What will a 7 mag do that a 270 won't?
Seems to me the 270 is all around superior.

I've owned both. I really like both.

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:
What will a 7 mag do that a 270 won't?..

one could ask the same about .30/06 vs 308mag,.. .338/06 vs 338win...etc,etc,

The limit with a .270 is 150gr bullets, whereas I prefer 175's out of all 7mm's. I think that takes the 7mm to a category beyond just deer/antelope and into all the North Am. big game.

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:
What will a 7 mag do that a 270 won't?
Seems to me the 270 is all around superior.

The obvious answer is shoot 7mm bullets.

I would hunt all game in the Anericas minus bear or buffalo with the 270 and the same for the 7 mag so for hunting purposes I see no advantage of the 7 mag. I would hunt bear with a 30-06. I'll honor the buffalo with a 45-70.
So what do you get from a 7 mag you won't get with a 270 minus the 7mm bullets?

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:

So what do you get from a 7 mag you won't get with a 270 minus the 7mm bullets?

more expense on brass and powder. I have 2 of each. I've killed many deer sized game with both calibers. I can't tell a difference in the dead animal when I walk up on it.

Nothing.


DHI.

The compromise is to get a .270Wea. Shoots everything from 110 grains to heavy 180grain made by woodleigh. I was was years ago in the same dilemma for a customrifle project and ended up with the Wea caliber.

quote:

The limit with a .270 is 150gr bullets, whereas I prefer 175's out of all 7mm's. I think that takes the 7mm to a category beyond just deer/antelope and into all the North Am. big game.

I'd agree. But if you asked what does a 7mm Rem Mag offer that a 7x64 or a 280 Remington won't I'd be unlikely to agree.

But as I live here in England and from that "game" viewpoint there is, effectively, NOTHING that a 7mm Rem Mag offers me that a 270 Winchester (or a 280 Remington) won't do.

Maybe offer the 165 and 175 bullets on large sika deer...that's all.

IMHO all that 7mm Rem Mag offers is the ability in short 20" and 22" barrels the ability to achieve the same velocity that a 270 (or 280) can in a 24" barrel.

In other words using the greater capacity of the 7mm Rem Mag case to "claw back" the velocity that you lose in those shorter barrels.

Handy I suppose if two ounces of weight is an issue...but as an acquaintance once said it is cheaper and better to lose two ounces and two inches off your belly and gut than two ounces and two inches off your rifle!

But it does come at the cost of ONE LESS round in the magazine. And from my English viewpoint I'd sooner have 4+1 and a 24" barrel with a 270 (or 280) than 3+1 and a 20" or 24" barrel 7mm Rem Mag.

Personally I have BOTH a 270 and a 280 but prefer the slight benefits of the 165 grain bullet that the 280 offers on continental game such as wild boar.

And PRVI don't make their excellent "GROM" bullet in .277"...just .284".

In fact on continetal Europe 7mm premium bullet selection (TIG, TUG, Etc., etc..) for handloaders gives a SIGNIFICANT benefit to that calibre over 270 calibre.

Nosler offers their .277 Partition bullet in 160 grain. It is said to be very good on heavy game.

I own both and in fact owned only those two calibers for many years. Why? Because one could back up the other if either went down on me. I could use my .270 preferably on deer and the 7mm on elk. If either rifle went down on me, I could easily switch to the other and be fine.

So to answer the question, there isn't a whole lot of difference, but there are a couple. I live in Arizona and a confirmed Coues deer addict. If you've ever hunted these diminutive deer here, you know what kind of ranges we sometimes shoot. So consider that a 130gr bullet out of a .270 will be have a muzzle velocity of roughly 3000fps whereas a 140gr bullet out of the 7mm will have a muzzle velocity of 3200fps. If the bullet of choice in both cases is a Nosler BT (my choice for Coues), the BC for 140gr is .485 versus .433 for the 130gr. This all taken together, the 7mm represents a flatter shooter that is appreciable at the distances we're shooting. Now with the advent of the ballistic turrets on scopes this is less of an advantage.

At the other end of the spectrum is the ability of the 7mm to shoot a 175gr bullet at roughly 2850fps versus the .270 shooting a 160gr at 2750fps.

The 7mm has it's advantages in certain situations over the .270 as far as I'm concerned. But again, if my 7mm is out of commission, I'm confident I'll able to get by with my .270.

Now having said all that, I definitely feel the lines get blurred on most anything elk size or smaller inside of 200 yards and there's probably not much advantage to the 7mm.

Why own either when the 30.06 will do anything either of those two will?

