Driver:

There is plenty of room inside that 18 inches that isn't lethal at all. There is an area between the top of the lungs and the spine that will not kill a deer, for example. It isn't all lungs. Most "experts" say the vital area is 10 inches.

Allan:

The point blank idea has been around a long time. Unfortunately, most shooters never consider two important facts: their bullets don't shoot one hole groups and they don't hold perfectly steady. That means that any range half of your bullets will be above the crosshairs, and half will be below. Now add 5 inches to all those bullet impacts, and a signficant number will result in being high at ranges of 150-200 yards. Assuming the vital area is 10 inches high, the point at which you are 5 inches high in your trajectory means you will miss 50% of the time. The point at which you are 4 inches high means you must shoot 2 inch groups in the field or you risk missing. My observation from hunting in Alaska, Asia, Africa, New Zealand and around the US and Canada is that game within 200 yards is often aware of your presence and you must shoot from less than ideal positions, resulting in groups a little larger than those from a rest or deer stand.

AnotherAZWriter, your point is well taken on the actual vitals, but when determing range, point to be made, the 18" figure is mentioned merely as a guide if you will to estimate range and therefore your "come ups," elevation adjustment, hold, etc.
The 06/7Rem. Mag at distances of up to 300 yards really do not drop that much and takes little estimating to hit a deer sized animal. You are looking at something in the area of 5" or less drop for the 06 and 3-4 for the 7Rem. Mag. With either of these calibers, game is at the 300 yard mark or even close, and you can shoot, do so and then the work begins.
Appreciate your hunting in other locations and I as well plus, lived in Alaska for some years and familiar with the moose, caribou and bear. All I shoot now are targets, no more skinning and butchering for me.

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:
Allan:

The point blank idea has been around a long time. Unfortunately, most shooters never consider two important facts: their bullets don't shoot one hole groups and they don't hold perfectly steady. That means that any range half of your bullets will be above the crosshairs, and half will be below. Now add 5 inches to all those bullet impacts, and a signficant number will result in being high at ranges of 150-200 yards. Assuming the vital area is 10 inches high, the point at which you are 5 inches high in your trajectory means you will miss 50% of the time. The point at which you are 4 inches high means you must shoot 2 inch groups in the field or you risk missing. My observation from hunting in Alaska, Asia, Africa, New Zealand and around the US and Canada is that game within 200 yards is often aware of your presence and you must shoot from less than ideal positions, resulting in groups a little larger than those from a rest or deer stand.

Well, Range estimation for me is easy to 300yards or so beyond that is wehen I get a bit shakey as to estimation... It's real hard to tell 375 from 400 or 400 from 450.

fortunatly the only two places I'm likely to take a 400-450yard shot I can look at where the animal is and KNOW the distance to it because I know within a yard or two the distance to the tree line at the edges of the field and at any closer range I'll just hold under a bit and let him have it.


One particular field is 200x400yards and the diagonal corner is just under 450yards away.
So one man on each corner of the field and one in the middle of the long side and any deer anywhere in the field can find itself in a three rifle crossfire.
If the men on either corner are carrying a 7mm, 264win, 25-06 or 260rem with light deer bullets
none of them have to bother calculating much for range within that known field of fire.

The man in the middle of the field can carry a 30-06 or 270Win, 7mm-08 or similar that delivers a 300+yd "point blank" with some load delivering 3000fps, because the longest shot he's going to have is 282 yards and that's easily within a 3" point blank sight in for a 30-06 with a 165@3000fps

On another friend's property there is a three wire fence that crosses the field 375yards from the usual "stand" position and deer visible on the close side of that wire fence (which is also marked with strips of surveyor's ribbon)
Is obviously inside of 400yards.

when the deer cross that fenceline the greatest suspense is seeing how close they come before you lose patience and shoot.

With a rifle that has a 420yard point blank range with the chosen load you hold dead on at maximum range (the fenceline) and hold slightly under for any intermediate range and score in the X-ring.

My greatest concern has always been elevation error.

