I'm still exploring buying a new rifle. Something to use form antelope to caribou, and maybe even moose, in a pinch. These two calibers, with their light recoil in the low 20s and their flat trajectory, speak to me. Any thoughts??

I would shoot for the 7mm rem. You can get some heavier bullets to handle your larger game and the lighter bullets will more than enough for antelope. For the most part, both rifles wil cost close to the same amount at your gun dealers, but the 7mm will get you "more bang for your buck", literally

If you look at both calibers with 140 grain bullets, they are pretty even. Givin the cost of 270 weatherby brass and availability of 270 wby ammo, i would go with the 7 mag, or even better the 7mm stw. The 7s give you more options. Good luck.

I own both and concur with the obsevation that the 270 Wby mag if you're not a handloader can be expensive. As far as I'm concerned, these two calibers are ballistic twins and suitable for the same kind of game. In my opinion neither is a rifle that I would use in africa but for what you discribed either would be fine. I have used the 7mm RM more than the 270 Wby mostly because I've had it since 1968. From a practical standpoint I would recommend the 7mm RM but I do like the 270 Wby better. Over the years I've basically come to the conclusion that the 7mm has no real hunting advantage over a hand loaded 30-06 with a 24" barrel, my most used rifle. If you're determined to buy one of these go with the 7mm RM.

I made the switch from a .30-06 as my go to gun to the 7Rem Mag about 8 years ago and have never looked back. Every kill with it has been swift. I have several friends that use a .270 Roy and there is no real difference between the two in the field. However, the 7Rem Mag has to be the most common magnum over the counter and you can pick up shells for it anywhere. I basically use 150-165 grain soft points and would not be afraid to take any non dangerous game on earth with it. As always, a handloaded 7 Rem Mag, will still out pace any handloaded .280 or .30-06 by 150 to 250 fps. Which is what magnums do.

Another vote for the 7rm for the same reason I like the .280 over the .270, you can get heavier bullets for bigger game.

The 7RM is a fine cart and it's long known good reputation speaks for it's self.

The 270 WEA is a Flatter shooting cart than the 7RM but, the cost are definitely higher. I load for both and the only real cost of the Wea is Brass. You may be able to find some of the Rem or Fed brass for the 7 Wea which works fine but, I tend to like the head stamp to actually be what I'm firing. Other than the brass the reloading cost are essentially the same.

Now factory loads are almost impossible to find for the Wea in some parts of the world where as the 7RM can be found might near anywhere which, could come in handy on fly-in trips where ammo may need to be purchased at the destination in case of a loss.

Then you have the Freebore issue for the Wea to reach it's super high velocity. Some think that FB is asking for a headache but, I've actually shot several Wea that would drive tacks despite having FB.

Tough Choice but, my vote goes for the 7RM. Hard to Beat a winner like that one.

Good Luck

Reloader

I had a 270 weatherby years ago and it was one of the best rifles and calibres i ever owned !! I had three 7 mm rem magnums but i liked the 270 better ! we used to shoot roos with it at 300 and 400 yards ! in fact we got sick of walking so far to get the roos and drag them back to the 4x4 ! the worst shot i ever did with it, was a roo at 100 yards which i clean missed ! my mate got out his open sighted swedish mauser 6.5 and dropped it on the spot ! i didnt feel so great after that one !

They're both great, but for the sake of simplicity and availability, I'll go with the 7mm Rem. Mag. every time.

AD

Go with the 7mm rem mag. It has performed very well for me over the past few years

Well Mark, I am going to be a real jerk here and suggest that you not buy either one.

Both are great cartridges, to be sure. I have reloaded and shot both. The popularity of the 7mm Rem Mag speaks for itself. The 270 Wby Mag is much overlooked, it is a good cartridge.

However, in this size of cartridge, my favorite is the 7mm Wby Mag.

It offers just a little more in the way of heavy bullet performance than the 270 Wby Mag.
You are obviously not worried about where to find shells for Wby cartridges, so that is no worry. And the free bore is a NON ISSUE in my opinion. I own a 7mm Wby Mag and a 300 Wby Mag that are both freebored. They both shoot hunting loads well under an inch day after day.

