Here's an Original: 7mm vs 300

[orygun]

But if your are using a heavy caliber bullet you are not going to get near the long distance performance

Ya mean like this?
Using a 120gr bullet in your 7mm leaving the barrel at 3500fps vs a 160gr leaving at 3000fps (both realistic numbers).......

with a 200 yard zero the 160gr drops a whopping 3" more at 600 yards and is only 100fps slower.

That 120gr bullet is making approx 3250 ft/lbs of energy when it leaves the barrel and has approx 1240 ft/lbs at 600 yards

vs.

the 160gr is making about the same at the muzzle, but is still packin' almost 1400 ft/lbs at the same distance.

When the BC is higher for the heavier bullet and you can launch it at a reasonable velocity, it will lose speed at a lesser rate and maintain a higher energy level.

I just used the 7mm as an example to mesh well with your preference of the 7mm Remington Magnum.

 

[majcl5]

heavier cailiber meaning .338 and up. 7mm in a berger 168 grain vld will crush any 120 grain bullet ballistically

 

[DeanMk]

But if your are using a heavy caliber bullet you are not going to get near the long distance performance

Not unless you build the case up to bring everything back into proportion.
Both the 7mm Remmy and .300 Winnie mags will reach out and touch you at 400 yards, but a .340 Weatherby Magnum will do the same, and with a bigger hammer (so to speak).
By building a heavier load, the platform then has to grow, in order to contain it.
Using that logic, the best suggestion would be a .50 BMG, which can reach out and touch you at a mile like nothing else can....however, I'm not sure how excited he'll be at the prospect of toting a 25 lb. gun around in the woods all day.
I know I wouldn't be.
So in the end, we're back to the original question...

Is the 300 worth the extra $150?

Since both will perform well on any game in this tri-state region, I say save some money and just do the 7mm.



Dean

 

[billybear]

I've shot a 300WM for over 25 years. It's worth the money, and, really it's only a small amount of pain to the shoulder. (Use some shoulder padding at the range, you will not need any in the field.) A 300WM is about a 100 yard better gun than the 7MM, and the 7MM is about a 100 yards better gun than a 30-06. For instance, my 300WM has as much energy, power, knock-down at 300 yards as a 30-06 has at 100 yards. The 300WM has a larger margin of error, for a clean kill, than either a 30-06 or a 7MM. (PS: I'm not a big guy either.) If you go with a 300WM, I can almost assure you that you will not regret the choice. My 300 WM with Nosler 200 partition hand loads has the energy to take an elk at 700 yards (wind providing, etc. , etc.) For a real confidence builder, try shooting one gallon jugs full of water at 300 yards.

 

[clarthom]

All of my rifles are blued with walnut stocks. All are in very nice condition. I have found myself babying them a bit in nasty weather and I will usually check my rifle for scratches before I stop my own bleeding after a nasty fall. So, I've decided I want a do-most-of-it rifle for open country deer hunting, elk hunting and hopefully in the future, a caribou hunt in Alaska and an antelope hunt in Wyoming.

For the type of hunting that I do and I want to do, flat shooting and an ability to get through wind are important. I would like to stick to the 7mm or 30 calibers because my current rifles are chambered in 7x57 and 30-06. I figure if I buy another 7mm or 30 caliber, I could use some of the same bullets I already reload in my other rifles instead of buying another caliber or buy additional cleaning supplies.

For the 7mm Rem Mag, I'd probably use 140 or 150gr bullets on deer and 175gr for elk. Or, I'd cut the difference and use 160gr for everything.

In a 300 Win Mag, I'd probably load 165gr for deer and antelope and 180 or 200gr bullets for elk.

Would there be an appreciable difference between these two calibers as far as trajectory and their ability to cleanly take game past the 300 yard mark? Regardless of which one, I'm probably going to end up with an M700 XCR. I've found that the 300 Win Mag is usually priced $150 more expensive than the same rifle in 7mm Rem Mag when I look online.

What do you guys think? Is the 300 worth the extra $150?

i shoot a weatherby 7mm rem mag, i load a 160 grain bullet and have taken deer and elk from 300+ yards with one shot, i love this rifle. for dear i usally load a 160 grain barnes TSX FB and elk i load the barnes 160 grain MRX BT. i load both with about 64 grains of H1000. approx. 2750 ft/sec.

