Home
Posted By: SLDUCK 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/03/16
So the girlfriend has bro. Wants me to come out Colorado. 300 yd longest shot he has taken should I get a 7 mag or just take the whelen?
Posted By: elkhunternm Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/03/16
Take the Whelen.
Posted By: 338rcm Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/03/16
Originally Posted by elkhunternm
Take the Whelen.


Xs2
Posted By: micky Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/03/16
If you need an excuse for an extra rifle... this is the wrong forum to ask that question. But, if you need better binos more, spend the money there. A 35W would work great.
Posted By: WyoCoyoteHunter Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/03/16
Visit Bob Hagel.. The big 7's will do all a "brush buster" will do an alot more..
Posted By: SLDUCK Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/03/16
It's a remmy 7600 though. Shoots nice tight groups. I'm a midwest whitetail hunter. Got a savage 300 99 and a 250 sav ruger 77. That is my battery. Pretty lame. No mags
Posted By: elkhunternm Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/03/16
Take the Whelen.
Posted By: bsa1917hunter Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/03/16
If you don't have a 7mm mag, I suggest you go out and buy one pronto. Take it elk hunting and let us know how it works out for you...Load up some good ol 160gr. nosler partitons to about 2,950 fps. Should work like a charm if you hit em right.. wink
Posted By: Wyogal Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/03/16
I've taken a couple 200yd+ shots with a 7600, and did OK.
But if you look at how the scope is mounted on a 7600, its not as stable as a bolt action mounted scope. I was told this by a gunsmith, who no, was not trying to sell me another rifle, but who wanted to inform me of the 760/ 7600 limitations. He knew I had other rifles I could use. I just use my 7600 for more close up work, expected hunting less than 200yds.
So just saying.
Posted By: bsa1917hunter Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/03/16
Originally Posted by Wyogal
I've taken a couple 200yd+ shots with a 7600, and did OK.
But if you look at how the scope is mounted on a 7600, its not as stable as a bolt action mounted scope. I was told this by a gunsmith, who no, was not trying to sell me another rifle, but who wanted to inform me of the 760/ 7600 limitations. He knew I had other rifles I could use. I just use my 7600 for more close up work, expected hunting less than 200yds.
So just saying.


I've seen some damn accurate 760's and 7600's. I think your smith was smoking dope. Is he from Washington? That stuff is legal there now... whistle
Posted By: Wyogal Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/03/16
Originally Posted by bsa1917hunter
Originally Posted by Wyogal
I've taken a couple 200yd+ shots with a 7600, and did OK.
But if you look at how the scope is mounted on a 7600, its not as stable as a bolt action mounted scope. I was told this by a gunsmith, who no, was not trying to sell me another rifle, but who wanted to inform me of the 760/ 7600 limitations. He knew I had other rifles I could use. I just use my 7600 for more close up work, expected hunting less than 200yds.
So just saying.


I've seen some damn accurate 760's and 7600's. I think your smith was smoking dope. Is he from Washington? That stuff is legal there now... whistle


My 7600 is very accurate. I am relating what I was told by a good credible gunsmith, who has since passed away, at age 80.

What are you on, your 2nd 6 pack of the evening? Getting a little, just a little, surly over a simple topic aren't ya.
Posted By: smallfry Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/03/16
Buy the 7mm, get it all ready for your trip without firing it, wait till the day before then flip a coin until it favors the 35 Whelen, take the 35 and get your elk. Get home and sell the 7 mag for 1/2 the price, impulse buy a 30-06, get sellers remorse and buy another 7mag. grin Now you are ahead!
Posted By: bsa1917hunter Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/03/16
Originally Posted by Wyogal
Originally Posted by bsa1917hunter
Originally Posted by Wyogal
I've taken a couple 200yd+ shots with a 7600, and did OK.
But if you look at how the scope is mounted on a 7600, its not as stable as a bolt action mounted scope. I was told this by a gunsmith, who no, was not trying to sell me another rifle, but who wanted to inform me of the 760/ 7600 limitations. He knew I had other rifles I could use. I just use my 7600 for more close up work, expected hunting less than 200yds.
So just saying.


