Sorry for beating a dead horse guys but I just have another x vs y thing. This time I would like any input on comparing the .270 and 7mm Rem Mag. I am interested in getting a rifle, this will be my first and I would like to use it as an all around. I would primarily be using it for whitetail and hogs and maybe the occaisional mule deer or even an elk if I ever got the chance. Some people say the 7mm is overkill for texas deer, some say dead is dead no matter how it got there. Honestly though, I would just like an opinion from anyone who knows about these two guns. I like a flat shooting gun with good range for accuracy. Should I get the .270 and it will be perfect for whitetail hogs and mule deer for the time being and get a bigger gun if I ever go elk hunting or do you think I should get the 7mag and it may be overkill for whitetail, but then it is very versatile? What are your thoughts? Thanks Nathan

Oh forgot to mention that these would either be in a Remington ADL synthetic or Ruger Stainless Synthetic. One more thing- Is the extra money for the ruger with stainless barrel worth it for longevity or does the ADL barrel hold up ok? Any quality issues or complaints?

Nathan... If it is a choice between the 7mm Mag and the 270, get the 270. The 7mm Mag isnt a "bigger gun" and you will have no problems taking an elk with your 270.

My personal preferance for an all around would be the 270, however there are better and a greater variety of 7mm bullets available and though the 270 has certianly killed its share of elk, a 175 grain bullet makes better Elk medicne than a 140. The 280 remington makes a nice comprimise between the two.

Go with the 280 140gr. pills for deer and 160 or 175 for elk. Great round have 4 guns chambered for it.

Wayne

Both will do the job you have in mind but the 7MM mag will punish you more with recoil. You can use the 160 grain bullet in the 7MM Mag and the 150 grain in the 270 for Elk. Deer being a thin skinned animal the 140 grain bullet in the 7MM Mag and the 130 grain bullet in the 270 should do just fine. Your choice of rifles depends on the wants of the buyer.

I would choose the Cooper rifle over the Remington or Ruger offerings. The Copper is just a bit higher cost than the Remington or Ruger but is a much higher quality factory rifle. The Copper rifle comes from the factory with a trued action fully adjustable trigger and a premium barrel ready to produce 1/2" groups at 100 yards. The Remington and Ruger must have all those things done to them after you buy them. That is get the action trued, install a premium barrel and adjustable trigger.

I'm with the .280 guys. Perfect compromise between the two.

I used to own a .270 and it was good I prefer the 30/06 but thats just my preference. I would opt for a .270 in a CZ American over nay of the other rifles mentioned.

Nathan,
I couldn't decide if I wanted a 270 or a 7mm Rem.Mag. so I solved the problem I bought both.
Although I've only killed whitetailed deer with them I can't see any difference in "killing effectiveness" none!!!
But I think the 7mm would be a bit better on heavier game due to heavier available bullets.
Sometimes I think this caliber thing is more imagined than real or that the only way you will see a difference is on paper.The key to any rifles effectiveness is shot placement.Shoot him in the guts with say a 338 Win.Mag and watch him run over the hill (long tracking job then takes place) shoot him thru the heart with say a 243 Win. and he won't go far if he goes at all.
To answer your question knowing what I know now I would opt for the 7mm Rem Mag

My own preference is the 7mm mag.It throws a slightly bigger bullet faster and a bit flatter and recoil is easily tolerated by most people.

For general use that will include regular elk hunts, I'd prefer the 7mm Remington Magnum over the .270. It's more versatile, and you can do things with those heavy 175 gr. bullets (great sectional density) that you simply can't do with the .270, yet it's still a reasonably easy cartridge to shoot well - on par with the .30-06 in terms of felt recoil.

AD

AD

I like the 7MM Rem Mag except that I reload and the belted cartridges are loosers at that.

Better to get a 7MM WSM and have the best of the three.

It sounds to me like a 7 WSM would be a great choice for you. It has the versatility of using lighter bullets on deer sized game, and heavier bullets for elk. Recoil would be much less than the Rem Mag, and roughly equivalent to the .270 Win. And, it could come in a short action.

