Long Range Hunting Online Magazine


Go Back   Long Range Hunting Online Magazine > Hunting > Long Range Hunting & Shooting

Long Range Hunting & Shooting Nightforce Optics


Reply

7mm RUM vs. 300 RUM and (PICS)....

 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-16-2004, 06:57 PM
Bronze Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 64
7mm RUM vs. 300 RUM and (PICS)....

Hi all,

I have been debating this with a buddy of mine- which rifle-cartridge would be best for long range (max. 600 yards)deer, sheep and pronghorn.

It would have to be a hunting weight rifle of no more than 9.75 pounds (rifle, scope, bases, sling, ammo). Sub-MOA accuracy, a given. Max. 28.5" barrel and be SS Synthetic.

It would have to be the least recoiling of either 300RUM or variants (30-378 Wea.,Tomahawk, wolf, warbird, etc.) or 7mm RUM or variants (dakota, 7.21 Firebird etc.). Though recoil was agreed would not be an issue, it was agred that the least recoiling should prove most accurate.

Can be a realistic, proven wildcat, if logical or a plain jain 300 or 7mm commercial cartridge.

It would have to shoot hunting weight bullets of 140-168gr (7mm) or 180-200r. (.300) with high B.C. for bullet weight- mainly to buck wind and not to compensate for range estimation.However, it would have to have flatest possible trajectory (time of flight) out to 600 yards.

Someone on another forum mentioned a 7mm\338RUM because it is slightly shorter than the 7mm or 300 RUM, thus allowing longer bullets to be chambered in the magazine. Pics from other site below:




What would you pick? Further, would there be a noticeable accuracy difference if said rifle is built using a Model 70 action vs a 700?

[ 08-17-2004: Message edited by: CanadianLefty ]
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 08-16-2004, 08:16 PM
Bronze Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Randolph
Posts: 57
Re: 7mm RUM vs. 300 RUM and (PICS)....

Thats one flat shooting setup (wow). Seems like it'd be quite the barrel burner. I would thing that any one the 7mm mags would be more than enough to do what you are talking about....the RUM being the flatest of the commercialy available cartridges.

But if you want less recoil, a 7mm WSM with a 160 grn Accubond (BC of ~.512 I think) would be an excellent choice. At 600 yards you would have enough energy to drop an elk still (1450 ft. lbs. with a MV of 3050 with a 24 in barrel).

Also easy to get in a carry weight rifle, get factory ammo if needed. I don't know if you'd be able to keep the gun that light witha barrel that long after scoped, etc...

Good luck with you choice,
Cobber
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-16-2004, 10:05 PM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 203
Re: 7mm RUM vs. 300 RUM and (PICS)....

Without elk on the menu and a max of 600yrds I don't see any need for 30 cal unless it tickles your fancy. With your flattest trajectory and recoil requirements you have pretty much answered your own question. Now for the but...
I'm with Cobber, you don't really need it. A 280AI, 7Mag, 7WSM, would all do the trick. If it was me I would go 7 Rem Mag or 7STW, a target turret or mil-dot scope and look at 160 and heavier bullets.
__________________
m
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-17-2004, 09:06 AM
Bronze Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 41
Re: 7mm RUM vs. 300 RUM and (PICS)....

For deer-ish critter size you don't need the recoil that goes with pushing .30 caliber bullets to speeds where they'll expand at 600 yards.

I'd suggest looking at .25 to 7mm cartridges. They're going to kick a lot less and be easier to shoot precisely at longer range and still deliver plenty of punch to kill deer. To begin with, ignore the cartridge, pick candidate bullets, look at the ballistic tables, and see how fast you have to launch each so they arrive at 600 yards with enough velocity to expand, _then_ go back to the data sections and see what cartrides are needed to achieve those velocities.

It's sort of difficult to know how much velocity is needed to assure expansion. That may take some bullet testing. I semi-arbitrarily say the bullet has to retain 2200 fps at impact because I ran into problems some years ago with bullets failing to expand intermittently below that line. Not all bullets are equal in that sense, but you have to make some assumptions to get started and that's one I choose to make.

Each one of us has a different threshhold where the additional recoil that goes with greater mechanical range decreases our effective range. For me, in a 9.5# rifle, 7mm STW with 160 grain bullets is just about my limit, if it kicks more than that I have to adjust my hold on the gun in ways that reduce my range.

I would look really hard at the .264 Win Mag and 7mm STW for your buddy's use.
__________________
Flex is for people who don't have lockers.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 08-17-2004, 09:06 PM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Fayetteville, NC
Posts: 13
Re: 7mm RUM vs. 300 RUM and (PICS)....

C L-

Given the parameters in your post, I'd vote for the 7mm RUM (factory dies, no fire forming, etc). Out to 600, the lighter bullets are pretty much equal to the heavy bullets in bucking wind/trajectory due to their higher initial velocity overcoming the the heavier bullet's higher BC. You should be able to get a 140 Accubond out at 3600+ with the 28" barrel. It'll be plenty at 600 for the game mentioned, and recoil a bunch less than with the heavier bullets. Magazine length won't be a problem with the 140 (you could use a Wyatt magazine if you want to go with the heavy bullets and not have to go the 7mm/338 RUM for magazine length). For the flattest trajectory to 600 with reasonable recoil in a 9.75 lb RUM, the 7mm with a 140 would be a top contender. It would be just as good with the heavier bullets, but would recoil more. My 2 cents.

Jim
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-20-2008, 04:47 AM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 26
Re: 7 RUM vs. 300 RUM

I recently used my new Sendero II in 7 mm RUM for Pronghorn with a 140 g. Corlokt Ultra factory load. I took a nice Pronghorn at 500 yards. I am new at long range hunting and did not compensate for the (strong) wind. I anchored the animal with the first shot, but had to sneak up for a finisher. I am confident that 5 moa of windage compensation would have required only one bullet. I am going to try reloading 168 g. Bergers at 3100-3180 fps. and pay more attention to windage adjustment. The scope is a Lightforce 3.5-15x50. The rifle/scope/cartridge combination weighs 10.5 lbs., so recoil is not a problem. My 100 lbs. wife shoots it better than I do. It works well at 500 yards and should have no issues at 600 yards. My best group with the above combination is three rounds into 1.6" group at 300 yrds. This shooter needs to work on adjusting for the windy conditions in easten Montana.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-20-2008, 07:42 AM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Pennsyltucky
Posts: 2,625
welcome aboard, it's a great place to hang out. don't be afraid to try the 180 bergers, they might be a better long range bullet than the 168. is your scope a Nightforce or a Lightforce? never heard of a Lightforce but don't claim to be that knowledgeable on scopes.
__________________
davesonlinedeals.com
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads for: 7mm RUM vs. 300 RUM and (PICS)....
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Id like to kill 2 birds with 1 stone, PICS PICS PICS Southernfryedyankee General Discussion 1 09-27-2009 01:18 PM
New Mcgowen barrel looks AWESOME. PICS PICS PICS Southernfryedyankee Long Range Hunting & Shooting 6 04-09-2009 06:35 PM
Some Pics of my DuraCoat Rigs!!!!! Several Pics lerch Gun Photos 3 12-19-2007 12:08 AM
WTS/WTT: NIB STI LS9... DFW, TX... *** PICS *** Bronson90 Guns For Sale 0 09-09-2004 02:35 PM
AR-30 pics James D. Equipment Discussions 1 06-13-2003 03:23 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Management Powered by vBadvanced CMPS
All content ©2010-2014 Long Range Hunting, LLC