Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Elk Hunting 284 VS 308

I'm thinking you gotta measure apples to apples. 165 grain .30 caliber partition at 3000 fps and a 160 grain 7mm partition at 3000 fps. There isn't a whiskers difference between the two terminally. They perform exactly the same on game in my experience. There will be a difference in BC, wind drift and drop. The edge going to the 7mm past 200 yards, increasing the better ballistics as the range increases. I've shot several truck loads with each caliber in the same settups and velocities, but with cup and core bullets. I can't honestly see the difference in terminal performance between the two calibers at like velocities and ranges. I haven't killed any big bears, but deer, antelope, elk and moose all have had like results.

Another good comparison would be 175 grain 7mm bullets of like construction pitted against 180 grain .30 caliber bullets of same construction and velocity. I can't see any difference in either. It is all based on personal preference and the feel good factor. I like the 7mm bullets better, based purely on better BC's and better sectional density, but that is just my preference. The bullet is what kills, not the case it was fired out of. Flinch

You do mention sectional density at the bottom there, which is the obvious difference between the pairings of bullets you mention. In each example, given similar bullet construction the 7mm should out-penetrate.

Maybe even way overpenetrate.

The 7mm bullets should outpenetrate .30 caliber bullets of the same weight, but I can't see any difference on animals, unless one is shooting X bullets. But again, it is so minimal, it can't really be measured with any consistency. That is why I put it last. The BC is worth considering though.

The biggest exit holes I have ever experienced are with 140 grain Nosler ballistic tips at 3,200-3,400 fps. I wish I could find the pictures I have of an elk and a couple of deer. All were shot at a smidge over 400 yards. Both 3 1/2 year old bucks had 10-14 inch holes (yes, all the innards were hanging in the bushes on the opposite side). The bull had a soft ball sized hole through both shoulders with same inner workings hanging in the bushes on the off side. I put my whole arm through the bull and barely got any blood on my arm. My hunting partner couldn't believe it.

I have hit a couple of other deer low behind the shoulder and completely unzipped them. The trauma is amazing! Flinch

There is a reason why I so luv the 150 NBT in my 7 Mashburn Super on anything that moves..

Dober

I have pretty much settled on the 150 ballistic tip in the 300WSM.

I haven't been able to recover one yet,I know it's not supposed to have great sectional density,but it keeps exiting on everything. Big exit holes,dead right there.

I tried a couple times to get the 150 to shoot Doc and my gun doesn't seem to likey it. Wish it would, and or the 168 NBT which is a bullet I really like.

Dober

True enough, but here is the part you are not considering. The larger .308 bore will burn the powder charge more efficiently and while a 7 Rem. Mag ought to normally produce around 2800 fps with a 175gr. bullet, a 300 Win. Mag. will normally produce around 3,000 fps with a 180gr. bullet. I don't know how much of an advantage it is to have a larger diameter, slightly heavier and slightly faster bullet, but the .308, under the conditions I outlined above, is more "powerful" (no matter how you choose to measure "powerful) and that extra bullet diameter matters, but I dont know how much and niether does anyone else.

I agree with what Flinch has to say here....which really makes sense since the 7 mag is like a 30/06 that shoots flatter with the right loads...

But Sundles is right, too....it has always been easier to get the 300 Win Mag to speed for me with 180 gr bullets, and it has always just been a good round...

Take a step up in capacity over the 7Rm and that 175 gets to app.3100....I have always used the 160's mostly but am anxious to try the 175's started that fast on something large.

The thing I like about the 7mm RM is it runs 140g and 160g very well with a lot less recoil than a .308" 180g with the same trajectory. My experience with the 140's is limited to one buck but the 160's have been performing well for me since 1982. No experience with my new-to-me .280 Rem but I expect similar results.

The thing I like about the .300MW is a 180g runnning around 3050fps. More recoil but works nicely.

Nothing wrong with the .30-06 and I tend to run 165-168g. That said, my 150g AccuBond antelope load worked fine on my cow last November.

Choose a good bullet and place it well and none will give you any problems.

