7mm vs 300 wm.

soundwaves

soundwaves

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2009
Messages
529
Location
TURKEY
According to my ballistic calculator, if you start a 180 grain Sierra Spitser BT out of a 300 Win mag at 3100 feet/sec, at 500 yards it will have a remaining velocity of 2266, energy of 2051 ft/lb and drop 60 inches. A 175 Sierra from a 7mm mag with the same velocity will have a remaining velocity of 2304 feet/sec and 2063 ft/lb and drop 55 inches. At 1000 yards the 7mm will still be going at 1644 feet/sec with 1051 ft/lb and drop 282 inches. The 300 on the other hand will do 1583 feet/sec, have 1002 ft/lb remaining and drop 290 inches. The 7mm will have better penetration because of better sectional density. Maybe the 300 Win can use heavier bullets, up to 220 grains while the heaviest bullet I see listed for the 7mm is 195 grains. Let's take the heaviest low drag bullet, the 220 grain Sierra HPBT Matchking at 2800 feet/sec. At 1000 yards it will go 1607 feet/sec with 1262 ft/lbs of energy and drop 327 inches. You can push a 7mm 162 grain AMax bullet at 3200 feet/sec easy, and it will still do 1895 feet/sec at 1000 yards and have 1292 ft/lbs of energy left, and drop only 243 inches. The 7mm wins hands down in my book.

I FOUND THİS İN A NOTHER FORUM. İS HE RİGHT?????
 
His numbers seem a little high in my opinion for both calibers. The 7mm will definitely out run the 300 in speed. The 300 will allow you to run a heavier bullet with equal BC hitting harder farther out. You take a 180grn Berger against a JLK 210 LBTHP and they are going to be pretty equal. The 300 however will carry a higher ark, but maintain more energy down range farther out due to the bullets higher weight and density. Just a heads up, the 210 bullets now or even the 208 A-max have a higher BC than the 220SMK. It use to be the king of distance, but not so much anymore.

Comparison 30cal.

Sierra SMK 220=.629
210=.645 you would be able to push this one a little faster than the 220grn
Berger 210=.631
Hor. A-max 208=.648
JLK 210LBT=.690

7mm
Hor. A-max 162=.625
Berger 168=.617
180=.659
Sierra SMK 175=.608
SMK 180=.660

By the numbers you aren't really gaining much, but if you want to nit pick, then the 7mm will be better than the 300 to a point.

Tank
 
Last edited:
soundwaves said:
According to my ballistic calculator, if you start a 180 grain Sierra Spitser BT out of a 300 Win mag at 3100 feet/sec, at 500 yards it will have a remaining velocity of 2266, energy of 2051 ft/lb and drop 60 inches. A 175 Sierra from a 7mm mag with the same velocity will have a remaining velocity of 2304 feet/sec and 2063 ft/lb and drop 55 inches. At 1000 yards the 7mm will still be going at 1644 feet/sec with 1051 ft/lb and drop 282 inches. The 300 on the other hand will do 1583 feet/sec, have 1002 ft/lb remaining and drop 290 inches. The 7mm will have better penetration because of better sectional density. Maybe the 300 Win can use heavier bullets, up to 220 grains while the heaviest bullet I see listed for the 7mm is 195 grains. Let's take the heaviest low drag bullet, the 220 grain Sierra HPBT Matchking at 2800 feet/sec. At 1000 yards it will go 1607 feet/sec with 1262 ft/lbs of energy and drop 327 inches. You can push a 7mm 162 grain AMax bullet at 3200 feet/sec easy, and it will still do 1895 feet/sec at 1000 yards and have 1292 ft/lbs of energy left, and drop only 243 inches. The 7mm wins hands down in my book.

I FOUND THİS İN A NOTHER FORUM. İS HE RİGHT?????
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Soundwaves, there is no way on earth the a 7mm will push a 175 gr bullet anywhere near as fast as a 300 WM will push 180 gr bullet with the same length barrel... period. With my 7mm I pushed 160 NP's right at 3000 fps with a max/warm load out of a 24" barrel. With a 26" barrel you could add another 50-60 fps. on the Hodgdon site, the fastest velocity they list for a 7mm 175 gr bullet is 2800 fps with Retumbo powder. On the same site, the best velocity for the 300 WM and 180 gr bullet is 3034 fps.... 234 fps faster than the 7mm.

