Ok, last post on this, I promise :-)
I've been tetering between these 2 calibers for some time (actually, several and I've got it narrowed to these 2).

Anyone have any pros/cons to share to help with the decision.

Other info. The gun will be the Wby Super Big Game Master in 26" bbl. Range and accuracy are more important to me than knock-down.

Thanks,
Jason

To me it's hands down 30 caliber. there's a super wide range of bullet weights, manufacturers and types. A 300 wby will run as flat as a 7mm and carry more energy downrange. It has the edge as game gets bigger and bigger. I don't think you'll ever find a guide that wants you to use a 7mm on dangerous bears.
NOW, on the other hand if you are simply dedicated to deer or caribou sized game and DO NOT intend on having a muzzle break (or practicing with a non muzzle break) then I might say go with the 7mm. just my opinion. PS as you might guess I own 3 300 wby's with muzzle breaks.
They are "puppies" to shoot--they kick about as much as my .243 lightweight micro medallion. With the right bullets they shoot flatter than a 22.250 and have the same energy at 400 yds as a 30-06 at 100 yds. It just doesn't get much better than that!

What will you be hunting? If it's medium game, like deer, antelope, caribou, etc., go with the 7mm Wby. If elk, moose, and bears are what your hunting, go with the 300 Wby. I'm not totally sure, but I think the Wby SBGM is a pretty light rifle. This rifle in 300 Wby could be quite a handful from the bench. The 300 Wby will have greater range, but the lower recoil of the 7mm Wby may lead to better accuracy. The 300 is a bit more gun, but any 7mm Magnum is nothing to sneeze at.

Like Jack O'Connor once said, "A .300 weatherby is the closest thing to a lightning-bolt that a man can hold in his hands."

If range is most important and the gun is to be light in weight go with a 7mmstw.This will give you a super flat trajectory with much less recoil.

I just purchased a Vanguard in a 300 WBY, and I was surprised how well I was able to handle the recoil off the bench (And I consider myself a wimp). If this gun shoots ok, then I plan on installing a break, but I personally wouldn't let the recoil scare you off.

"range and accuracy are more important to me than knock down" That statement pretty well answers your own question, as it did for me. I've had a couple of .300 mags and they were fine rifles. I have found that I prefer the 7mm mag because it has enough less blast and recoil that I enjoy shooting it more and am more accurate with it. The .30 maggies are undeniably more powerful, so if it's power you want go bigger, .30, .338 or more. I've found though that the 7mm mag is plenty of rifle, and enough easier to shoot to be an interesting choice. Now, about those muzzle brakes, they can indeed tame a fierce kicker and could give you the best of both, lighter recoil and a powerful .30 cal magnum. Guy

[ 07-25-2002, 20:02: Message edited by: m700 ]

Oh, forgot to mention that although I've shot the Weatherby 7mm & .300 mag, I don't own either. My 7mm is a Rem mag, and my .300 mags were both .300 Win mags, one Ruger and one Remington. Guy

First off, I feel SUFFICIENT knock-down power should always be the FIRST consideration. Killing the animal cleanly comes first, (with a little room for shooter error) followed by range. This opens the argument of what is sufficient knock-down power. Yes, I know this is an age-old argument, but when you think about it, Knock-down power and accuracy, and range capabilities go hand in hand. You don't need as much knock down power if you are accurate enough to hit precise spots on the animal. If you are not as accurate, then take something with a little more knock-down power. Unless you are close enough, then, to put it through the heart you may be able to make do with some old worn out rifle shooting 4 inch groups at 100 yards ....etc.etc.etc.

My personal preference would be to go with the .30 calibre. Looking at Weatherby's printed material, it will shoot as flat, and flatter, with bullet weights in the same range, AND will deliver a fair bit more energy with the heavier bullets. There are tribes of folks who will argue for both sides until you won't want either. Therefore, just pick whichever one you can shoot best, and whichever one you can best defend your choice against the believers from the other camp. (.30 VS 7MM)

[ 07-26-2002, 07:35: Message edited by: Woodrow ]

Unless you plan on chasing the biggest of bears in N.A. the 7mm will be slightly more pleasant to shoot. I personally wanted a rifle shooting bigger bullets than come in .30 cal for big animals so I have a hot rod 7mm and a reliable .338WM. Your choice is a good one either way as long as you hit what you aim for. No Elk or Moose will walk away from the 7mm. Remember the .30-06 is still the most commonly used and the 6.5 Swede rocks a lot of moose every year.

Personally, I would pick the 300 weatherby over the 7mm weatherby. The 7mm weatherby doesn't offer any real performance advantage over the the 7mm rem mag and both can be bested easily by the 7mm stw. Combine that with the very high priced factory ammo and in my opinion if the 7mm weatherby disappeard it wouldn't be missed much. The 300 weatherby has been at the top of the 30 cal magnum heap for years, excluding some of the magnums like the 300 ultra and 30-378 weatherby which I view more as sideshow freaks than real hunting rounds.

