PDA

View Full Version : 7mm vs 30-06


pdt1793db
December 5, 2007, 08:57 PM
I want to buy a new hunting rifle and I have narrowed it down to either 7mm Rem Mag or 30-06 Sprg. I am looking at the Browning A-Bolt Medallion with the 7mm coming with a 26' barrel and the 30-06 with a 22' inch barrel. I plan to hunt mainly deer and possible elk at some point. Let me know what you think.

angeldeville
December 5, 2007, 08:59 PM
flip a coin, both are great.:D

BIGR
December 5, 2007, 09:06 PM
30.06 will do just fine and has huge bullet selection.

WeedWacker
December 5, 2007, 09:23 PM
.30-06 = CHEAP!!!
7mm rem mag = not so cheap but still around $1 a round at wally world and such.
7mm STW = over $1 a round but awesome in it's capabilities

.30-06 = accurate enough for hunting out to 500 yards.
7mm rem mag = good for shooting a squirrel in the eye from 2 miles away
7mm STW = Same as above but with an extra 200 fps

Edit: .30-06 and elk - Stay around 300-400 yards. 7mm mag: 400-450. Better velocity retention over distance.

ligonierbill
December 5, 2007, 09:27 PM
Out to 300 yards, there is maybe 2-3" difference in trajectory. Beyond that, the 7 mm has some advantage with a little more muzzle velocity and higher ballistic coefficient. Also kicks a bit harder. In the real world, take your pick. The elk won't notice the difference. If you roll your own, the '06 will be a little more stingy with powder, and some say you will get better case life than the 7 mag.

ActivShootr
December 5, 2007, 09:40 PM
I like the 30-06 for its versatility. There is a broad selection of factory loads and the handloading choices are endless.

zpurdy
December 5, 2007, 09:42 PM
i like the 7mm rem mag, i don't think it kicks much

Buzzcook
December 5, 2007, 11:17 PM
.30-06 works well on both deer and elk and moose if you've a mind to.
I don't like to shoot further than 250yds (except at targets) so flat trajectory is not an issue for me.
It's kind of like comparing Chevy and Audi. the Audi has some performance edge but the Chevy has tons of after market support.

I'm willing to bet that which ever caliber you choose you'll be happy with it.

Fremmer
December 5, 2007, 11:21 PM
For deer and elk? The '06, because it will weigh a little less, and the barrel is a more manageable length. Either is great, though.

davlandrum
December 6, 2007, 06:42 PM
I swear by my 30-06, my hunting partner swears by his 7 mm Mag.

Both kill deer, both will kill elk.

Total coin flip between the two. I don't like the way his 7 sounds, how is that for splitting hairs...:p

jeo556
December 6, 2007, 06:59 PM
The difference between the two doen't really warrant argument unless you plan on shooting a long ways out, then the 7mm would get the nod. That being said, I purchased a new rifle(24" barrel) this spring and boy do I wish that my barrel was shorter, so much so that I'm currently researching Remington Model Seven's and Ruger frontiers. It's a bit of a pain in the rear when I get into the thick. A 26" barrel on a open plains gun is fine but If you plan to hunt anything thick I'd stick with th .30-06 and the 22" barrel. Just my two cents. Good luck in whatever you decide to go with.

Jeo556

langenc
December 6, 2007, 09:32 PM
I tend to be a 'long barrel' guy but believe the 22" is plenty. I guess Id prefer 23 1/2 to 24 really. Why?? cause.

Art Eatman
December 7, 2007, 09:26 AM
The '06 is a slightly overbore case, and performs best with barrels of 24" to 26". The velocity loss with a 22" barrel takes it down to--or even below--.308 performance.

The choice being limited between these two cartridges in this example, then, I'd go with the 7mm.

FWIW, an '06 with a 26" barrel will perform quite as well as a 7mm Maggie, from my own experience. The difference in trajectory is trivial.

Buzzcook
December 8, 2007, 12:10 AM
My .30-06 has a 24" barrel. If I know the range its going to shoot I'd trust the rifle out 1000yds. My ability as a marksman limits that down to 600yds at best.

In the field my rifle is zeroed at 200yds. Set up like that my point of aim up to 300yds is on the animal. further than that and I have to adjust my point of aim to a point above the animal. I'm not comfortable doing that.

A 7mm Remington Magnum set up the same way doesn't reach that point till after 350yds.

As the rifles get zeroed out further, 300yds, 400yds and so on, the window in which your point of aim stays on the target gets smaller. On average that window shrinks slower with the 7mm Remington Magnum than with the .30-06.

That will vary with the ammunition and with the rifle and scope.

On average I take deer at 125yds. My longest shots were about 250yds. So which round is better further out is academic.
Given the distance a normally shoot at I'd say both calibers are bigger than needed.

Kreyzhorse
December 8, 2007, 08:24 AM
I hunt with a 7mm Rem Mag, my buddy hunts with a 30.06. Not much of a difference between the two rounds. 7mm is a flatter shooting gun and a little faster with a little more energy hitting the target down range. In the field, but rounds perform equally as well and you can't go wrong with either. Plenty of different types of ammo available for both too. The real difference? Recoil. The 7mm recoils harder than the 30.06. It doesn't recoil much harder but you can certainly tell a difference. If you are an experienced shooter, I don't think the difference in recoil will make much difference to you however.

castnblast
December 8, 2007, 09:56 AM
I love my 7mm mag, and the recoil difference between it and a 30-06 are neglibible. My wife shoots it very well and does not complain about the recoil. I like the 160gr BTSP for elk and deer and hogs, and gophers, and coyotes, and.....o.k. you get my point. the 140 btsp is even flatter, and does just fine on elk too...Very flat shooting, tack driver....Love it.

Capp35
December 9, 2007, 02:07 PM
+1 on the 7 Rem Mag.
I have an Weatherby Alaskan Mark V.

Anyone know why Weatherby stopped making the Mark V in stainless? (just the Vanguard is available)


Out of the box cartridges, I have never found anything that shoots as well as the Hornady 139gr BTSP.

By the way.....
I upgraded from a Sako 30-06 and have never regretted it.

Mtn Hawk
December 9, 2007, 04:06 PM
I'd say if you want increased recoil, muzzle blast, barrel wear, and like to spend more money on powder and ammo than necessary, then go with the 7mm Mag.

Capp35
December 9, 2007, 05:25 PM
Mtn Hawk,
Why do you hate the 7mm magnum so much?

Quote from from you on another 7mm mag thread.
I've always thought the magnum calibers are for "hunters" who don't know how to hunt or shoot well and think unnecessary power makes up for their poor skills.

Desertscout1
December 9, 2007, 10:49 PM
As I recall, "magnum" is a term that was coined by Smith & Wesson back in 1935 when the .357 Magnum was born. Now anything with the word “magnum” associated with it is touted to be bigger and better than any of it’s lesser brethren. Gun owners eat it up too. Just about every new Super Turbo-Charged Nitro Express Heat-Seeking (caliber of your choice)Magnum is readily accepted by the shooting community and it is often agreed that the new brainchild fills a gap between calibers that is long overdue regardless of how many other “magnums filled the same gap earlier.

One of those is the 7mmRemington Magnum. This cartridge has been around for a long time. Since 1962 to be exact. It is a wonderful cartridge that is suitable to cleanly harvest any big game animal in North America and many species of African game as well. It is accurate, flat-shooting and hard-hitting. However, if we do just a little checking we’ll find that the 7mm is not THAT much better than many other standard cartridges and maybe not quite a good as some of them.

A few of the things that I find objectionable about many of the magnum cartridges is the fact that they have more recoil, muzzle flash, blast and a higher price tag for the ammunition than a comparable standard velocity cartridge and the energy or velocity advantages are often not worth the pain and expense. If you use the energy listings in any reloading manual, you will find that the old .30-'06 and the 7mm are so close to the same in performance at 400 yds that it's not worth arguing about. Different manuals will vary as to which one's best. Both of these cartridges have less energy at 400 yds than a 170 gr. .30-30 Winchester has at the muzzle yet most agree that the .30-30 is too light for elk even at very close range. Then why, exactly, would it be OK to make a 400 yard shot at an elk with 7mm Magnum but not a 50 yard shot at one with a .30-30?

If one were to use the Taylor factor to compare these two bullet’s “punch” instead of those hokey manufacturer’s figures, we will find that the .30-06 has a decisive advantage given comparable bullet weights. The Taylor Factor is much more accurate and logical when you are comparing two different diameters of bullets. The formula for “energy” that is used in the reloading manuals, does NOT take into consideration the diameter of the bullet. You cannot figure mass without ALL of the factors and you cannot determine how “hard” a projectile will strike without first determining it's mass.
Using the Taylor factor, a 7mm Mag. shooting a 162gr. bullet at 2900 fps will be represented by a factor of 19.06 and the '06, shooting a 165 gr. bullet a 2900 fps will be 21.04. The DIAMETER of the .30 cal. bullet is what gives it the considerable edge more than the 3 grains more weight.

For comparison, a .44 mag with a 240 gr. bullet at 1400 fps comes to 20.5 and a .308 shooting a 150 gr. bullet at 2800 fps comes to 18.4.

The elk probably won't be able to tell the difference but, what I am getting at is, I don't believe that the difference between the two is worth going out and buying a new gun unless you are just looking for an excuse to get a new gun.

