Given similar impact speeds using the same bullet, ie Nosler Partitions or whatever, 160s in 284 and 180s in 308, does the larger caliber bullet kill better? It would seem that it would, but I wonder, if in the field, is there any practical difference? thanks, capt david

Given your criteria, but depending on critter, not much practical diff.

Having said that, greater mass still counts for something.

I mean, if I was going to kill a brown bear, I'd prefer the 30 cal 180 over the 7mm 160 given equal velocity for both.

An elk?--not so much........



Casey

I don't know that you can ever truly know-shoot two hundred elk and maybe you can close in on a legitimate opinion but you can never get rid of all the variables..

Can't see that there would be any practical difference between the 284 and 308 when using proper bullets at similar velocities.

I load 140 grain Partitions in my 284s, because of the COAL limits of the short bolt and lever actions, and would feel well armed to shoot an elk.

JEff

I think it would take several lifetimes of killing with each to be definitive about it... and then I'd bet the answer would be a definitive, "no difference."

Are we talking at 300 and or 301 yds...grin

Dober

Ok sorry couldn't resist...no in all seriousness and I totally believe this. I am a fan of two holes and I do feel that it'd be tough to keep a 284 slug in the elk and from time to time one would find the 30's. No bigga casa grande really but to me it's important (sort of, plus I luv the 7's and borderline loathe the 30's.

Dober

I used a .308 all season this year. 180 grain as you mention. In every instance a .284 with 160s would have done the job just as well as the .308.

Differences are so negligible, I wouldn't worry about it. Pick whatever you like the most. If they took my .308 from me, I would think long and hard about a .284 to replace it.

Hell, that sounds like a good addition. Gunbroker, here I come.

Hey Fin, what 30?

I actually think you may be right about 30's staying inside.

Then again, I've seen the reverse too... one was a 160 7mm Speer Hotcore that was on the offside of a spike elk on a broadside double lung shot at 200 yards from a 7RM... go figure. But the bullet looked like a Speer ad!

I've killed elk with both (although I used 150gr Partitions in the .284) and never saw much of a difference b'twixt the two.

Saw my dad kill a few more with his .308...still no difference.

Given that, I still have to say that in my estimation, the .284 is the bee's knees. Just somthin' about that cartridge....goes faster than it should, shoots straighter than it should....kills like lightning. And for some reason, the felt recoil was less than it should be, too. when I was running a .284, I had an identical rifle in 7mm-08 that felt the same (no lie!) and the .308 was noticeably stiffer.

With today's bullets (say, a 150gr TSX), the .284 is about as good an all-around cartridge that you can find that is still pleasant enough to shoot.

This is hard to answer,and I don't profess to be the last word on tis or anything;just my point of view cause we are in a grey area.....I can only tell what I have seen.I think bullet action has a lot to do with it....

From the standpoint of tissue destruction(mostly fired from 7mm and 300 mags cause that is what I have seen the most),I've traced bullet paths through elk killed with both,seen the destruction,and would say (guess)that the 30 destroys more tissue,or seems to....

..after a long stint with 270's and 7mm's on large buck deer, I whacked a big bodied Saskatchewan buck 350 yards across a field with a 165 Partition from a 300 Win Mag started at 3250 fps.....I was a bit surprised to see the damage and size of exit wounds. I have seen the same thing on other animals and bullets fired from 300 mags.

But does the 300 "kill" quicker or "better"? I suppose it should....but I have not been able to detect it from the standpoint of how far the animals travel,given similar hits and comparable bullet action, and considering that no two shots are precisely the same.......

I think this is because,all things being equal,the 7mm destroys "enough" vital tissue,penetrates well enough,and creates enough damage, that the animal simply cannot handle the trauma......and I think also this is because ballistics is "Physics",or science,and in contrast to what happens to cause an animal to die from a bullet is something else,hard to quantify in certain terms.

I'd say the animals is in tough straits regardless which of the two he is hit with.....

These are my thoughts and observations on the matter....all contrary viewpoints welcome..

I believe NH is looking for a new Governor... throwing your hat in the ring?

I'm thinking your middle name is "Equivocation."

Just kidding of course!

Bob 4 Govenah...grin

I like that

Dober

Mark, you even got the accent down.

