freddyfour
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Brant County, Ontario
No kidding!!
7mm Rem Mag vs 300 Win Mag - Elk/Moose
- Thread starter -Doug-
- Start date
No kidding!!
Nuzzler is getting $5 a bullet by adding a primer, some low quality brass and a pinch of powder.
It really is crap brass that they are quite proud of when bought on its own...if anyone is suckered into it. Costs more than Lapua lol.
Their bullets as components are also stupidly expensive these days. No thanks. Hard pass on the Nozzles.
On 300 vs 7mm I find it really, really hard to believe either cartridge is going to do anything that the other cannot, downrange.
Dropped the 300 WM like a hot potato when I saw a few times how shooting moose with 30-06s gave exactly the same results too, but then we're talking inside 200 yards, and usually well inside.
7mm RM vs 300WSM vs 300 WM? Answer is...yes lol. Just do one.
Their bullets as components are also stupidly expensive these days. No thanks. Hard pass on the Nozzles.
On 300 vs 7mm I find it really, really hard to believe either cartridge is going to do anything that the other cannot, downrange.
Dropped the 300 WM like a hot potato when I saw a few times how shooting moose with 30-06s gave exactly the same results too, but then we're talking inside 200 yards, and usually well inside.
7mm RM vs 300WSM vs 300 WM? Answer is...yes lol. Just do one.
Last edited:
The rifle is far more important than the cartridge it’s chambered in. I don’t care what brand it is. It sure is nice to have a rifle that doesn’t shift point of impact with the weather. Something that feeds every time, and extracts and ejects without the aid of your pocket knife. A rifle that is reasonably accurate, is portable and shootable. A rifle that can be used offhand as a sporting arm and not just prone or from a bench. Seems reasonable I think.
BigUglyMan
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- New Scotland
Wouldn't it be nice!
Yep . I've shot Moose with both the 300WM and 7mmRM , I can't say I saw much difference between them . I've since switched back to an 06 as I don't shoot over 200 yards anymore and the Moose tend to die just as quickly .
The correct answer is .338WM.
As to complaints about component prices, I'm sure happy I loaded up when I did, and also that I'm a hunter more than a shooter.
I'm that 'check the rifle with 1 or 2 shots each fall' and only load as many as I need for a hunt.
My shelf will still be full when I'm too old to hunt.
As to complaints about component prices, I'm sure happy I loaded up when I did, and also that I'm a hunter more than a shooter.
I'm that 'check the rifle with 1 or 2 shots each fall' and only load as many as I need for a hunt.
My shelf will still be full when I'm too old to hunt.
With 160 gr 7mm bullets and 180 gr 300 bullets you will see very little difference on game. Not much difference in recoil either, in similar rifles. 300 will kick a little more, make bigger holes, 7mm will shoot a little bit flatter. - dan
pete dobinson
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Courtenay BC.
Yup, you summed it up well Dan.
20 more grains of bullet and 10+ more grains of powder has always produced more recoil, to my shoulder at least. Whether the shooter can shoot both equally well is another question. I freely admit that the 300 mags I have shot are on the ragged edge of more than I can to deal with, in relatively lightweight rifles anyways.
Ardent
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
I note a difference between the 7 and .300 too, though I don’t find either objectionable. The 7 feels exactly like a .30-06 to my shoulder that shoots flatter with the loads I opt for, and I’ll always choose less recoil if I feel like it will do the job I need to do.
This said the .300 has the edge, as it pushes more bullet to the same speed. The edge isn’t always needed however, but on the really big stuff for a small bore, I’d opt for it.
This said the .300 has the edge, as it pushes more bullet to the same speed. The edge isn’t always needed however, but on the really big stuff for a small bore, I’d opt for it.
- Location
- WMU247 near Edmonton
I have both and will echo that the 7mmRM is flatter shooting and the 300WM is a little harder hitting
both work well and I've shot a number of moose with both rifles over the decades, the both work well and its up to personal preference
both work well and I've shot a number of moose with both rifles over the decades, the both work well and its up to personal preference
YUP FOR SURE ! they ALL Kill with well placed shots thru the LUNGS ! Or Heart . 270 - 280 - 284 - 7mm - 308 - 30-06 - 300 mags All the same !
Waste of words and Time most of this cartridge VS cartridge discussions ! JMO. RJ
I was out shooting my 7MM Remington Magnum on Tuesday. It weighs just over 8 lbs and I could spot shots at 400 and 500 yards easily shooting 145gr bullets. They are extremely easy to shoot and best the 270 with that weight of bullet by 200 fps or more. And finding heavies to shoot is a lot easier.
As stated above, most use 160gr bullets in the 7mm Rem and 180gr bullets in the 300 Win Mag.
The 7mm will produce less felt recoil in rifles of the same weight as the 300, by as also stated above recoil is subjective and no two people experience it in the same way.
At the end of the day, less felt recoil by the shooter will generally produce better shooting, and promote extra quality practice, which is always a good thing.
(I too prefer the 300 WSM over the 300 Win Mag due to the improved efficiency of the short, fat powder column requiring 10% less powder to produce the same velocity, which equates to less recoil). I shoot my WSM better than shot my 300 Win Mag when I had it...that rifle's felt recoil was sharp compared to my rifle in WSM.
On game performance, the 300 will provide a slight edge in impact due to the slightly larger frontal area of the bullet. The 7mm has a better BC and will shoot just a bit flatter...but @ 500 yards, most hunters from field shooting positions won't be able to realize the difference. (not referring to experienced LR competition shooters here with LR set ups and higher powered tactical scopes, but rather the average hunter with regular hunting rifles and scopes))
A 7mm Rem Mag shooting a 160 gr AccuBond @ 3046 fps with 3296 ft lbs of energy will still be doing 2209 fps @ 500 yards with 1733 ft lbs of energy and be down 35.7" (with a 200 yard zero).