By-the-way, the .300 Winchester Magnum, shooting a 180 grain bullet at 2900 fps, comes to 22.9 which is less of an advantage over the '06 than the '06 is over the 7mm.
All three calibers are good, just don't let your friends or some gun shop salesman BS you into something that you may not really want. I get my elk very comfortably pretty much every year with either a .30-06 or a .44 mag.

One can "make" the 7mm Remington Magnum have better ballistics than the '06 by using different barrel lengths and changing other factors but there is really NO significant difference in the two cartridges. If you handload, you can make either one superior to the other one.

Just one example:
There are 5 "max" loads listed for the 7mm Remington Magnum that give a 162 grain bullet 2900 fps in my Hornady reloading manual. There are also 5 "max" loads listed for the 30-06 that sends a 165 gr. bullet downrange @ 2900 fps. Given this particular data, the 7 mm shoots 68.7" low at 600 yards. The .30-'06 shoots 74.3" low at the same distance with a 3 grain heavier bullet. 5.6" at that distance is pretty negligible. At the more realistic range of 300 yards, with a 200 yards zero, the 7mm shoots 7.0" low and the '06 shoots 7.3" low. The difference at this range is mostly academic.

The slightly heavier bullet with the larger frontal area also delivers slightly more punch, but again, it is mostly academic and boils down to personal choice.
Given the MUCH wider range of bullet weights, price and availability of ammo, the logical choice, in my mind, is pretty clear. I’ll stick with the 101 year old .30-‘06.

taylorce1
December 9, 2007, 11:53 PM
Mtn Hawk,
Why do you hate the 7mm magnum so much?

Quote from from you on another 7mm mag thread.

Quote:
I've always thought the magnum calibers are for "hunters" who don't know how to hunt or shoot well and think unnecessary power makes up for their poor skills.

I can't say that I don't disagree with Mtn Hawk on his points of view. I own a 7mm Rem Mag and I cant' warm up to it at all. All it does is cost me more to shoot and it really doesn't do anything a whole lot better than my .270 Win or .30-06.

I have a friend who fits in the category of the quote of Mtn Hawk's that was used. For years he hunted with a .30-06 and couldn't shoot it without flinching and always blamed his poor shots on the rifle. So he went out and bought a .300 Win Mag wanting more killing power because the 06 just couldn't do it in his eyes.

His .300 is a Weatherby Vanguard with a muzzle brake and recoil pad, his 06 is a Savage 110 with just a plastic butt plate. I told him to forget the .300 and buy a decent recoil pad for his 06 and he would shoot it better. Because of the reduced recoil his Vanguard gives him he has became a better shot but he hates to feed that .300, he was just too stubborn to take my advice.

I do want to own a .375 H&H someday but I'll probably wind up with the .375 Ruger as my 7mm Rem Mag will make a good donor. That will get rid of my last rifle with Magnum in the description. I would put my 8mm-06, .338-06, and .35 Whelen up there in the recoil department along with any Magnum rifle when I use 200+ grain bullets, in fact I would guess the .338 Win doesn't have much more recoil than these rifles.

I'm just honest enough with myself to realize I haven't completely mastered these rifles, after about 10 rounds out of any of them I have to put them away for the day. Any more rounds than that and I develop some serious bad habits that will take many an hour to get rid of. The reality of it is I've never needed a different rifle for hunting after I bought my .270; until I hunt dangerous game, other than for wanting to try something different.

I vote for the .30-06 because that is really all a hunter will ever need to hunt North America with.

Art Eatman
December 10, 2007, 08:16 AM
With today's laser range-finders, and with some scopes having some variety of ranging system built in, the need for ultra-flat trajectories is much reduced. If the trajectory of a cartridge is somewhat basketball-like, so what? If you know the distance and you know the trajectory, you can hit the target with almost any old cartridge.

The "horsepower" differential of any Maggie over "lesser" cartridges thus becomes merely an exercise in added recoil...

Mtn Hawk
December 11, 2007, 12:56 AM
Capp35--

Mtn Hawk,
Why do you hate the 7mm magnum so much?
I don't hate anything. It takes too much energy.

I am not emotionally attached to any caliber, just use what works best for what I need, considering all the factors involved.

Desertscout1 and taylorce1 have covered many of the reasons there are better caliber choices than the "magnums" for hunting in North America.

Have you ever seen the data for wind drift on a ballistics chart?

Dlr8
December 11, 2007, 12:24 PM
7mm Rem Mag 162gr. Amax BC.625 3000fps Max Load

100yds 2847 fps 2916 energy bullet drop +1.4 Wind Drift 10mph .4
300yds 2557 fps 2352 energy bullet drop -6.1 Wind Drift 10mph 4.3
600yds 2155 fps 1671 energy bullet drop -59 Wind Drift 10 mph 18.9
1000yds 1681 fps 1016 energy bullet drop -240.4 Wind Drift 10mph 59.5

30-06 168gr Amax BC .475 2900fps Max Load

100yd 2705 fps 2729 energy bullet drop +1.6 Wind Drift 10mph .6
300yd 2338 fps 2040 energy bullet drop -7.1 Wind Drift 10mph 6.1
600yd 1844 fps 1269 energy bullet drop -71 Wind Drift 10mph 27.8
1000yd 1316 fps 646 energy bullet drop -312.8 Wind Drift 10mph 91.2

Information Based on 200yd Zero

Loads can be found Hornady 7th edition Handbook
ballistics from Hornady.com ballistics calculator

Lyman 48th Editon Reloading Handbook States about 7mm Rem Mag

It started as the need for a cartridge with more punch than the 30-06 but not more recoil

I own 3 30-06s and 1 7mm Rem Mag, the 7mm is my personal favorite, simply because in my case the 7mm is far more accurate out of my 700 BDL then any of the 06's . I can shoot 3 shot 1/2 groups at 200yds on a good day with it .. The most I can get out of the 06's is a little over an inch. All with handloads. I don't use factory rounds so I have no information on them in either caliber

My advice is to pick what you feel is best suited for you do to Ammo in your area, and the cost you want to pay.. 7mm is a little more expensive, Ammo is a little harder to come by in some areas. You are not going to go wrong with either caliber as long as the gun is accurate. You can get .30 caliber bullets in a larger weight range. 7mm Bullets tend to have a better BC than the 30s but that don't come in to play until you are out past 300yds which is about where most average shoots tend to fall off anyway.

WeedWacker
December 11, 2007, 01:44 PM
this almost seems like it's turning into one of these 9 vs .45 debates... :rolleyes:

I have a .30-06. I like the price of ammo. I do not like the trajectory as per the diagram above when compared to a 7mm caliber or magnum. Physics over distance works in the 7's favor. However since I'm only hunting mostly deer maybe a little elk and not moose or hairy mammoths I don't need a huge magnum. Being a college student I can't afford to feed magnums, but it's somthing about that punch when you send a 160 gr projectile downrange at mach 3 that makes it seem more manly to others... :p

davlandrum
December 11, 2007, 02:53 PM
I have a friend who fits in the category of the quote of Mtn Hawk's that was used

I know they are out there, but the guy I hunt with that shoots a 7mm Rem Mag is absolutely the best shot I have ever known (OK, second best to his dad, RIP). He likes the extra range the 7 gives him, and he can actually shoot well enough to make it important.

But his back-up gun is an -06....:D

Capp35
December 11, 2007, 09:45 PM
I think several people hit on the main idea. It is what ever feels best for you and that you are comfortable using. They are both great rounds and I have owned both.
I don't notice any recoil difference between my old 06 and the 7mm, but I went to a heavier rifle.
I am more accurate with my 7mag also (most accurate rifle I have ever owned), but that could be due to the rifle and premium optics.

I also have more confidence in my new rifle and can clover leaf my shots. Isn't good shooting at least 1/3 confidence in what you shoot?

As far as the cost of shooting, or wearing the barrel out, that is void to me. I shoot 2-3 boxes a year before deer season, to check accuracy and get comfortable with it again. (I shoot twice a month though with pistols)

So there again, buy/shoot what you enjoy and are confident in.

sasquatch
December 11, 2007, 10:09 PM
7mm Rem Mag 162gr. Amax BC .625 3000fps Max Load

300yds 2557 fps 2352 energy bullet drop -6.1 Wind Drift 10mph 4.3


30-06 168gr Amax BC .475 2900fps Max Load

300yd 2338 fps 2040 energy bullet drop -7.1 Wind Drift 10mph 6.1

1" difference @ 300 yards means exactly jack squat in a hunting situtation. This discussion has degenerated into the likes of "how many angels can fit on the head of a pin".

castnblast
December 22, 2007, 01:42 PM
yeah, but if you are looking for trajectory, look no further than the 140 BTSP for the ole 7 mag. Both are good guns, the 7mag is just better...;)

Art Eatman
December 22, 2007, 03:49 PM
I don't reckon an inch or two of trajectory is of enough importance to justify choosing one over the other. If it is expected that there would be shots out around 600 yards as a matter of course, the 7mm Rem with a good 160-grain bullet would outshine the '06. From 500 on in, though, it's not enough difference to care about.

Much beyond 300, knowing the range is important no matter which is chosen. Beyond 400, they're both getting an attack of basketballitis.