Otherwise, go with the .270 Win! No need in getting a rifle that will punish you on the game you hunt just in case you decide to go after elk "someday".

As to the Cooper rifle comment above, no doubt they are a great rifle. But, rather than buying a Cooper, buy a Remington in .270 and 7 Mag and save some money! The difference in accuracy won't be significant enough as a hunting rifle to warrant the price. Especially if this is your first rifle...

I've never owned a .270. But I've shot some, as well as owned two 7 mm Mags. I have owned two .280's, and still have one.
There essentially is no difference on deer class stuff as far as range, or killing power. Elk class stuff can use the heavier bullets, etc. but the difference isn't very much.
There is a big difference in recoil. The 7 mm Rem Mag comes back with 26-28 lbs., vs. 17-19 lbs with a .270. This is comparing 130-150 gr. .270 loads vs. 150-175 gr. 7 mm Mag loads.
I, too, can handle the recoil of the 7 mm Mag. But, the truth is, day in and day out, I shoot better with a lighter round. I gave up my last 7 mm Mag. for a 7X57, and had nothing but success in the field with it. I shot better and got some really nice critters, etc.
I've learned that, with todays modern premiums, which are readily availiable in factory ammo, the bullet quality really makes the standard rounds much better killers. I've killed lots of elk class stuff with all sorts of standard rounds. The .270, with a premium bullet, is fully up to the job.
But the 7 mm Mag has an edge. One of my friends, for instance, shot through a Canadian Moose, from hip to shoulder, breaking the shoulder to boot, with a factory loaded 175 gr. Federal Throphy Bonded bullet.
My gut feeling is you would be better served by a .270 for a first rifle. Later, you can get yourself a magnum. Frankly, if you decide to get serious about elk. a .338 Mag is a much better elk choice than the 7 mm Mag. E

Thanks- as far as recoil- is the 25-30 lbs of recoil that the 7mm Mag puts out comparable to a 12 guage shotgun with 2.75 inch shells shooting heavy dove? I like the 7 mag and I don't mind the recoil so I don't see any reason to get the .270 when it can do everything the .270 can do and more.

I've had two 270's and only recently got a 7mm RM (mainly for the action to rebarrel to 338 WM).

Eremicus touched a point I'd like to expand on...

Most guys buying a "first gun" tend to buy something that will do everything (i.e. 30-06). Honestly, I think owning two big game rifles is a better way to go than trying to do it all with one rifle. In my mind the most practical two rifle setup for everything on this continent is a 270 and 338 WM. The 270 will serve you well on deer-sized stuff and will still kill any elk that walks with today's fantastic bullets (140 Failsafe's, etc.). Later you can get a 338 WM which is probably "perfect" for elk and bigger stuff.

My suggestion is get the 270... it recoils lighter and you'll become proficient with it easier than with a magnum. After that move up to the 338 WM.

Brad

Brad has a point about having two rifles, except I would add that I would prefer the 30/06 & .375 H&H combo. A third gun that I reckon one needs is a good lever 45/70

You guys telling him he needs two guns need to stop! You need a minimum of 4-6 big game guns plus varmit and heavy game guns. What am I going to do if my wife comes in the computer room and reads this thread?

Seriously though, I've got a range of big game guns including 270-7x57-308-30'06-300WinMag-338Win Mag. For big game hunting I think I would start with something in the 270/280/7x57 range. Recoil is very easy to get used to and with heavy bullets you could hunt most anything in the continental US. When you're ready for something for big Elk, Moose most Bears then you can add something in the 33-35 cal. range.

Then fill in between with specialty rifles, you know, one for under 150 pound deer then one for deer over 150, then one for short range deer, then.. well you get the picture.

The 7mm mag will handle the game you mentioned including elk better than the .270. I challenge anyone out there to tell the difference in recoil between the two, it's so minute as to not be a factor at all. As for the comment about the belted magnums being a "looser" for reloading I suggest you actually reload something instead of spouting crap you read from an internet forum.

I agree with Boltman. I think the 7mm Rem Mag is still the number one rifle caliber sold in the US and there is a good reason for that.

