Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles 300 Win Mag vs 7MM Rem Mag...Real World Experiences

What advantage does one have over the other in the real world? IE Knockdown Power,Killing Power,killing effectiveness what ever you want to call it. IS the recoil difference worth it?

I'm confused on real world. Like 90% of all hunters experience? Or like a rifle sitting in the hands of an expert marksman shooting at a critical target at long range in good conditions?

The former I would say zero. The latter I would say the 300WM would be the logical choice.

Tom

My first centerfire rifle was a 7mm Rem Mag back in 1982. That and a Browning B92 in .44 Mag carbine that Dad gave me in the mid �80�s were my only big game rifles until 2002. The Browning carbine got hunted one day a year so most of my experience was the 7mm RM, which worked very well on everything from the occasional prairie dog and coyote to antelope, deer and elk. Pretty flat shooting and recoil very similar to a .30-06 shooting bullets of similar sectional density. Until two years ago I had used only 160g and 162g bullets. These days, since I�m flinging 165-180g bullets with my various .30�s, it is mostly 140g bullets that get loaded. The one deer I�ve taken since, using a 140g North Fork that penetrated from ham to sternum, didn�t like it much - it dropped straight down so fast I thought it had stepped over a ledge.

In the fall of 2004, after hunting season, I purchased a .300 Win Mag. It was my first rifle in .30 Anything and my first loads were .308 Win and .30-06 equivalents. Pretty mild and very accurate. Full house .300 Win Mag loads came next and were definitely attention getters by comparison (although still quite manageable, accurate and well below the recoil levels of my top muzzleloader and .45-70 loads). Where the 7mm Rem Mag comes in at a calculated 22-24 foot-pounds recoil, depending on my load, the .300 Win Mag loads come in at around 28-32 foot-pounds.

So far I have taken one elk and two deer with the .300 WM. The elk went about 25 yards after a broadside with a 180g North Fork and the two deer went straight down with 168g TTSX on facing and nearly broadside shots. With that limited amount of .300 data for comparison, results with the two cartridges have been pretty comparable � as expected.

If it were to do over and I was going to spend the next 20 years with one or the other, I�d again select the 7mm Rem Mag.

my .300 winnie came from the factory as a 7 RM... i like both cartridges, and have advised several friends and relatives to acquire a 7 RM as an all round hunting rifle..
a late uncle was the most successful of the bunch with his 700 bdl 7 RM... he hunted far and wide across the U.S., canada, and mexico with it...

i have come to prefer the .300 win for open country work... simply personal preference, as i know of any number of 7mm rifles that will work as well as any .30....

Changed the original post to further clarify. Thanks

With good bullets well placed, two peas in a pod. Larger hole of the 30 MIGHT make a bit of a difference on Elk and black bear. The real difference comes, IMO, is when you go up to 338 and larger.

Well My second center fire rifle was a 7mm Remington Mag, My third was a 300 Weatherby Mag, in a Weatherby MK V. I was very young and a little foolish. I when on a gun buying binge that lasted till 2007 when I paired down my 50+ collection to a reasonable 5. I bought a Blaser R-93 and it had a 7mm Remington Barrel on it, I was going to sell the barrel and buy another. Well I did a lot of good shooting with that first 7mm Remington Mag, why I quit it, I could not tell you. In the end I would have been better served if I just shot that original rifle, rather than chasing the purple dragon. There is not going to be a whole lot of difference you are going to be able to tell, big game hunting wise. For most the 7mm Remington is going to be easier to shoot recoil wise, there for most will shoot better in the field. In the end stick a good bullet, bullets these days are very very good, in the right spot and it dose not matter if its a 7mm or a 30 cal. Both are good hunters cartridges. Toss a coin on it.

I've used them both and for terminal performance, ie killing stuff, couldn't tell any difference. That said, if I were hunting something that could hurt me, I think I'd prefer the .300 with a 200gr bullet over the 7RM with a 160.

My thinking as well. When I wanted to step up a bit from my 7 Mag I never even really considered the .300's and went to a .340. There's a awful lot of overlap between a 7 & 30 Mag.

