far greater than I was comfortable shooting game, and both carried a lot of energy. However the recoil of the .300 quickly became uncomfortable on a long range day and eventually I couldn't justify the recoil and the ammo costs of the .300. The .300 Win Mags advantages over the 7mm aren't huge and wasn't something I could regularly exploit. Didn't make sense to keep paying more to feed it and to suffer the recoil.
My 7mm will shoot a sub 2" group at 300 yards and a 4" group at 500 yards with a cold barrel and properly benched. And with the right ammo it carried more than enough energy to knock a big buck down at 500 yards. It's all I need. I'd love to find another 'new old stock' Black Shadow in 7mm mag.
YMMV.
Both were very accurate out to ranges far greater than I was comfortable shooting game, and both carried a lot of energy. However the recoil of the .300 quickly became uncomfortable on a long range day and eventually I couldn't justify the recoil and the ammo costs of the .300. The .300 Win Mags advantages over the 7mm aren't huge and wasn't something I could regularly exploit. Didn't make sense to keep paying more to feed it and to suffer the recoil.
My 7mm will shoot a sub 2" group at 300 yards and a 4" group at 500 yards with a cold barrel and properly benched. And with the right ammo it carried more than enough energy to knock a big buck down at 500 yards. It's all I need. I'd love to find another 'new old stock' Black Shadow in 7mm mag.
YMMV.
Last edited:
I hunt deer and elk with both. My 7mag is a tack driver but I like the heavier 30 cal bullet of the 300 without any loss of velocity. I believe the 30 cal is more efficient with the larger bore than the 7mm. The recoil is not that different. The wt of the rifles will make more of a difference. For really long shots in wind I would also take the 300.
Ummm I wouldn't go as far and say it "trumps" the 7mag. Depending on what bullet you are using will depend on trajectory and they both are close. As far as recoil that will depend on both your load and the rifle. If you're shooting beyond 600yds the 7mag will be more efficient. I myself just shoot a 270 winchester and it does great for me out to 550yds. The shooter will have the most to due with putting the bullet where it needs to go between the two cartridges.
Yeah ... but then there's that "energy" thang and that "terminal ballistics" thang and the fact that the OP didn't ask about a .270.
Myself I far prefer the 06 based rounds in the same caliber over these "entry level" magnums.
If I'm gonna go with a magnum I'm gonna buy a MAGNUM. But the paltry performance increase of going to a 7mmremmag or 300wm over a 280 or 30/06 isn't enough to get me to put up with higher ammo and fuel costs (powder)
If I'm gonna go with a magnum I'm gonna buy a MAGNUM. But the paltry performance increase of going to a 7mmremmag or 300wm over a 280 or 30/06 isn't enough to get me to put up with higher ammo and fuel costs (powder)
Fella's;
I've already voted the same way Krochus did, with my wallet. When I wanted a magnum, I looked at the full gamut. I have a .30-06 & just wanted another gun, but felt it had to be a realistic expenditure of money. Neither the 7mm or the .300 offered enough more than the .30-06 to make either worth it. I bought a .338 Winchester magnum a few years ago. And I'm a very happy camper for owning it.
BTW, it's a Tikka LHB wood/blue.
900F
I've already voted the same way Krochus did, with my wallet. When I wanted a magnum, I looked at the full gamut. I have a .30-06 & just wanted another gun, but felt it had to be a realistic expenditure of money. Neither the 7mm or the .300 offered enough more than the .30-06 to make either worth it. I bought a .338 Winchester magnum a few years ago. And I'm a very happy camper for owning it.
BTW, it's a Tikka LHB wood/blue.
900F
At similar chamber pressures a stout load in 7mag will launch 150g at 3081 fps versus the 300win mag at 3,289 for 150 g. The bc's are close so the 300 will shoot flatter out to a long ways before the bc of the 7 mag catches up. When you get the bullet wt of the 300 to 168 g it still pushes the round out at 3,129 with a better bc than the 150 g 7 mm bullet. The heavier bullet will not bleed energy as fast as the lighter one so the farther you shoot the bigger the margin. For most hunting though it is academic. The elk I shot with my 7 mag died just the same as the 300.
Do you know of some majestic load for the 270 weatherby that makes it turn into a 338 lapua? What is the energy and ballistic "thang" (advantage) are you referring to?
i am fourteen and shoot a 300 and it dont kick i would say the 300 is the winner and the 270 wasnt even mentioned by the op the 300 has alot more punch it also depends on shot placement
And i sold my .270 cause it recoiled to heavy for me..
in the end.. there's nothing in north america a .308 can't kill, so win.
back on topic,
I have seen just as many 7mm Rem mag kills as .300 win/mag. go with what suits you. they are both time-tested designs, and both work very well to long distances. until you are a very proficient hunter AND shooter, you don't need to worry about long distance shots, and what your rifle is capable of. 99% of rifles outshoot their owners. until you can squeeze the distance out of what you have, then you need not worry. My brother shoots the 7mm rem mag w/ 140G nosler btips for white-tail. I used to use 130 grain out of a 270, and now use 150grain out of a 308. my uncle uses a 300 wby mag with 180's.. I have a close friend that uses 180s from his 300 win mag.. and there isn't a deer in america that can stand up and tell you the difference between us.