Desertscout1
December 25, 2007, 05:20 PM
yeah, but if you are looking for trajectory, look no further than the 140 BTSP for the ole 7 mag. Both are good guns, the 7mag is just better...
That is solely dependent on what load you use. Since there is no 140 gr bullet that I know of for the '06, that's not quite a fair comparison but, if you use a 10 grain heavier bullet and go with a 150 for the '06 and start them both out of the gate at the same speed, they vitually ballistic twins. Let's start them both out at 3000 fps. Yes, they can both be made to go faster but, as I said earlier, since they ballistic doubles, you can make either one out do the other. It just depends on the individual.
Assuming we start them both out at 300 fps, the 7 mag shoots 2" flatter at 800 yards! At more reasonable ranges, say, 400 yards, there is .11" difference. Eleven hundredths of an inch.

A 130 grain '06 shoots flatter than both of them.

Art Eatman
December 25, 2007, 05:32 PM
One of the reasons I like the Sierra reloading handbook is because the appendices include lots of information on external ballistics. All of these comparisons, out to six hundred yards, are right there in the book.

I say the stuff I say because I cheat: I read the book.

:D:D:D

MeekAndMild
December 25, 2007, 07:32 PM
Hmmm. You see a lot of 7mm magnums in the pawn shops and on used dealers tables at gun shows but not too many 30-06 rifles. This says something considering there are probably 50 30-06 out there for every 7mm magnum. What I think it says but can't prove it is that people buy the 7mm and then don't like it for one reason or another and sell it but they keep their 30-06.

Firepower!
May 17, 2008, 10:40 AM
I am glad I found this thread. Very useful info and comparison between the two greats. 06 and 7mm Mag!

roy reali
May 17, 2008, 11:35 AM
There is another number to look at when comparing two cartridges of different calibers. Compare the sectional density of similar weight 30 caliber and 7mm bullets. The 7 does have slight advantage in any given weight.

Firepower!
May 17, 2008, 12:17 PM
Roy, could you please elaborate?
Thanks

Kawabuggy
May 17, 2008, 03:47 PM
I did the obvious-I bought a new one of each caliber in the last month. I will let you guys know in a few weeks which I think is better & why.

I load all of my own ammo and one thing I noticed already is that brass for the 7 mag is pricey... and they do eat a lot of powder. I have loaded 20 rounds of Ballistic Tip Boat Tails for the 7MM (140 grain), and 20 of the 150 grain FBSP (Hornady) for the -06.

If this post is still around in a few weeks I will weigh in with my official report as to which I like better.

I realize that brand, weight, optics, cosmetics, functionality will play as much, if not more, a role in my choice than actual caliber. Disregard my choice as it really won't matter.....

It would be easier to choose which caliber by simply test firing a gun and see which one you are more accurate with, and which one FEELS better to you.

W. C. Quantrill
May 17, 2008, 05:55 PM
If you are content at loafing the .30-06 out at 2650 fps, and compare it to a 7mm at 2900 fps, then you have some ballistical differences. However, if you load the .30-06 up to where it performs the best at the 2900 fps mark and then compare it to the 7, then the difference in ballistics are not much different.

I am running my .30-06 right close to 2950 fps with 165 gr boat tails. I can do anything you can do with your 7mm, with less powder, with less recoil, with less muzzleblast, longer case life, and less meat damage.

roy reali
May 17, 2008, 06:41 PM
Sure thing. It has to do with how well a bullet penetrates. Here is a link that does a good job of explaining sectional density.

http://www.chuckhawks.com/sd.htm

Brad Clodfelter
May 17, 2008, 07:08 PM
Lot's of various opinions. I'll give you mine. These are two of my personal favorite cartridges along with the 270 Win. Both will do what you are wanting them to do. Having shot both on deer, I'm gonna give the nod to the 7MM Rem Mag. It just seems to kill deer quicker and hits them harder with more ft/lbs of energy. It shoots flatter too.

Brad Clodfelter
May 17, 2008, 07:22 PM
Here's 2 comparison loads of the exact same weight and kind of bullet that Federal loads for each.

http://www.federalcartridge.com/ballistics/Ammo_Ballistics.aspx?id=372&firearm=1&bc=0.436&muzzvel=3110&bulletwgt=150

http://www.federalcartridge.com/ballistics/Ammo_Ballistics.aspx?id=264&firearm=1&bc=0.38&muzzvel=2910&bulletwgt=150

Now it may not be a lot of difference, but the advantage goes to the 7mm Mag.

Brad Clodfelter
May 17, 2008, 07:32 PM
But both are very hard to beat.

Brad Clodfelter
May 17, 2008, 07:46 PM
In all fairness to the 30-06 though, this is one load that Federal makes that looks very good with the 180gr bullet. The 30-06 seems to do better pushing the 180gr bullets as for overall performance in velocity and ftl/lbs.

http://www.federalcartridge.com/ballistics/Ammo_Ballistics.aspx?id=634&firearm=1&bc=0.552&muzzvel=2700&bulletwgt=180

Firepower!
May 18, 2008, 05:59 AM
Thank you for the links to ballistic tables.
I cant wait forthe field report.

A question arises since you threw in .270 Win. I have so far a 308, 7x57, .243 and a 7mm Rem Mag for hunting and targets. I want to know where does the 270 fit in? I understand it is a very popular cartridge in US. Also, I am curious to know if for my next gun a 270 or 30.06 will be a better choice, given what I have already?

I know there are other great calibers but they are not available in Pakistan. Even when you find a used rifle you can't fine ammo.

Hawg
May 18, 2008, 07:36 AM
If you are content at loafing the .30-06 out at 2650 fps, and compare it to a 7mm at 2900 fps, then you have some ballistical differences. However, if you load the .30-06 up to where it performs the best at the 2900 fps mark and then compare it to the 7, then the difference in ballistics are not much different.

I am running my .30-06 right close to 2950 fps with 165 gr boat tails. I can do anything you can do with your 7mm, with less powder, with less recoil, with less muzzleblast, longer case life, and less meat damage.

All true.:cool:

Brad Clodfelter
May 18, 2008, 07:47 AM
Firepower,

I for one don't know what calibers you currently have. If you already have a big gun like a 300 Win Mag, there is no need to get a 7MM Rem Mag. The 300 Win Mag will be perfect. If you are limited by choices of ammo, I would either get the 30-06 or the 270 Win. I've had both. If I had to pick one for likes, I guess the better all around choice due to bullet selection as far as range of weight in grs, the 30-06 will be the way to go.

You said you wanted to see some ballistic performance tables on the 270.


http://www.federalcartridge.com/ballistics/Ammo_Ballistics.aspx?id=237&firearm=1&bc=0.432&muzzvel=3060&bulletwgt=130

http://www.federalcartridge.com/ballistics/Ammo_Ballistics.aspx?id=233&firearm=1&bc=0.496&muzzvel=2950&bulletwgt=140

http://www.federalcartridge.com/ballistics/Ammo_Ballistics.aspx?id=234&firearm=1&bc=0.48&muzzvel=2830&bulletwgt=150

http://www.federalcartridge.com/ballistics/Ammo_Ballistics.aspx?id=752&firearm=1&bc=0.377&muzzvel=3400&bulletwgt=110

lt dan
May 18, 2008, 09:02 AM
the 7 mm maus and the 30-06 are loved rifles in africa. my sugestion is this. have a look at the 8mm mauser, that compares better with the 06. 30-06 / 7mm or 8mm, if that is the choice will go with the 06. it is importend to say this- you are considering two of the best hunting rifles ever build, while doing that why not go 300wm? it is above mentioned +20%. if you dont like the wm recoil build the ultimate nl a 300H&H. same recoil as the 270 but more speed than a 300wm.this calibre is a well cept secret of the african hunter. and dont forget the H&H allure

Huntergirl
May 18, 2008, 10:15 AM
I have used both with great results, but am sticking mainly to the 30-06 because its not as loud as my 7mag, and I have tons of ammo for it.

roy reali
May 18, 2008, 10:23 AM
http://benchrest.com/sst/sd.html

Enter the same bullet weight for .308 diameter and .284 diameter. In any given bullet weight, at similar velocities and construction, the 7mm projectile will penetrate more then the 30 caliber one.

Firepower!
May 18, 2008, 10:27 AM
I would love to get a 300 or even 375 not to forget 700 nitro!

That said, unfortunately these calibers are not available in Pakistan. Even when you find a rifle in those big bores you are out of luck for bullets.

Recoil and noise are no problem.

Today I did purchase a 7mm Mag. Now I want to scope it, and would like to know what is highest power scope best suit for this caliber?

I might buy 30-06 as well in future as I have found one with engravings. Its German with some very strange name starting with O.

W. C. Quantrill
May 18, 2008, 04:49 PM
Good Luck, Man. I hope you get a good buck.

ForneyRider
May 18, 2008, 05:17 PM
Like many a post, 7mm Remington Mag has flatter trajectory, because it has more case capacity resulting in higher velocity.

.30-06 can do 220gr bullets. Biggest I've seen for 7mm is 175gr factory load and 180gr target bullet.

For those long shots(1000 yards) with a BDC scope across a canyon to drop that prize elk, the 7mm Mag.

My coworkers and I shot a .30-06 Ruger m77 and a Remington 700 (SPS?) in Rem. 7mm Mag on the same day. The 7mm Mag had a lot more felt recoil and sharper recoil. .30-06 was more like a push. They were both very loud. Both were factory rounds, can't remember the bullet grain.

