Hey Tumbo,I don't have to look anywhere.I have shot both calibers and saw what there throats looked like after just a few rds.

quote:

Shoot a bigger animal and tell me there's no difference.

There's no difference.

If you honestly feel a .284 175grn or 160 grn Partition traveling at the same speed as a .308 180 grn partition will not kill game as effectively, you're fooling yourself.

They both work equally well and they are both great cals. Neither is any more effective than the other.

I actually choose a 7RM or WEA over the 300WMs I own many times because they have a slightly better trajectory, and slightly less wind drift with similar bullets. Not enough to make a huge real world difference but, it is present.

Reloader

quote:

Originally posted by Tumbo:
I would take 7mm over 30 cal any day, as a matter of fact I do, having owned a 7mm-08, 284 winchester and 7mm Rem Mag.

In my oppinion the better BC and SD's of the 7mm bullets easially make up for the .41" larger size of the 30 cal bullets.

The only advantage 30 cal has over 7mm is when you step up the the 200 grain bullets or heavier, and then you need a very large case to produce any significant advantage.

http://www.rifleshootermag.com/ammunition/seven_092105/index.html

Well come on now! Sectional density of the 7mm is superior? I didn't know that...

Don't you actually mean that a 175gr 7mm bullet has superior SD to a 180gr .308cal?



The fact is, the average guy hunting with a 7mm uses 150gr bullets and the guy with the .308cal is going to use 165gr or 180gr bullets. Very few bother to use 200gr or 220gr, but the fact is, the 220gr .308 bullet is very high on the list of Highest SD Bullets. In fact last time I looked, it's sitting at number 3, behind only the 500gr .458cal and 400gr .416 cal.

Do not throw out statements that are so generalized and vague. Use facts.


http://www.chuckhawks.com/sd.htm

Yep, that's partly why I threw the 264 in there.

264 140 SD=.287
264 160 SD=.328
277 150 SD=.279
7MM 160 SD=.283
7MM 175 SD=.310
308 180 SD=.271
308 220 SD=.331

They are all close enough for me, with the 264 coming in second, barely. I don't think big game will notice the difference for any of them.

It's amazing how screwing up one word in a post can entirely change its meaning.

In my earlier post on this thread, I meant to say I do NOT share the opinion you need anything larger than a 7 m/m for even the biggest moose. They die quite dead, quite easily & relatively quickly, even with a 7x57 loaded with 139 gr. or heavier bullets.

i just got a steyr 7x64 and 9 boxs of 173 gr SP. i cant imagine an animal thats gonna tell the difference between that and a 30-06 180 gr.

If everyone here thinks a smaller bullet kills as good or better than a big bullet thats fine. I don't and have to say I find it kind of odd.

The 7mm Rem Mag is the most perfect big game cartridge ever designed

quote:

Hey Tumbo,I don't have to look anywhere.I have shot both calibers and saw what there throats looked like after just a few rds

You are imagining things, as an armourer I have looked at the throats of many different rifles with a fiber optic scope and was never able to detect any difference in any of them after just a few rounds, reguardless of the cartridge.

I owned 300 win mag and 7mm rem mag for many years and there was virtually no difference in barrel wear/ throat erosion between them.

quote:

Don't you actually mean that a 175gr 7mm bullet has superior SD to a 180gr .308cal?

Yeah, I guess I do, but I basically use 160/162 and 175 grain 7mm bullets where their SD was .283/.287 and .310

I use 180 and 200 grain 30 cal bullets they best suit the win mag and have a SD of .271 and .301

I found the 220 grain 30 cal bullet didn't perform as well as the 180/200 grainers.

I prefer the 160 grain 7mm bullets launched fron a 7mm-08, 284 or 7mm mag and believe they kill game just as effective as any 30 cal bullet launched from a 308, 30-06 or 300 mag. the bonus is that they do it with less recoil in the process.

I have used all of the cartridges extensively on game except the 284 win and would take 7mm over 30 cal any day of the week.

