Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Tikka t3 7mm mag or 300win mag?

I've decided I'm going to purchase a new tikka t3 in either 7mm mag or 300win mag
Just can't decide on whitch one, it will be a hunting elk/ deer rifle.
shots will most likely be under 400 closer to 200-300 but might be longer.
Thoughts on which would be better?

I own a couple of 300win and currently no 7mm Mag. With that said, for elk and deer, I would say the 7mm would be more than enough. With good bullets, and the distances you mention, a magnum really isn't needed. I wouldn't hesitate to take my T3 in 270 or 260 for 99% of elk or deer hunting situations.

But, I am familiar with Rifleitis syndrome... carry on.

In the grand scheme of things it doesn't really matter. Buy one, go shoot it, then take it hunting. Spending time in the woods is more important than worrying about what caliber to take with you.

He clearly needs to buy both chamberings.

I plan to buy both but for now I have to start with one.

In that case flip a coin.

I would get the 7 mag first, and decide if you want to step up to the 300 Win later. The recoil of the 7 might all you want to deal with. Also, do not overlook the 300 WSM as well. I have one in a Tikka, and it feeds and shoots great.

I prefer the 300 win mag or wsm over the 7 rem mag? No particular reason other than I have a love/hate affair with the 30.06. As mentioned any standard non magnum caliber would work for the distance and game you plan on shooting. I wouldn't bother with magnums now that new bullets and powder make the standard cartridges even that much better? I would personally get a 30.06 or 308 winchester and go hunting.

I am a .300 Win. fan.. Have had one since the 1970's.. But had a 7mm Mag. first.. Currently I have more .300's than 7mm's, but both are favorites.. I think I lean to the .30 because it has never failed me, it put meat on the table when lesser calibers didn't, and I have carried it all over the world.. We are old pals..
My late wife's fav. was the old 7mm Rem Mag. No flies on it either.. But get both.. The only thing I would suggest is shooting them side by side if you can.. Not being critical, but a good friend was making this decision, and I had him shoot my .30 and then the 7mm, he went with the 7.. However, he did NOT shoot much, nor did he reload..

yup

I know I don't need both but I also don't need a 6mm and a 243
Or 3 22-250s
I just really want both but can only afford one at at time.
I don't think I can go wrong with either just wanted to try to lean toward one first.

I love my Tikkas in 22-250 and 25-06 but after owning a couple of 300Mags in heavier rifles, I have no interest in owning one in a rifle as light as a Tikka. A 7Mag would be the largest cartridge I would consider in a Tikka, and I don't know that I would take that plunge. But I already have a couple of 7Mags so I'm not in the market for another.

I am a .300 WM guy, I have a T3 Superlight that sees a lot of hunting time, that being said the 7mm Mag is also a fine cartridge, really no bad choice here.........Good luck......Hb

270 wsm. I've got 19 cartridges left from last year's elk hunting trip. Pot of elk chili is on the stove...


lol

I'd go 300 win mag. And a limbsaver pad. They're recoil magic.

I've heard shooting a 300 in a Tikka isn't very pleasant.

Not to mention, 7mm bullets are hard to beat.

300 WSM. I fooled around with 7mm RM a bit. I found it darn near impossible to get bullet speeds that beat 30-06 speeds with the same or similar bullet weights and still get acceptable accuracy.

I can beat 30-06 speeds with the same bullet weights in my 300 WSM by 150-300 fps depending on bullet weight. And come within 50 fps of 300 WM with recoil exactly 1/2 way between 30-06 and 300 WM. When you use 12-15 gr less powder and give up 50 fps it makes a noticeable difference in recoil. No game animal will notice the 50 fps, but your shoulder will.

For that quarry at those ranges you should get a Tikka in 7mm-08.




P

I considered both, but went T3 superlite in 30-06.

Either one, but Mr. Limbsaver should accompany you everywhere you go:)

I've been using a limb saver for 10+ years
Only way to go.

7mm provides 300 win mag trajectory with 30-06 recoil and should be fine for elk with a good bullet.
That being said, I have the Tikka 7mm mag and am having trouble getting the velocity that the 7mm mag is supposed to have. The same may be true for the 300 in a tikka also. Other than lower velocity, my tikkas have all been super accurate when you find the right ammo or loads.
For me the 7mm provides the long range performance. With the recoil of the 300, I'd much rather have a 338 win mag to go with the 7mm.

The 300 is a great round though. I'd just rather have a 338 in its place.

Thanks to all, I believe I am leaning towards the 7mm.

This in spades !

I'd go with the 7mm, though I think that my .270 T3 Lite Stainless is about the perfect Tikka setup when weight and recoil are considered. I like my magnums to have a bit more weight.

7mm has been my primary hunting rifle for over 30 years and has killed truckloads of deer and elk with 150grain NBT and Barnes TTSX so I cant say anything bad about it. For a one gun battery these days my preference would be the 300 WSM in your Tikka. A friend just bought one this month on my recommendation and is now deciding on a scope.

Seeing the results over a Chronograph and feeling the recoil difference between it and a 7 the short fat guy is just more efficient. I was also comparing the WSM to a Weatherby 300 and couldn't get over how close the WSM was in velocity with so much less powder being used.

The 7 would be the last rifle id give up because it is extremely accurate and has been so reliable for me but that 300 WSM is tough to beat and carries a little more oomph without much recoil penalty. With elk on the menu the 30 caliber makes more sense to me but you really cant go wrong with either.

I have owned Tikka's in 7mm REM MAG, 300WIN MAG and 300 WSM..

the only one I wish I would have kept is the 7mm REM MAG.

The name stamped on the brass is the subject of many discussions, but is largely irrelevant, when the performance characteristics of any round are largely determined by the choice of bullet.

Considering that the only noticeable difference between these rounds will be on the back end, one can avoid a lot of shoulder thump by loading lighter bullets faster; in the 30 calibers, for example...

A 300WSM or 300 Win Mag loaded with 150 Barnes or 155 Scenar is a great launcher and recoil shouldn't bother most folks...recoil is more like a 308, but then the 308 loaded likewise is nearly as competent.

With the bullets available today, I don't see the need for Magnum anything until very long range comes into play, or for the larger calibers as well.

A 7-08 with a 120 Barnes TTSX will perform like a 7mm Magnum in every way but the thump on the shoulder and the name on the case...the effects on the target are similar.

When a 223 is just about right for a lot of things that I used to think a 30-06 was marginal for...a 243 loaded similarly becomes almost overkill, so it's easy to see why some guys are such fans of their 260s.

Smaller, lighter and handier is the mantra of the day!

I also want a 260 but in a different rifle.

+1

Never saw much reason for a 300 Mag when there's the 30-06 !

Unless the OP has an iron shoulder, he will be reaching for a Limbsaver.

Why? I would assume it was due to recoil.

Had a Tikka T3 lite in 338 Win Mag and the limbsaver helped but putting it in a B&C stock was the best solution.

I've become pretty fond of my T3 300WM once I started shooting 130TTSXs at 3560fps. It makes 400yd work very simple. Prior to using that load, I found the rifle fairly boring.

That's coming from a hard core 7RM guy.

i had a 7 mag and so no real advantage over a 270, sold it. i've had a Tikka 695 in 300 WM for about 10 years and love it. the point of a magnum is extra velocity and power if needed, and the 300's available heavier bullets does that. i shoot Hornady 180's in it and on 2 occasions have appreciated the additional power on big midwestern whitetails on tough angles, perhaps unnecessary but still appreciated.