 

[best defense]

I guess if 7MM rem Mag and 300 Win Mag are the only ones you are considering, I would not care to comment at all. There are many other rounds on the market, and some wild cats that I would choose first. I shoot a 338 Win Mag for everything, but I would not normally shoot at a target over 300 yards. I was considering a 280 Ackly Improved, but the 338 barrel fell in my lap at a really good price, so that's what I went for. If I was to do it over, I would not opt for a round with that much recoil, and that goes for the 300 Win Mag as well. I would like to try out a WSM just to see what the recoil is like.
What ever you decide, good luck and good hunting.

 

[elkoholic79]

this happens everytime everyone comes out with the bigger is better redneck theroy that has been handed down for years!!!! LET ME "LEARN" Y'ALL SOMETHING
lets start with the energy or "knockdown" power of a round

im using remington ballistic charts for this.. and yes i know some jerkof# will find his own charts and embelish to make me sound like a liar but thats to be expected on these kinds of debates but anyways..........

Step 1: Multiply M (M = bullet weight in grains) times V2 (V2 = the square of bullet velocity in feet per second): so SPEED is squared therefor giving you a much higher integer or "numbers to use in multiplication" which gives you a lager product or "what you get when you times to numers together"

Step 2: Divide the product of step 1 by 450400: so.... mass x v2 ÷ 450400 = foot pounds of energy.

so lets use our new learned info!!!

7mm rem mag 150grn Scirocco™ Bonded: 150 x 3110fps2= 150 x 9672100=1450815000 now 1450815000 ÷ 450400= 3221.1700710479573712255772646536 so 3221 ftlbs at muzzle

300win mag 180grn Premier® Core-Lokt® Ultra: 180 x 2960fps2= 180 x 8761600=1577088000 now 1577088000 ÷ 450400=
3501.527531083481349911190053286 so 3501 ftlbs at muzzle

so at the muzzle 300win has 280 fltlbs more than the 7mm rem mag....BUT.... as the heavier 180 bullet slows much faster after 200yrds those numbers change quick heres the rest of the data on the rounds out to 500yrds so as a 0-200yrd gun the 300 is great after that the 7mm mag takes the prize qand yes the 7mm is also flatter trajectory all i have to say is DO YOUR RESEARCH opinions are like a**holes everyone has one and the all stink

Energy @ 100 yrds. (ft.-lbs.)

2852 7mm mag

2971 300win mag

Energy @ 200 yrds. (ft.-lbs.)

2520 7mm mag

2508 300winmag

Energy @ 300 yrds. (ft.-lbs.)

2220 7mm mag

2103 300 winmag

Energy @ 400 yrds. (ft.-lbs.)

1948 7mm mag

1751 300 winmag

Energy @ 500 yrds. (ft.-lbs.)

1704 7mm mag

1448 300win mag

 

[elkoholic79]

and not to make more of an arguement but as the 7mm being big enough for elk i have a#2record book 403 4/8ths roosevelt he was well over 1000 lbs and knocked him down one shot with a 150grn .308!!.....just sayin

 

[orygun]

Mr Elkaholic,
You are citing good sources of numbers for comparison, but I wonder what the numbers were to be like if you used the 200gr for the 300. I'm always a bit amused when anyone thinks it's a "fair" comparison with different calibers just because bullet weights are similar....

Anyway, I do have to agree with you that either of these, and your .308 are very capable elk cartridges. I, myself, shoot a 30-06 and am very comfortable with it. These guns are far more capable than most of us are.