in the end.. there's nothing in north america a .308 can't kill, so win.
back on topic,
I have seen just as many 7mm Rem mag kills as .300 win/mag. go with what suits you. they are both time-tested designs, and both work very well to long distances. until you are a very proficient hunter AND shooter, you don't need to worry about long distance shots, and what your rifle is capable of. 99% of rifles outshoot their owners. until you can squeeze the distance out of what you have, then you need not worry. My brother shoots the 7mm rem mag w/ 140G nosler btips for white-tail. I used to use 130 grain out of a 270, and now use 150grain out of a 308. my uncle uses a 300 wby mag with 180's.. I have a close friend that uses 180s from his 300 win mag.. and there isn't a deer in america that can stand up and tell you the difference between us.
Maverick223
Member
I agree wholeheartedly [with regards to hunting]...of course you can make a pretty good argument that the .280 and .30-06 are magnums, but that doesn't change the fact that they have a near perfect case capacity/bore diameter relationship (IMO of course), and cartridges can be had for much less than anything branded "magnum".
To the OP: Between the two there is not enough difference in energy, caliber, cost, trajectory, or terminal performance to make a hill of beans of difference. The 7mm has a little less recoil, and the .300 isn't quite as hard on the barrel...take your pick. I would strongly suggest that you take a good hard look at the aforementioned cartridges (.280Rem. and .30-06) before making your decision as they can do nearly anything that the magnums can, and do so with less recoil, less rifle weight/length, and at less cost.
Last edited:
Oh, to be young again, where recoil sensitivity was not to be mentioned for fear of looking less manly.
Lets face it...a .300magnum has a fair bit of recoil. Because of that, the rifle itself is heavier. I wouldn't want to carry one all day for hunting (as per the OP). The gun would make your shoulder sore before you ever triggered a round. I agree with Krochus and Maverick: a .30 '06 with the right grain weight can provide results just as good as the "entry level magnums" (I like that ) with far less pain on the shoulder and wallet.I take the 7mm over the 300 any day. The 7mm can literally shoot anything. I can load/buy 110 grain bullets and go after antelope or coyote at 500 yards. Or I can put 175 grains and go for moose and elk. And the 160 work great on deer and sheep. I've had a 300 win and it's great on the larger animals; but on the critters, varmints, etc... at closer range, it's a waste. But for those who think the 308, 30-06, 270, etc... are the "Real" rifles; and the "Real Magnums" are higher than the 7mm or 300; then you really need to check out the 30-378. That is the ultimate. I loved that rifle. But at $6 PER SHOT; Yes, $120 a box of 20. But zeroed in at 250 yard; it only dropped about 15" at 500 yards. Was not hard to compensate that round.
Maverick223
Member
Not saying it's impossible to find; but I like being able to shoot smaller/lighter 110 grain out of the 7mm magnum. It's hard to find, if available, commercial ammo for the 300 that small.
Maverick223
Member
Not impossible at all...here are a few:
100gr. Lapua
100gr. Hornady
100gr. Speer
FWIW I would go with the Lapua for a ultra lightweight .308cal. for varmints.
100gr. Lapua
100gr. Hornady
100gr. Speer
FWIW I would go with the Lapua for a ultra lightweight .308cal. for varmints.
Anything is possible for reloading. I did say commercial ammo. Reloading, you can put any 30 caliber on there. But I don't reload a lot. Anyway; that's why I prefer the 7mm. I'm not knocking the 300. Just that for varmints, I like the 7mm better for commercial ammo. For large game, they are basically equal. There isn't anything on the big end in North America that one can shoot that the other can't. But on the small end, I give the edge to the 7mm mag.
LOL. I love 'cartridge vs. cartridge' decision posts. 75% of the replies will suggest something other than the choices in the original post, with half of those being some obscure caliber or load that can only be handloaded or ordered from an old man in a shack in Alberta. The other 25% will be people arguing and insulting each other over why one is better than the other.
And I read them every single time because I always learn a ton. There is wealth of info here.
And I read them every single time because I always learn a ton. There is wealth of info here.
There have been a gazillion, maybe a gazillion-and-a-half, articles written about hunting with 7mm maggies and with .300 Winmags. As near as I can tell, "Hit don't make no nevermind, nohow." They both work, and work equally well.
Suggestion: Select whichever cartridge that is the most aesthetically pleasing. "It's prettier!" is as good a reason as any.
Suggestion: Select whichever cartridge that is the most aesthetically pleasing. "It's prettier!" is as good a reason as any.
I have shot and thoroughly enjoyed both of those calibers. You can't go wrong with either.
If I have a choice though, I take the 7mm. But I'm biased, as my father was a big 7mm fan.
If I have a choice though, I take the 7mm. But I'm biased, as my father was a big 7mm fan.
- Status