A 300 WSM shooting 180 gr AccuBond @ 2978 fps with 3545 ft lbs of energy will still be doing 2117 fps @ 500 yards with 1791 ft lbs of energy and be down 38.2" (again with a 200 yard zero).
Both have sufficient velocity for reliable bullet expansion at that range and with proper bullet placement, will cleanly kill an elk or moose. Neither animal is going to be able to tell the difference between the two.
The slight edge in penetration goes to the 7mm as this bullet has a Sectional Density of .283 vs .271 for the 30 cal bullet...but again, probably not significant enough to tell a difference on game unless heavy bone encountered...but with both, stay off that heavy shoulder bone...the minimum bullet that will reliable penetrate an elk's heavy, dense shoulder bone and still make it into the vitals is the .338 cal (338 Win Mag) 250 gr bullet with an SD of over .300.
I have used the 7mm Rem Mag and 300 Mags (Win and WSM) on numerous moose and elk over the years and have found both to work well. Many get caught up with thinking about longer range shooting 400-500 yards (or more). In 37 years of hunting these animals, my average shot distance is just 137 yards; with my longest shot on a moose to date being 220 yards, and an elk at 475 yards (where I severely underestimated the range as I watched the bull approach from 1/2 mile away through my scope cranked up to 10 power - I did hit him with the first shot, but just across the brisket below the vitals).
Myself, I prefer the 7mms over the 300, and if needed, I usually jump up to the 338 for more power. I do like my 300 WSM (my first custom rifle) that will consistently produce 1/2" groups with its preferred load of 180 gr AccuBonds, but tend to grab my 7 more often when heading out. (Although I now have a LH 7MM STW that replaced my RH 7mm Rem Mag).
At the end of the day, buy the rifle and scope combination that fits you, in the cartridge that you are most comfortable in shooting, and enjoy! (Both the shooting and hunting adventure, and the fruits of your labour!)
The 7mm will produce less felt recoil in rifles of the same weight as the 300, by as also stated above recoil is subjective and no two people experience it in the same way.
At the end of the day, less felt recoil by the shooter will generally produce better shooting, and promote extra quality practice, which is always a good thing.
(I too prefer the 300 WSM over the 300 Win Mag due to the improved efficiency of the short, fat powder column requiring 10% less powder to produce the same velocity, which equates to less recoil). I shoot my WSM better than shot my 300 Win Mag when I had it...that rifle's felt recoil was sharp compared to my rifle in WSM.
On game performance, the 300 will provide a slight edge in impact due to the slightly larger frontal area of the bullet. The 7mm has a better BC and will shoot just a bit flatter...but @ 500 yards, most hunters from field shooting positions won't be able to realize the difference. (not referring to experienced LR competition shooters here with LR set ups and higher powered tactical scopes, but rather the average hunter with regular hunting rifles and scopes))
A 7mm Rem Mag shooting a 160 gr AccuBond @ 3046 fps with 3296 ft lbs of energy will still be doing 2209 fps @ 500 yards with 1733 ft lbs of energy and be down 35.7" (with a 200 yard zero).
A 300 WSM shooting 180 gr AccuBond @ 2978 fps with 3545 ft lbs of energy will still be doing 2117 fps @ 500 yards with 1791 ft lbs of energy and be down 38.2" (again with a 200 yard zero).
Both have sufficient velocity for reliable bullet expansion at that range and with proper bullet placement, will cleanly kill an elk or moose. Neither animal is going to be able to tell the difference between the two.
The slight edge in penetration goes to the 7mm as this bullet has a Sectional Density of .283 vs .271 for the 30 cal bullet...but again, probably not significant enough to tell a difference on game unless heavy bone encountered...but with both, stay off that heavy shoulder bone...the minimum bullet that will reliable penetrate an elk's heavy, dense shoulder bone and still make it into the vitals is the .338 cal (338 Win Mag) 250 gr bullet with an SD of over .300.
I have used the 7mm Rem Mag and 300 Mags (Win and WSM) on numerous moose and elk over the years and have found both to work well. Many get caught up with thinking about longer range shooting 400-500 yards (or more). In 37 years of hunting these animals, my average shot distance is just 137 yards; with my longest shot on a moose to date being 220 yards, and an elk at 475 yards (where I severely underestimated the range as I watched the bull approach from 1/2 mile away through my scope cranked up to 10 power - I did hit him with the first shot, but just across the brisket below the vitals).
Myself, I prefer the 7mms over the 300, and if needed, I usually jump up to the 338 for more power. I do like my 300 WSM (my first custom rifle) that will consistently produce 1/2" groups with its preferred load of 180 gr AccuBonds, but tend to grab my 7 more often when heading out. (Although I now have a LH 7MM STW that replaced my RH 7mm Rem Mag).
At the end of the day, buy the rifle and scope combination that fits you, in the cartridge that you are most comfortable in shooting, and enjoy! (Both the shooting and hunting adventure, and the fruits of your labour!)
I've been shooting 7-mag for like 25 years, it's one of my favorite cartridges. Not a big enough difference between the two for me to hang on to a .300 Win Mag for very long, not that I don't love it too but I always fall back to the 7-mag. Currently I have two 7-mags (both Tikka, what's wrong with me?), the only .300 I own is a Weatherby which is a bit of a step up.
We can talk on and on about bullet weights and downrange energy, etc, but for any practical hunting situation, there is no difference at all. You shoot the Moose and it dies. If you're sensitive to recoil, you likely don't want a magnum anyway.
I like the 7mm mag personally, but I really couldn't make a sound case for it being better that the 300mag.
I like the 7mm mag personally, but I really couldn't make a sound case for it being better that the 300mag.