Heehee.......

Brad/Dober:Have you guys seen bigger holes from 300's than 7mm's? Is it my imagination? Thinking back I have seen some pretty ghastly holes from 300 mags.....funny thing I also recall the animals moving off, too....

I have not seen much difference in how quickly they died though......

Gee, nobody ever called me "equivocable"..........I wonder why?...........



And I'm such a nice guy, too........



Casey

I have not killed as much stuff as some of the guys in this thread but from my expierence the .308 bullet wins.

Take that for what its worth because I am a fan of 30 caliber and have hunted with one for more than anything else.

I think you would find the occasional .284 bullet instead of the occasional .308 bullet.

Dink

Scenar shooter got me hooked on this .308 idea, but I did not take it quite to the level he has with his setup. Mine is rather pedestrian.

I have a Kimber 84M Montana. It carries a Leupold VX 3 CDS. The setup is far more capable than I am. Two elk bit the dirt with it this year, as did some deer.

Randy-how do you like the CDS?

Dober

Nope big wifes tail....

Bob, I don't have anything remotely the experience with 7's that you and Dober have to respond with any authority... I'm a 30 guy at heart and the bulk of my elk have died at the end of some sort of 30 cal.

Kinda wantin' to know too...

I'm curious to hear as well...

Now dat is a sad tale and one we need to modify...grin

Dober

LOL, great minds, etc., at the same nano-second

up yers

Now he prolly won't answer us....

Hey there Ingwe bit me...and put your ball cap on to face the front and tie up your tenny's...grin

Dober

Randy, I spent the fall with my 308 MT and took two elk, one antelope and one mule deer at ranges from 185 to 400 yards.

Seemed to work.

What bullet in yours?

Ouch

Ah he's a 7X guy, probably take him a few days to catch it..grin

Dober

Well, you're a 7x guy too... and so am I... what were we talking about?

7X as in 275 gee I move slowly Rigby..grin

Next time you need pike flies, better inspect them carefully ..

Just sayin'.....

OK...that was mean....

Gotchya... sort of gay then, eh?

I do hear he likes Belgian White...

Tough crowd...

Just saying, next time you need to break in my fly rod on pike be careful...grin

You can blame Dober...

Gee...a guy trains a couple dogs...




And ties a few flies...



And he gets a reputation....

Go figure...

Cool thread. Bob for govenah- I'm there!

I wouldn't expect much diff between a .284 and .308 caliber bullet at equal velocity yadda yadda. Pretty similar.

I would expect a discernable diff between a .284 cal and .338 cal; some say there is, others say there isn't, I'll never kill enough elk to know for certain.

.323 cal works pretty damn good though.

Wasn't sure what to expect when they first sent them, but now they fall into the "How did I live without this category."

We killed a lot of critters on the show last year, and all were with rifles topped with Leupold VX3 CDS.

Once you set your zero, and you have your loads and turrets properly matched, it is idiot proof. Idiot proof is necessary for a guy like me.

They sent me four of them. One each for my .300 Win, .308, .270Win, .270 WSM.

I have a lot of guest hunters shooting these rifles, so when I range it, it is really nice to be able to dial it up and tell the hunter to hold dead on.

My uncle, who is notoriously an excitable guy with questionable marksmanship was sure he could shoot an AZ elk at 450 yards. I hesitated, but dialed it up and handed him the rifle. Boom. Time to notch the tag.

If you ever want to see or shoot one, let me know. Glad to meet you out at the range and you can play "hit the gong" with them.

I mounted all four rifles in one day. Once zeroed, I started marching them out to the gongs at MWA range. All four rifles hit the 450 gong 5 for 5 by dialing and holding dead on.

That is not shooting that I am known for, so I cleaned them up, put them in the truck and called it good. A tribute to the rifles and the CDS system, not the shooter.

This MT bull was 295 yards. 180gr Trophy Bonded Tips - Federal Factory ammo. Complete pass through with big wounds on the off side shoulder. Same results with everything I shot this year with that load.

Wish some one could tell me why that load/round kills so much better than it seems it should. But, until the results change, I am going to keep using it.

Since this is a .284 v .308 thread, I should mention that I finally got to see the new Kimber 84M Montana in a .280AI.