 

[elkoholic79]

orygun...great imput sorry i didnt put up numbers for the 200grn 300win mag... most guys here were talking 180s hers the info


200grn 300win mag ENERGY muzzle/3544 100yrds/2990 200yrds/2508 300yrds/2088 400yrds/1726 500yrds/1416

again at over 200yrds the 7mm has more energy i personally shoot a 7mm rem ultramag the ballistics are awesome!!!!! but then again my record book elk was the only one ive shot with a rifle im an advid bowhunter but i love long range shooting everything from my sharps to my custom long range rifles

 

[nitestocker]

now when you boys get done wasting powder and money its time to get your head strait and get back to the good old 3006 the best all around rifle round ever period. and you no what ever i shot between California to Washington has been killed with it and if i could ever go to Alaska it would go with me there to. my eyes are getting older but they will still reach out to 400 yards i cant see much after that

 

[DeanMk]

now when you boys get done wasting powder and money its time to get your head strait and get back to the good old 3006 the best all around rifle round ever period. and you no what ever i shot between California to Washington has been killed with it and if i could ever go to Alaska it would go with me there to. my eyes are getting older but they will still reach out to 400 yards i cant see much after that

+1, however, I'm coming from a slightly different train of thought.
You're hunting.
It's not about shooting across canyons. It's about tracking down your quarry and picking your best opportunity for a quick, clean kill.
If it were about shooting across canyons, or generating 3000+ ft.lbs. of ME, then the .30-30 would've never been the most popular deer cartridge of the past 100+ years.
The '06 is more than enough.
Save the mag's for Wimbledon.



DeanMk

 

[DeanMk]

this happens everytime everyone comes out with the bigger is better redneck theroy that has been handed down for years!!!! LET ME "LEARN" Y'ALL SOMETHING
lets start with the energy or "knockdown" power of a round

im using remington ballistic charts for this.. and yes i know some jerkof# will find his own charts and embelish to make me sound like a liar but thats to be expected on these kinds of debates but anyways..........

Step 1: Multiply M (M = bullet weight in grains) times V2 (V2 = the square of bullet velocity in feet per second): so SPEED is squared therefor giving you a much higher integer or "numbers to use in multiplication" which gives you a lager product or "what you get when you times to numers together"

Step 2: Divide the product of step 1 by 450400: so.... mass x v2 ÷ 450400 = foot pounds of energy.

so lets use our new learned info!!!

7mm rem mag 150grn Scirocco™ Bonded: 150 x 3110fps2= 150 x 9672100=1450815000 now 1450815000 ÷ 450400= 3221.1700710479573712255772646536 so 3221 ftlbs at muzzle

300win mag 180grn Premier® Core-Lokt® Ultra: 180 x 2960fps2= 180 x 8761600=1577088000 now 1577088000 ÷ 450400=
3501.527531083481349911190053286 so 3501 ftlbs at muzzle

so at the muzzle 300win has 280 fltlbs more than the 7mm rem mag....BUT.... as the heavier 180 bullet slows much faster after 200yrds those numbers change quick heres the rest of the data on the rounds out to 500yrds so as a 0-200yrd gun the 300 is great after that the 7mm mag takes the prize qand yes the 7mm is also flatter trajectory all i have to say is DO YOUR RESEARCH opinions are like a**holes everyone has one and the all stink

Energy @ 100 yrds. (ft.-lbs.)

2852 7mm mag

2971 300win mag

Energy @ 200 yrds. (ft.-lbs.)

2520 7mm mag

2508 300winmag

Energy @ 300 yrds. (ft.-lbs.)

2220 7mm mag

2103 300 winmag

Energy @ 400 yrds. (ft.-lbs.)

1948 7mm mag

1751 300 winmag

Energy @ 500 yrds. (ft.-lbs.)

1704 7mm mag

1448 300win mag

...and that is why the 7mm bullet was cited by gun writers back in the late 1970's as the best all around projectile for hunting.
It strikes the best balance between BC and SD.

BTW, I found your formula for calculating bullet energy quite interesting.
It appears to be a sort of inverse of the formula I use for calculating bullet energy.
Never heard of yours before. I found mine in a reloading manual many years ago.
Looks like they both work.



DeanMk

 

[best defense]

I just have a question about the bullet out of the 300 slowing down more than the one out of the 7MM. I keep hearing about how the heavier bullets retain more of their energy at longer range than the lighter bullets do. So, what is the truth in all of that?

I'm not a fan of either 7MM Rem mag or 300 Win Mag. I don't shoot either one, much less an ultramag.

So just the facts mam, just the facts.