Bought 150gr Winchester 7mm Mag at Wally World for 20$.

Firepower!
May 18, 2008, 05:29 PM
What would be the maximum effective range for 7mm Rem Mag, and for 30.06, with their optimal loads?

mikenbarb
May 18, 2008, 07:57 PM
Im wondering why the 7mm mag is considered better than the .270 or .280?? They have almost identical muzzle velocities. The 7mm mag shoots a 160 grain at around 2950fps and the .270 or .280 with a 150 grain is the same. Wheres the difference? My thoughts are that the 7mm mag isnt all that its made out to be when a .270 or .280 can do the same thing.:confused: I have a few rifles in different cals. but my favorite is the 300 win mag. With the muzzle brake it kicks like a .243. Yes the muzzle blast is more but its worth it because it kicks like a sissy gun now.

Brad Clodfelter
May 18, 2008, 08:50 PM
Mike,

The 280 Rem is very close in ballistics to the 7MM Rem Mag. But if you go to the Federal website and look at ballistic charts, you will see that the 7MM Rem Mag has about 150fps advantage when comparing the same weight bullets between the 2 cartridges. It isn't much like you said. Actually the 280 Rem is one cartridge that should be a lot more popular than it is. It is really one of the best all around calibers out there. It will pretty well do it all.

taylorce1
May 19, 2008, 12:10 PM
The .280 never caught on well because the fact that the 7mm Rem Mag was already popular and Remington chambered the cartridge in the wrong rifle to start. While the 740 and 760’s are good rifles they should have brought it out in M700 bolt action first and I think you would have seen greater success. Don’t get me wrong the .280 has a very loyal following and it is much deserved.

The truth is with a .270, .280, 7mm Rem Mag, .308, & .30-06 really there isn't a hill of beans difference between all of these rifle cartridges and their terminal performance on game. You can compare SD and BC all day and tout that one is better than the other but truthfully when it comes down to killing big game they all have impressive records. Plus they all have the power to take game (elk sized) out to 500 yards with factory ammunition , but all of them really shine when you hand load each caliber to your rifle.

As far as sectional densities go, with equal weight bullets the .270 will out penetrate the 7mm and .308 calibers as Roy Reali stated in his earlier post with the SD calculator. Why? It is pretty simple the smaller the diameter of the bullet and the heavier it is the higher BC and SD it will have because you have to make it longer to get the weight. There are getting to be more and more .277 caliber bullets with better BC’s than the 7mm just look it up on the web if you don’t believe me.

What I stated holds true with every caliber that is why there are grains of bullets that are better for certain calibers. Just look at the reputation the 6.5X55 has if you don’t believe me, use the SD calculator that Roy gave us to test it. That is why I don't subscribe to the theory of a one caliber does it all rifle. Some people will say that the .30-06 is the most versatile with being able to load 110-220 grain bullets, but I’ve only found my rifle to shoot really well the 165-200 grain bullets.

What I’ve found in my trials in reloading is that my .270 really likes 130 grain bullets, my .280 likes 140’s, and my .30-06 likes 180 grain. Sure they shoot other grains well but these are the best performers out of each of these calibers for me. These bullets give me the best accuracy and I use them all on different game animals.

My .270 is my pronghorn and deer rifle and has been my main elk rifle in the past, and the .30-06 is what I use to hunt black bear and back up elk rifle. The .280 I own my brother in law has laid claim too after I let him borrow it, I doubt I'll ever get it back but that is ok as he is my main hunting partner and I have plenty other rifles to use. I've retired all my sub .30 calibers as elk rifles not because they don't work, I just have other rifles that need an animal to hunt. I have rifles in 8mm, .338, .358 and .375 calibers that have become my primary elk rifles.

davlandrum
May 19, 2008, 03:07 PM
It just seems to kill deer quicker and hits them harder with more ft/lbs of energy.

This statement just makes me nuts! There are way too many variables involved to atribute killing them quicker or hitting harder to the small differences between an -06 and a 7 mm Mag.

My deer with an -06 are just as dead as my buddies with his 7. Sometimes they are bang-flops, sometimes not. Based on my personal experience - my -06 is deadlier because my deer hit the ground faster, in general. The fact that I take a little longer to line up the shot and am pickier on the aiming point couldn't have anything to do with it.;)

I don't like 7's just because of the way they sound, not anything to do with how they perform.

Firepower!
May 19, 2008, 03:11 PM
Please rank the following in terms of power and range with 7mm in 160gr others as close to 160 as possible bullet:

308, 30.06, 7mm Rem Mag, 270, and 300 wthby.

taylorce1
May 19, 2008, 03:43 PM
Please rank the following in terms of power and range with 7mm in 160gr others as close to 160 as possible bullet:

308, 30.06, 7mm Rem Mag, 270, and 300 wthby.


Well here it goes you could do all this by searching Federals web site. All ft-lbs of energy will be at 500 yards.

.270 Win 150 grain Nosler Partition 1238 ft-lbs

7mm Rem Mag 160 grain Nosler Partition 1479 ft-lbs

.308 Win 165 grain Barnes TSX 960 ft-lbs

.30-06 Spring 165 Nosler Partition 1210 ft-lbs

.300 WBY 180 grain Nosler Partition 1836 ft-lbs

I think you can figure out the rest on your own. Trajectories are not that far off either on all these rifles with .300 WBY being the flattest of all cartridges mentioned.


Something a little interesting for you, if you use the "High Energy" loads from Federal with the 180 grain Nosler Partition here is what you get.

.308 Win 1398 ft-lbs @ 500 yards

.30-06 Spring 1570 ft-lbs @ 500 yards

Brad Clodfelter
May 19, 2008, 04:05 PM
davlandrum,

Don't let it drive you crazy.

I've killed deer with both, and the 7MM Rem Mag if I had to pick just one deer cartridge as a do all, it would be it. Nothing wrong with a 30-06. I've already said it was one of my favorites. So is the 270. It's hard to pick one cartridge as a do all deer rifle. There's just too many variables to say one is the best over another. I just think the 7MM Rem Mag is a better overall deer cartridge than the 30-06. It shoots the same weight bullet faster and hits with more energy. Yes you can reload the 30-06 to get better performance than some of the factory loads, but you can do the exact same for the 7MM Rem Mag. When you have factory loads that will do what some of the Rem or Federal loads do, it would be hard to beat the performance that some of these factory loads will give you.

These loads will beat the Federal 30-06 High Energy loads.

http://www.remington.com/products/ammunition/ballistics/comparative_ballistics_results.aspx?data=PRSC7MMB*PRA7MMRB

Brad Clodfelter
May 19, 2008, 04:09 PM
Also, since we are knit picking. ;)

Show me any factory 30-06 load that will push over 2200fps at the 500yd mark. ;)

The loads I showed you above will. That's what I call carrying out the velocity of a bullet. That's why I like the 7MM Rem Mag. That velocity retention means added knockdown power at all ranges one you get out there a bit.

Now if you were to tell me the 300 Win Mag is better than the 7MM Rem Mag, you would get no arguement from me. I can justify with the ballistics to why you may want to say that. I also know a few guys that kill deer with them each year. They too are a deer buster.

Brad Clodfelter
May 19, 2008, 04:22 PM
I don't like 7's just because of the way they sound, not anything to do with how they perform.

I've never ever judged a deer cartridge by the way they sound. :confused:

That statement right there tells me you don't want to ever do a side-by-side comparison between two calibers because you would only judge the actual performance of the two by the way they sound. :D

But hey, to each his own. :D

Your deer rifle may beat mine in ballistics, but it sounds like crap. LOL!

davlandrum
May 19, 2008, 05:44 PM
Brad -

At the ranges I have killed mulies and seen them killed, the sound of the rifle is the only difference.

I have yet to kill a deer over 150 yds (probably even that is a stretch - 100 yds and some change maybe). That is why I am not worried about fps at 500 yds. I would not take that long of a shot with either, because I don't practice at that range. If you can make use of the increased range, I have no quarrel with the 7.

Honestly, do you think that there is that great of an advantage under 300 yds?

My huntin partner gives me grief about my slow -06 and I give him grief about his loud 7, and we both fill out tags.

I will be hunting this year with a .460 SW pistol anyway, so I am not sure why I jumped in here....:D

Art Eatman
May 19, 2008, 07:48 PM
If what I'm using kills deer dead, how can some other cartridge make my deer drop deader?