Given how well my 84M .308 has performed, I told them they should let me do some promo of that rifle. It sure felt sweet, and what is there to not like about that cartridge? Can there be a better all-around cartridge in the lower 48? Probably, but that would be one I would pick. Send me anywhere in the lower 48 with that one, and I am comfortable.

Which VX3?

You ever use dots?

VX 3 - 3.5-10X40mm

Never have used dots.

Exit hole made via 7RM 150gr BT. I don't know if I've seen a larger hole made by a .308" slug...

Jordan that's nasty....as I think back the biggest holes were made with stuff like Power Points,Speers, and Corelokts,ie standard stuff that held together.....not Partitions.

Like I said....can't see much difference...

Jordan,

I used a 7mm 150 NBT from a 7mm-08 on a buck 6-8 years ago. As luck would have it, I shot him in the neck and the wound was remarkably similar to that one in your picture, albeit rounder and with more meat missing. MV in the mid-2600's tops, range 35-40 yards.

You can make a hellacious hole with a 7mm bullet.

Randy...thanks for the run-down on the CDS...been toying with that idea..thats good info...

That particular shot was at about 230 yards, and I watched my client put a bullet through the base of the neck, and the bull crumpled. The hide is kind of shifted over the hole in that pic, but there is a lot of meat missing, too!

That was a nice cape, too. We had to get the taxi to supply a spare for that mount!

Like Bob said- 7mm or .308"....it doesn't make as much difference as the bullet you choose

I've used the 150 NBT a ton out of my Mashburn, it can be a bit less than subtle when rearranging meat etc.

Dober

Sure gets the job done, though

When my 7wsm arrives, the three bullets I'm focusin on are the 162 amax, 160 Accubond, and 150 Noz BT. That 150 is cheap & easy locally and if it'll shoot I'll be shooting bunches of them.

Man I got raped on shipping on the 162's! THOUGHT they was cheap... not so much, by the time the get here.

What bullet(s) in yours, Brad??

And dats why I keep using them, they hit a deer/lope at long range sort of like a 9 iron hits a field mouse off the T box..grin

Dober

John, 165 AB... was planning on using the 168 NBT but couldn't find any locally or nationally after I'd shot up my supply.

My rifle really dotes on the 168 Ballistic Tip. The Accubond, not so much, but it did work well...

Brad,
My fwt SS '06 absolutely LOVES the 165 Accubond. How did they work on the elk you shot?

Every animal I killed this year was a pass-thru, including both elk.

I did put a finisher into the bull as it lay thrashing... shot was no more than 20' away. Bullet entered the sternum and was lodged against the spine.

Looks pretty good to me

Thanks. My M70FWT really liked the old factory Fed. High Energy 180-gr. NP load. Very good accuracy and lots of oomph. I'm sorry it's discontinued, tho' I have a few boxes stockpiled. I save them for moose/elk and use other loads on deer.

Impressive. Thanks Brad.

All I can say is I've found 160g .284 bullets to be boringly reliable on elk since 1982. No lost animals, no tracking jobs on any I've shot. A couple went 40 yards or so, a couple around 25, some 10 and most straight down or no more than a few feet. Put a 160g .284 in the right place and good things happen.

Didn't start hunting with .308" bullets until 2006. Have only killed one elk with a 180g .308" (.300WM) and it stumbled 25 yards, even with good placement. The one I shot with a 150g .308" (.30-06) and two with a 165g .308" (also .30-06) all went straight down. Go figure.

Shot a few elk with the 7mm boolits in a 7x57, shot a few more with .308 cal boolits in a variety of cartridges....They all ended up in the freezer....

Dang I'd think that a 7X would have enough gas to penetrate a freezer at least and give you two holes..

Dober


(boy am I ever gonna regret all that crapola I give you about a 7X if I ever had "A" rebarrel my G33 to one aint I...grin)

Whatever you drop off for any reason is gonna get rebarreled to 7x57....

And FWIW, with 160 gr. TSX or 175 Gr NPTs...the 7x57 will completely penetrate a freezer....

Hey remind A that I faxed him a couple weeks ago about a barrel for me next time you see him. And yeah if it turned out to a 7X I could live with it. As long as it was .6" at the mzl and 23".