If you're primary goal is accuracy you might want to look somewhere else than at a weatherby rifle in a weatherby caliber. They're not known for their accuracy and the freeboring that weatherby uses to keep pressures down is the main culprit. Even with careful handloading freebored rifles don't offer much to work with to get top notch accuracy.

Boltman, Wby not being known for accuracy is certainly news to me! What other current factory rifle promises and backs up a 1.5" 100 yd. gp. with factory ammo guarantee? My experience is that most shoot much better than this and I frequently advise people looking for a new rifle with accuracy as their primary concern to consider the Weatherbys. If only I'd known!

My own two weatherbies were dissappointments in the accuracy department.They both met the 1-1/2" guarantee but were not as accurate as most of my much cheaper 700's.My weatherbies were mk v's in 257 and 300 wby mag.

Thanks to all for the replies. I'm looking for a solid step up in range and ballistics over my .270 Win. I'll be using the rifle primarily for coues deer (as opposed to grizzlies) so long shots are pretty much the norm. Either caliber is more than enough bullet, but you need a very stable, long range gun for certain circumstances. Many of the "serious" coues deer hunters here in AZ go with .338 mags in Wby or the Lazerroni equivalents.

The gun itself will be a Mark V SBGM, which is a pretty light rifle. That' why I was considering the 7 my first choice. However, everything from factory ammo to reloading components are much more plentiful for the .300 and, as many here have said, it is ballistically superior to the 7mm in terms of retained energy, etc.

I was seriously considering a Rem. Custom Shop APR (African Plains Rifle) in 7MM STW, but the lead time is 4-6 months and it costs significantly more than the WBY.

I'll keep you guys informed as to where I end up.

Jason

Just one more thought. The 7mm Wby really isn't a step over the 7mm Rem Mag and brass is way cheaper for the Rem Mag. If I were to buy a Weatherby it would be a .300 or .340 as they are what made Roy famous. I like the 7mm Rem Mag and the .300 Win Mag asfar as longer range versitile rifles. The 7mm with 150 to 160 grain bullets loaded to max would be tough to beat for longer shots on deer.
Your skill and practice are far more important than trying to pick between these two rifles.

I have both of these calibers, and I have to agree with the posters favouring the 300. The 7mm is a nice round, doesn't kick as hard, but for the money you may as well have a 7mm Remington. The 300 has a lot more case capacity (it's based on the full length 300 H & H, not the shortened versions) and will push bullets just that much faster. A like sized cartridge in 7mm would be the 7mm STW, and here you start to be able to make more comparisons. Basically, once you've evened the table, the 7mm shoots a little flatter, the 300 has heavier bullet choices, and hits a little harder. On both ends. FWIW - Dan

I've owned a Weatherby Custom Outfitter in both 7mm Rem Mag and .300 Win Mag. This rifle is identical in dimensions and weight to the Weatherby SBGM, with the exception that the barrels were 24" on my models.

I also own a Weatherby Fibermark in 7mm WBY Magnum.

I disagree about the equivalence of the 7mm RM and the 7mm WBY. The velocities from all bullet weights in the 7mm RM were always disappointing, considering the amount of powder being burned. Accuracy was aroudn 1 MOA with 160 grain and ligher bullets, poor with 175 grain bullets.

The .300 Win Mag model was a handful in the recoil department. Bone-jarring and mind-numbing actually. And I'm not recoil shy - - the recoil sensation was worse than shooting a .375 H&H from a normal 10 lb all-up rifle. The SBGM is way too light for the .300 mags - - I was shooting 200 grain loads at 2900 fps. Again the velocity was disappointing. The recoil of the WBY version would be far worse.

Of course few shots are fired in hunting, but your load development and range practice will be make a flincher out of you with the .300 WBY in the SBGM. I've fired the .300 WBY in the heavier Accumark and it is much more tolerable and accurate as well. But the heavy rifle is lug to carry over hill and dale.

The 7mm WBY has been outstanding. Velocity is about 100 fps greater than the 7mm RM and accuracy is all under 1 MOA. Forget the nonsense about scarce brass... there's plenty available from Federal and other sources, including once-fired. Recoil is no problem in the 9 lb rifle.

I am thinking of a 7mm WBY SBGM myself, as a way to lower the rifle weight and still have tolerable recoil. The late great Jack O'Connor wrote highly of this cartridge.

What it adds in practical terms over a good .270 Winchester with a 24" barrel is questionable though. I suppose a good 160 grain bullet at 3100 fps in the 7mm WBY would be poison on anything less than a brownie.

[ 12-08-2002, 06:46: Message edited by: KuduKing ]

Personally, I really hate muzzle brakes -- the blast and noise they put out is so jarring that they will ring the ears of and shake the balls off a brass monkey. If you are shooting at a range with other shooters next to or near you, I think using one of those things constitutes a form of abuse of those other shooters. So I would not think of solving the recoil problem that way on a rifle of this size -- if it were a 416 or 460 Weatherby, that would be different.

