I would like to know the opinions from those of you who have used both of these cartidges or seen them used on animals up to the size of moose or elk. Not including anything that bites back.
How would you compare the 2 after actually seeing them both used?

Some people would have you believe you need more power for moose and elk than a 7mm Remington Magnum. I'm not one of them. I am, however, a fan of using heavy-for-caliber bullets in Magnum capacity cartridges. I would prefer 175gr. bullets in the 7mm and 200gr. bullets in the .300. They will both push them fast enough to drop moose/elk at any reasonable ranges.

Lighter game is no problem although even then I prefer keeping the weight up, 150 or 160gr. in the 7mm, 165 or 180gr. in the .300. More penetration, and you don't give much up in trajectory.

The determining factor for me would be where I was hunting. If I was hunting in grizzly country, I would choose the .300 "just in case", but out here in the prairies, the 7Mag would be an excellent choice. I know several hunters who own handy, light 24" barreled 7Mags and hunt with them exclusively.

A well-made and well-suited bullet placed in the vitals from either the 7mm or the .300 will do just fine for all manner of medium game.

I have seen used and have myself used various 7mm's and 300mags for elk and moose.The 7mmremmag and 300win mag are both very good choices if proper bullets are used.I have found that the lighter premium bullets work better than heavier conventional bullets in both cartridges.I personally would not bother with any 7mmbullet heavier than 160gr or any .308" bullet heavier than 180gr since they certainly aren't required and just add recoil and bullet drop.The 7mmremmag is a better choice for recoil sensitive people and the 300winmag adds just a little more power.

Ok if you were going after an elk or a moose at maximum ranges of 300 max with a proper shot placement do you think that either one would have an advantage with premium bullets?

I personally like the 300WM over the 7mm. Bigger bullets, better performance ( my belief). I shot both and prefer the 300WM. I shoot 180gr. bullets for all my game in Alberta for many years now. When we hunt the elk and moose, if I see a trophy mulie or WT I know it will be going down.. I like the Failsafes and Partition Golds and tried the Accubonds CT's last season (Winchester Supreme ammunition). They performed awesome on everything from moose and elk, to mulie and a 1 shot kill (perfect bullet placement) over 300 yrd (554m actually) at my whitetail (8x7). This season I have been into reloading Accubonds and BArnes TSX in 150,180, 200 grains with different powders, but have not spent much time at the range.
My future fatherinlaw shoots a heavy, hard recoiling 7mm that I got a new scope for and reloading 160gr. Accubonds, but after he shot my Sako m75 SS 300WM a few times over the past few years he wants one!

As for recoil, I know his 7mm Rem Mag (160gr) recoils harder than my 300WM shooting 180gr.

Thats my view, good luck in your choice. (300WM!)lol

quote:

Ok if you were going after an elk or a moose at maximum ranges of 300 max with a proper shot placement do you think that either one would have an advantage with premium bullets?

With a perfect broadside lung shot there would not be much advantage.However with steep raking shots or shoulder shots the premiums such as the failsafes,tsx's,partitions and accubonds do offer much more penetration that can be very useful.I will be using 180gr tsx's in the 300ultramags for elk this year for that reason.

In a nutshell.

The 7mag shoots a little flatter and carries a little more down range energy. (keyword: little)

The .300mag makes a bigger hole.

I think they both recoil about the same.

That's about it as far as I'm concerned. IMO, you can't do anything with one that you can't do with the other.

Terry

I like the various 7mags, in comperable weight rifles the 7s will kick quite a bit less. The .30 probably has a bit of an edge in heavy cover, bigger bullet, bigger hole. Premiums are more important if you can't plan your shot. From 50-350 I think performance is more predictable w/ a NP, Swift, etc. If I new my shot were going to be on the far side of 250yds, then it wouldn't bother me too much if I had a Interlok or HotCore, sorry no NBTs for me.

I know you asked of Elk but, The only animals I've had a vast amount of Experience w/ the Two is on Whitetails and they are the exact same performance wise w/ the exception of the 7RM having more Penetration because of the Higher SDs of similar weight bullets.

They will both flat out Pulverise a whitetail w/ plain jane cup-n-core bullets. Much more internal damage inflicted than your standard 270, 280, and 30-06.