Choices

My choice is the 7mm Mag. It may be the rifle I have or just dumb luck, but I have never missed or had to use a second round with my 7mm Mag. I have had so much luck with it that when my son reached the point that he could use any of the rifles in my collection, he chose the 7mm Mag. This was at 16yrs old 6' 150lbs. He is now 19yrs 6'2" 185lbs USMC. I have lost this rifle to him which I do not regret because he had confidence in the rifle right from the begining.

As far as recoil, my daughter did not care for it, 5'4" 103lbs. but she could shoot it. They do make pads you can wear at the range, but I have never noticed recoil while in the field.

My father had a 270 for a number of years. I could not tell much of a difference in the recoil when we went out to shoot 20-30 rounds.

I butcher my own animals and those of my father and any other deer shot in the family. I have not seen much difference in the loss of meat between the two rounds. The rounds seem to behave in similar ways under 100yds.

My choice would be the 7mm Mag and purchase a starters Reloading Kit. Then the round you choose can perform as you desire.

Same trigger, same feel, same results!

(Buy a single shot and Just change barrels)

3000 fps with 130 in 270
3200 fps with 140 in 7mag.

no real difference, if you are deer hunting and hog hunting in texas.

338 winnie, load it light for deer, and you can load it heavy for elf, moose, and plainsgame.

Recoil mosty a mental thing, as once you've decided it's going to hit you, let it.

Seriously, if you can, shoot a 7 mag and a 338 right next to each other... offhand...

jeffe

If you look at comparison of the .270 & 7mm magnum
you are best to make sure that the 7mm mag does in fact have the 26 inch barrel on the rifle. Then the 7mm mag is really a magnum in ballistic terms. Winchester's 7mm mag has such a rifle.
Those who compare the 7mm mag with the 24 inch Remgington end up with velocity being much closer in comparison.

The biggest difference is that you have the 160 and the 175 grain bullet weights to hunt bigger game with in the 7mm mag, such as the elk, moose etc. I have used the 270 in years past, you must understand it's limitations (yardage and game presentation on the shot)when going after animals such as elk, bullet choice is critical. I used the Nosler 160 grain partition's on such game. The 270 slows down a bit using it, but it is a better bullet on the elk penetration wise.The 7mm magnum is a better big game rifle when you compare apples to apples in my opinion. Recoil is a non-issue when comparing same weight bullet (160) for 85% of must men hunters in the field.

I shoot a 7mm. mag remm. 700bdl and have killed many deer and elk with it and never had to track one. the recoil isnt pleasant at the range
but I find it tolarable and have never noticed the recoil when shooting game. One of my hunting
buddys shoots a 270 and When cutting meat I havent
seen any difrence in blood shot between his and mine. I think if recoil is realy a factor in your decision you should realy try shoot one befor making your mind up. I would prefer the 7mm. only
becus of the heavier factory loads available but I dont think much of the nosler ballistic tip in this cartridge.

I can't speak about larger game than deer, but I can truly say that I cannot tell one iota of difference between the recoil of a 7 RemMag and a 150 gr. 30.06 load. I believe anyone can learn to handle it. We butcher our deer ourselves and have never been able to tell the difference between one shot with a 270 and any of the smaller mags either. I'm sure the heavier bullet of the 7 would be my preference on elk and such over the 270.

I'm with Brad in that I'd rather have a two-rifle battery (i.e. .270 Win./.338 Win) than just an '06. With that said, I'll also state that if I could only own a .300 Winchester for all N. American hunting, I wouldn't feel handicapped at all.

One more point: Too many guys make way too big a deal over general-use cartridge selection. 'Most all of the factory-loaded big game cartridges are fundamentally good and will kill 'most everything very well if you do your job, so it's important to get past that part.

It's amazing how many folks worship that Great Cliche In The Sky - that one perfect "all-around rifle" for N. American hunting - yet most will never, ever come close to hunting all species of N.American big game. In fact (I base this on what I've seen here in my own home state) most won't get much past hunting deer and elk as resident hunters.