The 300 WM will hands down deliver more energy and momentum down range than the 7mm with comparable type bullets simply because it has more case capacity. There are no free lunches.

Having said that, the 7mm RM is a great cartridge and very capable within it's effective range.

Cheers
 
yeah your right. l dont recon the 175s will go at 3000 fps. but thay definatly travel faster than 2800..period. winchester power points have a velocity of 2860 fps. and l think the 150s carry more energy after 500 yards than the 300wm 150s. am l wrong? just looked at winchester balistic calculator: 7mmRM 150 grain power point vs 300WM 150 power point. take a lookto about 500 yards the 300 is better but after that distance the 7 starts gaining on him:)
 
Its hard to compare a 150 30cal w/ a 150 7mm. There is a big difference in length verses diameter. The 7mm 150 is going to be longer carrying a better BC making it more aerodynamic. The 150 30cal is a short little stubby bullet. To compare the 2 of them, you need to compare a 150grn 7mm, to a 175grn 30cal. Now we're talking apples to apples.

Tank
 
Case capacity is also slightly different. Compare the 7&300wsm's or the 300wm and the 7mm/300win mag. I am rebarreling my 300wsm to a 7mm wsm because I already have a 300rum and I feel that the 7wsm will better suit my needs. I have the hard numbers from my 300wsm. As soon as it is rebarreled and I have some numbers on the 7mm I will post the up for ya.
 
soundwaves said:
yeah your right. l dont recon the 175s will go at 3000 fps. but thay definatly travel faster than 2800..period. winchester power points have a velocity of 2860 fps. and l think the 150s carry more energy after 500 yards than the 300wm 150s. am l wrong? just looked at winchester balistic calculator: 7mmRM 150 grain power point vs 300WM 150 power point. take a lookto about 500 yards the 300 is better but after that distance the 7 starts gaining on him:)
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

It's possible the Winchester data was from a 26" barrel and the Hodgdon from a 24" barrel... who knows? In any case, when your comparing apples to apples the 300 WM is going to beat the the 7mm.

As Tank pointed out, it's hard to compare equal weight bullets in different cals. Typically, a 7mm RM is going to shoot a 160 gr bullet about as fast as a 300 is going to shoot a 180 bullet and their BC's will be fairly close. They will have the same trajectories and velocity down range with the 300 making a larger hole with more KE and momentum. Not a huge diff between them, but fairly significant and I like putting the odds in my favor :)
 
I think something to note is that the 7 will pretty much do ballistically what the 300 will do with less recoil. This is because you get better B.C.s with lighter bullets, which equals less recoil. When you compare theses 2 calibers you have to balance what you need/want. The 7mm will recoil less and have a better ballistic arch but will arrive with less energy than the 30 cal. So you have to decide how much energy you wish to have and how much recoil you want to endure. I decided on a 7mm becasue I enjoying the shooting and its important to me. I prefer to run a 150/160 gr bullet than having a similiar BC bullet in the .30 cal at 200gr, plain and simple for me its recoil vs energy and I feel that the 7 has enough enegy (Ft lbs) using these weight bullets. The .30 has more but the 7 has enough.
 
As I look at his velocities that he is stating it makes me think and do some research. I am new to the numbers game. I have been hunting with and shooting rifles for years, but I am new to the long range accuracy game. But I am noticing that the numbers he is stating for the 7mm are way too high. Those are the numbers that I am pumping out of my STW, not a standard 7mag. As for the 300 wm numbers they do seem to be close to what I have been able to see others acheiving.
 
Soundwaves, if you are asking which is the best all around hunting rifle between these two it is the 300 winchester by far. You must compare realistic velocities with good quality hunting bullets when doing a comparison.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 12 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

S
300 wm vs 300 rum vs 338 wm
2 3
Replies
28
Views
6K
ShadS
S
B
.300 WM vs. .338 WM
Replies
9
Views
6K
kbaerg
kbaerg
E
300 RUM vs 300 WM
2 3 4
Replies
51
Views
33K
GonzoK34
G
G
300 WSM vs. 300 WM
Replies
10
Views
4K
COBrad
C
H
300 WM vs. 300 WSM
2
Replies
18
Views
11K
head2h2o
H

Recent Posts

Top