I think if you shae bad enough to miss to the side you shold find another hobby.
Elevation/range error will always be with us, so you learn to adjust or compensate.

AllanD

Allan:

I have never understood the logic of I will hold under if he is closer than 300 yards (or whatever range). At ranges past 300 the game is generally undistrubed and you have all day to dickdance with elevation, windage, etc. At 200 you don't.

From what you describe, you should consider using a 400 yard zero. I used that quite successfully for years. I just plant the crosshair at the bottom of the brisket so I can just see daylight, then pull the trigger. Works great out to 350-375 yards and you won't miss due to hitting high.

Since I bought a rangefinder in 93 I have dispensed with that technique, but I did shoot a Dall sheep, 2 caribou, and an antelope at ranges greater than 350 with that technique, and that was before rangefinders. The sheep was at a steep angle at 360 yards, the caribou were 360 and 375, and the antelope was 455. I estimated range back in those days by using a Ranging 1000 (painted white to keep the temp error low) and a reticle from Premier. I averaged the two together to est range.

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:
There is plenty of room inside that 18 inches that isn't lethal at all. There is an area between the top of the lungs and the spine that will not kill a deer, for example. It isn't all lungs.

Really? Then what is it? Please don't tell me you believe in a "void" over the lungs but below the spine. It just ain't there.

The killzone isn't 18" on an 18" deer because of the brisket and the part ABOVE the spine. Inside the chest cavity itself, and I'm not talking about behind the diaphragm, from bottom to top you have heart, lungs and the aortic artery which runs tight to the bottom side of the spine.

That DOESN'T mean that any hit in that area is 100% absolutely guaranteed to be fatal, and I agree that the acceptable killzone should be thought of as "smaller", not "larger", nor does it mean that every fatal hit in that region will automatically produce enough blood for an easy bloodtrail.

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:
Allan:

I have never understood the logic of I will hold under if he is closer than 300 yards (or whatever range). At ranges past 300 the game is generally undistrubed and you have all day to dickdance with elevation, windage, etc. At 200 you don't.

From what you describe, you should consider using a 400 yard zero. I used that quite successfully for years. I just plant the crosshair at the bottom of the brisket so I can just see daylight, then pull the trigger. Works great out to 350-375 yards and you won't miss due to hitting high.

Since I bought a rangefinder in 93 I have dispensed with that technique, but I did shoot a Dall sheep, 2 caribou, and an antelope at ranges greater than 350 with that technique, and that was before rangefinders. The sheep was at a steep angle at 360 yards, the caribou were 360 and 375, and the antelope was 455. I estimated range back in those days by using a Ranging 1000 (painted white to keep the temp error low) and a reticle from Premier. I averaged the two together to est range.

At Ranges where I am completely confident of my ability, 300yds or less, where I have a rifle that's sighted for a 420yd point blank at the closer ranger the bullet will strike high of the crosshairs, by 5" or so, I usually do not try for a heart shot, which is why I've never gotten one.

Head on to about 25degrees angled towards I'll actually try to thread the bullet through the chest cavity/lungs and depending on exactl angle out through the ribs or liver. dead deer.

On an angled aspect 30degree angle on the bow or more I aim to spray the lungs with rib fragments and break the offside shoulder
on the way out.

On a broadside shot I'll grudgingly aim to break both shoulders but on atleast three occasions the deer has decided to take half a step as the trigger broke and that combined with a touch of wind drift put the bullet through both lungs, dead deer.

with a 420yard point blank sight in if the deer is within 370yards or so any bullet strike is going to be above point of aim, so aiming for the heart and letting the bullet go where it may
basically boils down to the same point of impact you are suggesting.
Just a different way of getting there.

Personally I prefer a high lung hit rather than a low lung hit, I'd almost rather have the trauma drown the deer than leave a big blood trail as even though there tends to be less blod trail with a high lung hit than a
low one, but with a high lung hit the trail is usually shorter, especially if you can get some additional bone and or bullet fragments making holes in the lungs, aorta or pulmonary artery or other associated plumbing

the whole point is to make a mess inside the thoraxic (chest) cavity. if you accomplish that...