I've seen some damn accurate 760's and 7600's. I think your smith was smoking dope. Is he from Washington? That stuff is legal there now... whistle


My 7600 is very accurate. I am relating what I was told by a good credible gunsmith, who has since passed away, at age 80.

What are you on, your 2nd 6 pack of the evening? Getting a little, just a little, surly over a simple topic aren't ya.



Sounds like you needed a better smith anyway... RIP..
Posted By: saddlesore Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/03/16
I am a Colorado resident, but meet a lot of nonresident elk hunters every year. A,lot from MN, PA, big,whitetail hunting states. I see a lot of 7600's and those guys go home with elk. Most of them chambered in 30-06, some in .270, and some in 35 Whelen. I used a 7mag for a few years, now a 30-06 stoked with either 220 gr RN or 180 gr partitions. The 220 gr come real close,to the 35 Whelen. Spend your money on other gear.
Posted By: specneeds Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/03/16
Pick up a new 7mm, grab a rifle that feels good and will carry well, I like several rifles that are a bargain and come with an accuracy guaranty. Match it with a good scope in good mounts and practice out to 500 yards - with a little practice you will amaze yourself and your buddies with your long range marksmanship - when that elk pops out at 290 yards it will be a slam dunk for you.

Tikka, Weatherby Vanguard S2, TC Venture would top my list for accurate dependable guns that shoot well and don't break the bank. A $320 Conquest 3-9 from eurooptic or a Meopta from Doug at CameralandNY would be great on a new 7 mm. But it is your new rifle maybe you've always wanted a high dollar custom with an S&B on top. Find the bullet that works best - your marksmanship will be dialed in and at an all time best because you had to get ready for Colorado..... you don't want your GF to be embarrassed that her guy isn't ready to shoot at least as well as her brother.

Then take the Whelen because it is perfect for close in black timber hunting and that may be where you find them.
Posted By: Jaguar Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/03/16
Either will do the job fine. The advantage of your Whelen is that you already know your rifle. When the chips are down it is better to have a rifle your reflexes are tuned to. You will make all the right moves in a hurry - the first try. That could make the difference in getting off a successful shot.

Agree with others, spend the money on other gear you need, like a good pair of boots that you start breaking in now, and add a new memory to the Whelen.

(This said by a person whose go-to rifle is a 7 mag.)

Also get in shape.
Posted By: Dre Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/04/16
Are you even comfortable shooting 300 yards?
I practice to 400 with my 06. At 500 small errors really add up. I'm considering building a 35 becaus most of my elk encounters are less than 100 yards. If I had the patience to sit and glass canyons for hours on end Then maybe I'd consider some magnum. Honestly my 270 is a good flat shooter. Rather be a good shot than have some magnum you can't shoot.
Posted By: WyoCoyoteHunter Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/04/16
I know dozens of folks who shoot magnum rifles very, very well..
Posted By: moosemike Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/04/16
Originally Posted by Wyogal
I've taken a couple 200yd+ shots with a 7600, and did OK.
But if you look at how the scope is mounted on a 7600, its not as stable as a bolt action mounted scope. I was told this by a gunsmith, who no, was not trying to sell me another rifle, but who wanted to inform me of the 760/ 7600 limitations. He knew I had other rifles I could use. I just use my 7600 for more close up work, expected hunting less than 200yds.
So just saying.


That's the dumbest ass gunsmith I've ever heard of. All you need is eyes and you know he's on weed.
Posted By: Wyogal Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/04/16
That coming from a moose. In character too. Actually MORE in character of a lefty Liberal, who denigrates anybody they disagree with. If the gunsmith in your opinion was wrong, as now he's been dead a couple years, I understand you disagree with him. But you are behaving like the very people, I'll bet, who make your skin crawl everytime you see them on TV, protesting punching people, calling conservative people names. And here you are being an idiot just like them, accusing an old dead guy of having been a tooter on weed. You and Bsa191 are pathetic.....and obviously lefty liberals.
Posted By: Les7603006 Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/04/16
Rem 7600 / 760 = Two scope rings attached to a base that is attached to the top of the receiver with 4 screws.

Rem 700 = Two scope rings attached to a base that is attached to the top of the receiver with 4 screws.
I'm not seeing a difference here.