Guys, very helpful and interesting dialogue. I had to go out of town for a bit, and this is the first I've checked on this thread.

DJ, you always have some great intel, considering the patches never crossed my mind!

As DJ knows, due to a lot of variables, I have a rig that was to be delivered in 300 Dakota, and fortunately, I figured out the 300 Dakota brass ain't available for a while. It being their best seller, it was the first brass they went out of, and due to their bankruptcy shiznit, Jamison won't make em anymore. There is currently plenty of 7 Dakota brass. I figure 200 pieces is like a lifetime supply, so I've got that on hold right now. They are currently negotiating with other vendors to make the 300 brass for them.

The rifle is already set up to handle the Dakota case--magazine, feeding etc. but I am a ble to get the right barrel on it for 7 Dakota, thus my question. I have a couple 33's for bigger stuff, as well as a 375 H&H, so this is to be a big deer/elk rifle. I have several 30's, so I'm not prejudiced anyway in particular, I tend to like bullets in a given cartridge that are medium weight for caliber, and max speeds.

I don't have any logic for that, it's just what I like, I like a flat shooting rig for deer/elk etc.
I am thinking of the TSX in 140-160 grains for this rifle, or maybe Accubonds.

Thanks for the comments guys.

The 160 TSXs shoot extremely well in my STW.

quote:

I am thinking of the TSX in 140-160 grains for this rifle, or maybe Accubonds.

Fish,

I shot a large bodied Bull, A huge 240lb whitetail Buck(yes, weighed on a scale), and a real nice Mulie Buck with the 160 NABs last year. They did awesome, I went ahead and bought some more after the season. On the WT and the Mulie I shot them in the base of the neck with one quatering to with lots of bone impacted. Full penetration with small nickel sized exits. Elk was a Full penetration on the behind the shoulder shot and the second shot went through his shoulder, tore off the bottom of his spine and lodged in the off side shoulder in a textbook mushroom(Lost in the snow, so no chance to weigh). They are alittle longer than a 180grn .308 NBT to give you an idea of their length, they have a good BC and they've shot sub MOA from every 7RM I've tried them in(4).

That's a very small sample but, I have no doubts in their effectiveness on the game you mentioned. I talked with a guy that hunts Moose and Elk with a 7RUM and he said he loves the 160NABs, He said he's shot from chest to rump on a Bull Moose with this bullet and achieved full penetration on several Elk as well.

Good Luck

Reloader

Dr. K. I agree with almost all of your quoted statement above.

The only bit of your view I do NOT quite sincerely share in is the part regards moose. I have shot more than a few very large moose, as have hunters I was escorting, and anything from 7x57 up worked very well on them provided bullets were put in the right place. And, if bullets can't be put in the right place on an animal the size of a moose, I would suggest the hunter stick to hunting lost golf balls. (Friendly Grin)

I was under that very believe myself ; Until an Alaskan venture taught me other wise .

I put a .338 Win Mag. 225 Nosler Partition 3" back of the front left leg shoulder upper joint , on a frontal quartering and had to do it again while on the run . I had almost always used one of my 7 MM Rem Mags., to shoot most everything on this Continent any way .
This Moose is Huge just missed B&C by two points . I'll post a picture of him along with an Elk I took . These ain't your ordinary Skippy's .

Shoot Straight Know Your target . ...

Fish, The 7mm Dakota is a sweet round, you will probably love it. I have one in a Model 10:




Mine was a little funny to reload for. It was acheiving the listed velocities with several grains LESS powder than the manuals listed. My max loads are nearer the starting loads than the max loads but are right at the listed velocities with max loads. I suspect that it has a tight bore, 7's can tend to vary a bit in bore diameter.

I think the 7 Dakota is a nice step up velocity wise from the 7 Rem Mag and doesn't suffer some of the chamber variations that 7 Rem mags can have. 7 Dakota brass is of far higher quality than any 7 Rem mag brass I've used (cost's a lot more though). The Dakota is also a lot more efficient than the 7 Ultra. IMHO opinion it's the perfect caliber for the Model 10 (I bought the 10 in 7 Dakota because I thought so, I don't think so because I bought the Dakota in 7).