What I really like about the 7RM is that if your gun will shoot the 140gr. TSX, you can get light recoil coupled with flat trajectory, high speed and deep penetration--it is the best of all worlds. I have noticed that as I have aged, I enjoy the recoil of heavy 338 loads less and less. Prehaps it is simply that I dont shoot them as much as I used to, but I think the older I get, I'll be into using my 7's more and more.

Yup...

Oh, you can still shoot them....reaches a point you just don't want to.....

It's funny how everyone wants to compare the mighty 7MM Mag to the .308 diameter rifles yet it is all but the same as the 270 Win(Non Magnum)using the for mentioned 140 grain TSX for us oldie's but still kicking.

To make it fair the comparison is of "Factory Ammo" from Federal Premium with the 140(.284) versus the 130(.277) TSX.

There virtually the same except for that huge .007 diameter difference unlike the .024 diameter difference between the big 7 and the .30's

270 Win


7MM Rem Mag


Jayco

Jayco: You are always a formidable adversary in debate....

That said I'll be the first to admit that distinguishing between a 270 and a 7 mag can sometimes be quite a chore,and especially if you cherry pick loads for either one aganist the other...personally I gave up years ago wondering all this and just ran with both of them, as there is not a bigger fan of the old 270 than me....but facts....are facts,and i gotta be objective.

In selecting any cartridge I'm not gonna be hemmed in by factory loads, especially knowing (as I do) that a good many factory loads for the 7RM are intentionally held by the makers to a hair below 60,000 psi(Federal told me this).

Rather, I'm going to look at what my chronograph shows me after load workup to a safe max, shoot them all, and hunt them to see what's up.Because I have found that what the paper says,and what the chronograph says, are frequently two different things in the real world.

In contrasting the two cartridges what I get from the 7 mag is a 160 gr bullet at the same veloctites that I have run 130's in the 270 for years,ie, about 3100 fps for both.So right there I have a 30 gr advantage in bullet weight...running the other direction I'm about 20 gr below the 30 cal 180 running about the same velocity from a 300 Win Mag,which IS a difference in bullet weight and frontal area,I admit.....but I think we will both agree that,given equal bullet behaviour and placement....we got a dead elk..... I will not speculate which kills "deader"...

From there we can go to 150's in the 270 and get about 2950 fps,optimally....in the 7 mag with a proper mag box and throating, we will be about the same place with a 175....and in the Partition configuration that 175 has good construction, and a BC of .519,IIRC,and this is nudging us into the same neighborhood as the 300 WM with a 180....again, the 300 has an advantage by going to 200 gr bullets;but to start it as fast, you're gonna burn more powder in the 300,get kicked harder, likely have a heavier rifle..

So day in and day out,with the lighter 7mm bullets from a 7RM,you are not a universe ahead of a 270....but you DO assuredly, beat it...and it won't take more than a few range sessions to firmly establish that the Big 7 shoots flatter, with heavier bullets,to any distance beyond 300 yards than anything you can cook up in the 270....

And I'm not dreaming this stuff up because several thousand rounds at the range have told me so.......along with plenty of dead animals with each.

So in the end....what does the 7 Mag do that a 270 does not? It offers heavier bullets at the same velocity,a flatter trajectory,and just throws more flak.It might not be much....but it is a step up. I note in passing that the 7RM with 168 and 180 VLD's seems to be the darling of a lot of skilled elk killers who seem to routinely kill elk at beyond 600 yards;and while it is not chump change, I see few reaching for a 270 for that purpose...I guess they all can't be right....or wrong......


...and of course we can trump a Big 7 with a 300 but we are generally gonna burn more powder, get kicked harder in the process, and (likely) carry a heavier rifle(admittedly a 300WSM, today, will split the baby into more pieces)......but anyone who looks me in the eye and with straight face tells me the elk is gonna be deader from a 300 Win Mag or 300 WSM,than he is from a 7RM,both shooting the same quality bullets,and hit well....is not playing precisely fair .