Maybe your smith should have smoked some weed. Hell, in my prime I drank enough moonshine to float a 14 foot boat and smoked enough weed to sink the same boat.

Never mind. I just figured it out. You must be one of those that use the see-thru mounts. That was just his polite way of saying "moron"
Posted By: Ulvejaeger Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/04/16
An avowed fan of the 35 Whelen, there is no doubt which rifle I would take!!!
After more than 25 yrs. still no problems with the original scope mounting set up.......
Yes it is a rebored 760.
Posted By: mart Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/04/16
Since you already own a 35 Whelen, inarguably the finest North American big game chambering ever, all that awaits you in a 7 mag is buyers remorse and bitter disappointment. grin
Posted By: moosemike Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/04/16
Originally Posted by Wyogal
That coming from a moose. In character too. Actually MORE in character of a lefty Liberal, who denigrates anybody they disagree with. If the gunsmith in your opinion was wrong, as now he's been dead a couple years, I understand you disagree with him. But you are behaving like the very people, I'll bet, who make your skin crawl everytime you see them on TV, protesting punching people, calling conservative people names. And here you are being an idiot just like them, accusing an old dead guy of having been a tooter on weed. You and Bsa191 are pathetic.....and obviously lefty liberals.


Bernie 2016.
Posted By: colorado bob Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/04/16
I would take the Model 99 in 300 Savage. I know a few guys here in SW Colorado that use them.
Posted By: RinB Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/04/16
Asking most guys here if you need another rifle is about like asking your barber if you need a haircut.
Predictable, YES.
Use the 35. Any gun good, shoot'em good.
Posted By: Jeff_O Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/04/16
A 7600 in .35 Whelen and a good 7-mag would be a great 2-gun elk battery. But if you are limiting your shots to 300 yards there's no need for the 7mm. With some practice and attention to detail an accurate 7-mag is a VERY capable rifle; the simplest path forward there would be a scope with a range-compensating reticle and the 160 Accubond. That's a 500 yard rig. You can stretch a good 7-mag much further than that but you start getting into more esoteric and expensive gear, and the practice requirements go way up.

If you want to "go there" budget a rangefinder. The Sig Kilo is the one. All of us with Leica LRF's are going "aargh".... grin....
Posted By: elkhunternm Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/04/16
When a 300 yard shot is the longest one taken,no need for the "range-compensating reticle" or a rangefinder,JeffO. smile
Posted By: tedthorn Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/04/16
Shoot what you already have.

You're license (if you don't already have one)
will eat up 90% of 7 Benjamins
Posted By: Billu Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/05/16
Take the whelen. Those 7600s just plain work. The 35 Whelen is an awesome round. LOVE mine smile


[Linked Image]
Posted By: Billy_Goat Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/05/16
easy call. whelen.
Posted By: specneeds Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/05/16
Lots of practical responses from a bunch of addicts with an expensive out of state elk hunting habit.

I bought my 7mm 25 years before it ever got to shoot an elk and it works well for deer, maybe the best deer rifle but your Whelen has the advantage for elk killing out to 200 yards certainly.

If you don't already have them good boots, binoculars, rangefinder will make a bigger difference in your experience and chances for success.

A little longer range practice should give you a better answer for your rifle and scope combination. Whatever range you can consistently hit a coffee can sized target from a field position gives you a safe conservative maximum range. If the Whelen does it out to 300 you are probably good to go.

Our area offers more long range shots than close up normally so we practice out to 800 getting ready for 400 -500 yards. In a different area my first bull was only 60 yards away and closest cow was 11 yards when I pulled the trigger.....you never know so a rifle you use like it is part of you.
Posted By: PJGunner Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/06/16
Originally Posted by Wyogal
I've taken a couple 200yd+ shots with a 7600, and did OK.
But if you look at how the scope is mounted on a 7600, its not as stable as a bolt action mounted scope. I was told this by a gunsmith, who no, was not trying to sell me another rifle, but who wanted to inform me of the 760/ 7600 limitations. He knew I had other rifles I could use. I just use my 7600 for more close up work, expected hunting less than 200yds.
So just saying.