All in all I think you would really enjoy the 7 Dakota, it may be a more useful step down in recoil from your 330 Dakota than the 300 Dakota would have been. But if you end up not building a 7 Dakota, I'll take the brass off of your hands one of these days......................DJ

quote:

Originally posted by djpaintles:
There is a reason why 30cals are better than 7mm's.

It's because patches are almost always made for 30caliber rifles and they never seem to fit just right in 7mm's! Use the right size jag etc. and still the patches don't fit the 7mm's as well as the 30's.

So unless you're really good with a pair of scissors buy a 30cal! ...............DJ

hey dj, why not use a 270cal jag in a 7mm, save the problem of trimming wouldnt it?

How about I say the same thing that several others have said, but approach the issue from the opposite direction...

ANYTHING that's too big to shoot at with a 7mm cartridge
is also too big to shoot at with a comparable 30caliber cartridge.

If a 7mm is "too small" you don't need a 30cal you need a 338mag.

AD

Simple answer? it makes little difference.

I'll reverse the direction most people have used...

Any animal too big to shoot at wiht a 7mm is too big to shoot at with a 30caliber.

I suppose the "heavy bullet mafia" and the people who enjoy disparaging the use of "premium bullets" feel more comfortable with a bigger blob of lead, but if using a quality bullet of similar construction and sectional density it's a wash...


As for Shootaway claiming there's some evil magic that eats the throats out of 7mm rifles because their bore is 0.024" smaller? Enough already!

AD

This argument of 30 cal. vs. 7mm has been going on for as long as I can remember. For 40 years I’ve seen this dead horse of an argument flogged. I’m surprised that we haven’t beat its bones into dust yet.

quote:

Originally posted by ScudRunner:
The 7mm Rem Mag is the most perfect big game cartridge ever designed

Maybe if you handload! Reality is the factories all download the 7mmRM today.

Case in point:
I went to the range with a buddy; he had a shiny new M-700 LSS in 7mmRM, with facory 162gr Hornady bullets. I also had a M-700 in .30-06, (I was shooting several other calibers as well and I had my Chrony set up).
After a bit he asked if I wanted to shoot his 7mm. He was expecting something like 3000 fps MV. Since I had the chrony set up I fired the 7mm through it...

The 7mm Hornadys chrony'd at 2780 fps MV and my 165gr Hornady btsp chrony'd at 2850 fps MV.

He was pretty surprised to find out his "wonder-magnum" was way below what he believed.



FWIW, As far as best cartridge ever, that's got to be the .375 H&H.

I shoot a 7mm STW and it smokes a chronograph just shy of 3500 fps with 140's!! The 7mm is an outstanding caliber. No extra speed needed - the 7x57 has been doing just fine. The 7mm is just as good a hunting round as a .30 caliber. If I think I need a 200-gr .30 caliber I go up to a .338 or bigger caliber.

Regarding overall bolt action cartridges, the .416 Rigby comes closest to the perfect design.

quote:

The 7mm Hornadys chrony'd at 2780 fps MV and my 165gr Hornady btsp chrony'd at 2850 fps MV.

Something is wrong there, I easially get that velocity from my 7mm-08 with those bullets. In the 7mm Rem Mag he should get 3000 fps without any problems.

quote:

Originally posted by Tumbo:

quote:

The 7mm Hornadys chrony'd at 2780 fps MV and my 165gr Hornady btsp chrony'd at 2850 fps MV.

Something is wrong there, I easially get that velocity from my 7mm-08 with those bullets. In the 7mm Rem Mag he should get 3000 fps without any problems.

Those are the exact numbers the Chrony registered; he was shooting factory ammo. What a lot of people fail to realize is that the 7mmRM factory loads have been dumbed down over the years. Most people still believe in the original ballistics, but they don't load 'em as hot as they did.