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:
What will a 7 mag do that a 270 won't?
Seems to me the 270 is all around superior.

The mag will shoot heavier bullets effectively, kick more. probably shoot a little flatter, depebding on the load, cost more to shoot, but for hunting I'll take it, for just "shooting" I'll take the .270

The 7MM mag will burn more powder. I did a quick look and with some powders you could use 70 grains. I didn't see any .270 loads using that amount. That is very important. Using 70 grains, you would get exactly 100 rounds out of a pound of powder. You buy bullets and primers by the 100's. You would not have all the nuisances and hazzards of having some left over powder. If you use several types powders and eliminated all those partial cans you would gain enough space for another rifle. Get a 30-06 as Fjold suggested.

In a model 70 it will hold down 5 in the magazine and 1 in the chamber, I own both and shoot the 160 or 175 grainers in the 7Mag
but I do like the magazine capacity of 5 down vs 3.
I have not been able to tell the difference between the 2 over the years othet than more muzzle blast and a bigger appetite for more powder at a very slight advantage in velocity.


Cal30


Cal30

With modern premium bullets available for the .270 it is just as viable a hunting cartridge as the 7mm Remmy and the mag offers no advantages. If you need deeper penetration get the 160gr Partition for the .270, and if you need a flatter shooting hard hitting load use the 110gr Barnes tipped triple shock bullet. I have both so I need not choose between them.

Mine will bruise about 400% more of my right arm.

Not a bad choice (or a 300 Winchester or Weatherby) for a 1-3 gun battery(as was suggested to me on these boards).

With me it's a 4 gun deal, a 7mm Remington, a 7x57(by far my favorite), a .223, and a .221.

-and a mixed bag of others to play with.

I recall Jack O'Connor writing that for all the additional powder and muzzle blast/flash that the 7mm Mag developed, its actually effectiveness over the .270 was negligible. To my mind, all the necked down belted magnum cases below .30 caliber really need about a 26" barrel to bring them to their potential. I'd rather try and sneak a little closer than lug a giant rifle around.

quote:

Originally posted by Oldsarge:
I'd rather try and sneak a little closer than lug a giant rifle around.

The long-range ballistics of a 160gr 7mm bullet are outstanding

The 7mm Mag really comes into it's own with 160g and 175g bullets. Original spec for the 7mm Rem Mag was a 175g bullet at 3000 fps. That's equivilant in power to a 300 Win Mag. I love my 270, but 3000 fps with a 150g Nosler Partition is all I can squeeze out of it safely.

There is nothing giant about a hunting-weight 7mag. If you cannot carry a 7 mag, then you probably aren't going to be hunting too hard with anything. With light bullets the 270 is more than enough, but the 7mag will out-shine it with heavy bullets. Is it necessary-no, but as with any caliber it is personal choice. If all I was ever going to hunt was deer, I would take the 270 or better yet, a 280. I sure like the 160 and bigger bullets for elk,moose etc. though.

I thought about buying a 7 mag, but after more research, the 270 was my choice. With the premium bullets we have these days, the 270 is an effective caliber.

I own both, and hunt with both. As has already been said in this thread, the 7 offers 3k fps with a 175-grain bullet. You cannot do that with a .270 OR a .30-'06. No disrespect intended... The 7 just takes it up a notch, all things being equal. Yes the .270 kills deer, elk, etc. The 7 just offers a bit more margin in length of shot, weight of game, etc.

We like to debate the HUGE differences a few hundred FPS or a few grains of bullet weight or a few thousandths of an inch in bullet diameter when in truth you run a bullet through an animals heart, liver or lungs or combination thereof and that animal is going to soon die. Jack O'Connor dismisses the difference between a .270 and 7mm Mag as negligible, yet he became rich and famous over a .031 difference (30-06 vs .270).

.270 owners have to make post like this every so often to reassure themselves that the .270 will in fact kill stuff.
To say the big 7 is not superior to the ,270 is a pipe dream. Will the .270 kill a WT deer? Well, duh. But you have to go a long way down the list of cartridges before you get to one that will not reliabilly kill a WT deer. But when you start up the list of bigger animals, the .270 is soon left in the dust. Sorry guys, you'll just have to live with it.

(this is Beeman posting over my son's file.)

My chronograph tells me the 7MM will push a 175 gr. bullet at 3000 FPS...A .270 would push the 170 gr. Speer at 2800 FPS..I think today one would have to push the 160 gr. .270 at 2800 FPS, so the 7 mag. has a slight advantage over the .270 but at the cost of a longer barrel and heavier rifle..

