I see a lot of people favor the .30/06 for Alaska hunting and that is understandable. I would like to know what Alaskans think of using the 7mm Remington mag for hunting there. Is it very popular there or is it not recommended? Any thoughts or opinions welcome.

Nothing wrong with the 7mm Magnum for Alaska. While the 30-06, .300WM, and .338WM may be the most popular in Alaska, the 7mm Magnum is not too far behind.

It has a very good reputation as a 'big gun' in places remote. Perhaps the biggest downside - though many wouldn't call it that- is the lack of readily available 175 Core-lokt ammo in many of the smaller places. (I would venture that more game has died via Remington Core-lokts in the last 50 years in Alaska than from any other single bullet.)

love mine for use in Alaska, particularly like 140 gr. Core-lokts in it.


but no flies on partitions or mono type Barnes bullets.


if the crosshairs are pasted in the correct place when the trigger breaks, dead animals are most often the result of using it.

that's been my experience anyway. It's taken caribou, sheep, moose.


when I play the mental masturbation game of "if you could only have one rifle" it and my .338 are always finalists.

When I lived in SE Alaska it was fairly popular which I always found funny because the terrain didn't lend itself to many long range shots. Nevertheless, the 7mag I always felt had a sort of cult following elevated it's powers beyond mortal cartridges. I had 280 that was the closest thing to a 7 mag but almost exclusively shot a 458. A few others 338 win mag 375 H&H, 300 win mag. I think the 7mag is a decent cartridge for most circumstances in AK.

Whatever the 06 can do the 7 mm Mag can do just as well or maybe a little better. My brother before he passed away was a die hard 7mm Mag fan and I could never convince him the 06 and 7 mag were just about even in the playing field and he was convinced the 7 mag was twice as powerful and nothing I could say made any difference.

I will agree the 7mm Mag can fire the same weight bullet at the same speed as the 30-06 with MORE powder ! And a couple less rounds in the magazine.


The 7mm mag is a great round, and due to the fact that there a a number of great 7mm bullets, it may have a little benefit in long range shooting. But if both rounds are loaded to equal velocities with similar bullets the difference is minimal.

It just never caught on in Alaska as well as it did in the lower 48.

7mm isn't my choice but good bullets proper placement it will tackle what you shoot at. I would take for grizzly, if I were going to Kodiak with the intent of bear I'd go for a e0 caliber or larger but if I was going for deer I might take it.

In part due to the fact that the local armories could not supply ball ammo for Remington bolt Mags while they did carry '06 ball ammo as well as appropriately chambered rifles. Softs versus walrus noggins are not always preferred.

Have a few friends that swear by their 7's that they've inherited. They're the typical "shoot just enough to fill the freezer with moose" hunters. I have no doubt they can kill very big animals, and better at long range relative to a 30-06 but, that's the only thing it has on it. The 30-06 would have heavier bullet options. Although, current bullet development towards tougher monolithic expansion is improving performance for magnum cartridges more than for traditional ones.

You could do everything with a 7 Mag. I always thought that a Rem 700 XCR2 in a McM Edge stock would be the ultimate do-all rifle in Alaska.

Noone has steered you wrong so far. Calvin is right, a relatively light 7mm would be a do-all for AK. I'd go bigger for brown bear, but that's the exception. I ran a R700 KS in 300 Wby for a do-all. Calvin's suggestion is essentially the same platform.

A good bullet probably matters more than anything. I shot 165-180 Barnes.

I think I would opt for a 8MM Rem magnum little more recoil but much more energy than a 7mm or a 30. Pretty awesome medicine with a 230 Gr. bullet.

I've used a 7mm Magnum for AK hunting a bit and never found it lacking. With a 7mm Magnum you get top notch bullet selection and recoil is noticeably more comfortable than larger caliber magnums.

Calvin's thoughts of a XCR in a McMillan Classic would make a formidable hunting rifle for AK, including the big bears.

I've never felt the urge for a 7 Mag,but after 3 Brown Bear,a Goat I know of taken with it,l wouldn't kick dirt on it.

Impossible to get "much more energy" without much more recoil.

And enough energy is enough and adding more adds very little to lethality...

I wish I had an 8 Rem Mag.... I don't know why but I used one for a few years and really liked it. Didn't have the cash with my BIL sold it.

I've shot 7 Rem mags a bit, and have a 7x300 wtby...

The 8 mag is definitely a notch up in recoil. Though not dissimilar from 300wtby.

Any time you are same speed and heavier bullet that tends to happen.

I think both rounds would do very well in AK. Of course I like the 338 mag too.

Bottom line, bullet choice, and shot placement, even with big bears.