I think it was due to pressure issues... somebody here will know.

Yes, if you handload the 7mmRM, you can get 2900-2950 fps or something like that, with the 162gr'ers. 3,000 fps is what my buddy figured those 162gr Hornady's would clock. Wrong.

For those that scoff at the 7x57

The 7x57 Mauser cartridge, was developed by Mauser as a military cartridge in 1893, initially for use by the military forces of Spain. For the late 19th century, these ballistics were impressive compared to the 30-40 Krag and .303 Br. The .303 cartridge at that time was still using fine-grain black powder propellant, in contrast to the Mauser's higher-performance smokeless powder. The British kept the .303 cartridge, switched to a smokeless propellant (cordite), and updated their rifle to the Lee Enfield No. 1 Mk III. The change in bullet style, from a rounded tip to a pointed tip, was partially responsible for the cartridge's performance as it significantly reduced wind resistance within normal combat ranges - an improvement in both velocity and the ballistic coefficient of the bullet. It was subsequently adopted by several other countries as the standard military cartridge. It is recognised as a milestone in modern cartridge design, and although now obsolete as a military cartridge, it remains in use 'till today as a sporting round.

The single most important ballistic characteristic of the cartridge was that conventional lead-core bullets held up to the velocity of 2,300 fps that the high sectional density bullet of 173 grains was launched at. This combination ensured that bullet performance was superb and so quickly became very popular with game hunters here in South Africa. With the better constructed bullets that we have today, the 7x57 is even better and a perfect match for medium game. The more you hunt with it, the more you will like it. Just place the bullet where it counts.

Warrior

quote:

Originally posted by Demonical:

quote:

Originally posted by Tumbo:

quote:

The 7mm Hornadys chrony'd at 2780 fps MV and my 165gr Hornady btsp chrony'd at 2850 fps MV.

Something is wrong there, I easially get that velocity from my 7mm-08 with those bullets. In the 7mm Rem Mag he should get 3000 fps without any problems.

Those are the exact numbers the Chrony registered; he was shooting factory ammo. What a lot of people fail to realize is that the 7mmRM factory loads have been dumbed down over the years. Most people still believe in the original ballistics, but they don't load 'em as hot as they did.

I think it was due to pressure issues... somebody here will know.

Yes, if you handload the 7mmRM, you can get 2900-2950 fps or something like that, with the 162gr'ers. 3,000 fps is what my buddy figured those 162gr Hornady's would clock. Wrong.

you can get a 280 ackley to 3000fps with 162gr Amaxs...

quote:

you can get a 280 ackley to 3000fps with 162gr Amaxs...

And many 7RMs will get to 3100fps with them as well without pressure signs.

Some 7RM factory loads are downloaded terribly but, I have shot some that gave descent velocity that was close to the advertised velocity.

I have 3 7RMs and strangely the shortest barreled(24") is the fastest of the 3. It will achieve 3300 with 140s, 3130 with 150s, and 3080-3100 with 160s.

Reloader

200 pieces of 7 Dakota brass in my hands, and dies ordered. Barrel is in process (being chambered)
I'm excited about my new caliber choice, didn't intend to lube a slippery slope with this post....I like Allens thinking a lot, if I really need to step up, I'll shoot a 338 of one type or another, or larger.....

I am actually excited about the chambering of this rig now, it will be the first 7 that I will really be doing some hunting with.

Thanks guys--Don

quote:

Why would a 7mm not be as good as a 30 for hunting

Usually when someone didnt choose a good bullet and/or didnt place their shots well. Thats when the .024"bore size difference can become the convenient thing to blame.
If you drove a 7mm or .30cal pill through the heart,lungs,CNS of something, the parts in question would not spend much time disputing the effects of the damage before they began to seize up.

If the animal you are hunting can’t stomp you into a bloody, grease spot on the Africa plains, or eat you after you mess the shot, than pick out a 7mm or 30 cal. They’re fine for everything except the big bears in America.

