PDA

View Full Version : If I were


ultramagshooter
February 6, 2009, 11:12 AM
to go with a 7mm ultra mag what advantage would I get over a 7mm mag. I was thinking of getting a 300 win mag to. The gun would be an sps remington stainless with 26 inch tube.

ultramagshooter
February 6, 2009, 11:14 AM
all animals in north america including moose and alaskan game at long range.

kraigwy
February 6, 2009, 12:23 PM
Fon hunting is this country, none, they will both do the job. If you dont reload then you should check to see which one's ammo is easiest to find.

The 7mm RM had been around a long time, you can find it just about anywhere.

davlandrum
February 6, 2009, 12:55 PM
biggest advantage is you get to say "ultra" :D

It would also keep your wallet thinner buying ammo - which will prevent back problems from sitting on a fat wallet...:p

Sorry, you were probably looking for real information, not silly, smart-*** remarks. If you have the skills to take a legit shoot at game over 500 yds, then you may find your advantage. I know with my meager skills that is further than I will take a shot, so there would be no advantage for me.

Daryl
February 6, 2009, 01:22 PM
You'll get more recoil, burn more powder, and have more blast, and you'll pay more for each shot, whether factory or reloaded (because extra powder costs more, too). For that, you'll get a bit more energy at long range, slightly better trajectory at long range, and perhaps more meat damage at closer ranges.

When the 7mm RUM came out, I thought about switching to a rifle so chambered. Then I thought about it some.

Ammo would cost more, and I'd have to buy dies and brass for a different cartridge. My 7mm Rem Mag has never failed to kill what I've shot with it, and I don't even use heavy-for-caliber bullets (I use 145 grain bullets). I've shot critters from the size of coyotes up to buffalo, and never had an problem killing any of them, and they usually don't take a single step after being hit.

I've never felt like I needed more power for longer range shooting. My closest shot was about 10 yards on a coues deer; the longest measured was 472 at another coes deer. I once finished a wounded bull elk at an estimated 600 yards, and each of these critters dropped when the bullet hit.

There just isn't much more I could ask for in a hunting cartridge on this continent, unless I was going after the big coastal brown bears. In that case, I'd want something bigger, but I'd also not want to use that "something bigger" for most other hunting I do.

I know a few who use the 7mm RUM with good results. Even so, I haven't seen them make a successful shot that I couldn't have made with a 7mm Rem Mag.

ultramagshooter
February 6, 2009, 01:39 PM
shoot groundhogs out to 350 with my 300 win mag and 180 winchester silver ballistic tips before. I don't get one thing, people say the 7mm mag hits harder then the 300 win mag but when comparing the foot pounds at 400 yrds the 300 win mag beats it.

Daryl
February 6, 2009, 04:26 PM
I don't get one thing, people say the 7mm mag hits harder then the 300 win mag but when comparing the foot pounds at 400 yrds the 300 win mag beats it.

Anyone who says that the 7mm Rem Mag hits harder than the .300 Win Mag is...well, wrong. The 7mm mag MAY shoot flatter, depending on the bullet used, and the distance shot, but it doesn't hit harder.

I don't know who those "people" are, but they don't know what they're talking about.

Now, if you comparing the 7mm Ultra Mag, then it might be different, again depending on the bullet and distance.

All in all, it's really irrelevant for this continent unless you're talking the great bears. Any of the above mentioned cartridges, with an appropriate bullet through the heart/lungs, will kill the same animal just as dead at 400 yards.

Some folks feel better about having all that percieved power behind their bullet. Others want bragging rights. A select few can actually shoot well enough to utilize the longer range cartridges beyond what some "lesser" cartridges will do, but those who can are most-times experienced enough to know what can happen beyond the shooter's control at extended ranges, and opt to get a bit closer.

Sometimes you can't get closer though, and that's when those who use such cartridges are glad that they do. Those times are few, from what I've witnessed and experienced.

Daryl

Stealff
February 6, 2009, 06:22 PM
you know I bought a 300 RUM when they first came out. I bought it mainly because it was new and cool. I never considered or looked for that matter at what the ammo cost. I bought it with the intentions of using it for hunting. 5 yrs later I've put less than 30 rds throught it and havent used it for anything but paper. So now it is gonna get sent to the gunsmith for a heavy barrel and new tactical stock, with the hopes of making it a shootable. So in short what little advantage you get in added velocity, you loose in the extra recoil and ammo cost.

ligonierbill
February 6, 2009, 07:43 PM
When I was hunting in Idaho and Colorado, I used a 7mm Rem mag to good effect. However, at least in Idaho, the most popular round was .300 Win mag. Real difference in the field? Not enough to write home about. The "ultra" mags? I never tried one. My 7mm shoots further than my abilities. Now, when you say "all game" and you mean including big bears, take a look at the .338 Win mag. It has a smaller, but very dedicated following out West.