If I have no trouble in making hits at 300 to 400 yards, how can some other cartridge lessen "no trouble"?

mikenbarb
May 19, 2008, 09:20 PM
Has the 300 Win.Mag. been put on the back burner due to all the new cartridges out there? I think the 300 win mag is one of the best big game rounds out there next to a 30-30. The main reason I like my 30-30 is it flat out kills stuff dead. And I believe more North American big game animals have been taken with it over any other out there. Including Elk,Bear and Moose. I like to get up close with the game I hunt and try to get within 100yds(or less) no matter what gun im shooting. It just proves to myself that I am a hunter and not a marksman shooting 500-600yds with a 15mph crosswind. If I can get within 20 yds of a whitetail with a long bow, getting within 100yds with a rifle or slug gun is a piece of cake. (just my own thoughts)

Brad Clodfelter
May 20, 2008, 07:47 AM
Art,

I never ever complained about overkill. The philosophy that dead is dead is very true, but I would much rather have a cartridge that would overkill my deer than underkill it any day. I think too many people like to say you don't need a 7MM Rem Mag or 300 Win Mag because they are in fact overkill. I say that is hogwash. The ballistics speak for each of these cartridges. Sure there are those that say ballistics don't kill deer. But if that was the case, why the trend for all those that used to own 30-30 Winchesters to the flatter shooting calibers like the 270, 7MM-08, 30-06, or 308? Hunters have gotten smarter over the years and learned to extend their range rather than limit yourself to a 150-200yd shot from a 30-30. I say don't blame a cartridge that shoots flatter and beats other cartridges when it comes to overall ballistics and performace on game. I like the 7MM Rem Mag because it flat gets the job done, and reatains its velocity as well as any other round. More and more hunters are realizing the benefits of overall performance that this cartridge will give you. Do you need the extra advantage the 7MM Rem Mag gives you over the 30-06? That's up to you to decide, but don't hate the caliber because it's overkill to you or that it beats up on your cartridge of choice. Accept it for what it is. It's a super whitetail rifle.

taylorce1
May 20, 2008, 03:23 PM
Brad,

I know you are a staunch advocate for your 7mm Rem Mag, but I have to disagree with you on the fact that it extends you range. With either the .30-06 or the 7mm Rem Mag with a 200 yard zero both bullets fall outside a 10" vital zone between 300-400 yards and that is if you are holding high on the vital zone. If you hold dead center the vital zone with a 200 yard zero the .30-06 drops 5" around 270 yards and the 7mm drops 5" around 290 yards. So roughly all the 7mm does is gain you 20 extra yards over the .30-06. Now if the 7mm would gain an extra 50-60 yards over the .30-06 I'd figure it to beat a great improvement. Any guy with a decent range finder and the dope worked up on his rifle can overcome any disadvantage of the .30-06 pretty easily past 500 yards.

http://www.remington.com/products/ammunition/ballistics/comparative_ballistics_results.aspx?data=PRA3006C*PRSC7MMB

Brad Clodfelter
May 20, 2008, 04:25 PM
I'll agree with that Taylor. There are certain type bullets that you can push through the 30-06 and get just about as good as performance(ballistics) as the 30-06. The Scirocco bullet is one of them. I did not know that the bullet would hit the 2200fps mark at 500yds from the load. I should have looked. So that is my fault. It actually does well over it which surprises me. Most bullets being pushed ove the years from what I have seen just seems to be in favor for the 7MM Rem Mag du to it's smaller diameter which seems to do better in trajectory performance.

So with that, I'll conclude that the 30-06 can be made to dang near match the overall performance of the 7MM Rem Mag. I just hate to see someone give a bad rap to a good cartridge when it comes to shooting most typical bullets with excellent overall downrange ballistics. ;)

taylorce1
May 20, 2008, 05:31 PM
Definatly not giving the 7mm Rem Mag a bad rap, it is a good cartridge in it's own right. The 7mm Rem Mag was just very well marketed and most people bought it hook, line, and sinker. The truth is while it is a good cartridge it is only marginaly better than the competition, which is true with most cartridges that are the latest and greatest.

BIGR
May 20, 2008, 06:25 PM
7 Mag. whizbanger might be a touch better the the 06 and you could say the 300 WIN MAG is better than the 7 Mag, and the 338 WIN mag is better than that and on and on. 30.06 has such a great bullet selection and will kill deer just as dead as the 7 MAG will. If you like using the 7 MAG then knock yourself out, without a doubt its proven itself to be a decent caliber. With a recent surge of new whizbanger calibers, this my caliber is better than yours debate will go on until the end of time. If the shoe fits wear it and wear it with pride.

VonFireball
May 20, 2008, 07:03 PM
The 7mm Rem Mag was just very well marketed and most people bought it hook, line, and sinker.

Maybe they bought it hook, line, and sinker because overall, it outperforms the competition.

You say it like Barack says "clings to guns and religion"......as though that were a bad thing.


The truth is while it is a good cartridge it is only marginaly better than the competition, which is true with most cartridges that are the latest and greatest.

Never mind the fact that the 7mm mag has been one of the "latest and greatest" for over 40 years, pushing 50.

As far as I'm concerned, save the .270's and such for the kid's christmas presents. I'll take a good .300 win mag or 7mm mag any day.

Nothin' wrong with a trusty 30-06 though. Great cartridge.

Some people seem to act as though your life hinges on the decision.

Just get the 7 mag.:)

taylorce1
May 20, 2008, 07:47 PM
Maybe they bought it hook, line, and sinker because overall, it outperforms the competition.

You say it like Barack says "clings to guns and religion"......as though that were a bad thing.


Show me where the 7mm Rem Mag significantly out performs the .30-06, .270 or .280? At best the 7mm only averages around 200 ft-lbs of energy at any given range plus only extends the range by 20-30 yards. I have nothing against the 7mm Rem Mag, but like I said it was marketed very well when it came out, how else can you explain its success using a metric caliber in the United States?

To be honest I don't think you can significantly out perform the .30-06 until you step up in caliber to the .338 Win Mag or the .375 H&H. With these to cartridges and 225+ grain bullets you can have roughly the same trajectory as a .30-06 with 180 grain bullets. Plus with the right factory you can have over 500 ft-lbs more energy at 500 yards with these calibers over factory .30-06. The 7mm Rem Mag and .300 Win Mag can't even do that.

I've owned two 7mm Rem Mags over the years and felt that they never truly lived up to the hype. I found that when I went hunting I was grabbing my .270 more and more as it is a lighter rifle that shoots extremely well for me. So I sold one rifle and re-barreled the other to .375 Ruger just to try it.

VonFireball
May 20, 2008, 09:02 PM
Show me where the 7mm Rem Mag significantly out performs the .30-06, .270 or .280? At best the 7mm only averages around 200 ft-lbs of energy at any given range plus only extends the range by 20-30 yards.

You just showed it for me.


I have nothing against the 7mm Rem Mag, but like I said it was marketed very well when it came out, how else can you explain its success using a metric caliber in the United States?

You can market a product all you like. If the product doesn't back up the marketing hype it will typically fail to be a successful product. Obviously, the 7mm magnum has lived up to the hype surrounding it when it came out. It has become a classic and timeless caliber.

Art Eatman
May 20, 2008, 09:06 PM
Brad, I don't see any problems with the 7mm Maggie. I had one for a while; developed some loads for it. It's just that I couldn't see where inside of 500 yards it would do any more than my '06.

FWIW, my old Sierra book shows a 7mm 140-grain bullet max at 3,100. Mr. Hodgdon says 3,200.

The Federal Premium High-Energy '06 with the Sierra 165-grain HPBT has been chronographed at 3,150 from a 26" barrel. My '06 has a 26" barrel (heavy sucker). :)

So I don't see any practical difference...

Art

taylorce1
May 20, 2008, 11:51 PM
You can market a product all you like. If the product doesn't back up the marketing hype it will typically fail to be a successful product. Obviously, the 7mm magnum has lived up to the hype surrounding it when it came out. It has become a classic and timeless caliber.

Totally agree with you, the 7mm Rem Mag is a classic hunting cartridge, but it had to be heavily marketed to be successful. If Remington had quietly brought out the 7mm RM do you think it would be as popular as it is today? At the time it came out Americans had a strong aversion to metric calibers. Plus it is a very capable round and did back itself up with performance. Plus it was competing against the wildly popular .30-06 and .270.

The point I'm trying to make when comparing these cartridges is as Art put it:
So I don't see any practical difference...

VonFireball
May 21, 2008, 06:55 AM
Totally agree with you, the 7mm Rem Mag is a classic hunting cartridge, but it had to be heavily marketed to be successful. If Remington had quietly brought out the 7mm RM do you think it would be as popular as it is today?

This is the USA, for anything to be successful amongst the general populous, marketing must be well thought out for the most part.

The 7mm mag ain't the "crystal pepsi" of gun cartridges. It's a hit.

The point I'm trying to make is that it's a better all around cartridge. I ain't trying to start a ******* contest over it, the point is a properly hand loaded 7mm magnum will run right by the other two cartridges. Maybe the difference ain't huge, but there is still a difference.

I think whether dude chooses the 06 or the 7 mag he will have a great rifle. My point is that if he were bringing me along shopping there would be no way in hell I'd let him leave the store without making sure he had grabbed the 7mm mag.:D

taylorce1
May 21, 2008, 07:44 AM
The point I'm trying to make is that it's a better all around cartridge. I ain't trying to start a ******* contest over it, the point is a properly hand loaded 7mm magnum will run right by the other two cartridges. Maybe the difference ain't huge, but there is still a difference.


While I agree it is a good choice to consider when looking for a new rifle, especially if animals like elk are on the menu. But the 7mm Rem Mag isn't what I would consider a better all around rifle, I would say that it is in the same class range as the .270, .280, and .30-06. Plus I'm saying you will not notice a huhe difference in how each one of these shoot.

By 300 yards without holdover you will not put a bullet in the kill zone on any of thes rifle. By 500 yards you had better know your BDC reticle or Target Turrets very well on your scope if you expect to make a killing shot with any of these cartridges. The thing is when looking for that new rifle for hunting the work "Magnum" takes on mythical proportions in the hunters mind, especially if they don't get to chase animals like elk on a regular basis.