The 7mm Rem Mag is a good cartridge to be sure, but all is not rosey with this thing. Factory loads tend to be underloaded. I have chronographed factory loads using 160 grain bullets that will not hardly break 2800 fps!!!
Loaded safely the average 7mm Rem Mag will give about 3050 to 3100 fps with 160 grain bullets.
My 7mm Wby Mag will safely give 3200 fps and never wimper.

Don't get me wrong, both are good cartridges. If I had to choose I guess I would take the 270 Wby Mag just to be different than the average shooter. BUT, I really like that 7mm Wby Mag!!

7 MAG!

I LOVE mine.

Never owned a weatherby, but they are fine cartridges.

7mag, good 160 bullet, like an AFrame or TSX.

the 7 Mag.....a clear winner

Another vote for the 7mmremmag.

I love the 270 wby... and have two 7mm mags... to make reloading cheaper use the wby 7mag brass and resize the neck..for some reason it's more readily available and cheaper... just looking at the headstamp will throw you off though...

Al

I chose the 7mm Rem Mag as my all-purpose gun long ago and haven't been sorry, 3 hunting partners have switched to it in the last few years.

But the 270 Weatherby would certainly do the job as well with the possible exception of when heavier bullets were needed.

Other than the 30-06, and maybe 308, 30-30, this would be the easiest cartridge to find if you were out in the back country, good luck finding a 270 weatherby if yours dissapear.

I have both and on medium game there is no difference between the two. 0.007inch is inconsequential except to literally splitting hairs and having something to argue about. With the selection of bullets, brass, factory ammo and available rifles the 7mm is the most practical choice. Heck, I may have just talked myself into selling my 270 Wby. But it is a Euromark with a gorgeous piece of wood. Decisions, decisions.

A 30/06 or 270 Win will perform just as well on the game mentioned as either the 7mm Rem or 270 Wby. That belt on the case has never helped kill anything!

To summarize these replys, it appears that of those who actually shot game and used both rifles, most give a preference to the 270 wby. But for ammo reasons (cost, availiblty, etc.) as well as for the most part 7mm RM can be had in much greater varity of less expensive rifles, is there anything else I missed? It is noteworthy that those who owned only the 7mm RMs do seem to like them.

quote:

But for ammo reasons (cost, availiblty, etc.) as well as for the most part 7mm RM can be had in much greater varity of less expensive rifles, is there anything else I missed? It is noteworthy that those who owned only the 7mm RMs do seem to like them.

Actually I just prefer the .284" bullets over the .277" bullet diameter.

When Mark mentioned "Moose in a pinch" that is another reason I'd lean towards the 7 cal. There's nothing at all that one rifle couldn't do over the other, but I'd prefer a bit heavier bullet the 7 Mag can take.

NOW, all of this could change if Mark was to get a Lilja .277 barrel, make it 28" long in a 1-8" twist and shoot a 169.5 grain Wildcat ULD RBBT bullet. I might just take up that 270 Weatherby in a heartbeat with that.

Just some more to chew on.

Not that I disagree on the general concensus of going with the 7mm Rem Mag - for availability, price of ammo as well as components and for general versatility. One thing has me puzzled though. Most posters seem to consider the 7mm Rem Mag and the .270 Wby ballistic twins??

Now, barring the use of somebody's "wonder" loads, and sticking with data from manuals, I don't see data for the 7mm Rem Mag, which even come close to the numbers for the .270 Wby. I should add, I compare 130 grs .270 Wby loads to 130-140 grs 7mm Rem Mag loads. Those bullet weights to me are what makes it worth considering either caliber. For bigger bullets, one might as well get a .300, and gain additional flexibility for heavier game. Even factoring in the 2" extra barrel length from the .270 data, there is still a significant difference...

OK, OK, I know that comparing data is the sign of an infantile and immature shooter, who has not caught onto the fact, that even 2-300 fps may not mean the world in real life. Still, who can resist, and in that comparison, the .270 Wby certainly shines, in spite of the flexibility of the 7mm...