What would be the retained energy from a 7MM with the optimum weight bullet versus a 300 Win Mag with it's optimum bullet, and is the energy delivered to the target really what we are talking about, or are we only concerned with how fast the projectile is moving?

You can quote any range that is practical for someone who is comfortable shooting at those distances. I am not asking for information on 1000 yards. Lets keep it under 400 yards.

I have never shot a deer at more than 100 yards, so I don't have any bragging rights.

 

[elkoholic79]

best defense it all has to do with Ballistic coefficient....its hard for me to explain so i plagerized wikipedia....

In ballistics, the ballistic coefficient (BC) of a body is a measure of its ability to overcome air resistance in flight. It is inversely proportional to the negative acceleration—a high number indicates a low negative acceleration. BC is a function of mass, diameter, and drag coefficient. It is given by the mass of the object divided by the diameter squared that it presents to the airflow divided by a dimensionless constant i that relates to the aerodynamics of its shape.

 

[orygun]

best defense it all has to do with Ballistic coefficient....its hard for me to explain so i plagerized wikipedia....

In ballistics, the ballistic coefficient (BC) of a body is a measure of its ability to overcome air resistance in flight. It is inversely proportional to the negative acceleration—a high number indicates a low negative acceleration. BC is a function of mass, diameter, and drag coefficient. It is given by the mass of the object divided by the diameter squared that it presents to the airflow divided by a dimensionless constant i that relates to the aerodynamics of its shape.

Layman's terms:
The more aerodynamic the bullet, the less it slows down over time. The less it slows down, the more energy it retains.

And yes, we're talking about the amount of energy that can be delivered to the target.

The best, heavier 7mm bullets are very sleek and have less frontal area than the larger diameter 30 cal. A 7mm 160r bullet is quite a bit longer than a nearly "equal" 168gr 30 cal bullet and the length of the bullet figures into how aerodynamic the bullet is. The length of the bullet is where the mass part of the above equation comes from. That's why I was asking for the inclusion of a heavier weight 30 cal in the info given above.

7mms usually do have a high BC for a "typical" hunting weight bullet when compared to other, usually larger calibers. However when dealing with bullets that are more specialized than the standard Remington Core-Lokt the difference can be far less. But the info given is correct.

Me, I'll stick with my 30-06.

 

[best defense]

OK, so does that mean that If I have a 7MM bullet that weighs 160 grains, it's BC is going to be closer to the BC of a 200 or 220 grain 30 caliber bullet than the 168 grain bullet? Let's assume that both bullets are pointed.

 

[orygun]

OK, so does that mean that If I have a 7MM bullet that weighs 160 grains, it's BC is going to be closer to the BC of a 200 or 220 grain 30 caliber bullet than the 168 grain bullet? Let's assume that both bullets are pointed.

That is true. You could go to a bullet manufacturer's web site and pull some info if you are that interested. Or, look in any loading manuals.

 

[iusmc2002]

Sierra has a great PDF, if you can find it. Has ALL their bullets; listed by caliber, then by weight in that caliber. Lists SD and BC of the bullets for varying speeds. Its pretty neat. I have it downloaded to my desktop, but can't remember where it was on the website. The highest BC I've heard of is the Berger's 7mm, but I can't remember what it was off the top of my head

 

[nmntz]

300 win mag. far superior to the wsm. sure, factory loads look fairly close but the bigger winchester case allows you to do a lot more. Although i wouldnt recommend it as the best load I have an older Ruger that I can load a 200gr sierra boattail to 3005fps! Thats smokin. The Browning I recently picked up wont allow loads that hot without high pressure signs. Heavy bullets knock game down, the heavier, the more energy transfered to the animal. I own both 7mags and 300's and Ill take the 300's anyday, even over my 338 or 375 for elk. just my .02

unfortunately 284 guy you must believe everything you read and must not have experience with the 300wsm. i own all 3 calibers and actually have a switch barrel 7mm to 300 wm for sale on here lol. my 300 wsm is also, i can say hands down my 300 wsm outperforms any 300 wm i have shot against, it gave up 70fps to my buddies GAP 300wm, (wow 70fps.......) held more accurate with hot loads as well, and i save on powder when im reloading. here is a quick pic of my 300 wsm