The word "Elk" seems to conjure up imagaes of a very large animal that is hard to kill for most hunters. Granted I haven't killed a whole lot of elk but it has all been done with the .270 and .30-06, and I've seen elk killed with the 7mm Rem Mag and there wasn't any visable difference in the way these calibers killed.

Brad Clodfelter
May 21, 2008, 08:12 AM
Taylor,

For what its worth, and I love the 270. My buddy years ago shot a pretty big buck that was on a run with his 270 that gave him broadside shots at about 150yds. He managed to hit it 3 times out of 5 shots which is pretty good shooting actually. None of the bullets went completely through the deer. He was using 130gr Win factory loads. Not really what I would call the kind of performance from a deer rifle that I would want. I used 150gr Federal Premium Nosler partition loads on the 270 of mine. They always went through both sides of the deer. I don't want my bullets to go in and stay in the far side of the deer. I want a entry hole and a exit hole. That's another reason I'm not a big fan of the 243.

taylorce1
May 21, 2008, 09:35 AM
For what its worth, and I love the 270. My buddy years ago shot a pretty big buck that was on a run with his 270 that gave him broadside shots at about 150yds. He managed to hit it 3 times out of 5 shots which is pretty good shooting actually. None of the bullets went completely through the deer. He was using 130gr Win factory loads. Not really what I would call the kind of performance from a deer rifle that I would want. I used 150gr Federal Premium Nosler partition loads on the 270 of mine. They always went through both sides of the deer. I don't want my bullets to go in and stay in the far side of the deer. I want a entry hole and a exit hole. That's another reason I'm not a big fan of the 243.

Brad, don't know how to explain that one and I will not try. Stuff happens and it could have easily happened with a 7mm Rem Mag or .30-06. All I know is I've never had a failure in any caliber on deer including the .243 as long as I made the proper shot placement. I've never had a 130 grain .277 caliber bullet fail to penetrate through deer either and at ranges that I probably shouldn't have been shooting.

My last deer I took with a center fire was beyond 500 yards and it was with the .270 using 130 grain Sierra SPBT complete pass through broad side. Last elk was 250 yards with 150 grain Nosler Partition in my .270 again complete pass through broad side. Last bear was a 200 grain Nosler Partition .30-06, complete pass through both shoulders. I'm sure I could have made all of these shots just as easily with the 7mm Rem Mag, but I didn't need one to make these shots either nor would it have made any difference in the end results.

Firepower!
May 21, 2008, 10:20 AM
Ok I have 7mm Mag, .308, .243 and a 7x57.

Tomorrow I might buy a 30.06. Now I want to know whether I should go ahead and buy a 30.06 or should I consider 270?

I guess the crux of this question is which of the two will be add more varsatility to my rifle collection?

mikenbarb
May 21, 2008, 10:41 AM
Firepower, What about a good ol' .300 Win.Mag.? Then you can really reach out and touch em.:D

taylorce1
May 21, 2008, 11:55 AM
Ok I have 7mm Mag, .308, .243 and a 7x57.

I guess the crux of this question is which of the two will be add more varsatility to my rifle collection?

Neither one will add any more versitility to your collection because you are overlaping your cartridges quite a bit as it is. What you need is a larger than .30 caliber rifle if you want to improve your collection. The .270 and .30-06 will not do anything that the 7mm Rem or .308 will not do.

Firepower!
May 21, 2008, 11:55 AM
Mike I wish 300 was availabe in Pakistan, but its not. 358 and 300 wthby are but no bullets!

Some expensive 375 HH are but old!

ForneyRider
May 22, 2008, 01:38 PM
You can get Remington 55gr Accelerators (4000 fps) for .30-06.

:D

BIGR
May 22, 2008, 09:13 PM
Heard the Remington 55gr Accelerators were not that accurate?

mikenbarb
May 23, 2008, 07:04 AM
Bigr, I shoot them and their not the most accurate over 150yds but their pretty good for 150 and under.

Firepower!
May 30, 2008, 09:08 AM
tylorce1....thank you for the advice. I almost wasted good moeny adding something I dont need.

I guess I will keep me eye out for a 300 WSM or bigger cartridge.

milemission
May 30, 2008, 01:30 PM
Firepower, the .270 fits in between the 7x57 and 7mm Remington Magnum insofar as ballistics. As far as killing power, well, I have a 7x57 and the longest kill I have on a deer with it is probably about 300 yards or so. I also once shot a big buck at 175 in the spine that went down instantly. Really, insofar as any cartridge that has the power and velocity of a 6.5x55 or more, the difference on deer sized game at less than 300 yards isn't worth arguing over. Within 300 yards, my 7 Mauser will kill any deer on earth, and within 200 to 250 with proper bullets, any elk on earth. So arguing over .30-06 versus 7mm Magnum for game when there isn't a significant difference until you reach 500+ yards isn't exactly worthwhile.

If you want to expand the versatility of your arsenal, a .300 magnum will be slightly better for elk at longer ranges than the 7mm Magnum. But a .338 would be even better. A .338 Win Mag would probably do just as well as a .300 mag for elk at any range. A .338-06 isn't as good as a .300 win mag for elk beyond 300 yards, but it also shoots heavier bullets, making possibly better at closer range (possibly). But your 7mm Magnum will already do over 95% of what a .300 magnum will. So with what you have, if you want to have more versatility at the upper end, get a .338 magnum.

On the other hand, if you want more versatility for the various rodentia, get a .223 or a .22-250.

Firepower!
June 8, 2008, 07:40 PM
Mike, I guess my next purchase will have to be 375HH. Its the only one other than what I have available here. I wish a 700NE and .50 were as well. I have .223 but those are in assualt rifle platforms.

For now I am happy with what I have, and I quite convinced that I made a better choice by picking 7mag over 06. It seems from the post that folks are trying to measure 06 upto 7mag. Thus, there is an edge in favour of 7mag, regardless of how much it is! I think leaving .243 and 308 aside, I am well prepared for any game upto 250 yards between 7x57 and 7mag. Its really the shot placement. That said a 7x57 might be just what I need period. I think these big cals are gimmicks to sell. Most oldtime hunters in Africa used 7x57 on pretty much anything. I doubt I can make a kill shot beyond 250-300. I am not a professional sniper;)

Art Eatman
June 9, 2008, 10:19 AM
Without belaboring the issue, the ability to reliably hit targets beyond 300 yards is a function of practice and thought. You can teach yourself to be a pretty good judge of distance and wind. You can memorize the trajectories of your most commonly-used rifles. You can practice from a shooting table in order to get basic proficiency--and then use field-position stances to turn it all into real-world skill.

Age and common sense have me pulling back, nowadays, but I did have some forty good years of, "If it's inside 500 yards, I own it."

:), Art

Major Dave (retired)
August 25, 2008, 02:43 PM
Art, you mentioned chrony results on your 30-06 - have you ever run a 7 Mag thru the screens? I ask because a Field & Stream article indicated that the 7 Mag was, "the most over rated caliber" when compared to .270, .280, and 30-06, when chronigraphed alongside the others.

My Chrony says my 7x57, loaded with 140 g Hornadays produces a MV of 2,950, wirh a 23 inch barrel. Blows holes as big as your thumb completely through Texas deer. Some flop, others take off on a "death run" of 50 to 75 yards, then flop.

The same result you would expect from all of the calibers being discussed, I think.

KY Jim
August 26, 2008, 02:06 AM
Well, once again here are a bunch of put downs against the most versital cartridge in the world The 30-06 Lets look at the facts PLEASE!!!! First to the gentleman who said the 7mm RM would run off and leave the 30-06 I say to you Sir You have no idea what you are talking about. Max load for a 7mm with 175 gr Buttets 2850 FPS out of a 24 in bbl ( Hornady Loading Manual)
30-06 180 gr Hornady Light Magnum Ammo 2900 FPS 24 in bbl
Now last time I checked 2900 fps was faster then 2850 and the 30-06 is pushing a 5 gr heavier bullet. My Father- in- law Has worked up a load for his 30-06 24 in bbl that will rival a 300 WM Loading of over 3000 FPS with 180 gr Bullets. Now if you go down to 22 in both calibers you get 2850 fps with the 180 gr 30-06 load and since the 7mm started at 2850 you will loose about 75 - 100 fps vel in the 7mm load. In the actual real world The 7mm magnum is a HYPE caliber and the 30-06, with over 100 yrs of field service to back it up and with the new advances in powder, which don't seem to help the magnums much, The 30-06 still stands where it has for 102 yrs as the most effecient and versital cartridge ever developed. THIS IS PROVEN FACT NOT SOMETHING DREAMED UP BY ADVERIZING EXECS FOR THE PURPOSE OF SELLING A RIFLE. Why do you think the 30-06 doesn't get advertized it doesn't need it. I guess what I am saying to Firepower is get rid of all the others and buy a 30-06 it will serve you on most any game and then all you'll need is a 22 caliber CF for varments and something like a 338 Win Mag for big bears if you go to Africa Hunting you are on your own partner. BTW I have only ONE hunting rifle A Win Mod 70 FWT 30-06. As if you didn't know.
Jim

HiBC
August 26, 2008, 03:29 AM
First big game rifle I bought was Rem 700 7 mag when I was 16.I went to buy a .270 but it had a problem and the 7 was in the rack and I was leaving with a rifle.
Old Louie sold H-4831 bulk for $1.60 a lb,bring your own bleach bottle.Now,that was OLD style 4831.
16 year olds are smarter than most everybody else so I loaded 70 gr behind a 160 gr Sierra boat tail as my standard load (DO NOT TRY THIS,4831 IS DIFFERENT POWDER NOW!!)
PO Ackley said that was about 65,000 psi.I did not have a chronograph,but I did have busted glasses and a cut eyebrow.Sucker sure would shoot,though.