My choice for any animal hunted would be the light short 22inch barrel fwt. 270 Win..A born to hunt elk hunter with a 7 mag and 175 gr. bullets at 3000 FPS would have a slight advantage over the .270 user, but would that advantage balance out the size and handiness of the .270..not in my books, but it is a individual choice and neither choice is right or wrong..Its yours to choose from.

quote:

Originally posted by TerrenceEason:
.270 owners have to make post like this every so often to reassure themselves that the .270 will in fact kill stuff.
To say the big 7 is not superior to the ,270 is a pipe dream. Will the .270 kill a WT deer? Well, duh. But you have to go a long way down the list of cartridges before you get to one that will not reliabilly kill a WT deer. But when you start up the list of bigger animals, the .270 is soon left in the dust. Sorry guys, you'll just have to live with it.

(this is Beeman posting over my son's file.)

I wonder why the 270 wasnt compared to the
280/7x64/7mm-06.


280>270

Before the internet I had never heard the term "bullet failure" and the .270 would kill every deer in the world.....dead!

Wow what I have learned on-line

Nothing. I have a 7mm Rem and it's fun to shoot, but I don't think it's any better than a .270 Win, only shot it a handful of times and never at an animal. I'd rather hunt with one of my .270s instead.

If you subscribe to the jack of all trades and the master of none theory, the debate would really be between the 7mm Rem and the 30-06. I just don't believe in that at all and think they're both (7mm Rem/.30-06) useless cartridges.

I'd just rather use the .270 Win/.300 Win combo for 99% of hunting.

There is a quantitative difference but is the difference worth anything. Some say yes others say no. I own and shoot both and choose the 270 90% of the time. There is nothing that walks on this continent that cant be taken with it. It wouldn't be my first choice for some critters but its more than capable none the less.

quote:

Originally posted by chuck375:
The 7mm Mag really comes into it's own with 160g and 175g bullets. Original spec for the 7mm Rem Mag was a 175g bullet at 3000 fps. That's equivilant in power to a 300 Win Mag.....

...

...but Boomstick would rather settle for .30/06 power, on bear.

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:
I would hunt all game in the Anericas minus bear or buffalo with the 270 and the same for the 7 mag so for hunting purposes I see no advantage of the 7 mag. I would hunt bear with a 30-06. I'll honor the buffalo with a 45-70.
So what do you get from a 7 mag you won't get with a 270 minus the 7mm bullets?

Silly guy..
The bullets are the most important part and you more than most know that..

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:
I would hunt all game in the Anericas minus bear or buffalo with the 270 and the same for the 7 mag so for hunting purposes I see no advantage of the 7 mag. I would hunt bear with a 30-06. I'll honor the buffalo with a 45-70.
So what do you get from a 7 mag you won't get with a 270 minus the 7mm bullets?

More energy transfer at longer distance + excellent penetration. I feel the way about the .270 as you do about the 7mmRem mag. My 7mmRM works great on bear.

The 7mm with 175 grainers is almost a 30-06, with lighter bullets its a 270 win, plus a small extra.

Rate of twist, not bore size or case capacity, is the biggest difference. A .270 is at its best with various 130's with a 22" barrel and most actions hold 5 in the mag. The Rem with its faster twist usually shoots better groups with the heavier 160-175 gr loads and needs at least 24" of tube. My point being for a light carry rifle intended for deer, sheep etc to 500 lbs. +++.270, heavier rifle, longer ranges, less carry for similar game +++7mm mag. Heavier game get a larger caliber

quote:

Originally posted by larkin:
Rate of twist, not bore size or case capacity, is the biggest difference. A .270 is at its best with various 130's with a 22" barrel and most actions hold 5 in the mag. The Rem with its faster twist usually shoots better groups with the heavier 160-175 gr loads and needs at least 24" of tube. My point being for a light carry rifle intended for deer, sheep etc to 500 lbs. +++.270, heavier rifle, longer ranges, less carry for similar game +++7mm mag. Heavier game get a larger caliber

I have a Savage 110 Sierra light. About 15 years old, pre accu trigger. For the 1st 5 years I had it, 175gr were all I thought I needed for 7mmRemMag. Then I found 150gr. . Great whitetail medicine. I started reloading, 140gr BT were A total disaster under 100 yards. My buddy has the exact rifle in .270. Best bullets are 130gr. while mine loves 140+++. so the fact that the difference between a 160gr .270 @ 2750fps and 2715fpe and a 160gr 7mm @ 3000fps w/ 3100fpe
makes them equal? The 7mm Rem Mag gives 100 yards to the shooter on lethality for Elk.

Switch it around, What will the 270 do that the 7 Maqg can not do?