AllanD

quote:

I had three different loads that reached 3100fps from a 30-06 with a 22" barrel

Dude, you're serious?

quote:

Originally posted by JLarsson:

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:
There is plenty of room inside that 18 inches that isn't lethal at all. There is an area between the top of the lungs and the spine that will not kill a deer, for example. It isn't all lungs.

Really? Then what is it? Please don't tell me you believe in a "void" over the lungs but below the spine. It just ain't there.

The killzone isn't 18" on an 18" deer because of the brisket and the part ABOVE the spine. Inside the chest cavity itself, and I'm not talking about behind the diaphragm, from bottom to top you have heart, lungs and the aortic artery which runs tight to the bottom side of the spine.

That DOESN'T mean that any hit in that area is 100% absolutely guaranteed to be fatal, and I agree that the acceptable killzone should be thought of as "smaller", not "larger", nor does it mean that every fatal hit in that region will automatically produce enough blood for an easy bloodtrail.

I don't know what it is Jon, but I have had more than one PH tell a high shot between the lungs and the spine will knock an animal down but not kill it. Since they are watching with binos, I suspect they know what they are talking about.

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:
I don't know what it is Jon, but I have had more than one PH tell a high shot between the lungs and the spine will knock an animal down but not kill it.

I can believe "knock it down, but not kill it....immediately." I'm not familiar with the physiology of African game, which I DO know to be different to some degree than our good, old, 'Merican animals ( ), but the main thing is that the chest cavity has to be a sealed "vacuum" if you will, without empty space inside. As the lungs inflate and deflate, the volume of the chest cavity increases and decreases, but until you puncture it, it is "full" of "stuff".

I will say this, also. My understanding of the African hunting is that (1) If you wound an animal, you're paying for it regardless of whether the animal is recovered or not, and (2) The quicker you can put something down, the happier everyone will be. Chasing anything - especially large, ill-tempered critters like buffalo which will just as soon turn around and chase YOU - is less desireable than walking up to the beast whose lights shall forevermore remain "off". And things like buff and elephant (according to Capstick, anyway) can take a couple through the heart and keep going for an appalling distance, particularly if it happens to include the ground upon which you stand....or run.

I'll probably never make it to Africa, so I do envy you that.

quote:

Originally posted by Brad:

quote:

I had three different loads that reached 3100fps from a 30-06 with a 22" barrel

Dude, you're serious?

Serious? as a visit from the IRS.

But I'll give you a hint, it was in one "particularly fast" barrel that I have
in a rem 700, for some odd reason any load that shoots well in any other barrel between a couple of friends, Cousins & Uncles shoots 40-50fps faster in this particular barrel.
That and I wasn't strictly limiting myself
to SAAMI level loads for the 30-06.
So I was "pushing" by a few grains...

the other hint? Barnes XLC bullets,
they really are Faster, sadly they are also
being phased out.

I won't repeat the loads in public
but I'll tell you where to start:
Barnes XLC-BT

Look at RL22, IMR4831, H414 and Accurate's version of 4350(can't recall their letters)
You can start where the Barnes manual leaves
off. I stopped and backed down at the first sign of a stiffer bolt lift, never saw a flattened or cratered primer. but I got as fast
as 3140 with one load before I decided enough was enough and dialed things back to an even 3100fps.

My uncle had an FN Mauser that would tolerate the same loads but velocity on the best of the loads wouldn't go past 3040fps.

Remember also that the SAAMI limits are based on the potential of chambering a loaded cartridge into an early low numbered springfield
or Winchester 1895 or some other action made more questionable by fatigue, wear, corrosion
or simple neglect.

Lastly I would try popping off any of those loads if the ambient temps get much above 70 or so...

Ahh... Being young, brave and having a chronograph

Now I'm older, more cautious and my brother stuck a bullet through my chronograph


AllanD

quote:

Originally posted by JLarsson:

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:
I don't know what it is Jon, but I have had more than one PH tell a high shot between the lungs and the spine will knock an animal down but not kill it.

