Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Elk Hunting .270 Win or 7mm RM

Some guys think there's a huge difference, but really there isn't. With todays bullets and optics that reliable track at any sane hunting distance, you can take an elk with both cartridges equally as well. One doesn't really "out perfom" the other, when in the end you have a dead elk laying on the ground. This isn't the longrange hunting forum either, so essentially we are comparing two peas in a pod for most average elk hunting scenerios. To be honest, all of my elk could have been killed with a 6.5 creedmoor and that's what I plan on using this year...

Just because this forum isn’t exclusively about long-range hunting, that doesn’t mean that LR scenarios are not included in general modern hunting. Even at moderate distances, the 7Mag has a noticeable advantage in steering the bullet to vitals (necessary before you can have a dead elk on the ground). Wind can play havoc on bullets, even at 300 meters. With a 7Mag pushing a 180 ELD at 2960 fps, a 15 MPH full value wind pushes the bullet about 4.5” at 300 meters, using atmospherics common to my AO. So even if the wind is gusty between 0-15 MPH, switchy, and inconsistent, the bullet will still land within a 9” circle with a center hold, which is wrecked vitals. The .270 pushing the 150 ELD-X at 2900 fps drifts about 8” under the same conditions. Even the 6.5 Creedmoor with 147 ELD at 2700 fps drifts a meager 6.6”. With an equally fickle wind, your .270 bullet will land within a 16” circle, which could be a poor hit and a bit of a rodeo.

The contrast between the two bullets only gets more pronounced when you go beyond 300 meters.

Both the .270 and the 7Mag can be made to work fine, and the advantages of the 7Mag may only be apparent in certain scenarios, but to say that there is no advantage is incorrect. This isn’t purely academic- I’ve got extensive experience observing the external ballistics of all three bullets/cartridges, and there is a material and observable difference in how each is affected by the wind, even at modest ranges.

The recoil advantage goes to the 270, which often trumps a small advantage in ballistics.

If comparing apples to apples, one should compare the 170 berger and the 180 eld.

The difference in recoil is slight, IME, compared to the difference in external ballistics.

Choose any .277” bullet currently mass produced, and the result will be the same- the 7Mag increases the margin of error in ensuring POI is in the vitals.

Nah, that would be too easy and make it seem like the 270 win treads too much on the heels of the 7mm rem mag.... Wait for JeffO to pull out the ballistic gak, we all so greatly appreciate.. Some people might think others like the feeling of smoke being blown up their azz...

If I was going to deal with the muzzle blast and recoil of a magnum case I would step up to the 300 Winchester or 300WSM.
270 will work just fine as well a gaggle of other cartridges.
I would concentrate on learning to locate elk. That will bare the most fruit.

One of these is a 160 grain accubond shot out of a 7mm mashburn at 3200fps, one is a 168 grain LRAB shot out of a 280 Ackley at 2850fps, and one is a 140 grain berger shot out of a 6.5-06 at 2825fps. All three went through elk and were found just against the offside hide. All three were broadside shots. The 140 and 168 were within 25 yards of each other and the 160 grain was another 50 yards farther. All three elk stumbled 30 or so yards and fell over. Which bullet is which?

Anyone that thinks there’s a significant difference between the two inside 500 yards (where the bulk of hunting should happen) needs more experience shooting elk.

M

Wow. Thanks for the write up.

Whoa! Based on all the pixie dust heaped on some cartridges, I should toss all my rifles in the truck and haul them to a shop for consignment and buy a 6.5 Creedmoor and a Cactus Jack Special .270 Winchester to cover all North American large game! Everything worth having is between 6.5 and 6.8 mm it seems. Happy Trails 😎

Brad,

When it comes to terminal performance, I would agree with you. But anyone who thinks there isn’t an observable difference in external ballistics between the two, at least in certain circumstances found in the field, needs more experience shooting.

There's a little more leeway in wind hold with the 7, but most hunters will never see the difference. For example, The 180/7 vs 170/270 will have around 2" difference in wind drift at 500 yards @ 10 mph, which is the difference in hold between a 10 mph wind vs a 12 mph wind. Either will be holding off vitals in those conditions, and I'm of the opinion that if I have to hold off vitals with my wind hold, it's time to get closer or re-position.