Personally, I think the 7mmRM is a superb cartridge. I just wanted to point out that factory ammo may not be as advertised.

Other than that, you’re under gunned. Pick a bigger caliber.

quote:

The single most important ballistic characteristic of the cartridge was that conventional lead-core bullets held up to the velocity of 2,300 fps that the high sectional density bullet of 173 grains was launched at. This combination ensured that bullet performance was superb and so quickly became very popular with game hunters here in South Africa.

Just as a contrast, I wish to illustrate the effect of additional velocity on conventional lead-core bullets, such as PMP, Sierra, Speer & Hornady. Let us take the .375/300 gr PMP bullet that runs 2,528 fps ... it breaks up on blesbuck and retain only 28%. Just a mere 200 fps can have a drastic negative effect on the performance of the bullet.

Similar examples, with the same genre of bullets, can be found in comparisons like:

7x57 vs 7x64
9,3x62 vs 9,3x64 & 375H&H

If these frangible bullets are to be used in the faster calibers, then we need distance for them to slow down before they impact to assist better bullet performance. At close ranges, like in the bushveld, these bullets that shatter so easily spell mostly disater.

Better bullets should be the focus point, and how they react to different impact velocities.

Warrior

We have just seen evidence that a 130 gr Sierra bullet @ 3,100 fps cannot shoot trough an antelope's head and that it makes superficial wounds on the body of a large animal when shot on the shoulder without reaching the heart.

Warrior

Demonical,
I've found the same thing, and consider the 7mm Rem Mag to be the equivilant of a really loud 30-06. Not that that is such a bad thing to be.

quote:

Originally posted by larrys:
Yep, that's partly why I threw the 264 in there.

264 140 SD=.287
264 160 SD=.328
277 150 SD=.279
7MM 160 SD=.283
7MM 175 SD=.310
308 180 SD=.271
308 220 SD=.331

They are all close enough for me, with the 264 coming in second, barely. I don't think big game will notice the difference for any of them.

SD, whilst useful in its right context, is a ratio only, and thus cannot stand on its own; it needs to be considered together with its mass, as it is part of the momentum equation (Mo = M x V). Also too much velocity is destructive on Softs, whereas Solids can take the abuse. Bullets must be evaluated on keeping their integity and that is a function of striking velocity in relation to its threshold strength.

For this reason I will be more inclined to pick a .308/180gr bullet with an SD of .271 with a lower velocity relative to the faster .264/140gr with a higher SD of .287 for hunting game with Softs.

Warrior

PS: A better application would be: Momentum density = Mo/Xsa at range to account for terminal momentum to recognise loss of bullet mass & velocity.

I find over thinking things makes my head hurt! I'll just stick to my little ol .270 Win for deer and elk and be happy with the results.

If anyone thinks that you can tell any differnce in the killing power of a .284 bullet at 2700 FPS or a 308 bullet at 2700 FPS, and you can juggle those figures any way you want, then your nuts...

As a matter of fact it is impossible to tell any difference in killing power in a 7x57 all the way up to a 300 for that matter...You may be able to tell the difference in trajectory but that is still very little...

Bullet construction and properly placed bullets sure blow a lot of therory, and they do blow the paper tigers away...

its all down to bullet placement and the bullet construction. but largly bullet placement.

you be just as well off shooting a deer way back in the guts with a partition as you would be a chest shot with a FMJ.

a lot of woundings can be put down the the nut behind the but!

I think if you look at any two calibers you will find a range of applicatons that they are suitable for. For calibers that are reasonably close in performance there will be an overlap with the smaller caliber being better at the light bullet end for smaller game, and the bigger caliber being better at the heavy bullet end for bigger game. However in the middle there is often not much to choose between them. In this case 7mm 154gn and 30cal 165gn in my opinion would perform very close to eachother, so close that you probably wouldn't be able to pick the difference in the field. The choice then depends on the game you want to hunt, whether it is biased towards the small game end or the big game end of the caliber's capability.