I can believe "knock it down, but not kill it....immediately." I'm not familiar with the physiology of African game, which I DO know to be different to some degree than our good, old, 'Merican animals ( ), but the main thing is that the chest cavity has to be a sealed "vacuum" if you will, without empty space inside. As the lungs inflate and deflate, the volume of the chest cavity increases and decreases, but until you puncture it, it is "full" of "stuff".

I will say this, also. My understanding of the African hunting is that (1) If you wound an animal, you're paying for it regardless of whether the animal is recovered or not, and (2) The quicker you can put something down, the happier everyone will be. Chasing anything - especially large, ill-tempered critters like buffalo which will just as soon turn around and chase YOU - is less desireable than walking up to the beast whose lights shall forevermore remain "off". And things like buff and elephant (according to Capstick, anyway) can take a couple through the heart and keep going for an appalling distance, particularly if it happens to include the ground upon which you stand....or run.

I'll probably never make it to Africa, so I do envy you that.

Sounds like you speak from a position of knowledge. Thanks for the education.

quote:

Barnes XLC bullets,
they really are Faster, sadly they are also
being phased out.

Look at RL22, IMR4831, H414 and Accurate's version of 4350(can't recall their letters)
You can start where the Barnes manual leaves
off.

I stopped and backed down at the first sign of a stiffer bolt lift, never saw a flattened or cratered primer. but I got as fast
as 3140 with one load before I decided enough was enough and dialed things back to an even 3100fps.

First, the coated XLC's are NOT a faster bullet. That's blatant nonsense and marketing hype.

Second, I've used all those powders in the 30-06, albeit H4831 over IMR 4831.

Third, going "OVER" the Barnes manual might be the dumbest thing on the planet... generally their data, particualrly the older manuals (Barnes number one), have the most red-line data of any manual around.

Third, just because primers don't show "signs" or you don't feel sticky bolt lift doesn't mean you're not WAY over max.

The real clue should have been 3,100 fps...

My self I like them both.I've killed deer with my 30/06 and with my 7mm Rem Mag I shot a golf ball at 200 yds dead center hit.
The 7mm can reach out there but so can the 30/06
So I'd say its up to you.

quote:

Originally posted by Brad:

quote:

Barnes XLC bullets,
they really are Faster, sadly they are also
being phased out.

Look at RL22, IMR4831, H414 and Accurate's version of 4350(can't recall their letters)
You can start where the Barnes manual leaves
off.

I stopped and backed down at the first sign of a stiffer bolt lift, never saw a flattened or cratered primer. but I got as fast
as 3140 with one load before I decided enough was enough and dialed things back to an even 3100fps.

First, the coated XLC's are NOT a faster bullet. That's blatant nonsense and marketing hype.

Second, I've used all those powders in the 30-06, albeit H4831 over IMR 4831.

Third, going "OVER" the Barnes manual might be the dumbest thing on the planet... generally their data, particualrly the older manuals (Barnes number one), have the most red-line data of any manual around.

Third, just because primers don't show "signs" or you don't feel sticky bolt lift doesn't mean you're not WAY over max.

The real clue should have been 3,100 fps...

That's all nice, but I was chronographing the loads, SAAMI is conservative on the 30-06 due to the reasons Cited, and I was getting the velocities Barnes specified +/-20fps.

Your results may have been different, but I already see this is a case where you just want to arguementative and insulting, though that could simply be me seeing you as another incarnation of "dave".
If you want to discuss, that's fine.
If you jsut want to argue, it isn't.

"MAX" is a guideline related to "lowest common denominator", it isn't like a load at ~53,000CUP
is going to blow the cases in a Remington or a good quality Commercial Mauser action.

And for the record it was the #3 Barnes book, I've never seen a copy of the famous (infamous?)#1Barnes "suicide for dummies" handbook.

In a very smooth barrel I found that the XLC's are faster, on a slightly less than smooth barrel (typical "cut" factory barrel)? they are almost as slow as an uncoated Barnes, like the coating doesn't matter.
the analogy I used to someone else is that Slugs (You know the little snails without a shell?) can't travel very far over sandpaper
before they run out of slime.