Now if we are talking back up IE Guide Gun or such, to stop a wounded bear, obviously the choice should be larger... larger much better.... IF you can shoot it.

I own both and have used them for years hunting Newfoundland, which mimics Alaska's boreal forest and barren grounds terrain amazingly close. I've taken many woodland caribou, Canadian moose and uber large black bears that can grow as large as 700+ lbs. I generally prefer my own handloads (160gr Barnes Triple Shock for 7mm Rem Mag & 180gr Nosler Partition for the .30-06) but I'd have no reservations betting my moose hunt on 175gr Core-Lokts in factory ammo. As much as I love the 7mm Rem Mag, however, if I was hunting Brown bears, I'd probably opt for the '06 simply because I'd prefer to use a heavier bullet on dangerous game.

Regardless of calibre, I think the most important consideration is what rifle and calibre each individual shoots best. Whether you're shooting a 100gr pill from a .243Win or a 220gr bullet out of your grandfather's old Springfield, put it in the boiler room of even the largest moose and the result is the same.

I had a friend drop a Kodiak brownie with one shot from the hip at 10 yrds with an 8mmMag, luck yes but he was impressed once he cleaned himself up.

Coulda done that with a 243 if he was lucky. LOL.

I rolled a charging Kodiak brownie at less than ten yards with a 300Wby...a good bit less. I was impressed that I didn't die.

The lack of readily available ammo for the 8mm Magnum has kept it far behind the 7mm Magnum. I don't remember ever seen an 8mm Magnum at the shooting range around Fairbanks, nor while hunting.

yep, thats a big consideration unless you reload.

It really was a good round.

That must have been interesting!

A friend has hunted Africa and Alaska,and for elk in the west with a pair of 8mm Mags. I got to watch it work on elk several times. My impression was that it didn't do anything a 300 Weatherby wouldn't do as well.He agreed but he liked the rifles.

bigger diameter bullet is alwyas going to do things a tiny bit better if not more.

At least IMHO.

They may not be on the bang flop list but they sure bang on through always with a hair more authority from what I"ve seen.

We all have our ideas on what is best.

I know I'll never run another 180 partition in 300 wtby again, John sorted me out on that. At least 200. But probably stuck on 180 Barnes instead in that round, or 200...

bestest pard, straight shooter, and a dog that can hunt shot a charging brown bear at point blank range with his .375 H&H, at the exact same time he shot, so did the guy he was guiding shoot with his 300 win mag (IIRC), pard was down on his knees and they were putting the stalk on this bear guarding a moose kill that he'd run a lesser bear off from, that bear had run the wolves off that had killed the moose.

said if he'd raised the muzzle higher it would've slapped the bear in the chin with the barrel.

in his view the only reason they didn't get rolled by the bear was the fact as the bear came crashing through the brush at them, the bears eyes went wide with surprise that it was humans and not another bear and he slowed.

they didn't recover that bear, he ran off and they lost the blood trail. and he said it was a very nice bear.

am thinking that incident played a huge role in him buying a .458 and having it tweaked to a .458 Lott

glad to hear your 300 wby. got er done Bob, but tis always interesting to me how our choices are shaped by our life's experiences.

Jeff I agree. But I have sometimes struggled trying to figure where the lines are..

7 Mag and .30-06 are ballistic twins with the right bullets. I have them both and wouldn't feel out of place with either except for the bigger bears. I've been itching to use my 7 Mag on a nice black bear. The biggest difference is basically the amount of recoil that you can stand.

I shot two deer this year with a 7 mag a friend left to me a few years back he had built when he was stationed in AK back in the 60ts , loaded some 175 gr noslers they hit the ground hard .

Lines are fuzzy to the extent you can't see them, UNLESS it gets chitty...
Bigger does better in a lot of things, bigger holes, better penetration(given the right bullet) and more energy.
Probably 99% of the time its never needed.

We could go the other way though too.. I"ve not shot anything much I can recall at this point in life, that a 243 would not have done just fine on. WEll there were a few LONG shots, but in reality, not large stuff, biggest was a caribou.. 243 would have been fine on them too..

Only moose I"ve shot have been close enough and right angles a 243 would have done them in too....

I know a shop that has a bunch of factory Remington. 8mm mag ammo if anyone is interested

Better late than never on this thread. Or maybe not...


These guys above have it all wrong. Having used the '06, .300 Mag and 7Mag here in Alaska, let me put it this way:

The '06 will do anything the 7 will and the 300 will do it better.

I'm positive a 175 grain in a 7 Mag will kick more and and probably just bounce off, whereas the 180 in '06 and 300 Mag will kick less, has good penetration, and kills better.