And, if that 7mm 175 bulllet expands to .60-.65 caliber,hangs on to its weight,and drives on through....and the 30 cal 180 does the same......what, exactly, did I hit the elk with?

Because it's expanded frontal area after the bullet has smashed thorugh hair,hide, and bone, that really shows up frontal area advantage,and does the killing.....NOT what the bullet carries in flight....that only gets it there.

The real action starts once it hits.........IMHO.......of course.....

Oh geez Bob..Not the intentionally loading down the 7MM theory in factory ammo...What about intentionally hampering the modern 30-06 to 60,000 PSI for the older weapons out there?

I have been close to 30 pages on another forum arguing the 270/7 MM "Hit 'em again" with Coyote Hunter and his endless reloading manuals..I say that in humor as Jim is a friend of mine.

Reloading manuals differ,sometimes big time as we all know and not every hunter reloads.To compare fairly for the so called normal Joe who does not reload,factory ammunition is the only fair way to do it showing the ammunition company's best shot per caliber.

Besides..All I here around here is lighter bullets at Mach 3 for the Big 7 ruling out the heavier bullets for most.

I know we have been here before but in my opinion from what I have only seen on a somewhat limited bases for the big 7,the .300 Win Mag hits with more authority than the big 7 and I'm not talking the Weatherby/30-378 and the truly monster 30's of today.

We all love are chosen calibers to the point we sometime act like idiots(in fun mostly) defending them when it doesn't matter all that much on game,to a point.

Never owned a 7MM or .308 as there is know need owning two .270 Win's a 30-06 and .300 Win Mag.The 270 Win was my one rifle battery for about 30 years without a complaint on Elk other than the year I tried the 140 Fail Safe like an idiot but we all learn..

If it ain't broke don't fix it boring or not!!!

Jayco

If any of my 7mm's only hit 2,800 fps with 175 grain bullets, they would go down the road. 2,900-3,000 is more in line, depending on barrel length. I haven't found a loading manual yet that lets any 7mm magnum case stretch it's legs (including Weatherby and Ultras). Even factory ammo is pretty anemic.

I have chronographed a bunch of different 7mm magnum ammo. Some is pretty interesting. Some is pretty anemic. I chronoed a box of 150 grain green box bullets that kept hitting 3,300 fps over two different chronographs. I called Remington about it to see if they would give me any indication of the propellant they used. They wouldn't budge on any info on it, but simply said they don't make it any more....bummer!

Even the best .300 Winchester magnums top out at 3,100 fps or a shade more when hand loaded with 180 grain bullets. Most are about 3,000 fps that I have worked with. At 200 yards, the 7mm and .300's equal each other in velocity (7mm 175 at 2950 fps, .300 WM 180 at 3,100 fps). After that, the 7mm will walk away little by little. Not to say one is better than the other, but the 7mm kicks a whole lot less. I like them both, but ALWAYS hunt with the 7mm mag. I find myself crawling the stock too many times with the .300 and getting a sore eyebrow. I don't get that with the 7mm.

Comparing the .270 (which is always loaded to it's full potential in factory ammo) to a 7mm magnum is like comparing the the .308 to the .30-06. The .308 is loaded to it's potential at 65,000 psi. The .30-06 is loaded to 45,000-55,000 PSI. Ammo makers boggle my mind, but when hand loading, the differences become quite substantial. Flinch

Jayco - I don't pretend to be "fair" with my 7mm RM. 140g TTSX and North Forks run over 3200fps with ease in my 7mm RM and I've run them over 3300fps, which is in line with Nosler's 3340fps data. By contrast the .270/130g runs about 150fps slower per Nosler and te 270/140g is listed at 3018fps.

Case capacity matters when given equal pressures and an extra 300fps when you want it is worth having.

Flinch I agree with what you said above.My experience with those 3 cartridges is the same.

a lot of things that seem like they would make a difference...don't. Especially relating to rifle calibers, we could eliminate all but a couple .22 centerfires, .270, .30-06, .338/.375 and .458 and there wouldn't be any less game killed in the world. Very little talk on the shooting forums however!