I just happen to have a smallish stash of the old 175 Noz Semi's that would be about model perfect for our yearly Nilgai shoot..

Dober

Ever tried a 120 TSX in it? Speed in the 2900 range maybe??

Thx
Dober

Nope.....always shoot the heavies.....

This is about what I have seen as well using both 7mm's and 300's.

I wanna believe that because of larger bore diameter and more bullet weight,the 30's at the same velocity are more "powerful"(this has been ddrummed into my head by others for decades )but in actual use,and in terms of dead animals, I can't tell the difference.

.308-284 = .024 x l (the bearing surface of the bullet) in favor of the 308 bullets when both are the same type, S.D, velocity And roughly the same B.C. It would seem to me any real advantage/disadvantage would exist only in the mind of the shooter.

Goodnews: I have never worried too much about it over the years....regardless which one I carried...

being "undergunned is ....hard to do...if you are choosing between 7mm and 30 cal..I worry more about bullets.

To me Bob, the extra speed of the 7 and 30 Magnums is about flattening trajectory, and little else... theoretically they should kill deader than 06 based hulls, but danged if I can see it.

I'll keep trying

Brad; I agree...except for one little item The added velocity expands the heavier, tougher bullets I like to use to longer distances.

Whether this matters a whole lot is another question.....but it is what it is...

Dober,
120's out of my 7X (either TTSX's or BT's) go over 3000 in my 23 inch barrel that mic's .6 at the muzzle!

Amazing to me that a lefty rifle could do that... Thx

Dober

The thing I'd add to the discussion in terms of how the 06 kills verses the 7's or big 30's is that I've observed over the years when the range gets to the 400-600 range that the critters hit with the bigger/quiker rounds tend to go down quicker (not any deader though...) and they also react stronger to the hits.

Oddly enough and I think it's the extra speed but I feel the same about the .270 vs the 06. Plus I can't recall ever finding a .270 slug in an elk and I can't say that about the 06. And for me, I like/want but don't need 2 holes in the critter..

I would like to tip over a few elk via flight 155 Scenar and either the 06 of the 06+P (what I call the 300 shorty mag...grin). I think that with that bullet I'll get the quick knock downs that I'm used to with the 270 and big 7's.

And maybe even the elk will be deader....

Either way, hunt hard, hunt a lot, shoot a lot and have one heck of a lot of fun!!

Dober

Mark, shouldn't bee too hard to run a 155 Scenar at around 3,280 +/- with RL17.

I also agree about "reaction to the hit" with the bigger rounds... have noticed the same. It does give a guy some comfort.

One of these years I'll get another 270 and kill a few elk with it and see if I can't recover a bullet!

I'm getting 3,330 with RL17 and the 155 Scenar. Best accuracy too and that's not difficult with that bullet.




I agree with that and that's why I like 30 mags for elk.

Just remembered one bullet we found (out of the .270), on a bull we shot down by Gardiner. 5 point and the 140 Horn was found looking nice and comfy about to exit.

3280 sounds stout for my gun but maybe, how much 17 you thinking to get it there? I've been shooting 67 and it seems to me it clocked a bit over 3100. I shot 69 the other day but didn't clock it, I don't think and me thinking is always a scarry thing but I don't think it'll go much over 3200. But, I've been wrong many many times b4...grin

Dober

I was posting while you had Bob, how much 17 are you running to get to 3300? And how long a tube, mine's 23".

Thx, and have an awesome day there my friend.

Dober

Mark,

Looking at my notes again.

24" barrel

Running 69.0 grains
Norma brass
Win primer

That 69.0 is a drop of .5 to get down
to 3,300 with a very low ES of 10 fps.

With the 4 30 shorts I've run all loved Norma brass for accuracy.
Nosler Pro Shop had a bunch for sale cheap and I snapped them up.

edited to add...
Norma brass may be a little thicker and run a little higher pressure.
Safe load in my rifle though.

