Merits of 7mm Rem Mag Vs 338 Win Mag for long range Elk/Moose/Bear cartridge?

N

Northern Shooter

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Location
North
I'm looking to add a longer range cartridge to the arsenal that can reach out further than the 308/30-06 that can still take big game.

I think I have it narrowed down to these two choices. What are the pros/cons of each? Is there anything the 7mm Mag does better than the 338WM, other than price?
 
Wait for someone to come along with a ballistic chart showing the 6.5CM hits harder at 1426 yards that either.
 
Having owned and hunted with both over the years, at the end of the day, it really comes down to you, the rifle and your tolerance for recoil, and which of the animals identified do you hunt most, and in what type of terrain/cover.
After that:
The 338 will have a more noticeable impact due to frontal area, and the extra bullet weight provides additional mass and momentum for breaking heavy shoulder bones if encountered enroute to the vitals.

I really like both.

For me, for bear, Canada moose, and elk, and other lighter big game such as deer, caribou, sheep and goats, the 7mm out to 400 yards (my own limitation) would be my first choice.
If looking more towards elk, the larger northern Alaska/Yukon moose, and bison, then the 338 would be the choice. (or now, my 9.3x62 or 376 Steyr).
 
I have owend 2 rem model 700 bdl deluxe
1 in 7mm rem mag
the other in 338 win mag.
I loved the 338 but my 7mm was deadlier
i also had a 30-06 and a 25-06 in the 700 bdl.
The 7mm was my best rifle, [at all ranges].
I never lost an animal with that rifle.
My bullet was a sierra 160 grain boattail
old timer 76
 
Northern Shooter said:
I'm looking to add a longer range cartridge to the arsenal that can reach out further than the 308/30-06 that can still take big game.

I think I have it narrowed down to these two choices. What are the pros/cons of each? Is there anything the 7mm Mag does better than the 338WM, other than price?
Click to expand...

If you get an opportunity, shoot all three.
The 7mm, 300, 338 debate will rage eternal...
The 7mm has the least recoil, followed by the 338. The 300 easily wins for the most recoil.
Depending on the bullet weight, the ballistics are all very similar, with an edge towards the 7mm.
Really, it depends on the parameters you're placing on yourself, such as maximum distance, bullet weight, etc.
The 7mm Rem Mag, is very simply the most for the least. The most performance in any average hunting situation, even getting into extended ranges, with the least amount of recoil, which means better shooting.

R.
 
Nothing you ever shoot will know the difference or care. Any differences between them within actual hunting ranges are probably too minor to matter.
 
Shoot a gong at 500 yards with a 7mm and it will go "twap"

Shoot a gong at 500 yards with a 338wm and it will go "TWAP"

The difference is amazing.

Long range deer ... 7mm

Long range moose elk ... 338wm
 
Maximum for 7rem is about 175gr......a range of about 100gr to 175gr. The 338 range is about 165gr to 300gr. Loaded light 《 200grs it's basically a 300 magnum, just poor BC for long range.

A typical 225gr .338 would be great on game to say 500yds. I however like the 250gr partition. Anything larger than 30 cal is even more ridiculous for ammo or reloading projectile.

For me the choice would be.

Deer with a possibility of elk, moose..........7mag
Moose/elk with a possibility of deer...........338wm
 
Looking at Hornady's ballistic calculator and taking the best loads from their manual for the SST in 162gr 7mm Magnum vs 225gr 338 WM the difference in energy at 500 yards is about 200 ft/lbs

There's about a 38 Special worth of difference between em. Significantly less than a 9mm Luger at the muzzle.

For Nosler's best load in 250gr bullets, it becomes the Accubond, at 2780 fps if you can get it that fast.

makes about a 600 ft/lb difference! That'll ring the gong like AlbertaJohn says!

Pretty significant! I hadn't realized it was *that* different! Still think either kills just fine when it gets there but I can definitely now see why y'all are givin the nod to the 338 for big critters!



:)
 
Nothing you ever shoot will know the difference or care
Click to expand...

BS

You seem to be struggling with the idea that your experiences are not universal lately.

If you want to quote stats instead of relying on anecdote here's the simplest one for you: common loadings of both calibres differ by 100 grains of bullet weight...
 
conor_90 said:
BS

You seem to be struggling with the idea that your experiences are not universal lately.

If you want to quote stats instead of relying on anecdote here's the simplest one for you: common loadings of both calibres differ by 100 grains of bullet weight...
Click to expand...

Oh, well then.

If you hit an animal in the vitals with each, what is the mean time/number of steps it takes before death? Percentage of time it destroys enough of the organ function for systolic blood pressure drop/lack of oxygenated blood to cause death with one shot?

How much more animal can the 338 shoot through to get to said vitals and how often does it matter?


Let's hear that from your anecdones then. How many animals have you shot with both to arrive at this conclusion?

I really think your take on this is likewise just an opinion and certainly no better demonstrated than mine is. If you don't like that i really don't much care.

The only thing I am struggling with is the amount of difference people think it makes when you put well constructed bullets at sufficient veolcity into the organs an animal needs to live. Do that, they die in short order and the difference between cartrige "A" and cartridge "B" is not all that significant except at the margins. It is what it is.

I'd wait for someone to explain to me how a 175gr bullet at 2300 fps with 2026 ft/lbs of energy that readily expands is not a very effective killer, but I know it is and i have better things to do lol.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the info. I'm primarily a moose hunter that would like to branch out into elk as well. Typical shots on moose where I hunt are under 200m but there have been a few opportunities at 350m + down a power line where I wasn't confident with the 308/30.06/45-70 I was carrying that left me wanting for more.

I think I'm good for deer with my .308/30.06, I'm ideally looking for something that produces 1800fps+ and 1500+ft-lbs at 400m and it looks like both of these cartridges would do the job.
 
Northern Shooter said:
Thanks for the info. I'm primarily a moose hunter that would like to branch out into elk as well. Typical shots on moose where I hunt are under 200m but there have been a few opportunities at 350m + down a power line where I wasn't confident with the 308/30.06/45-70 I was carrying that left me wanting for more.

I think I'm good for deer with my .308/30.06, I'm ideally looking for something that produces 1800fps+ and 1500+ft-lbs at 400m and it looks like both of these cartridges would do the job.
Click to expand...

At those distances, the 7mm should get the nod... you will simply shoot it better than the other two.
R.
 
dan belisle said:
Bigger holes better. - dan
Click to expand...

How much better, Dan? Can it be quantified in time taken before death, travel before death etc between 7mm and 338, or is the end result likely to be "my heart/lungs don't work anymore" with both?

People say that, but once it gets to a certain point, likely just dogma or diminishing returns?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom