.270 win or 7mm rem mag

[kimberman]

I'm not a huge fan of belts myself but there is also a minuscule argument that the belt actually improves feeding. The belt provides a small bearing surface for the cartridge to slide rather than the entire case as well as creating an area for foreign material to pass. I know many of you will call this bs but possibly food for thought.

It's just plain hard to beat these 2.5" magnum cases for performance. The .358 Norma, .338 win, .308 Norma, 7mm rem, 7mm wby, and .257 wby are all fantastic cartridges. They all work! Some people just love to hate them!

 

[jackrabbit000]

Im going with a .270 for a number of reasons: 1) Ammo anywhere! Where i live we have literally 4 calibers to choose from (.270, .30-06, .308 and .300 win mag) 2) 7mm rem mag is tad more to shoot 3) lighter recoil to practice more and my gf can shoot it 4) Just nice caliber that is proven!
Thanks for opinions!!

Good choice, .270 is all you need. Does what a 7mm would do with less recoil.

 

[rem338win]

They are also wonderful when making 300 Wby from 300 H+H, 450 Ackley from 375 H+H or 416 Rem, and so on.... and so on...and so on.....
Belts make wildcatting so much easier and standard brass available for some of the more expensive Mags.

I think that this is exactly why so many of the cartridges we call "magnum" now wears them.

 

[rral22]

I'm not a huge fan of belts myself but there is also a minuscule argument that the belt actually improves feeding. The belt provides a small bearing surface for the cartridge to slide rather than the entire case as well as creating an area for foreign material to pass.

Well, I don't know where I've been, but that is the first time I ever heard anyone argue a belt makes for improved feeding.

 

[WhelanLad]

The 270 is a wikid "little" cal, but one most are able to shoot very accuratley due to the mild recoil, but with plenty of punch it takes game!

have not used a 7rm but is on the list to get one day, i opted for a 300wsm for time being.

Winchester Supreme accubond 140gr are a top choice in my Rem700!

 

[mackillan]

No, because it isn't

With bullets in the 130-150gr arena, the 7RM and the .270WCF are identical on game given the same bullet contruction and bullet placement.

If I intended to keep it under 300, I would go .270 and never look back. I used a 130gr Federal Fusion to dump my moose this year in .270.

The 7RM only starts to pull away when you move into the 160-175 gr range and are wanting to go to uber-ballistic coefficient bullets to move into the 500+yardage arena, which it sounds like you are not.

So, buy a .270 load up some 140gr Accubonds at 3000fps, and go kill deer and elk. Poor mans 7mm.

Isnt 130 gr in a .270 a bit light for moose?

 

[rem338win]

Isnt 130 gr in a .270 a bit light for moose?

Obviously not.

 

[hunter-4-life]

Isnt 130 gr in a .270 a bit light for moose?

Well considering my cousin shot his moose at exactly 258 yards, folded him like you would have shot with a .338. Id say no

 

[flick]

You just confirmed that it was a Savage problem. I have owned belted magnums in everything from Mausers to falling blocks and never had an issue. The belts don't intrude into the case capacity, and the reason they all have belts is due to them sharing the parent cartridge of the .375 H&H that did headspace off of the belt. People have been more than able to shoot itty bitty trophy winning groups with the cartridges sporting that belt, so who cares?

Uh yeah, I confirmed it was a savage problem... you felt the need to reiterate that... why? Do you feel that you cleverly trapped me into "admitting" that or something?

The statement still stands - problems were (much) more prevalent with belted cartridges.

It's great that you've never had any feeding troubles with belted cartridges in a variety of guns, but some people (me included) have. That's all I ever said, and all I intend to say about feeding problems. It's a strike against the cartridge. Maybe a small strike to you, since you've never experienced it, but I think it's worth mentioning.

And yeah, the belt is there because it was "inherited" from the H&H. So what? it's purposeless on the 7RM because the 7RM has a shoulder to headspace off of.

I never claimed that the shoulder "intrudes" into the powder space, but for a given head size and length one could have a larger case capacity if the cartridge didn't step down at the belt. Conversely, if one were satisfied with the case capacity they could decrease the size of the head and fit more cartridges into the magazine or have a smaller magazine.

It's not that there's anything particularly detrimental about the belt (assuming your rifle feeds well), it's just a silly, purposeless design element on a cartridge that headspaces off the shoulder. So that's pretty much how I feel about the cartridge: it's silly If I ever decided I wanted to shoot another 7mm I would choose a different one.

I have heard it said that the belt was kept as a marketing device. It allowed the 7 to piggyback off of the H&H's historic credibility, and made some people think that it was so powerfully badass that a big strong belt was needed to contain all that badassness in such a little cartridge

I can't verify that that was the intention of the company that made and marketed it, but I have heard from some gullible shooters who believed it.

 

[RememberTheSomme]

Well considering my cousin shot his moose at exactly 258 yards, folded him like you would have shot with a .338. Id say no

Looks like you have the answer to your original question.

I own and shoot both. The Big 7 to a handloader is superior in terms of energy potential and flat trajectory, and is a beast with the heaviest bullets(175s), but inside the range you specified, and the game mentioned, I'd stick to my Featherweight .270Win, and leave my Magnum sulking in the safe.