Well, you'll probably send me a nastygram to go with the others saying you "gunsmith" was full of it or smoking whacky weed but up to a point I'm inclined to agree with them. I worked for an older gunsmith for a bit over three years before he passed away and most of my work had to do with mounting scopes on rifles he built or for customers who wanted to upgrade. Part of my job was to ask sight the rifles in for the customers.
The point made that a scope on a Remington 760/7600 takes a base and four screws or two bases and fours screw vs the Remington M700 also taking bases and four screws is spot on.
Now I'm not gonna say your "gunsmith" is full of prunes just yet. It would go a long way settling that question with a couple of good photos on how that scope set up is mounted. Your choice. A couple of pictures or more badmouthing. Which ever lifts your skirt.
Paul B.
Posted By: PJGunner Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/06/16
"So the girlfriend has bro. Wants me to come out Colorado. 300 yd longest shot he has taken should I get a 7 mag or just take the whelen?"

Originally Posted by SLDUCK
It's a remmy 7600 though. Shoots nice tight groups. I'm a midwest whitetail hunter. Got a savage 300 99 and a 250 sav ruger 77. That is my battery. Pretty lame. No mags


Well, I hunt New Mexico near Raton which is right on the Colorado border. Been doing it for the last 6 years. Closet shot was right at 100 yards and the longest was 350 yards, all verified by laser. My hunting buddies shots were at similar ranges with two exceptions. Both a bit bit over 400 yards. Animals were hit and running away. They didn't make it.
My buds were shooting .270 Win.150 gr. Nosler Partition and 30-06 180 gr. Hornady SP.
My rifle is a .35 Whelen shooting a Barnes 225 gr. TSX at 2700 FPS. Dunno if that load would be OK in your rifle though it's fine in mine. It's accounted for 5 of the 6 elk I've taken on those hunts. One was with a 30-06 when the scope on the Whelen turned toes up. Take the Whelen. If you don't reload, try some of the Nosler ammo with the 225 gr. Partition. Pricey? Oh yeah but they'll do the job if your rifle likes them.
FWIW, I have there rifles chamber to the Whelen. My custom which is what I take, a Remington M700 Classic that my current load is too hot and a Ruger. M77 with a possibly bad chamber. Factory ammo will have case head separations on firing. Gonna see if I can firearm some brass and use it as a cast bullet gun.
Paul B.
Posted By: Wyogal Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/06/16
Paul, I appreciate your response. I have since read extensively on the 7600, its design, many reviews, and conclude that I stand highly corrected, on believing the opinion of an old gunsmith. It appears that he had a bias against 7600. And, in believing his opinion of the 7600, I was wrong. It would have benefitted me if previous posters would have directed me to publications, or even explained how the 7600 design and mounting system helps to give it great accuracy even at long distances. But since previous posters had no intention of educating me, preferring instead, to respond as jerks, they demeaned the old gunsmith, whom I regarded as a friend. Badmouthing began on THEIR end, probably fueling their egos by a few brews. What they think of me is really none of my business. They know what I think of them. They started out taking the low road at the git go.
Posted By: Ringman Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/06/16
Wyogal,

A post of class.
Posted By: moosemike Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/06/16
Originally Posted by Wyogal
Paul, I appreciate your response. I have since read extensively on the 7600, its design, many reviews, and conclude that I stand highly corrected, on believing the opinion of an old gunsmith. It appears that he had a bias against 7600. And, in believing his opinion of the 7600, I was wrong. It would have benefitted me if previous posters would have directed me to publications, or even explained how the 7600 design and mounting system helps to give it great accuracy even at long distances. But since previous posters had no intention of educating me, preferring instead, to respond as jerks, they demeaned the old gunsmith, whom I regarded as a friend. Badmouthing began on THEIR end, probably fueling their egos by a few brews. What they think of me is really none of my business. They know what I think of them. They started out taking the low road at the git go.


I don't drink.
Posted By: beretzs Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/06/16
I ran my 35 Whelen for quite a few elk hunts and it NEVER left me wanting. With a good scope 400 yards isn't hard and with a practiced shooter it'll get out further..