Yet the search for The Grail continues....

I have a friend who I've been pestering to go on some out-of-state hunts for the last twenty years, but he can never afford to go: But he's got plenty of money for more guns and related equipment. He must have forty rifles in his large gun safe; most of which he never uses except when he manages to draw an Oregon mule deer or elk tag on the odd year. I know other guys just like him, too.......

And yet I also know guys with a basic .300 Weatherby, .338 Winchester, 7mm Remington, .30-06 or a combination of two or three good rifles in basic, useful calibers who hunt everywhere and who have literally shot the works.

Smart money says buy one or two good rifles of high functional quality and then save your money for hunting trips - not more rifles. An old, much used, battered set of basic rifles will look better in your old age than a whole fleet full of guns you've managed to hoard (and that have bled you dry) but have never been hunted with.

"There's no shortage of all-around rifles - where are the all-around hunters?" - Jim Carmichel

AD

[ 01-23-2003, 06:23: Message edited by: allen day ]

Nathan:

The 7mm Remington Magnum is a an extremely versatile and accurate cartridge. It is one of the world's true all-around cartridges. The 270 caliber is more specilized for "smaller" big game. I would not use a 270 Win or Wby for game over 500 pounds.

I have both a 7mm Rem Mag and 270 Win. I appreciate the qualities of each one. The 7mm Rem Mag will better serve your needs. I prefer a 26" barrel and heavier bullets.

Buliwyf

Well said Allen... the point of all this hardware is to hunt. At least that's why I started my accumulation's. After owning in excess of forty ceterfire rifles in over 25 different chamberings I've come back to the original battery I started with... a 270 and 338. The 300 Mag's combine the best qualities of those two in a flat shooting, hard hitting "compromise"... not much of a compromise IMO!

For all my hunting I could be happy using a 300 WSM and 22-250 and never feel under/over-gunned.

BA

Really theres only 0.007" of a difference between the 2 calibers. I'd take the 7mm because its got just a little more oumph to it and would handle elk a bit better.

Nathan
You've already answered the question. You said that you like the 7MM. Go with it. The main difference between the two is recoil amd you feel that that isn't an issue for you. If you feel better about the 7MM than you will have more confidence with it and, all other things being equal, you will shoot better with it. In my case I'd get a 30-06, but that's me, you should do what feels right for you.
As to which rifle, I'd use the same measure; which feels best. If they feel the same go with the cheapest and use the extra money to buy a better scope. The difference between rifles is rather small, the cheapest rifle really isn't much of a step down from an expensive rifle. Both will usually shoot a tight enough group to successfully take a trophy at normal hunting range. The difference between a cheap scope and an expensive scope is huge.

Allen
Well said. Just get something decent and go hunting. You'll figure out for yourself what is best if you keep hunting.
Mike

Since you indicated an occasional elk or moose might be on the menu, I would go with a 30-06 for the 220 grain round noses available. And for deer to 300 yards, a 150 or 165 grain 30-06 is wonderful.

Nathan... welcome to the conundrum (sp?) I call mental masturbation... you can't go wrong with with either choice and consideration of the .280 Remington is very valid!

Don't put yourself through the anguish! By a .270/.280 now, shoot it alot and then when you're ready for that elk hunt, buy a .300 Winchester Mag!

Nathan,

I have recently bought a 7mm Remm Mag in a Tikka Stainless Synthetic and love both the caliber and the rifle.

I have found that recoil at the range is very similar to the 270 ,that is noticable, but in the field I find it very tolerable.

The 7mm will give you better choice of projectiles and therefore has to be more versatile.

With regards to reloading the 7mm, my understanding is that belted cartridges are no problem as long as they headspace on the shoulder rather than the belt (After being fireformed) I therefore necksize my once fired brass and have had no problems with it.

The Tikka Whitetail Hunter is worth a look at and I believe very good value in the U.S.

Nathan,

I would have to suggest again to take a look at the CZ American's in the calibers your thinking of. They are a better gun than a Ruger or Rem ADL in opinion. They also make a 9.3x62 which may interest you if you want a bit more stick.