If I was going to choose one over the other as a practical matter it'd come down to use. Are you looking for a flat shooting rifle that doesn't kick too much (by the reckoning of most) that is going to spend most of it's time with 500lb game or less? That would seem to favor the 7. Are you planning on primarily, or at least often, shooting at game 500lbs or more, particularly if said game might be of the clawed and toothy variety? The bigger bullets of the .300 would seem to be of use here and it's still capable of being plenty flat. It will kick more though.

If you really wanted to be practical look for both and see which you can get the best deal on first.

Kill the same, but the 7 kicks less. Go 7.

7.62 beats em both. 'Tis the perfect caliber

I built a 300 Win about 6 years ago to be my be all and end all rifle. It kicked more than I enjoyed and I didn't shoot it all that well (the two may be related.) So I ended up pulling the barrel.

Now a 7 mm Rem is my be all and end all rifle.

I think the 300 is more versatile. The 150gr loads shoot super-flat and the 180/200gr loads give you plenty for confidence on elk-sized animals and larger. Even with the 180gr bullet, the 300 Win Mag still shoots very flat with good punch. I think it offers a bit more margin for error (meaning if you hit a big bone or something on a bigger animal).

The 7mm Rem Mag is a great open country cartridge for deer and is plenty adequate for elk. I used 160gr Nosler Partition factory loads for everything. Though I felt that it was less gun than I'd like for quartering shots on elk, I bet the 7mm would have worked just fine. Recoil was very tolerable with the 7mm, especially in the prone.

I think it comes down to your personal preference. I haven't had a bad experience on deer or elk with either cartridge.

The big difference between the two is the bullet selection available for the .300 win mag is much greater. This is for both factory ammunition, and components.

There is a difference in the quantity of bullets and factory loads available, agreed, but I'm not sure how important it is. The original poster will be shooting factory loads and the factory selection for the 7mm RM is very good. The factory options for the 7mm RM ranges from inexpensive cup-and-core loads to loads featuring the best premium bullets on the market.

There are reduced recoil loads for the .300 WM for the recoil sensitive, but there is a much wider variety of standard, full-house 7mm RM loads that offer the same recoil levels and shoot flatter. Granted, if one wants to shoot 200-220g bullets the only choice is the .300.

It seems to me it really comes down to the individual's needs and expectations as to which is better. For the recoil sensitive or longer range sessions, the 7mm RM gets my vote. For heavier bullets, things that bite back or work past 500-600 yards, the .300 would be my choice. Both are really excellent cartridges with plenty of factory ammo offerings.

"real world" in terms of how they impact critters, there is no significant difference IMO. Depends on what you like, and how much recoil you can tolerate. Not that there is a ton of recoil in a 300 win, but it is more than the 7mm.

The game is gonna die just as fast from a 175 partition as it would from a 200 gr partition...and for longer distances, the 160 AB is hard to beat.

I already load for a few other 7's so the choice would be easy for me.

Actually the original poster will be shooting handloads..

I had a 300 Win I shot for about 20yrs. I didn't reload then and used Remington 180gr CoreLokt factory stuff. Only used it on whitetails from 25yrs to maybe 400yds, most in the 200-300yd range and it killed them like they were hit with the hammer of Thor. DRT!

Ran into some finacial troubles after losing my job due to layoffs and had to feed the kids and sold it.Finally got back on my feet again and bought a 7mm RM and was now reloading and only loaded 160gr Accubonds @ 2960 as they all fall into one ran ragged hole with my rifle at that speed. Hunted whitetails and one wild Auodad Ram in the Chinati Mtns in Texas. Well it kills them too but they always seem to go on a little death run 25-sometimes as much as 100yds. Not sure why they don't drop like they did with the 300 win and the 180's? So far they never require a second shot but they run a little bit dead on their feet! Thats been my experiances with those two cartridges.

Think I'll load some 140gr Accubonds this year and see if that helps?

A lot of Canadians moved up to the 7MM mag from a 30-06 for extended range when hunting moose. In areas that have brown bears they have gone to .338 and above. Buckfever1

There would be no question a 338 would be much "Nicer" in a situation like that