Love the 7 mags as well but I've been left wanting with the Whelen.
Posted By: War_Eagle Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/09/16
Originally Posted by beretzs
I ran my 35 Whelen for quite a few elk hunts and it NEVER left me wanting. With a good scope 400 yards isn't hard and with a practiced shooter it'll get out further..

Love the 7 mags as well but I've been left wanting with the Whelen.


???
Posted By: Jeff_O Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/11/16
Just to salt the soup... I have and love a .358, which has left me chronically yearning for a Whelen, just because .35's are fun and whack the crap out of critters.

But I have a good .338, and it sure strikes me as a superior elk cartridge in pretty much every way at comparable recoil levels. And in the same size rifle.

No?
Posted By: gerry35 Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/11/16
No.
Posted By: elkhunternm Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/11/16
Wasn't this settled in the .300 Wby thread? wink
Posted By: SLM Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/11/16
Originally Posted by elkhunternm
Wasn't this settled in the .300 Wby thread? wink


Yes it was.

Grab anything from a .243 to a .308 and go kill elk.
Posted By: elkhunternm Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/11/16
That was from .270-.375 and go kill elk.
Posted By: bsa1917hunter Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/11/16
Originally Posted by elkhunternm
That was from .270-.375 and go kill elk.



Yep, save the .243 for the women and kids... whistle. Be ready to back them up with a 338 though...
Posted By: elkhunternm Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/11/16
And Nosler Partitions.
Posted By: SLM Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/11/16
Originally Posted by elkhunternm
That was from .270-.375 and go kill elk.


That was your version. grin
Posted By: SLM Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/11/16
Originally Posted by bsa1917hunter
Originally Posted by elkhunternm
That was from .270-.375 and go kill elk.



Yep, save the .243 for the women and kids... whistle. Be ready to back them up with a 338 though...


Ya, most women and children have figured it out.

Don't worry, you'll catch up someday.
Posted By: elkhunternm Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/11/16
Originally Posted by SLM
Originally Posted by elkhunternm
That was from .270-.375 and go kill elk.


That was your version. grin
Ah yes,the correct way. wink grin
Posted By: SLM Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/11/16
Originally Posted by elkhunternm
Originally Posted by SLM
Originally Posted by elkhunternm
That was from .270-.375 and go kill elk.


That was your version. grin
Ah yes,the correct way. wink grin


The heat is obviously getting to you.
Posted By: elkhunternm Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/11/16
Nope. laugh laugh
Posted By: scenarshooter Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/12/16
Get a seven......
Posted By: ColdCase1984 Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/12/16
You can get a 7RM T3 SS Superlite for just over 6 bills right now.

Weighs 6.4 lbs. Naked. Add a light scope & rings.

What does your pump gun weigh?

My old azz was dragging at 8,500 feet w a 10.5 lb. rig. This year I'll be carrying a Montana 84M.

You need to be walking five miles a day right now.
Posted By: NH K9 Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/12/16
Guy has a T3 7mm barreled action in the Classifieds for just over 4 bills. If Bin still has the McMillan Edges ready to ship for it.......

I'm a fan of the 7600 in Whelen, but I was a bigger fan of my 700 in a McMillan for humping around the CO mountains. I think I'd be a bigger fan of an 84l in '06 or, maybe, just my 84m in the future.
Posted By: Fireball2 Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/12/16
I'd take any Savage 99 I own. No need for anything else.
Posted By: jwall Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/12/16
Originally Posted by ColdCase1984
You can get a 7RM T3 SS Superlite for just over 6 bills right now.

Weighs 6.4 lbs. Naked. Add a light scope & rings.
.


Geewhillakers - that makes me droool!! and I have 2 - 7 RMs.
I might outta sell one. cry


Jerry
Posted By: Bugger Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/13/16
Originally Posted by bsa1917hunter
Originally Posted by Wyogal
I've taken a couple 200yd+ shots with a 7600, and did OK.
But if you look at how the scope is mounted on a 7600, its not as stable as a bolt action mounted scope. I was told this by a gunsmith, who no, was not trying to sell me another rifle, but who wanted to inform me of the 760/ 7600 limitations. He knew I had other rifles I could use. I just use my 7600 for more close up work, expected hunting less than 200yds.
So just saying.


