Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles 7Mag vs 300Mag

Jayco, I used to have this conversation ad nauseum, week after week for about a decade,with a well known maker of premium bullets that pre-dates many in use today.He had used them all(cartridges), lived in Idaho,hunted a lot and knew bullets and cartridges very well.He was for a time a ballistician for Speer;he had both the hunting experience and technical knowledge.

He felt very firmly that if you want to make an elk go all "loose",use a 375AI and push a 250 grain bullet(he used his own)at 3150 or a 270 gr bullet at 2900+.You get very large wound channels, lots of punch and big exits.He felt it was better than any 338.He also felt the 35 Whelen was a better "killer" than the 338...I dunno because I have never used a 375 on elk.

My own meager experience tells me elk are easy to kill if hit properly with either a 30 or a 7mm.


I have not read JJ Hack's thread on "hit 'em again 7mm's".JJ has shot more game than me.But in my blissful ignorance,if I were going to Africa tomorrow, I'd load good bullets in a 30/06 or 7 mag and just go hunting.I'm sure it would turn out OK.

Got a close friend who believes very firmly in 300 mags.He came back from BC deeply disappointed last year. Seems he hit a big bull poorly(or not exactly right)with a 300 RUM and 180 gr TBBC at 3300 fps;the elk was floored,it writhed around and got up and into heavy brush and forest very quickly,before a follow up shot could be given.He lost the elk.

He asked me what I thought; I told him he did not hit the elk correctly.If he had the elk would have died and not gone far.

Seems even with a magnum 30,a guy should be just as ready to hit them again as he does with anything else.I think there may be magic in greater bore diameter and heavy bullets, but doubt it occurs between 7mm and 30.

I have seen 338's and 340's used on quite a few elk;hit properly, they died. Hit poorly, they were wounded.Ditto a 300 and ditto a 7mm. I'd hunt with any of them and not lose any sleep.

That wouldn't be Bill S from Lewiston would it, aka Bitteroot bullets.I remember back in the day when some of the old timers then,questioned something better than the Nosler when Bitteroots came out.I think John Nosler won some hearts here in Idaho that were not happy with the bullets available back then and like me,didn't want to change again or experiment..

Turns out the Bitteroot was one heck of a bullet..Nowaday,a guy doesn't have to look far to find a great bullet unlike it was in the 50's & 60's.

To be fair here,one of my good friends in McCall Idaho was a staunch .300 Win mag user with year after year success(A logger and FS worker)then I ran into him bragging about his new 375 H&H..I asked why..He felt the .300 let him down on a tough old bull..He explained and to me it was his bullet choice not the caliber.

To many people just use factory cheap ammo like the old days then complain about caliber when things go south..And yes,he uses factory ammo in his .375.

In the same competent hands with the same competent bullet,there probably would be little to no difference at all between these two great calibers..I still prefer the 300 because of bullet weights available for game from A-Z compared to the big 7..

Jayco

I had a 7 RM and a 300 WM in Stainless Rem 700 Sendero's with Vias muzzle breaks installed on each. I sold the 300 due to the fact that even with the Vias muzzle break, I could shoot much better groups at 300 yards with the 7RM.

With the 7 RM, max load of R#25(WLRM primers), I was shooting the 150g Accubonds and 154g Interbonds at 3200+ with amazing accuracy at 300 yards.

I sold the 300 to a Moose hunter with all the load data for 180g Accubonds I worked up...he is sure one very happy dude.

300 WM is just over my recoil thresh hold...worse than a 375 with a Vias muzzle break (which felt like 20ga Buckshot rounds to me with 250g Bullets).

Most of my elk and those of my co-hunters over the last 20 years have dropped to a 7mm RM. With a good bullet and placement, the results have been uniformly good. (The only one I was unhappy with was a cow my buddy neck-shot. It made it about 120 yards and we didn�t find it until the next day.) Had a couple go maybe 40 yards tops, but most have gone a few yards or straight down. So far I�ve only taken one with my .300WM and while the results were also good, the end came no more quickly than with my 7mm RM.

When I started with the 7mm RM I ran 160�s for the first 20 years. These days I run 165�s in my .30�s and have dropped to 140g with the 7mm RM. Given the result on the one mule deer I�ve taken with the 7mm RM/140g (straight down like a stone), I don�t think an elk will know the difference.

The 7mm RM has a definite advantage in the recoil department and I shoot it more often as a result. While the .300 has a mostly theoretical advantage, the extra practice with the 7mm RM results in higher confidence levels at long range. Still, I like very much like my .300 WM.

Maryanne on Monday, Wednesday and Friday; Ginger on Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday; toss a coin on Sunday?