Which brings me to a point.SAAMI pressures are low on a 7 MAG as a lot of smiths were custom building them on Mausers and Springfields and there wasn't a lot of control over what rifle they were in.It is a 1963 cartridge.
That is an amusing comparison with the STW.It gets a bit more performance,but at much greater pressure.I am not suggesting you ignore SAAMI,but it explains the low performance in the tables.

In bbls less than 26 inches,I would not prefer the 7 mag over the '06.
In my experience,given both animals will be dead,you will have more meat to eat with the 06

For a mountain packing general hunt rifle,I might prefer a 22 in bbl.

But,for a long range plains rifle,the 7 can be good .I wont tell you my load,but I chrono 3050 with a 162 gr Horn SST .I do not use it for big game hunting.It is a varmint gun.(MDL70 Laredo,4.5-14 Leu long range 30 mmMil dot,Nightforce 20' bases.I have a custom made elevation knob for my altitude /load that goes to 1400 yds)
Another use for this rifle might be the finisher,for when others are optimistic about their long range ability.

The 7 mag is good.Read old Warren Page articles,he loved it.Use a bonded bullet,and IMO,160 gr or so.
You got it,enjoy it!!!

Wildebees
August 26, 2008, 04:08 AM
Say I was offered either as a present? I would accept either with glee and use it with joy!

If I have to buy it myself, and if both rifles are EXACTLY the same in appearance, quality, etc, I shall buy the 30-06. Why? Simply because I eat the meat I shoot and therefore I like a heavy bullet (180-220) to stike the animal at no more than 2 400 ft/sec. I doubt if you are going to shoot your game at more than 200 m, and likely at 100-150. 200 grain well constructed commercial ammunition shall serve your purpose admirably in dense bush, and for plains shots 168 gr is excellent.

My final advice? Pick up each rifle in turn, look at it closely, bring it into your shoulder and feel its comfort, where your cheek instinctively rests in relation to the sight picture, etc. Carry it in your hands, turn around and bring it into your shoulder again. (you are going to carry it around over quite some distances). Does it feel easy and nicely balanced?

Oh, and do not be worried one second about the 22" barrel on the 30-06. No animal that you shall ever shoot shall know that it is not a 24"! Small, paper figures of energy relative to other small paper figures of energy - still enough for an overkill on moose, elk, deer, with no value in practice.

Enjoy!

And very important - listen to your heart's response. That one that talks to your heart, that one is the one to buy because both are excellent calibres.

Brad Clodfelter
August 26, 2008, 05:20 PM
I'm not here to argue. I always said the 30-06 is really all you need in a caliber for most North American game. But you still can't knock the 7mm Rem Mag. The 7mm diameter bullets are probably one of the best ballistic co-efficient bullets offered. You can handload a 30-06 pushing the limits for powder volume and get extended ballistics that will rival a 7mm Rem Mag. But your pushing the pressures at doing so. For guys that don't handload, you still get more overall performance from most factory loads out of the 7mm Rem Mag vs the 30-06. There may be a few exceptions. But you can also handload a 7mm Rem Mag to give you added performance vs most factory offerings as well. To knock the 7mm Rem Mag because it may not be much of a difference from the 30-06 for some to say why was the cartridge even in existence is not really fair. Every little bit of speed and knockdown power is worth noting. The 7mm Rem Mag still pushes most every grain bullet flatter and faster than most 30-06 offerings.

sc928porsche
August 27, 2008, 02:20 AM
The 7mm mag shoots flatter than the 06 with about the same or more power depending on bullet weight and style.
Advantage: Less hold over or under at different distances.
Disadvantage: Less bullet weight and style selection.

sureshots
August 28, 2008, 12:38 PM
As for deer I wouldn,t turn my hand over for the difference between the 7mm mag and the 30-06. as far as effectivness. I had rather buy shells for the 30-06(cheaper,more variety) and I don't like the recoil of the 7mm mag. So I like the 06 best.

Brad Clodfelter
August 28, 2008, 01:22 PM
The price of ammo I will agree with you on.

The recoil difference I won't.

Both actually have dang near identical recoil.

I did a read from a guy who had the facts about recoil from the 7MM Rem Mag vs the 30-06. He said that there is only a 1/2lb difference in force to the shooters shoulder in pounds felt. The loads he compared had the 30-06 at 22.5lbs. and the 7MM Rem Mag at 23lbs. Now that ain't much difference to me. I have owned both, and can tell you I can't feel much difference either.

Both kick, but are like a flea compared to my Mossberg 835 shooting 3.5" 2 and 1/4oz turkey loads. They have 72lbs of felt recoil. That is over 3 times as much.

Art Eatman
August 29, 2008, 11:31 AM
For any rifles of equal weight:

Add the weight of the bullet to the weight of the powder charge. Multiply the sum by the muzzle velocity.

Compare the results, insofar as percentage difference in recoil.

For the .270 and the '06, the common loadings of powder are in the 50- to 55-grain range. For the 7mm RemMag, 70 to 75 grains. (Speer #13 reloading manual).

.270: 55 gr.; 130 @ 3,000. '06: 55 gr.; 150 @ 2,900. 7mm: 70 gr.; 140 @ 3,300.

The math is left as an exercise for the student. :D

Brad Clodfelter
August 30, 2008, 03:27 PM
Art,

The recoil difference between the 2 calibers is not much difference at least to my shoulder. I'm sure there are more hotter factory offerings since I read that article.

The whole point is this. Anyone who thinks a 7MM Mag is too much recoil for a deer gun, doesn't need to be shooting 3" or 3.5" turkey loads out of their turkey guns at turkeys then. All centerfire rifles from the 25-06 on up will kick a little. It's just the way it is. If you can't stand to have a pop to your shoulder and still manage to hit what you aim at, either toughen up and hit the weights and get used to it, or don't be shooting much of the bigger higher powered rifle cartridges.

Like I said, all centerfire rifles for the most part are tame in felt recoil as compared to heavy 3.5" turkey loads. When I shoot a turkey from my 3.5" Mossberg, the jar to my shoulder is the last thing I'm worried about.

TheNatureBoy
September 3, 2008, 04:01 PM
Close your eyes and point. Either of them will do you good.

HiBC
September 4, 2008, 02:38 AM
I would boil it down to barrel length and what sort of shots you intend to take.
If you go with a barrel much less than 26",you compromise the 7 Mag.It needs a long runway.The '06 or a .280 will be right with it.I had a 23 in Husky 7 mag.It didn't make much sense.

If you do not plan to shoot at ranges longer than 300 yds,the magnum is unnecessary.
IMO.for many situations,the 22" 30-06 is the more practical choice,But,
If you are playing with over 350 yd shots and carrying a 26 " barrel,the 7mag has a payoff.Is that going to be what you do?
To disagree with an earlier statement,I think the 30-06 is NOT overbore.In a bolt gun,with common powders,100% loading density is practical and safe.The 30-06 is a sweet spot in bore/case ratio.The 7 mag is moderately overbore,the majority of loads not exceeding 80% loading density.
I will concede in loads meant for gas guns,using quicker powders,the '06 may not have full loading density.(80% with 4895)

Unless you are pretty technical in handloading,the '06 will get more loads per case,and will use less powder,your barrel will last longer,premium bullets are less necessary,its not as loud,it will metal foul less,and the rifle holds one more.Usualy, a 7 mag comes with a #4 barrel,and a 30-06 a #3. Lighter.

Firepower!
September 4, 2008, 05:55 AM
Well it goes like this:

Anything 30.06 can do, 7mm Rem. Mag. can do better, and anything 7mm Rem. Mag. can do, 300 Win. Mag. can do better.

Art Eatman
September 4, 2008, 08:42 AM
HiBC, if I didn't say "slightly" overbore, I should have. What's been discovered with the advent of the .308 is that those case dimensions are more efficient in terms of velocity vs. powder weight. From the standpoint of percentage velocity and percentage powder weights, the .308 is somewhat of a standard. The '06 would be slightly overbore, and the .300 WinMag and up are definitely overbore. As a generality, this leads into the needs regarding barrel lengths for best performance.

Bambi usually doesn't care. :D

Firepower!, it seems to me that "better" depends on the opinions of the person. If, as example, I can reliably get a one-shot kill out around 400 or more yards--and I have--with my '06, isn't the lesser recoil better than if I had done the same with a .300 WinMag? A flatter trajectory is not necessarily the sole criterion of "better". :)

Boston T. Party
December 28, 2008, 03:18 PM
For me, the .30-06, since I hunt Africa often.

Within a sportsmanslike range of <300yds, the slightly
flatter shooting 7mm Rem has no advantage.

200gr for Africa/Canada, and 180gr for USA.