In the interests of full disclosure, I just have never been able to get all warm and fuzzy over the 7 Mag. Could have been that POS stock on my first one....ah, naw...! (Roll your eyes back, it would.)

Although there was this one Husquavarna that the SOB wouldn't sell me. I'd done some work for him on it and consequently had to "test fire" it before he got it back. About 50 rounds worth, tho the first 3 rounds were sufficient for function. That thing was sweet in every respect.

Bullets probably would have just bounced off a moose tho.....

Bob, it was plenty interesting! We were on a small hill and I think that helped immensely as I knocked her (8' sow) down, but she was right back up, but instead of running back up the hill towards us, she headed down the hill. At that point I was determined to finish her and hit her a second time and she rolled down into some alders and expired. Had she been determined to keep coming, it would have gotten a good bit uglier.

2L,

Mine was not quite that close, but prob still less than 5 yards. As I said in my response to Bob, we were on a small hill. She stood up at the bottom of the hill and I tried to yell and run her off. She had two large (2 or 3 year old) Cubs that I was pretty worried about too....anyway, she just dropped and charged when I yelled because of the cresting of the hill all I could see was the grass parting until she was almost on top of us,

We were goat/deer hunting. If I had been brown bear hunting, I would have been carrying my .375. Choices matter. White lives matter ( mostly my white azz). Bear's lives, not so much.

There isn't enough difference between the two except price of factory loads. If ya dont reload the mad has more power. If ya reload there is so little difference . The 06 has brass all over, can pick it up at gravel pits. It uses less powder too.

I've got the ballistic twin of the 7 RM, which is the 7MM WSM. If one does not need to invest heavily in the ability to shoot well, and kill well, at longer ranges, it's a waste of good powder and magazine space. But if one does ... the 180 grain slick bullets in a 7 MM deliver optimum performance per unit of recoil. To beat it most have to run a muzzle break. I think for shooting less than 1/4 mile the '06 is more versatile. And kicks less.

After that big azz unseen sweeper dips your raft in the creek ...along with your 7mm rounds, u will have your work cut out for u ...trying to bum a few rounds...just saying...

When the law allows you to shoot game with a 223, and the 223 bullets are now very good, why would you have a 7 Mag?

Most of the guys I hunted with in AK used the 30-06, 308 and 223, in that order.

Couple of the guys used 300 WM and 338 WM, but "downsized"" as they got older and got the same or better results with less recoil.

I know several guys who still use the .338 in Alaska. The big 7 would be one of my top picks..

If you choose your bullets well there is nothing in Alaska, save for the larger marine mammals, that the 7mm Remington Mag will not readily dispatch. That doesn't mean it's ideal for all things, but it certainly will work if the user holds up his end. And the 7mm Remington Mag is plenty common, not as common as some other similarly suitable calibers like the 308, 270, 30-06, or 300 Win Mag, but plenty available if one gets in a bind.

I would draw the line at .308 diameter bullets....for Alaska.

My favorite rifles are

300 Win Mag
338 Win Mag
338 Rem Ultra Mag

I've shooted one black bear with a 300 Win. It died, although mostly due to bad luck on its part.

I think everything else has been a .284 of some flavor. Trying to think of a counterexample, and can't come up with one.

Had a guy up here tell me once that a 7 mag wants to be a 30-06 when it grows up. No reason to doubt him. I had one years ago, shot a few critters with it, gave it up for mo better options.

Welcome to the Fire.

DF

I've been lied to before as well.

This

Thanks for all of the replies. I did't see a problem using a 7 mag but wanted to ask those that live there and hunt with different calibers.

I think in the early days the 7mag had a checkered reputation, simply because pushing a cup core bullet over 3000 fps is asking for trouble and there were enough hunters that didn't realize that and figured the word magnum made it a magic death ray.

As with any caliber, use good bullets and place them where it matters and it'll work just fine. With modern bullets that hold together at higher velocities the big 7 is a fine big game round.

But when you start talking about modern bullets, you can consider more modern chamberings and guns and perhaps choosing a lighter short action rifle if going with a 7.

I'm kind of partial to the 7LAUM myself, but it is pretty tough to go wrong without putting a lot of effort into it.

Can you expand a little on the part I highlighted in red? It's still early here, I don't think I'm reading it right

7wsm is what I read out of it...

I'm sure 7mm WSM is what 458 Lott meant too. Problem is the cartridge is deader than a mackerel,with brass in scarce supply.

Meantime the 7 Rem Mag continues in the top 10, so I guess the rifle buying public does not agree. It's real easy for us to over think things sometimes.

Would agree on the bullet thing. I know of at least one outfitter who wailed loud and long about the 7 Rem Mag. Seems clients were showing up with fragile bullets that did not do well on his elk,moose and bear. He changed his tune on the cartridge after seeing it whack a grizzly with Barnes TTSX. It really is all about the bullets.

I ran into a couple of folks this fall at the local Sportsman Warehouse who were looking for moose and or all-purpose loads for their rifles. It was pretty obvious that they were probably going to be pointing their rifles at flesh before paper under the circumstances at the time. One was a woman who had her 'nephew' on her cellphone and was contemplating whether to get the 150 or 180 Core-lokts for her 308. I did my best to convince her to go heavy, but....the 40 pack of 150s were a good deal.

And then there was the fellow who had a brand new 300 Win Mag. He had been to the range once and had shot 150s of some flavor -(more of which weren't on the shelf). He wanted to get a load that would be a versatile, all-purpose moose/caribou load. He was looking at some plastic tipped, thin jacketed 150. I tried to explain that it would work fine on his caribou, get real messy of he ended up poking a moose in a big bone, and might ruin a bunch of edible meat on a caribou that he had to hike at least 5 miles of tundra just to shoot. I tried to get him to think heavier ("But those 150s really shot well! And, my gosh, those Federal 180 Partitions or TSXs are spendy!"). I think I convinced him to at least buy some kind of bonded 165 grain bullet.

All that said, my partner this fall had 175 Core-lokts in his 7 Rem Mag, and one of those big slugs broke both heavy femurs. The problem in a lot of small places (here in Alaska anyway) is that they might carry a single bullet weight in a given cartridge. That could easily be 100 grainers in 270, 175s in 7 Mauser, and 140s in the 7 Rem Mag. That's a tough way to compare cartridges.

To Paul's point, good bullets in a 7-08 are pretty impressive, even on big bone in a moose.

My favorites are the 280AI and 7SAUM, which are twins, just like in the movie....

The WSM is a beast in a very nice package when looking at 3"ish magazines (Montana). The "rifle buying public" is mostly retarded, so I tend to not put much stock in their opinion. One need look no further than Washington DC to learn the value of popularity as a decision making tool.

My 7x57 loves the 120gr TSX and they seem to kill stuff really extra dead... not sure adding noise and recoil would kill them double extra dead or not...

Could be a 7-08, .284 win or one of the short mags. The point is, I personally don't want to tote the weight of a std. size action unless it's chambered in a 300 or 338 win mag as a minimum.

A 7 doesn't kick that much, and as has been proven again and again, the slightly smaller 7's kill just as well as the big 7, in a lighter more compact package.

Femurs?

Assshooting must be getting popular...

I was thinking boolit test.

my 7mm-08 seems to like the Barnes bullets in 120 gr. bullets

at least two moose seemed not to like them


if the meat's more tender if they're double extra dead, I'd say go for it.

LMAO. Yeah we can look on here and come to the same conclusion....

Well... I know my bone terminology...some of it anyway.. (That's not a misprint.) He was up a tree pretty well, so shooting off from "sticks" I guess. He shot twice and the animal was hit in the neck (grazed) and had two broken hinds. He was still full of spunk when I approached so I put one center-mass, broadside, when he raised his front end up - I thought he was going for it, not realizing he was broke up already. I gave my buddy a box of ammo over 10 years ago; it was an MTM box so 50 holes, but It probably wasn't filled all the way. He needed to buy ammo last year. I'm pretty sure won't wear out his rifle. I imagine he probably isn't a crackshot but I wouldn't be surprised if the "femur-breaker" also killed a sapling or two prior.

(Both femurs were broken near their lower ends, right above the joint, so mostly just bone and skin involved, very little muscle. Even so, a pretty good showing for a cup-n-core bullet.)

My Fellow Harvard Alum Ed Rasmusson specifically hunts with a 7 Rem Mag. He had filled the former NBA central headquarters with all sorts of trophies. He has told me several times that his custom 7 Rem mag is all that he has ever used.

For folks who are not from Alaska. Ed sold National Bank of Alaska to Wells Fargo for north of 750 million dollars. He spent 275,000 for a First Nation hunt in Kluane National Park where he shot a 176 inch Dall Ram. He paid Terrence Cole to write his History of National Bank of Alaska and had 10 pages concerned with Sheep hunting and how Elmer and Ed hunted with the Dixons in Canada.

I had terrible luck with a 7 Rem Mag once but that is another story all together. It was a freak fluke but it is interesting that if you go to the Undergraduate Dean's office at Harvard you will see a 62 inch moose in their office. It is a great story.

Sincerely,
Thomas

You don't have anything to 'splain! I was just trying to focus the picture.

*Someone* else used a bad word....

That weren't the aiming point, no way, no how.

Gotta make sure we're clear.