I've recovered quite a few 270 bullets from animals-Ones I can think of right off are some 150 Interlocks, cow elk, 425 yards, 150 Ballistic Tip, small bear, 60 yards, quite a few 140 Ballistic tips from deer, one a very large buck, shoulder shot at 200 yards or so,
Had 3 Ballistic tips that stopped in a 6 point elk, before range finder days, but I was getting over 4 feet of drop on my shots. Usually, the ones I weighed weighed about 60% of original weight. I credited the Ballistic Tips for stopping a couple of animals that were hit too far back, never had a legitimate gripe with them. Certainly seemed to kill better than a 35 Whelen I had for a while.
Until I came here, I had no idea they were such a wretched failure as a big game bullet. But, then, I used to shoot gophers with that 270, and when I flopped down and put the tripod legs down, it wasn't too big a trick to slip that Ballistic Tip in tight behind the shoulder, with very predictable results. A friend has used one of my 270s for the last several years with 140 BTs with similar results, including a gorgeous mule deer in Wy that scored 180 or so.

Fred

SU35 and Dober the data with RL17 and 155's...May I conclude you are discussing the 300 WSM? Reading Dober's post I wondered if he was thinking of the 30/06 ?

Rin, both are talking 300 WSM... I think Mark's pretty conservative with his load and I have no doubt there's more room... OTOH, it shoots great and 3,100 is penty fast for anything!

I have sorta noticed this,too.....is this like,when you come down outta recoil....and they ain't there?

Beautiful day here, 28 and sunny gonna try to get some more shorty mags loaded and ramble out to run them over the clock. Will check in later if I get it done.

Dober

I have sorta noticed this,too.....is this like,when you come down outta recoil....and they ain't there? [/quote

[/b]thats[b]. Been my experience with the 340 B

Two thoughts:

The discussion of 7mm's perhaps penetrating better than 30's, depends on bullet construction and impact velocity and impact material, more than caliber. A soft 160gr. 7mm hitting at the same speed as a harder/stiffer 180gr. .308, will penetrate less than the .308, if all else is equal, which it never is......

Second, a 160gr. .284 cal. hitting at 2900 fps cannot be as "powerful" (however you measure that)as a 180gr. .308 cal. hitting at 2900 fps. This simply has to be true. Can you see the difference "in the field" on elk? Maybe if you shot hundreds of elk with each caliber, you might be able to be definitive, in some way.

I have not shot all that many elk with various 7's, but I have with .308's and 338's and I am certain I see a definitive difference in how the 338's hammer elk versus the various 30's I've used...........but this is an OVER-ALL statement--so the same theory ought to apply to some degree, to the 7mm versus 308.

THAT spells big time trouble for me... One of those might make me give up the 7 WSM...

A sample of one
RL 17 with 155 Scenars in a factory 24" Rem 300 WSM
65 2912
65.5 2991
66 3088
66.5 3089
67 3152
67.5 3162
68 3184
68.5 3233
69 3286

This is pretty spot on for my Sako A7 300 wsm using win brass win primers and a coal of 2.880.

FYI--I just started a new thread on the 300 WSM/R17 combo in the reloading section so we didn't take away from this thread too much. Not that that ever happens..grin

Dober

In regard to the original quesion of 7mm bullets vs. 30 caliber,I have hammered a bunch of hogs with both.

I think the 30 caliber tends to make bigger wound channels.

I know that I used my 300 WSM this year to take deer,hogs,a mountain goat and an elk.

They were all pretty dramatic kills.

I did lose a really big hog this year that I had hit pretty hard with my 280. I don't think I've ever lost one with a 308,30-06,or 300 mag.

I know that a sample of one doesn't prove anything,but a 180 grain Acuubond or Partition is hard to beat and so far nothing has walked away from either.

Doc-u loading for your 300 shorty or burning factory?

Thx
Dober

I have dies for a bunch of stuff,but not for the WSMs yet.

I have used factory 180 failsafes,180 power points,180 Accubonds,and 150 Balistic Tips.

So far nothing has stopped any of these bullets,I think that includes five bull elk and dozens of deer and hogs.

After all, you are loading Partitions....

.284 or .308, shoot whichever you like and whichever you find most interesting. I've heard it said before that bullets matter most and the .284 cal 160gr Partition is rediculous (in a good way)...

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!