As to the 7mm vs 300 question: Unless you are very recoil sensitive, I'd say go for the 300. With it, if you want to do so, you can load it down to 30/06 velocities. But you have that extra 400 f.p.s. over the 30/06 if you want it. And with the 300 Weatherby you will have one of the truly great and classic calibers -- the one that, more than any other, made the Weatherby name and reputation.

If you're not planning on using the rifle for bear and you want an amazing long range round, go for the 257 Wby. It kills deer like nothing I've ever seen!

Gosh! I don't know what to really say, other than the 7mm mag is easier to shoot (guess I am soft hey)it is sure enough a 400 plus yard rifle on thin skinned game up to and including elk with the right type and weight bullet. Recoil is just a shade more than a 270 and lighter than a 30-06 with 180 grain bullets in the magazine. The ammo is easy to come by compared to the Weatherby and at about half the price too. Most stores don't even stock the ammo, even if they might sell a couple of their rifles now and then.

If you do get a 7mm mag just make sure you get it in a 26 inch barrel, so you can take advantage of the magnum performance it will give, about 40 to 80 feet per second more than a Remington model in a 24 inch barrel.

I got a cousin who bought a 300 Weatherby about 5 years ago! This fellow isn't a bad shot under 300 yards, after that he can't hit squat. I asked him why the "300 mag Boomer" and his answer was for those far out shots. Well after two days at the rifle range sighting it in and all, I noticed he started flinching and it has gotten worse over the years. Now when we go deer hunting this year, he took his 30-30 instead of the 300Weatherby magnum he has been packing along for the last 4 deer seasons. Guess you all got the picture clear enough on the Big 300 Weatherby. Some folks just are not cut out for such recoiling rifles in the first place.

AZOnecam... I can understand wanting a 300wby for any reason. My question is... have you ever hunted "coues" deer before? I know what you mean by "serious coues hunters" but dissagree. I live in arizona also and hunt down south usually in 36C. One of my favorite "coues" rifles is the sweetest 250 savage a smallfry can own. I oftan run into "serious" coues hunters at the range and in the field and they are oftan holding the most rediculous rifles. These hunters have "Ima gonna kilt me a 600 yard coues" written on their forehead, even before they step out of the truck and set up a law chair. My point being... Coues can be stalked, despite the reasons given to crank up the elevation on your 300 whateveristhenextbestcartridgeofthisweekis mag. Shoot AT one at long range is your chioce, but dont feel undergunned or at a dissadvantage with your 270. If you like very serious long range small deer rifles, how about a 257 wby? Though id take the 300 wby over the 7mm wby.
Take care
smallfry

I advise two things. Firstly, forget about impressing anyone via choice of chambering. You'll do more "impressing" by connecting on game. Secondly, be honest with yourself as to whether or not you're entirely comfortable with a .300 Magnum. Deriving real benefit from the .300's is a quantum leap for many, almost always sacrificing shootability for footpounds.
Over the years, I've seen many, many spectacular kills, by a diverse group of hunters, using a .270. I've seen a strong number doing good work with the 7 Mags. A very few of those I have seen afield with .300's could consistantly reap the benefits at the distances they reside.

I've loaded extensively Weatherby calibers 257, 270, 7mm, 300, and 340 over the years. But as I've admitted before have never hunted bigger game than deer. The 270 and 300 were mostly for others. All are superb long range rounds but I have to go along with those who say that if you wish to go for larger game the 300 will do anything the 7mm will and more with heavier bullets. I have to take exception with stubblejumper about the 7 STW having "much lighter recoil" than the 300. I can find almost no difference between it and the 300 or my 340 with full power loads. The STW seems to have a faster recoil. Of course, I'm comparing a MK V with a Ruger number one, with much different stocks.

Gentlemen,

My choice would be the 7mm Rem Mag, because I have had a lot of very positive experience with it. I use the 175 gr. Nosler Partitions, almost exclusively, and it has worked for me on game from jackal to a few eland. Mostly one-shot kills, too.

I have a Ruger M77 MkII and a Weatherby Vanguard in this caliber, and have nothing but good things to say about them.

If I am after game that needs more power than a 7 Mag, it is a real step up to something like a .375 or .416. For me, the 7mm is very useful for an incredibly wide range of game.

Joel Slate
Slate & Associates, LLC
www.slatesafaris.com

7mm Rem Mag Page www.slatesafaris.com/7mm.htm

In general I agree with Nickudu's comments.

The majority of shooters who I have seen do well with 300 Magnums, especially the 300 Wby, are shooters who are use to and able shoot accurately with calibers that are bigger then the 300s.

The 270 and 7mm Mag are at a point just before you cross a threshold.

Mike

The only reason for me to use a 300 mag would be for Quebec moose where they require a 30 caliber. They seem like too much gun for all the lower 48 stuff. A 7mm Rem mag seems more practical to me than the Weatherbee, or is it just cause I don't like Weatherbee rifles.

AZOnecam,

The choice is without any doubt the 300 Wby over the 7mm Wby. The 300 provides a solid step up in long range energy over your 270 Winchester. I would recommend 180 gr bullets and up for the 300.

B