The thing that most hunters will be able to differentiate is the recoil - there's a 20%+ increase in recoil with the 7 mag. I've found that portable (say 8 lb or so) 7 Mags aren't much fun to shoot, whereas 270s in the same weight range are a bunch easier to shoot. I've also seen this manifested with a whole bunch of hunters. The 270 guys generally kill stuff without issue. A bunch of the 7 Mag shooters have trouble with the recoil, resulting in missed or wounded game.

But again, whether terminal performance or external ballistics, the difference inside 500 yards between the two is meaningless for anyone that can shoot.

I don't know. I use a 30/06.

"outperforms".
Now there is a word that is thrown around all the time in the shooting world, but often is not understood at all.

If "performance" only equals energy, or if it equals velocity, or if it equals ballistic co-efficient, I see no reason anyone, anywhere, would use anything but a 50 BMG or a 408 Cheytac or maybe a 416 Barrett.

But performance is 98% the man and 2% what he shoots--------- and that has been true for a very very long time.


So if we had a scale of 1 to 10, and a cartridge that was a 7 and one that was an 8, in energy, BC and velocity, the answer would be easy.

But if "8" holds less ammo, needs a longer barrel, weights more or kicks harder, and has a shorter bore life (so long term practice can be more costly,) and shoots more costly ammo, in view of the true measure of "performance" being the skills of the shooter over time, is the 8 "better" then the 7?

And if I say 7 is better and you say 8 is better, there is no way to make a definitive judgement between the 2 shooters opinions, because no one is in the place of God who can say from perfect knowledge of every single shot ever fired from both "7" and from "8" which shooter is correct.

We all voice our opinions only from 2 bases.
#1 is individual experience.

#2 is the experience we heard about (some of which may be true and some may not be, or may be only part of the story)

I have owned both and I have used both. I still own some 270s. I sold all my 7MM mags.
Why?
Because I could not see any difference at all in the way either shell killed game and I have a LOT of game behind me to make that judgement from.

The fact is that the 7MMs I had were rifles that I didn't love as much as the 270s I still have. And that is far more about the guns than the rounds they were chambered in.

My 7MM Mags have been a 1 Weatherby, 3 Remington's and 1 Ruger, all of which worked fine, and 2 of which were REALLY accurate (one Remington and one Ruger).

To be 100% fair I must admit that I have sold 5 270s in my life too.

But my 270s are a Winchester M70s, 2 Mausers, and a Winchester M95 Lever Action, all of which I like better then the Weatherby Mk5, the M700s and the Ruger 77 that I had all chambered in 7MM mags.(both Remington and Weatherby) As I said I could see absolutely NO difference at all in the way they killed deer, elk, antelope, bears caribou or moose if they both used good bullets. That statement includes all game as well as farm and ranch critters. (horses, cattle and sheep) that I have either shot with both or seen shot with both.

If I were to make myself a 7MM mag on a Mauser or get one in the Winchester M70s in 7MM Mag I am sure I could see no difference between the Mausers and the M70s I have in 270.

But I just like (for no good reason) the 5 round mags better then the 3 round mag. (I say "no good reason" because I often hunt with a Single Shot rifle and many times that rifle can be a flintlock, so obviously I don't put all that much weight on mag capacity for my hunting rifles)

I like long barrels on the 270s too, so I can't say from a standpoint of custom or semi-custom build that 270 is any handier then a 7MM Mag.

The 270 does kick less then the 7MM Mag, but I really like and enjoy my 300 H&H and also my 9.3s, and my 375H&H, so in reality the heavier recoil of the 7MM Mag is not significant to me either. it is to some, but they have to make their own decisions.

So this is a very simple question, but the answer is not as simple and should be judged on the basis of who is going to own the rifle, and is far more about shooters then it is about cartridges.

What I can say without any doubt is what I have said above. There in NO difference at all that I can see when used to kill game up to and including moose. I like the 175 Grain bullets I can get for the 7MMs, but I have used a lot of the 160 Gr Nosler Partitions in my 270s over the years and again I can't really see any difference in how they kill game .

The bottom line is this:
Get the one you like best. Don't let someone else do your decision making for you. The rifle needs to only please you!