The "aught six" rules!

Boston

http://www.brownells.com/aspx/NS/store/productdetail.aspx?p=25890&st=safari%20dreams&s

jckeffer
December 28, 2008, 04:10 PM
Beyond 400 yrs it's much more the shooter than the rifle. The late, great Marine sniper Carlos Hatchcock had a verified kill at 1200 yards with... - you guesed it, a 30.06. You'll alway find someone at hunting camp with an '06, alway find a variety of ammunition to fit the occasion. It definitely has the most flexibility in reloading options. From 55gr sabot to 220gr round nose.

sserdlihc
December 28, 2008, 04:23 PM
I have a 308, 30-06, and 7mm mag. My 308 is in a BAR, 30-06 is in a Sako, and the 7mm mag is a Ruger mk 2. I love all three. They each have their own characteristics, good and bad. I enjoy shooting my 06 due to the fact that it has a wood stock. My ruger has a synthetic stock and whips my tail when I shoot it. I don't shoot my 308 as much due to the fact I loan it to my best friend to hunt with.
At first, I tried to loan the 7mm mag to my friend. He gave it back. Said it hurt too much when he shot it!!
If I did it all over again i would not have gotten the synthetic stock on the Ruger. But that is just me.

zahnzieh
December 28, 2008, 08:13 PM
With the 7mm you had best reload your own, too pricey for factory ammo!

DiscoRacing
December 28, 2008, 08:17 PM
i have one of each but prefer the .06 myself just for the wider range of weight and style of bullets since i reload

RocketRider
December 28, 2008, 10:27 PM
What About The 7mm Ultra Mag?

Daryl
December 29, 2008, 02:37 PM
This is one of those comparisons that in the end is mostly a matter of preference. Either choice will do about the same job, as long as the shooter takes the time to learn the trajectory, capabilities, and limitations of the cartridge and load chosen.

I use a 7mm Rem Mag. I don't care much about bullet choices, because I already know what I'm going to use. I load 145 grain bullets, either Speer Grand Slams or Speer SPBT's, and use them for anything from coues deer and antelope to elk and buffalo. They do a great job on any of them, and some other critters as well.

The right bullet in a 30-06 will do just as well; you just have to know your rifle and cartridge, and what it's capabilities and limitations are..

Daryl

Para Bellum
January 3, 2009, 06:02 AM
Here's good info on your quest (I'd go for 7mm):

http://www.rifleshootermag.com/ammunition/seven_092105/

Firepower!
January 3, 2009, 07:20 AM
7mm Mag is better, but lighter. However, more variety in bullets is available in 30-06.

texfar
January 3, 2009, 08:21 AM
I bought a 7mm Rem Mag second hand in an old 700 Classic years ago and fell in love with it. It was my rifle of choice because I liked it and it was unbelievable accurate. Hey, I liked it and nothing I shot at walked away. That is all I needed or cared about. Two years ago, The throat was gone, no longer fun to clean so I put a Rock Creek 26" barrel, with all the custom accuracy receiver tricks and chambered it 7mm STW. I hand load and really don't care much what it cost me so forget about bucks to shoot it. Yes there are accurate cals out there, but I wanted another 7mm and not an ultra. I guess simply put is the STW is a 7mm Rem Mag on steroids. My smith's quote. anyway, it is the most accurate rifle currently in my crib. Recoil...I shoot a .300 Ultra Mag and don't flinch. Never been a factor for me. I know it is there and live with it. My opinion is buy what you want and be happy with it. Do I need this blaster to shoot Texas white tail. No, but it is so accurate I could care less. I built it and am gonna kill something with it pure and simple. Quoted several time "overkill"? Dead is dead. Honestly, when I started all this gun stuff many years ago, everyone had a 30-06 and I kinda wanted to be different. My choice. The only 30-06 in my crib is a Garand which I dearly love, but everything else is different. I might try let folks know the advantages or disadvantages of different cals, but the choice is theirs and that is OK by me. I don't get into arguments much on personal choices. As stated, flip a coin and go for it. You won't go wrong with either in my opinion.
Rant over.
Ken:D

Para Bellum
January 3, 2009, 05:13 PM
Why not a .270 WSM. That case form bears higher accuracy.

Daryl
January 3, 2009, 05:37 PM
Why not a .270 WSM. That case form bears higher accuracy.


'Cause that's not what he asked about. ;)

Daryl

ZeroJunk
January 3, 2009, 05:59 PM
The 7MM Rem Mag is one of the best all around cartridges. I have had a couple over the years but didn't keep them for one reason or the other. But, I think I will put one together to hunt with next year. I have decided to fall in love with the .284 160 grain bullets, for the moment anyway.:)

azsixshooter
January 3, 2009, 06:41 PM
Why not go for the best of both worlds? .280 Remington. In fact, the .280 Ackley Improved is supposed to be very close to the 7mm Rem Mag's ballistics but with the long case life of the '06 case, longer barrel life, less powder and less recoil. If I could find/afford one of those Nosler Custom Rifles in .280 AI I'd take that in a heartbeat.

.280 Rem/.280 AI aside, I would go for the .30-06. It is the smart choice all-around.

But like the man said earlier in this thread: If you want more recoil, more weight to carry in the field, a longer barrel to hang up on brush, shorter case life, shorter barrel life, more muzzle blast and flash for slightly better ballistics that probably don't make any practical difference for hunting North America then the 7mm Rem Mag could just be the gun for you!

WhiteWolf4
January 3, 2009, 07:03 PM
It all comes down to personal preference....Buy the one you want the most....WhiteWolf

ZeroJunk
January 3, 2009, 07:49 PM
You can push a 160 grain Nosler Partition 3100 FPS form a 7 Rem Mag with a 24 inch barrel. You can push a .308 165 grain Nosler Partition 3000 FPS from a 24 inch barrel in a 30/06. At least using manual data which usually comes up short on my chronograph. But, anyway that would give you 17.7 inches drop at 400 yards as opposed to 20 .2 for the 30/06 with a corresponding difference in energy of 1931 to 1677 foot pounds. If you don't want a 26 inch barrel, saw the sucker off.

Daryl
January 3, 2009, 08:23 PM
The Remington 700's used to come with a 24" barrel on the magnums, and a 22" barrel on the standard.

My 7mm mag has a 26" barrel, and I've never found it to be a problem.

I can tell you though...

But like the man said earlier in this thread: If you want more recoil, more weight to carry in the field, a longer barrel to hang up on brush, shorter case life, shorter barrel life, more muzzle blast and flash for slightly better ballistics that probably don't make any practical difference for hunting North America then the 7mm Rem Mag could just be the gun for you!

Except for the shorter case life, that's a bunch of hogwash to try to sway someone else's choice.

The 7mm Rem Mag is an excellent cartridge for North American big game. So is the 30-06. I've killed lots and lots of big game animals with my 7mm mag, and I'm quite sure I would have killed them just as dead with an '06.

I stand 5'7", and weigh 140 lbs. I've never found my 7mm mag to be too long, too heavy, or to recoil too much. I've never found the muzzle blast to be excessive (and since I don't hunt big game at night, muzzle flash isn't an issue), and I've been using the original barrel for almost 20 years now (and I do quite a bit of hunting). It still touches bullets at 100 yards, so I'm pretty sure the barrel's still good.

I would expect no less from the same rifle chambered in 30-06.

You just need to learn the characteristics of the cartridge you choose, and use it accordingly.

eezridr
January 3, 2009, 10:01 PM
I have found the recent Federal HE loading for the 06 using 180 gr Nosler Partitions an outstanding load in my old Sako. It actually Chronos at 2900 FPS out of my rifle and will shoot into an inch or under at 100 yards.
That is hard to beat and I have never been able to achieve those results at my loading bench.
You 06 guys should give them a try. That is the beginning of 300 Mag territory with excellent accuracy.

Para Bellum
January 5, 2009, 04:19 AM
'Cause that's not what he asked about
But maybe he can use the suggestion anyway...:p

YODA308
April 8, 2009, 01:50 AM
maybe a little off topic but i dont believe that a shot past 350 or 400 yds to be ethical (for me)so i will stick with my 308 win.150 grain ballistic tips for deer and 180 grain partitions for elk. as i am familiar enough with the ballistics of either bullet to hit what i shoot at out to 400. i am talking about real practice at these ranges not just looking at a ballistics chart and applying theoretical bullet drop numbers.YOU MUST PRACTICE IN REAL SPACE NOT CYBER SPACE !

hardhit
April 8, 2009, 02:37 AM
Deer and Possibly Elk

I would be inclined to go 3006 using 150 grain for deer,

If you get a chance at an elk you can load 180 or 200 grain Partition or accubond,

A well placed shot in the boiler room will anker any elk on the spot with the 3006, at sane shooting distances.

Your slightly governed by the 175 gr as your max bullet in the 7mm rem mag no problem on deer and ,

very capable of getten the job done on Elk but the,

06 work for me.

ZeroJunk
April 8, 2009, 06:26 AM
I'm not sure I understand all the concern about case life.

It's a simple matter to back your die off so that the cartridge headspaces on the shoulder in your rifle instead of the belt. Or, you can neck resize only. If there is much difference in case life I haven't noticed it.

Shorthair
April 8, 2009, 11:51 AM
I own a magnificently accurate 7 Mag. I love it.
Get an 06.