If the rifle you use the XLC's in has even the slightest roughness in the throat the coating is simply gone before the bullet travels the first several inches down the barrel.

I've played with several different rifles where the coating made no difference, generally those rifles don't work well with any of the barnes bullets (this being "pre" TSX)

In my experience rifles that are finicky in the first place are even worse with Barnes.

And I usually try Barnes bullets first (after a thorough cleaning) because if they shoot the barnes bullets acceptably they'll usually shoot anything well.

Still when I carry the rifle off into the field it's usually loaded with Noslers.

No, lack of sticky bolt lift and no flattened or cratered primers don't surely indicate a lack of pressure, but they don't indicate "high" pressure either.
But lacking a blown case or even any loose primer pockets, even after TEN full power
firings? I'm not loosing any sleep.

"High" velocity is NOT necissarily a warning sign... unless you are pushing 100gr bullets to 3200 from a 250Sav....

3100 is within 50fps of what my ballistic tip loads with compressed charges of RL22 can do.

I agree that 3140 was "excessive", and at that point where even though I THOUGHT I might be able to get another 0.2gr into the case
I decided that it was "imprudent" to do so.

I'll add that I have another 30-06 rifle that "craters" the primers with EVERY factory load I've ever fed it.... amusingly that includes the two rounds of "managed recoil"
ammo I fed to it not too long ago.
It isn't wear as I bought that particular rifle new and it's done it since day one, and the fit between the firing pin and bolt isn't the issue either....

I'd be happy to hear of any suggestions on things I might have missed.

BTW, I have 30-odd rounds of the XLC's I loaded
several years ago and never used and though I haven't shot any in a while I am getting a new chrongraph this week and I'll reshoot the velocities over the new Chronograph at my earliest opportunity. Though I don't know what might go differently as the results were the same over two different chronographs.

BTW, the most important lesson I've learned in 22 years of handloading? NEVER let someone else shoot their rifle over your chronograph.
I'm still kicking myself for not learning that lesson the first time.


AllanD

Allen: FWIW 22 years of handloading experience is probably on the low side for the folks who are regulars on the forum.

quote:

Originally posted by olarmy:
Allen: FWIW 22 years of handloading experience is probably on the low side for the folks who are regulars on the forum.

quote:

Originally posted by JLarsson:

quote:

Originally posted by olarmy:
Allen: FWIW 22 years of handloading experience is probably on the low side for the folks who are regulars on the forum.

Admitedly, Yes, it probably is, but in 22years I have yet to actually "blow" or pierce a primer
I have not yet "wrecked" a rifle and the worst I've done to a barrel aside from washing the throats out of a few was trying to shoot past a "dropped" gas check in a 30-06 barrel...

which incidentally ended my playing with cast bullets.... in rifles anyway...

So considering I haven't "blown myself up" yet
I'm not exactly considering myself "uncautious"

Would I push a 30-06 so hard in anything other than a Remington action? probably not.

Do I advocate anyone else pushing them that hard? No. I won't even share the particular loads, but if you wanna try it...

And FWIW I only reloaded the cases repeatedly
with those level loads to SEE if the primer pockets would open up, they didn't.
And the ammo I have now, 36rounds, (I checked)
were all loaded in once fired cases so fatigue of the case isn't an issue either as I never intended to load rounds to that level for repeated use.

I refer to them in my own mind as "+P" loads
but I don't consider them "dangerous" in the rifle they are specifically loaded for.

Do I need to load them that hot? Probably not.
Did I achieve those velocities? Oh Yeah.


BTW, I've met many people in my life who have claimed to have X-years experience, and one question that always comes to mind sooner or later (about some of these people atleast)
is "was that really X years of experience?
Or was it REALLY 1 year of experience X number of times?

Meaning that yes they've been doing the same things for 20, 30 or 40 years, and they've undoubtedly gotten very good at it "by routine", but how long has it been since they actually learned anything new?