I've seen some damn accurate 760's and 7600's. I think your smith was smoking dope. Is he from Washington? That stuff is legal there now... whistle


BSA hit it square on the head. Your smith may be able to fix guns but he knows little about 7600's. He also does not seem to realize if you ar getting good groups at 100 yards the accuracy won't drop off.
Posted By: Bugger Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/13/16
I'm on my third 7600. My sons wanted the first two. Each have been sub MOA with my favorite loads.
A 7600 in 35 Whelen brings a lot of money on the market. As it should.
Posted By: beretzs Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/14/16
Originally Posted by War_Eagle
Originally Posted by beretzs
I ran my 35 Whelen for quite a few elk hunts and it NEVER left me wanting. With a good scope 400 yards isn't hard and with a practiced shooter it'll get out further..

Love the 7 mags as well but I've been left wanting with the Whelen.


???


Apologize about that. Fingers must have gotten ahead of my brain. Meant the 7's haven't ever let me down either.
Posted By: Coyote_Hunter Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/14/16
Originally Posted by SLDUCK
So the girlfriend has bro. Wants me to come out Colorado. 300 yd longest shot he has taken should I get a 7 mag or just take the whelen?


The Whelen should work great. I'd load it up with a 225g AccuBond or Partition.

My longest shot was at 487 yards with a .338WM and a 225g AB, MV 2742fps. You should be able to get close to that MV. The AB worked great.
Posted By: jwall Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/16/16
I honestly like and have hunted/killed with both cartridges.

However I would feel the 7 RM would cover ALL possibilities better but

that's just me.


Jerry
Posted By: Tejano Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/17/16
The Whelen is fine but a lighter rifle would be nice.

Better to spend the funds on good boots, good bino's and maybe a range finder as others have said. Plus the Nosler Ammo.
Posted By: northcountry Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/17/16
Originally Posted by Ringman
Wyogal,

A post of class.


I second that. Cheers NC
Posted By: Bugger Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/17/16
Originally Posted by Wyogal
Paul, I appreciate your response. I have since read extensively on the 7600, its design, many reviews, and conclude that I stand highly corrected, on believing the opinion of an old gunsmith. It appears that he had a bias against 7600. And, in believing his opinion of the 7600, I was wrong. It would have benefitted me if previous posters would have directed me to publications, or even explained how the 7600 design and mounting system helps to give it great accuracy even at long distances. But since previous posters had no intention of educating me, preferring instead, to respond as jerks, they demeaned the old gunsmith, whom I regarded as a friend. Badmouthing began on THEIR end, probably fueling their egos by a few brews. What they think of me is really none of my business. They know what I think of them. They started out taking the low road at the git go.


Just to let you know, I've read magazine articles by writers I have a lot of respect for. They stated that pump action rifles have no ability to group shots. So your gunsmith falls in good company. Before 7600's came out I found out that it was difficult to get 760's to shoot well off sand bags. But after I learned how, they shot fine.
The 7600 is a very accurate rifle but many poo hoo'd the 7600 without trying them. Perhaps your gunsmith read those articles too.
The only issue I have with the 7600's is their recoil pad. I have arthritis and bersitus I need a soft recoil pad even on low recoil rounds such as the 270. But that's due to my short comings not the 7600. If you're shooting good groups off bags you are doing well.
That 7600 in 35 Whelen is an awesome rifle. I believe it is good for any animal in the Western Hemisphere. Also don't believe it when people tell you it isn't any good for longer distances a decent 200 to 225 grain bullet loaded to 60,000 PSI is a fairly flat shooting cartridge. Just look at the bc on the bullet, look at the velocity, then look at the tables.
My brother reliably took deer to 450 yards with his whelen.

I hope to see more of your posts.
Posted By: bellydeep Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/17/16
I'd get a 300 WBY. There's nothing better for elk
Posted By: Bugger Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/27/16
Split the difference. Get a 32 Special
Posted By: Angus1895 Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 06/27/16
I personally wouldn't worry about what people say. I would concern my self with what I can do. Shoot the one you own. If you can't shoot it as far and as tight as you need, loan a different rifle and see if you can shoot that one better. If you can clearly see a difference buy a different rifle. Or loan one, or shoot your brother in laws, or sneak closer. Or buy an archery tag. I think a 35 wheeled would be ample elk medicine.
Posted By: Heym06 Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 07/01/16
You have the rifle! Get in shape and have your boots broken in, spend the extra dollars on good glass.
Posted By: old_willys Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 07/01/16
For years I took either a 300 WSM or 7mmRM but every animal shot was under 300 yards and most right around 200.


