Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
What caliber 7mm Rem Mag or 300 Win Mag
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="MontanaRifleman" data-source="post: 501823" data-attributes="member: 11717"><p>You're missing the point. The point is not that the 300 WM with the GS 177 is some kind of super rifle (although it does give it some very impressive numbers), the point is that the 300 WM is up one level, at least, from the 7 RM. what I am reading in the last few pages of this thread is that some guys don't like the recoil of a 300 WM, so they are going to use the 7 RM and they want to feel good about it, so they will say it's just as good as the 300 WM, that there is no difference, and that is simply not the case.</p><p></p><p>The 7 proponents are hanging their hats on 2 bullets. The 168 Berger and the 162 A Max. The CE 170 (as mentioned) also has a good BC if accurate, but here's the deal. A lot of comments have been made about this and that bullet and velocity that seem to be way out of proportion. If you go to the Hodgdon data site, you will see that the 300 WM is capable of pushing a 200 grain bullet about the same velocity that a 7 RM is capable of pushing a 160-162 gr bullet. That's a 40 gr difference in bullet size at the same velocity.. Let's translate that to the .284 (.617 BC)168 Berger vs the .308 (.631) 210 Berger. The 300 WM is capable of pushing the significantly bigger bullet with slightly better BC at the same velocity. OK, so let's take a look at the mentioned CE 7mm 170(estimated BC .62) vs the 180 CE 308 180 (tested BC .6) Based on our knowledge of cartridge potential how much faster is the 300 WM going to push the 180 vs the 7mm and the 170? Probably about 200-300 fps faster. You realy don't need a ballistic calculator to see which has the clear advantage. Let's start using realistic figures when we do comparisons.</p><p></p><p>Now if you or anyone else want to say you want to shoot the 7 because it kicks less, then fine... but don't say there's no difference between the two to make you feel better. That is total BS. Now I'm calling BS.... anybody can get on their keyboard and type that the 7 RM can kill anything that a 300 WM can, but that doesn't make it true. If it is... then I can get on my keyboard and type that a 22-250 can kill anything a 7 mag can. And if I search the net enough, I can probably find some story where some guy killed a 1000 lb Brown Bear with a 22-250. It might even be true. So what? We both know that there's a difference between the 22-250 and the 7 RM, just like there is a difference between the 7 RM and the 300 WM. What's the difference? One more time..... bullet cal, bullet weight and powder capacity.</p><p></p><p>I think most people are going to agree that as we move up the ladder the larger cals/cartridges are going to be more destructive. A 243 is going to be more destructive than a 22-250, and a 6.5-284 is going to be more destructive than a 243, and a 270 WSM is going to be more destructive than a 6.5-284, and a 7 RM is going to be more destructive than a 270 WSM... but why is it that when we compare the 7 RM and the 300 WM, they are all of a sudden the same? I don't get it. The reason I don't get it is because it's BS.</p><p></p><p>Now we can split hairs all day on how much the difference is, but don't say they are the same. I could kill an elephant with a well placed shot through the eye with a 22-250, but I would rather go with the odds and use a 416.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="MontanaRifleman, post: 501823, member: 11717"] You're missing the point. The point is not that the 300 WM with the GS 177 is some kind of super rifle (although it does give it some very impressive numbers), the point is that the 300 WM is up one level, at least, from the 7 RM. what I am reading in the last few pages of this thread is that some guys don't like the recoil of a 300 WM, so they are going to use the 7 RM and they want to feel good about it, so they will say it's just as good as the 300 WM, that there is no difference, and that is simply not the case. The 7 proponents are hanging their hats on 2 bullets. The 168 Berger and the 162 A Max. The CE 170 (as mentioned) also has a good BC if accurate, but here's the deal. A lot of comments have been made about this and that bullet and velocity that seem to be way out of proportion. If you go to the Hodgdon data site, you will see that the 300 WM is capable of pushing a 200 grain bullet about the same velocity that a 7 RM is capable of pushing a 160-162 gr bullet. That's a 40 gr difference in bullet size at the same velocity.. Let's translate that to the .284 (.617 BC)168 Berger vs the .308 (.631) 210 Berger. The 300 WM is capable of pushing the significantly bigger bullet with slightly better BC at the same velocity. OK, so let's take a look at the mentioned CE 7mm 170(estimated BC .62) vs the 180 CE 308 180 (tested BC .6) Based on our knowledge of cartridge potential how much faster is the 300 WM going to push the 180 vs the 7mm and the 170? Probably about 200-300 fps faster. You realy don't need a ballistic calculator to see which has the clear advantage. Let's start using realistic figures when we do comparisons. Now if you or anyone else want to say you want to shoot the 7 because it kicks less, then fine... but don't say there's no difference between the two to make you feel better. That is total BS. Now I'm calling BS.... anybody can get on their keyboard and type that the 7 RM can kill anything that a 300 WM can, but that doesn't make it true. If it is... then I can get on my keyboard and type that a 22-250 can kill anything a 7 mag can. And if I search the net enough, I can probably find some story where some guy killed a 1000 lb Brown Bear with a 22-250. It might even be true. So what? We both know that there's a difference between the 22-250 and the 7 RM, just like there is a difference between the 7 RM and the 300 WM. What's the difference? One more time..... bullet cal, bullet weight and powder capacity. I think most people are going to agree that as we move up the ladder the larger cals/cartridges are going to be more destructive. A 243 is going to be more destructive than a 22-250, and a 6.5-284 is going to be more destructive than a 243, and a 270 WSM is going to be more destructive than a 6.5-284, and a 7 RM is going to be more destructive than a 270 WSM... but why is it that when we compare the 7 RM and the 300 WM, they are all of a sudden the same? I don't get it. The reason I don't get it is because it's BS. Now we can split hairs all day on how much the difference is, but don't say they are the same. I could kill an elephant with a well placed shot through the eye with a 22-250, but I would rather go with the odds and use a 416. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
What caliber 7mm Rem Mag or 300 Win Mag
Top