Just a philosphical question for everyone to ponder...

Not aiming that at anyone at all, but I have to admit that I probably have "10 years experience twice" rather than 20+ years once and I really doubt that anyone else is really that different....
AllanD

I shoot 2 different 7x57 rifles. I killed my first deer witha mannlicher schoenour 7 mag. I think the latter is something for orthodontists and dilletants to praise. 7 mag is for rubes. It works, but so does portland cement. Booring round. However, I am jealous of a friend who has a 700 equipped with a Shileen barrel. His 7 mag makes some fine, fine shots on ground hos out to 380 yards.

Back to the original question: 30-06 vs 7 mag

quote:

Originally posted by Allan DeGroot:
the 7mm can be a "beanfield" rifle when loaded for the purpose, the 30-06 isn't and cannot be.

I don't know about that, a lot of marine and army snipers have made many incredible shots over rice paddies and clearings.

It seems that Gunny Hathcock did not find the performance of the 30-06 with 165's lacking to 1000 yds and beyond.

With handloads of equal pressure, there just is not a significant difference in performance between the two rounds.

3000 fps is not an unreasonable max velocity to expect from a 30-06 with a 165 gr bullet, and 3100 fps is a likely expectation from the 7 Rem mag with a 160 gr bullet.

My balistic charts show if both of these rounds are zeroed at 300 yds, there is only a couple of inches difference in drop at 500 yds between them. The difference in retained energy is just as insignificant between the two rounds.

What one can do in the field with good handloads, the other is perfectly capable of.

On the other hand, if a person is limited to factory fodder; the 7 mag does have a bit of an edge in power.

The reality of this argument is that it makes no difference. Both will work well on game, as will a .280, .308 and 7x57. Arguing over long range really doesn't matter as most game is shot plenty close. Recoil of the two rounds is the same, you can have a shorter barrel in the .30-06 I don't like a short barrel anyway. Both are great cartridges, and it doesn't take a great cartridge to kill game anyway. In fact, we could get rid of all but about 5 or six cartridges in the world and the same amount of game would be killed next year, it's just fun to debate their merits.

I think that they are both equal in the real world uses.. but since this is the 100th anniversary of the 30/06, one of the most widely used cartridges in the world... for a long time....

Im too much of a traditionalist to even look at the 7 Mag in this case....

I'd get the 30/06, then if I had the money left over, I'd buy the 7 Mag second...

cheers
seafire

Doubt that the animal being shot will ever know whether it was a the 06 or 7 Rem. Mag. As for the superior ballistics of one over the other, does not really matter if the shooter knows the flight of his bullet, do the come ups, can read the wind, and hold steady and squeeze the trigger (as in trigger control)

The lowly 308 w/ the 155 Palma bullet is routinely driven to 2950 (Palma rifles have 30" barrels normally for that bit of extra velocity needed) for 8,9, and 1000 yard targets and certainly the 06 can drive the same bullet at equal if not greater velocity if desired. (That bullet needs that starting velocity to remain super sonic at the 1000 yard mark and remain stable. )
"Bean field..." rifles as they are called will only in the extreme example ever take a shot at game some 1000 yards away! Many more claim such shots than actually occur I would say. Can they hit the deer? no problem if it is standing still and the wind is properly doped, but all academic and not practical in any respect. Some of the Secret Svc. types use the 7 Rem Mag and they do very well indeed with them at extreme ranges.
Hey, both will work and work very well indeed. I would venture to say that when the average hunter even approaches the 400 yard mark, he is generally lost unless he has considerable experience at long range shooting and has sent many rounds down range. There is absolutely no substitute for rounds down range and time spent behind the gun at the range and making yourself feel and look stupid! Much of the items, articles, photos, are simply not the real world. Go to a range that has 600 or more yardage available and give it a crack if you have not experienced it, it will be an eye opener. Again, best possible training regardless of 100 or 1000 yards.