One thing you may want to consider is recoil. The 300 Win Mag has a good bit more recoil than the 7RM. I've found the 7RM to recoil much like a stout 30-06 load but, all of the 300s I've owned and shot had quite a punch w/ stout loads (W/ the exception of Braked rifles).


Good Luck!

quote:

Originally posted by Jarrod:
I would like to know the opinions from those of you who have used both of these cartidges or seen them used on animals up to the size of moose or elk. Not including anything that bites back.
How would you compare the 2 after actually seeing them both used?

I have used both and also witnessed them in use by others on elk, moose, caribou, and inland grizzly bears (AK). I doubt that the quarry could tell which was which.......

Most of my 7mm Rem. Mag. experience was between 1977 and 1983 on elk and mule deer. I've always liked the 7mm Rem. Mag., because it combines '06 power with 270 trajectory, and recoil is reasonable. It can be an extremely accurate cartridge as well if you fall into the right rifle. A bum 7mm Rem. Mag. will be slow and fussy, and I've owned several that were.

I bought my first 300 Win. Mag in 1980, and for the last eleven years it's been my standard do-all cartridge, and as much as I admire the Seven-Mag, I like the 300 Win. Mag. better. I've found that advertised velocities are easier to achieve with the 300, inherent accuracy is better and more consistent, and it hammers the bigger animals such as elk harder. I don't see the personal need for a 7mm Rem. Mag. anymore, so I don't shoot this cartridge these days.

The 7mm Rem. Mag is better only if you can't shoot a 300 well........

AD

The 7mm Mag has around 20 ftlbs of recoil in a 9 pound rifle, the 300 has almost 30. The 300 has more energy at the muzzle but the 7mm will catch up at longer ranges (400 and over) due to higher BC of the 7mm bullets. At 300 yards or less the difference is marginal. Like everyone else has said, the 7 has less recoil the 300 has more energy. Both are adequate at 300 yards or less.

it's a tie in my opinion. There's no real advantage one over the other.

I'm with vapodog,..I like em both. I damn sure ain't sellin my 7mm rem for a 300 as that would be a waste of time. And visa-versa.

Don't forget, recoil is almost directly related to the stock design and proper fit. I had a new shooter having trouble hitting the paper with his Wallyworld Remington 270 synthetic. Got nothing against the gun, it's a great entry gun/value. I fired a shot to check the accuracy. Gun shot fine, but kicked the crap out of me.

I have a Sako Deluxe AIII action in 7mm and it is milder than that 270 or my 30-06 A303 sporter. Much more pleasant to shoot. Granted, the barrel is a medium weight (I wish I could find an older Sako Deluxe with a standard barrel), but Sako knew a little something about stock design. That gun shoulders so well for me and the LOP needs to be reduced yet. Just haven't had the nerve to cut that wood : (

quote:

Originally posted by Josywales:
Don't forget, recoil is almost directly related to the stock design and proper fit. I had a new shooter having trouble hitting the paper with his Wallyworld Remington 270 synthetic. Got nothing against the gun, it's a great entry gun/value. I fired a shot to check the accuracy. Gun shot fine, but kicked the crap out of me.

I have a Sako Deluxe AIII action in 7mm and it is milder than that 270 or my 30-06 A303 sporter. Much more pleasant to shoot. Granted, the barrel is a medium weight (I wish I could find an older Sako Deluxe with a standard barrel), but Sako knew a little something about stock design. That gun shoulders so well for me and the LOP needs to be reduced yet. Just haven't had the nerve to cut that wood : (

I had a Beretta Mato in .270 once. After firing it a couple times I was checking to see if the cases had belts!

Terry

Seems like every globe tripping big game hunter from Weatherby award winners to the guys I know all use and swear by a 300 magnum. I've never used one myself but I can't bring myself to argue with that level of commitment from those with more experience than myself.

what about the 7mm wsm or the 300wsm,short action and plenty of power I have had bulit a 7mm wsm adn I vey pleased out performs the 7mm remmy mag also the 300 wsm with the right bullet

Used both ditched both for 338 either is good for your purpose all a matter of personal preferance.