The laws of physics positively states that all things being equal you would have the same exact amount of killing power. However the two equations that are not equal in this equation is bullet weight and diameter. The equality argument can be made for each existing caliber directly under the next however at some point you realize that you've talked yourself all the way down to a 22 long rifle or maybe even the 22 short. This is the point where the realization finally sets in the you have indeed been slowly talking yourself down. Is the 7 mm slightly less than the 30 cal? Yes, slightly! With that being said I personally prefer the 7 x 57 mouser. For me it is the perfect ballance of range, recoil, shot placement, etc. Shot placement I believe is the deadliest equation of all!

Well stated.

May take 2,000 and even then not be conclusive. Statistically, the smaller the difference, the greater the sample size required to establish a credible difference. And throw in the variables of shot placement, state of the animal (at rest or in the rut), etc, etc, like you pointed out.

IMHO, this is always going to be anecdotal and subject to each shooters experiences and biases. But, that's what makes it fun and will never allow it be a "science". Besides, science can be boring...

DF

I shot a cow elk with 308win/180SB thru chest and broke offside upper front leg bone, lodging under off side skin.
Shot bull and cow with 284win/160NP and 200 and 300 and both were pass thru only hitting ribs and lungs.
Also shot several with 270win/130NP,150SB and most were pass thru.
Of course everything died, so bullet performance was great.
I personally think the 284 win with 160NP is a real butt kicker and with the 120BT rounds out its ability to handle about any task.
jmho
Tim

Ive seen a good many deer and elk shot with the 270-280-30/06 class cartridges, they all seem to give vary similar results in my opinion, stepping up velocity with the 7mm mags and 300 mags sometimes seems to produce faster kills and more bullet failures, Ive dressed out dozens of deer and elk, and at least in my case Ive seen that the larger calibers and heaver bullets in the .270 -.300 sectional density range in the .338-.375 calibers moving at sub 3000fps velocities seem to produce the more consistent results and deeper penetration.
but the fact remains that almost any projectile that impacts the heart lung area and penetrates 10"-12" thru that area ,potential delivers a mortal wound, its the projectile destroying vital organs that matters, and its both shot placement and the fact that both impact angles and ranges are unpredictable and most hunters CAN,T consistently place bullets correctly under field conditions that causes the problems, selecting a bullet that has a higher sectional density (weight for diam.)tends to increase penetration allowing raking angle shots to reach and destroy vital organs, but the main factor its the LACK of consistent hunter skill in proper bullet placement in my experience.
In my experience ,you have a better chance of a single shot kill if you limit shots to ranges where you can place shots consistently in a 5" circle and if you use a heavy for caliber expanding bullet, and on animals as large as elk Ive found the
150 grain 270
160-175 grain 7mm
180grain-200 grain 30 cal
to work reasonably well
but once you see what a 250-270 grain 338-375 caliber does its just obvious that the medium bores have a slight advantage
any of the better bullets can and do produce mortal wounds, with proper shot placement.
but Ive noticed the heavier medium bores consistently seem to impact harder and get a more pronounced reaction from game
IVE found no reason at all to swap from a 250 grain speer in my 358 win or 35 whelen, or a 250 grain HORNADY in my 338 win or 340 wby.
theres always going to be those guys that want to brag about their equipment, but you can,t really improve on almost a perfect record of one shot kills on ELK and DEER killed over 42 years with those bullets.
If you KNOW your games anatomy and have decent shot placement with a reasonable caliber and bullet weight for the game being hunted than you'll find the standard bullets work just fine!
or If I put a different perspective on this, if wounded elk consistently used those antlers to impale and kill elk hunters that could not properly place their shots I think you would find far more proponents suggesting a 35 whelen-375 H&H was a better selection than a 25/06-30/06 for use in elk hunts

'Zackly. But, I'd be packing a 280.

About that time of year again.

For what, to dig up a three year old thread? Just kidding. I love these type discussions.

I only began hunting seriously in 1998. From 1977 to 1998 I only dabbled in it. Considering myself a kid in 77, I purchased what must have been the hardest recoiling rifle I have ever owned. It was a Rem700 BDL in 308 Winchester. I honestly believe if I still owned that gun in its original configuration it would still be the same.

After that, I embarked on 7mm Wby's & 280 Rem's. I fell in love with them. But, I never lost my desire for a short action 30 caliber. When the 300 WSM & 7WSM came out I tried both. I could not get the desired velocity from the 7 WSM, so I stayed with the 300 WSM & purchased a Sako 85 in that chambering.