Maybe in another 20 years I�ll have this figured out...

Jayco:.....yes it was Bill;

Had a feeling you'd figger it out

I know him well.I learned a bunch of interesting stuff from him.The man knows bullets.

I think we are really on the same page;to see a jump in performance means a BIG jump in caliber.

Keith/Coyote:I have always loved big 30's,used them a bunch, but age catches up.... I can still shoot them but stopped using them seriously over a decade ago.No doubt they are among the best things a guy can carry on an elk hunt.

For some reason,the 7's lack that head-snapping,heavy recoil that the 30's dish out.Yet the bullets(chosen carefully;today the X,North Fork,Aframe's,heavy Partitions or AB's etc)help it work really well on a variety of stuff...bring it up a notch.

Bob, do you really notice recoil while shooting at wild game. I never have

IMO habits come thru practice, if one practices enough to be utilizing a big 30 or a big 7 then that's when good or bad habits are made.

Point being, that while we don't feel recoil while shooting the game it's the habits we form prior to that that counts.

Capice..?

Dober

Capice - Have not heard that term since my father passed away 10 years ago, was one of his favorite expressions, sounded pretty good to hear it again!

So Dober that term might shed some light on your years of experience as I never heard it from any youngins!

338,yes and no...I'm aware of what I am shooting and hold on accordingly...

That said I've always been a pretty firm believer in practicing with the same rifles/cartridges I hunt with...that is the bugaboo for me.At various times I have had 300's, 7 mags and 270's going at the same time.Once 300's reached the stage when I no longer shot them extensively, they went to the back of the safe,and the lighter rifles got most of the calls to duty.

For me(not necessarily for anyone else)the 300's required that additional degree of concentration and muscle tension to master and be precise with...they are just over the top.And this gets worse(not better) when I shoot a lot.I also find them more difficult to manage from awkward field positions.

Today I just use the 270's and 7 mags;it has been that way for about a decade.

Bob, A few years ago my dad bought a browning A bolt in 7 mag. He ask me to sight his gun in for him.That was the most punishing magnum rifle I have ever shot. Kicked harder than any 338 I've shot.
I dont see how there would be much differance in recoil from a 7 mm rem mag shooting 160s than a 300 win shooting 165s if both guns are identical.
Just cause a guy is shooting a 300 mag does'nt mean its going to kick harder than a 7mag. Bullet weight and stock design have a lot to do with it also

JMHO

Maybe true enough;the 300 burns more powder than the 7RM.It's not a lot but just enough,the 7RM burning in the mid to high 60's charge; the 300 Win in the mid to high 70's,and the 300 weatherby in the 80's. It ain't much but just enough to catch up to you if you shoot a lot.

As to stocks, I have had them all....no matter how the pie gets sliced the 300's generate more recoil with comparable bullets at the same velocity.

The correct comparison of a 30 cal 165 is a 7mm 140;the 300 WM burns more powder to get it to 3200 than a 7 mag does a 140.Check the manuals and they will demonstrate this I think.Across the board the 300's kick harder.

Bob, I'm talking all things being equal. Of course a 7 mag will kick less shooting a bullet that weighs 25 grains less than the 300

That's the point;ballistically a 140 gr 7mm(not a 160 7mm) is the ballistic equivalent of a 165 30 cal.

A 160 gr 7mm is the ballistic equivalent of a 180-190 gr 30 cal.

You can look it up.(Use the same type bullet,ie BT,AB,Partition, etc to be fair about it)

It takes more powder to start the 30 cal 165 at,say,3200 fps than it does the 7mm 140;the reason the 7mm kicks less.Yet the two are "ballistically" similar.

I'll take th FT. LBS. of energy the 300 offers over the 7 mag and deal with any exta recoil.

Can't go wrong either way as I've killed elk with both...they work dandy

Ditto here.

Both are reliable elk thumpers. For smaller game I prefer the 7mm Rem Mag but the .300 Win Mag works there as well. The two deer I shot last year with the .300 went straight down. (Have to use what�s in your hands at the time...)

Ain't that the truth!Never felt under gunned I'll bet...

Ditto here, also

I think too many people get too hung up in the numbers game, and in the opinions of others.

For all round hunting, up to elk and moose, I'd just about as soon carry my handloaded 7x57. If it was just bigger game, no deer-sized animals, I'd carry a .338 WM or .338-06. That just kind of leaves both of these without a lot of purpose, but that is just my opinion. If I'm going to put up with the recoil of a fast .300 I'll take my FN .338 WM steady hunting of the big stuff, or in Ak or Africa where a chance encounter of something that bites is possibel. Otherwise the small 7 is my everyday rifle.