All

Between the two..7MM MAG. For sure.. It's got the high end bullets.. Very deadly across the range of animals suitable to it.. I have taken Grizz with it..
And my I suggest that we look at another old powder for this round..H-1000.. Works for the 300 Win.Mag also...
AK

It's the rifle that I would not choose. I just don't like the 700's for many reasons that include safety, operation and function.

As to the cartridges I have used both and the 7mm RM will carry a little longer distance in terms of being able to hit something with a flatter trajectory and less wind drift.

However given the choice I would always want a 30-06 first.

I use my 30-06 all the time and it is my favorite light rifle by far. I seldom even shoot my fine old 7mm RM Husqvarna anymore...too much bang not enough difference to burn all that extra powder. The fact is I prefer my 06 over the 300 mags for much the same reason and now own only a 300H&H mag pre 64.For me the next step up is the 338 WinMag, not the 300's and certainly not the 7mm Rem Mag.
As for accuracy I don't think these calibers are the issue as both are very accurate. I would say the rifle its self will be the difference in accuracy.

They are both very good and very close ballistic calibers, of that there is no doubt.

I just bought a 7mm Mag in a Model 70 (before they dissappear) because every one owns a 30-06 and I find a 7mm Rem a more interesting caliber.

Also I have a .308 which I love and that also is so close to the 06, so the 06 did not make much sense for me.

But really its horses for courses....

Giovan22--
I own both a Ruger 77 in 30-06 and a Browning A-bolt SS. Both are good rifles...I like the 7mm but it takes more work in my rifle to get accurate reloads. Stainless steel provides utility I really appreciate (especially since hunting in the rain with a blued rifle makes me cringe!)....BUT that being said I keep coming back to the 30-06 as being more versitile--it is the rifle I typically pick up to go shoot at the range for fun. The 06 has lots of options for bullets and loads, and will also allow you to use some of the same powders you probably already own. My vote goes to the 30-06, even though I will probably always own both calibers.

Happy Shooting!

Dan

I 've always considered the 7 mag sort of a glorified 06. They are both great hunting rounds. I wonder if the 7 mag will still be going strong on it's hundredth B-day?
If you ever plan on hunting around the globe, or even in remote parts of the US where ammo can be hard to find get the 06. Otherwise, for killing things - at any range - you won't see any difference.

I personal don't think that you can make a bad choice with ether one. All I can say is that I like the 7MM Remington A bit better in the reloading part I have good luck with my 7MM, useing A 160 grain nosler par. bullet reloader # 22 and A fed 215 primer,it's A great load ,but like some have said the 30-06 is A very versitile round and ammo can be had easy.

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:
I 've always considered the 7 mag sort of a glorified 06. They are both great hunting rounds. I wonder if the 7 mag will still be going strong on it's hundredth B-day?
If you ever plan on hunting around the globe, or even in remote parts of the US where ammo can be hard to find get the 06. Otherwise, for killing things - at any range - you won't see any difference.

Well over the years I've done a lot of hunting in the Western States. Any little Mom and Pop store I've been into that carried ammo had 7MM Remington. I have a friend that has a small shop on Prince of Whales Island the Floatel. Jim has 7MM ammo. I love my 30-06 but I'll tell you hands down that there are more hunters in the woods with 7MM Mags.

But it wouldn't be my gun of choice to take to Alaska.

Go to the Floatel for 7MM ammo.

Notice I said remote parts of the world. I don't consider any of the lower US remote by any streach of the imagination.
The 30-06 is vastly more popular in Alaska than the 7 mag and ammo is avaliable in most villages.

Giovan22, So did you pick up the SS'06 yet?

This thread, like many others drifted off. I wish I'd have gotten a M70 FW in '06 before they crashed. Looking back I'd now recommend getting it while you can. Nate

quote:

but I'll tell you hands down that there are more hunters in the woods with 7MM Mags.

HUH..I can't believe that this is true even in Washington let alone the big hunting states!

quote:

I'll tell you hands down that there are more hunters in the woods with 7MM Mags.

Not anywhere I ever hunted......

I wouldn't bet on it nationwide, but I may take that around here. I do know quite a few more people that shoot the 7, of course that's a pretty small sample size.