IMR .270 Wby data

IMR 7mm Rem Mag data

Hodgdon 7mm Rem Mag data

Alliant 7mm Rem data - this comes fairly close to the .270 Wby, but still...

- mike

One of the short falls of the 7mm Rem Mag is the loading data. Someone already pointed out that factory ammo is no big splash and in fact substandard in many loadings compared to what can be achieved with carefully managed handloads. Somewhere along the line there were pressure problems with the 7mmRM because of the difference in manufactoring the chambers and free bore differences (not to mention quality of the steel). Even the reloading manuals reflect conservative loads in some cases. I'm in no way advocating exceeding the max loads from any reputible source but the competent, knowledgable handloader can usually get more out of the 7mm RM safely. The proprietery cartridges like Weatherby are not nearly a common caliber and in my experience it is difficult to meet factory velocity with handloads in the 270 weatherby.You can get 160gr bullets for the 270 and get 2900+ fps about the same as the 7mm RM handloads. I think at one time even 180gr bullets were available for the 270 and handloaded at about 2800fps. You can't really compare ballistcs between the two without comparing down range velocity and energy. There are little differences but it's like comparing the 270 winchester with the 3006.The game will never be able to tell the difference and neither will you.

I made this decision 10 years ago and went with the .270 WBY in a euromark. However, if you don't load your own, stick with the 7mm. IMHO long range game getting is more about sectional density and BC than bullet weight. The .270 WBY is the clear winner there. And my experience has proved this to my own satisfaction from deer to Moose. Thanksgiving week I fired two shots and took two nice bull Caribou. Neither one took five steps after the shot.

One big draw back, there is almost no new data for the .270 WBY. All of the load books I've seen are still using data developed over 10 years ago, (Barnes being the exception, but I haven't had any luck with the X bullets in the .270 WBY). Why can't we see some new data for RL25, Retumbo, or Big Boy?
These newer slower powders would seem to be ideal for the .270 WBY.
BD

quote:

OK, OK, I know that comparing data is the sign of an infantile and immature shooter, who has not caught onto the fact, that even 2-300 fps may not mean the world in real life. Still, who can resist, and in that comparison, the .270 Wby certainly shines, in spite of the flexibility of the 7mm...

I'll have to agree w/ ya mho, The most accurate 270 Wea Loads I've loaded lately were w/ 71.5 grains of R22 pushing 150 HDY SPILs in Wea Brass w/ FED 215s. Those loads were tack drivers and bumped along at 3265 fps 12-15' from the muzzle. That's a good bit more speed than what I've achieved in the last 3 7RMs I've loaded for. When you bring the better BCs of the .277s into the equation is does make the 270 Wea a ballistically superior cart but, you know as well as I the difference is not enough to get upset about.

Reloader

My father uses a 7mm Rem Mag.

So far I think these are his numbers with it.

Dall Sheep in NWT
Mt. Goat in Yukon
Moose in Newfoundland
A bunch of Deer
Bear in Quebec
Mule Deer in Mexico

Go with a 7mm Mag, I had a friend take one to Africa for PG add another 11 animals to the list.

He mostly shoots 160 grain Nosler Partitions, but I load up 175 Grain Nosler Partitions for the bigger stuff.

If it's a magnum your after the 7mm RM is very popular. I can't see getting a Weatherby cartridge unless you, like many of us, must have them all.

Since I buy factory rifles I go with the rifle first plus I want to get as far away from belted rounds as I can. Thus I am shooting a 270 WSM in a Kimber. I have others too but that's the one I am using now and it does about the same with 140's downrange as a 7mm does.

Those magnums are not that light on recoil you know and the muzzle blast is quite loud. One just has to have a magnum or more in the battery but I prefer to shoot the 308 series these days. It's amazing how a little cartridge like that will put a nice hole in stuff with little fuss.

I use and will continue to use a 7 mm rem mag,used wisely it wont let me down and has helped me achieve a great strike rate over the many years i have used it.....i originally bought mine when i heard a very experienced deer hunter say "nothing puts down a sambar stag like this one" as he reached into his gun rack.... it was of course a 7mmrm.