I quickly developed a very fond attachment to this chambering and haven't hunted with any of the others since. The 300 WSM supersedes the 7 Wby, 280 Rem & 308 Win. Relatively soon I will be selling most of my other rifles and focusing all my effort on the Sako & my new Borden custom in 300 WSM.

The next objective is to start hunting in full force, enough so as to wear the paint off those two new 300 WSM's. In contrast to the original 308 Win, they both have 1/2" recoil pads and NO muzzle brakes. I just can't get enough.

.284 and .358

Taking it as bores, rather than cartridges, I changed it to the only two that you must have.

You may have others, if you must, but they are just frivolities.

I'm glad you are very found of your 300-WSM. They look nice and shoot nice from what I hear. I have yet to shoot any short mags. I have thought about building one, just a thought.

I go back to thinking------300 or 7MM short mag. Yeah, I know about BC and gack. Then I wonder, would I like them more than my 30-06? Prolly not.
That's just being a rifle loony

Have a great day.

I own a 7MM Rem Mag. I have no trouble SAFELY breaking 3000 FPS with 175 grain Partitions and 3100 FPS with 160 grain Partitions. But speeds kills nothing if bullets miss targets. I'll take accuracy over velocity, within reason, every time.

From pragmatic perspective, there are too many variables associated with killing animals. Were a 45 grain .22 Hornet to whack a ton Yukon moose in the head killing it instantly, it would not make the .22 Hornet a moose rifle. Were a 700lb elk struck square in the thorax with a 400 grain .45/70 round at 1800 FPS and wander a 100 yards before dying would not make the .45/70 an inferior elk round. In fact, were I to know that all of my shots would be within 150 yards, I'd buy a 22" barreled .45/70 and never look back. There ain't an animal that walks Earth that the .45/70 won't kill.

While these debates are academic, there is modicum of science contained therein. Why destroys important original equipment is immaterial. That that equipment is destroyed is. According to the science of biology, nothing lives but seconds sans heart. You might be able to double remaining lifespan sans lungs. Oxygenated blood to the topside organ is required to keep four hooves on the ground.

Just shy of a week ago I heard a guide say while he was quartering a bull that he'd much rather have a hunter show up with a .270 Win that he can shoot than a magnum that he can't. And that right there is the answer. It ain't what you use, it's all about how you use what you use.

So, captdavid, if you put a bullet from any suitable centerfire rife into organs that are essential for sending oxygenated blood to the topside organ of any animal, it will die. If you're intending on breaking shoulders before killing an animal, I'd go with heavy-for-caliber bullets. (Guides like shoulder shots. That way they don't have to track dead animals that refuse to accept the inevitable).

When I was older and a whole lot smarter and knew everything there was to know about everything there was, I up & went and bought a 7MM Rem Mag specifically for elk hunting. After all, I had read O'Connor and knew that Remington's Big 7 was designed to be a long range elk rifle, and that the Big 7 worked as designed. Now that I'm a lot younger and less knowledgeable about important stuff in life, were I accorded a life do-over I'd buy buy one and only one rifle: the best quality .280 Rem I could afford and never need another rifle.

Translating the sage words of that guide who was quartering a bull last Monday morning: it ain't what you use, it's how you use what you use.


Vaya Con Dios

Bob,
I think those of us that have used the 7x57 have seen the same thing which confirms the adequacy of both 7mm caliber and general bullet integrity for the caliber, as being "enough".

John

its how you shoot it for sure. Its also bullet choices. I just read a bunch of bullshit by Horace Gore in a magazine..... to many generalities for me to care for his writing.

I prepare for the worst case, and in this case I think the two rounds are very close, but I'd be going 284 personally and see how far I can get energy out of it. Enough energy.

Then I'd do what I had to, to get as close as I could.

Its all pretty damn simple though, take what you want, know its limits, then know YOUR limits in EVERY situation.

Believe it or not I passed shots for over an hour on a bull moose at under 75 yards because I never had a clean shot. Shots to the body at angles and such, yes, but not the clean sure shot I wanted.
But it worked fine, I got the neck/shoulder about 36 hours later with one clean shot.

I'd certainly not question a decent weight TTSX in either round for elk though. Shot within its energy and the shooters abilities on any given shot.