Kreyzhorse
February 6, 2009, 08:17 PM
As mentioned, you get to say Ultra. You get to say Ultra a lot. As in, "I've looked every where in town for 7mm Ultra ammo and can't find it any place."

The 7mm Rem Mag has been around a long time. Ammo is available every where and it will handle any critter you put in front of it.

L_Killkenny
February 6, 2009, 08:59 PM
The best 7mm is the 7mm-08. The magnums are over kill. Can't imagine why......:confused:

Daryl
February 6, 2009, 09:24 PM
The best 7mm is the 7mm-08. The magnums are over kill. Can't imagine why......

I disagree with that statement, if for no other reason than you'll have to define "best".

Each of us hunts a bit differently, and each of us has different needs. What's "best" for one, may not work well at all for another.

Lots of guys who hunt in thicker areas figure that the 30-30 is the best all around cartridge. They're right, if only for their own needs and wants.

I like the 7mm mag, mostly because it's served me well. I have no need for a 7mm-08.

Daryl

L_Killkenny
February 6, 2009, 09:33 PM
How do I define best? Let see...

Available in light easy handling short action guns
Low recoil
Any critter up to and including Elk won't know the difference between it and the magnums out to 300 yards.

Considering that I and most US hunters will never hunt moose or brown bear it makes it the best for the majority of US hunters. The magnums are only better for a select few. Can't kill em any deader than dead.

HiBC
February 7, 2009, 04:39 AM
There is a relationship behind bore dia vs case capacity.The point of diminishing returns shows up.

I like to look in the loading books at the load density percentages.The 7 Rem mag ,pretty much you achieve about 80% load density.I have a hard time accepting I need a bigger case.Actually,the old 7x61 Sharpes and Hart hit it pretty close.A 280 Ackley hits pretty close to the sweet spot.A 50 BMG necked down to 7 mm isn't going to gain much.

Burning lots of slow powder is hard on the bbl throat, and consider cartridge OAL if you want to long seat 160/175 gr bullets.
I guess I'm saying a 7mm Rem is a plenty big case for 7 mm boreIMO

2rugers
February 7, 2009, 03:37 PM
Had a 7 mag. and ended up selling it and getting the 300 win.
Just a little more ooomph for the really long stuff.

Para Bellum
February 7, 2009, 04:01 PM
I'd consider the .270 WSM. It only needs a 60cm (23,5") barrel to develop all it's power, whereas the "long" Magnums (even the 7x64) all need 65cm (25,5") barrels to really develop their potential. Check the test barrel specifications in the ammo catalogues. You'll see that "long" magnum rounds are always tested with 65cm barrels...

So, if you get a "long" magnum but don't have the long barrel, all you get is performance of a normal round like a .270 Rem and more flash and bang.

Para Bellum
February 7, 2009, 04:02 PM
The best 7mm is the 7mm-08. The magnums are over kill. Can't imagine why......
I agree 7-08 or 7x57. All you need more than that is marksmanship.

Al Thompson
February 8, 2009, 03:31 AM
Look up "point of diminishing returns". :) I think the 7mm RUM is the poster child.

If your planning to shoot beyond 300 yards, it's probably an advantage (at a heavy price). If not, it's not (IMHO) worth it. A lot of the guys who shoot bean fields in my home state of South Carolina tend to use non-magnums as it's accuracy they need, not horsepower. Your a lot better off with a laser range finder and a carefully built series of come ups..

Daryl
February 8, 2009, 01:45 PM
How do I define best? Let see...

Available in light easy handling short action guns
Low recoil
Any critter up to and including Elk won't know the difference between it and the magnums out to 300 yards.

Considering that I and most US hunters will never hunt moose or brown bear it makes it the best for the majority of US hunters. The magnums are only better for a select few. Can't kill em any deader than dead.

I'm glad it works for you. My definition would be different, because I want more from my rifle.

I don't care about action length. I don't care about recoil all that much. I shoot beyond 300 yard pretty regularly.

What about 472 yards, like the shot I made on a coues deer a few years back?

What about critters larger than elk, like a buffalo?

The 7mm Rem Mag works for me, so I don't need a RUM. For those who need/want one, more power (literally) to 'em.

There is no "best" for everyone. We're all different, and want/need different things. I like to match up what I'm using in the form of a firearm to the task at hand, and I can tell you that the 7mm-08 isn't enough for what I do. The 7mm RUM is too much for what I do.

Other's opinions will vary with their needs and wants.

Daryl