Feel no fear that either will let you down if you simply use good bullets in both. If you use poor bullet you can't blame the shell. (I have learned that the hard way, over 50 years of experience)

I've always looked at the two in terms of use, carry weight and barrel length. The 270 Win stands out as a nice to carry 6 lbs rifle with 21 or 22 inch barrel giving great MV with that length and making a fine mountain carry rifle able to dispatch bull elk at good distance while maintaining needed ME. The 7mm RM could be reduced somewhat in weight to supply ability for same task in mountains, but would be heavier by a pound or more needing a 24-inch barrel minimum to make a real ballistic advantage over the 270 Win. The 7mm RM comes into its own when utilizing a 26-inch barrel for the likes of pronghorn and mule deer. A 140 grain BT or AB at 3,400+ fps is a nice advantage out in western Nebraska, Wyoming and New Mexico. The 7mm RM is as good as it gets when equipped with a 26-inch barrel for taking long shots with reduced holdover and doping. I have a 308 Win for the mountains and whitetail use and use the 7mm RM exclusively on pronghorn and mule deer in Wyoming and western Nebraska. For elk I typically use a 338 WM but like the 308 Win as well. With the advent of the 6.5mm craze, which is well deserved, the 270 Win and 308 Win are still legitimate contenders in the field and can certainly hold their own against the rest.

No argument here. I never said that the average hunter will be able to take advantage of the difference, but to say that there is no difference is just not correct.



The difference is about 3" using 2850 fps for the .270 Win and 2950 fps for the 7 Mag (not red-lining either cartridge), but that's not really the important thing. Comparing wind drift in a simplistic 10mph full value wind is not typically the reality we encounter in the field. We often deal with wind that is constantly gusting, changing directions, etc. If the wind where you're hunting on a given day is gusting between 5-20 mph, suddenly the difference between the two bullets is 6" if you happen to break the trigger during a 20 mph gust. So while 3" in a simple 10 mph FV wind doesn't sound like much, it can be a big deal in the right circumstances. The biggest advantage most guys will see, is the ability to hold on vitals further out without having the bullet pushed off target by an errant wind change or by a wind call that isn't 100% correct. As an example, if we assume an elk's vital zone is 16" across, using the same simple 10 mph constant FV wind, you could hold center vitals and not have your bullet pushed outside of the vital zone by the wind, even if there were let-offs and gusts and direction changes, out to 465 meters with the 180 ELD versus 405 meters with the 170 EOL, assuming sea level atmospherics. So using your criteria of needing to sneak close enough to hold on vitals, you could stop sneaking 60 meters earlier with the 7RM. Again, I'm not saying that the average dude will see the difference, but the advantage is there in the right hands and situations.


I'm a proponent of lower recoil promoting more practice, higher round counts, and greater familiarity with a load's trajectory, but when the recoil difference between two loads becomes minimal (the .270 with 170gr bullets recoils more than grandpa's 130gr load) and the ballistic advantage of one load over another is significant, there comes a point where the reduced recoil isn't yielding a net gain in making hits in varied field conditions. IME, if a guy has trouble making hits with a 7Mag, he will also struggle with a .270. If he has shot enough to become familiar with a .270's trajectory, he's usually conditioned enough to do quite well with a 7Mag. If we're concerned with maximizing the ballistic performance to recoil ratio, then the 6.5 Creedmoor with 147's at 2700 fps looks pretty good. It'll go to 435 meters before the same 10 mph wind pushes the bullet outside of the 16" vital zone.

Either way, my initial comment on the ballistic advantage of the 7Mag over the .270 wasn't about the average hunter, but simply the fact that the advantage exists. A good rifleman can take advantage of that advantage under certain circumstances

To quote Bryan Litz "Regardless of your level of skill in reading wind, choosing equipment with superior ballistics will improve your chances of success in long range shooting".

See above quote from Bryan Litz.

Less recoil trumps a couple inches of drift.

recoil advantage for .270 can vary, dependent on an individuals sensitivities, or perception of 'felt recoil'

and for those that elect.270 so they can have a lighter rifle are trading away or diminishing recoil advantage.

Some folks are not at all bothered by toting a heavier 7-mag, in fact they also prefer such for a steadier hold.