Shopping for WBY ammo's gotta be a big pain in the patoot! Go 7mm. Your choices and availability are much, much greater.
But why not a 30-06?
Dave

My next door neighbor bought a beautiful .270 Wby and took several Mulies with it and one speed goat. He was quite happy with it.

Then he went Elk hunting and sold it when he got home. He had hit an elk (decent but no monster) three times through the chest. His father put it down with his .338WM.

He has the money to play, and has several nice rifles. The one he uses most is a .300 WM.

From what I've seen, there is little difference between the 7mmRM and the .300 WM on game if using similar bullets. Placement is always key but I like the way the bigger diameter bullets at lower velocities work. For this reason, and the availability, I'd pick a 7mm RM. Which I did a bit ago. Nate

quote:

Then he went Elk hunting and sold it when he got home. He had hit an elk (decent but no monster) three times through the chest. His father put it down with his .338WM.

Does this mean that if he used the exact same bullet construction (e.g.partitions) with the same weight bullet (e.g.160grs ) out of a 7mm RM hitting the elk in the same places the results would have been different?? Of course there is nothing to compare when you bring a 338 into the senerio but even a 338 will not make up for poor hits.

quote:

Originally posted by Pathfinder:

quote:

Then he went Elk hunting and sold it when he got home. He had hit an elk (decent but no monster) three times through the chest. His father put it down with his .338WM.

Does this mean that if he used the exact same bullet construction (e.g.partitions) with the same weight bullet (e.g.160grs ) out of a 7mm RM hitting the elk in the same places the results would have been different?? Of course there is nothing to compare when you bring a 338 into the senerio but even a 338 will not make up for poor hits.

Nope! I don't believe using like weight and constrution of bullets in either of these would have been a different result. Not sure how you got that out of what I wrote at all.
I don't know what bullets he was using. In your way of thinking the 160 gr is about as heavy as you can get for the .277 cal and the 7mm can go heavier. Maybe he was trying the "speed kills" idea and found out the hard way. What I know is he was unimpressed with it as an Elk rifle.

Once again the differences we are debating are so small that it really doesn't matter. I'd pick the 7mag of these two. But I bought a .338 WM 15 years ago just for Elk hunting. That alone aught to let you know about my thought on the "Elk Rifle" subject. Like I said, I like the bigger bullets going slower.

And no, I don't think any step up in caliber will make up for a step down in proficiency. You'll not find that stated in any post I've ever made! What you'll find is that I believe a bigger diameter bullet with more weight will do more in the worst situations than the smaller lighter ones. A marginal shot with a .338 WM can still result in a dead elk, where the same hit with a .270 can be lots of tracking. That doesn't mean I am ok with the "shoot it anywhere attitude" just because I use a .338! Far from it.

Re-read the last thing I wrote:
"From what I've seen, there is little difference between the 7mmRM and the .300 WM on game if using similar bullets. Placement is always key but I like the way the bigger diameter bullets at lower velocities work . For this reason, and the availability, I'd pick a 7mm RM. Which I did a bit ago."

I don't see how this can be understood differently. I use a .338 WM as my primary "Elk" rifle, and chose a 7mm RM as an either/or rifle. I clearly stated the shot placement issue, and my choice of bigger and slower bullets.

How did you get that I thought a 7mm would work better than the .270 Wby does with the same bullet weight? Or were you just a little quick on the keyboard? Nate

Big Nate,
I simply used your comments about your friend to ask a rhetorical question and made a one sentence statement about 338s and shot placement. This was not directed at you per se'. How you worked my one simple, short paragraph into 6 paragraghs of defensive statements is puzzling. Actually I don't disagree with most of your conclusions.

I didn't mean for it to go this route but maybe I'm needin' a beer!
I'm not a great typist nor do I explain myself well enough at times. Then next thing I know, what I said has been mistaken and I've been put into the very group I disagree with!
These debates are interesting, frustrating, and strange at times. To me lots of these comparison threads are to close to call really. Mostly it comes back to personal choice more than performance.

Many of the deficiencies blamed on the rifle is really because of bullet choice for the job, or where the bullet lands.
I need to get out of here and breathe a bit!