Next trip will be my 35 Whelen and my 30-06 as backup....
Posted By: raybass Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 07/04/16
Don't be worried about the 35 Whelen on an elk hunt. I took one on several hunts and finally took a small bull at a tad over 300 yds. DRT and whip out the camera. I also was pushing a 225 gr TSX @ 2700 fps.
Posted By: boomwack Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 07/05/16
Originally Posted by SLDUCK
So the girlfriend has bro. Wants me to come out Colorado. 300 yd longest shot he has taken should I get a 7 mag or just take the whelen?


Perfect excuse for a new rifle, not that a guy needs an excuse grin

The Whelen will handle the chore quite well if need be, even at 3 hundy wink A slouch the whelen is not.
Posted By: Axtell Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 07/05/16
Both will kill. I hunted with a 7Mag with good success for years, then acquired a 35Whelen, the difference between the two are more one shot knock downs with the Whelen than the 7.
Posted By: Rug3 Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 07/05/16
Originally Posted by SLDUCK
It's a remmy 7600 though. Shoots nice tight groups. I'm a midwest whitetail hunter. Got a savage 300 99 and a 250 sav ruger 77. That is my battery. Pretty lame. No mags


I remember reading years ago a statement by John Jobson I believe. He said, concerning elk hunting, "If you see someone carrying a 300 Savage he probably knows something you don't."

As a couple others suggested the 300 is also fully capable of dumping an elk. You already have an adequate elk package. I'd suggest the Whelen as primary and also take the Sav99 for backup.

Jim
Posted By: Dre Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 07/07/16
Curious to see what the OP will do.
Posted By: SakoAV Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 07/15/16
SLDUCK,

If a bullet from a big game cartridge destroys an elk's heart and/or lungs, it will die. So take the rifle with which you're most confident.

I've used 160 grain Partitions out of my 7MM Rem Mag. Elk died.

A .280 Rem might just be a great way to kill elk.

I haven't seen any big game animal go very far after its topside oxygenated blood flow stopped. Nothing living remains in that condition very long without stuff necessary for oxygenating blood and pumping it topside.
Posted By: oldman1942 Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 07/15/16
+100

Best Elk hunter I ever knew killed well over 100.

1894 special order Winchester rifle in 30-30.

His best quote: "Son you a'int huntin' Elk till' you can smell them.:

Take the 35 with TSXs or partitions, get close.

As for the silly debate on accuracy. Scope mounting has zero to do with accuracy differences. Pumps and semis are just not as stiff end to end as a well bedded bolt gun. That said "minute of Elk" as ethical ranges <300 is so big, a rifle that groups 5" will kill every time. Remember a 5" group is only 2.5" off the POA.

My go to rifle shoots 3 165 TSXs @3100 in 1" all day long, although my best was killed @18 paces with a .61 flinter and yes, I could smell him.

[Linked Image]
Posted By: Whelen Nut Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 07/22/16
Someone above asked what does a M7600 weigh? Well, I just weighed one of mine in 35W with a 2-7VX2 on it and in came in at 7.90#.

On a trip to northern Idaho some years ago I took both a Rem 700--7Mag, and the 7600 35W. After the first day, that heavy 7Mag stayed in the tent.

Those with no experience with 760's/7600's don't have a clue how accurate and lightweight they are. AND, NO, they DO NOT rattle. laugh

A 225 grain AB, TTBC, NP, TTSX does rather well in the Whelen on NA big game. A bit much for deer but certainly does the job. grin

WN
Posted By: hanco Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 08/03/16
Go with the 7 Rem with 160 partitions
Posted By: BustemAgain Re: 7 mm vs 35 whelen - 08/03/16
Go for the romance, take the Whelen
© 24hourcampfire