I want a legit argument against an old trusted cartridge

My first big-game rifle was a 7-MM Rem & I still have it. It's a Browning Stainless Stalker from the very first shipment of A-Bolt Stainless Stalkers. It's a great rifle with a great "jack-of-all-trades" cartridge — which is why I bought it. I knew it could handle anything from whitetails to moose.

I can honestly say I haven't hunted with it in 4 years. Although it's a great cartridge, now that I have "a bunch" of rifles to choose from I tend to choose rifles more optimal for the day's tasks. I stopped using the 7 mag on whitetails because of the amount of meat lost to "cannonball sized holes". My .25-06 has nearly the same trajectory with much less meat damage. My .243 does even less damage. For elk I now have my choice of bigger cartridges that promise better penetration if shot opportunity isn't ideal. For elk I normally carry a .300 Weatherby or a .338/.378 Weatherby. In the dark timber I might reach for my Sako in .375 H&H.

Yes, if I was limited to one big game rifle it might well be a 7 mag, but I am not so limited. With many rifles in the safe I have found the 7 mag is rarely MY best choice.

It seems you are intent on having ONE big game rifle. With that as a premise, the 7 MM Rem mag is a great choice.
 
I've never found a use for the 7 Rem Mag.

I think a better question would be why should anyone looking to buy a new gun spend their money on an effective, but outdated design? There are a variety of other 7mm cartridges which will offer comparable performance in a more compact package (WSM, SAUM, Sherman, Lazzeroni etc). There are plenty of 7mm cartridges which will offer superior performance in the same size package (Dakota, Weatherby, Nosler, RUM etc). The belt on a Rem Mag doesn't hurt anything, but it certainly doesn't help. It just seems like an unnecessary use of space that could be used for extra powder capacity.

The 7mm magnums in general just don't make much sense to me. The 30s offer a greater bullet selection, the 6.5s offer less recoil. I don't have much use for the 7mm Mags as a hunting cartridge because they're too big to be small and too small to be big. They're entirely unnecessary for any deer I've seen and a 30 caliber is better in every way when elk are in the picture. If I were looking for a dedicated elk rifle I'd look to the 338s anyways, not because they're necessary but because I'm partial to 250gr+ bullets for bigger critters.

There's nothing wrong with the 7 Rem Mag, but there's nothing great about it either. It's the mid-sized SUV of rifle chamberings; versatile enough to work for all round use, but not the best at anything.
 
I've never found a use for the 7 Rem Mag.

I think a better question would be why should anyone looking to buy a new gun spend their money on an effective, but outdated design? There are a variety of other 7mm cartridges which will offer comparable performance in a more compact package (WSM, SAUM, Sherman, Lazzeroni etc). There are plenty of 7mm cartridges which will offer superior performance in the same size package (Dakota, Weatherby, Nosler, RUM etc). The belt on a Rem Mag doesn't hurt anything, but it certainly doesn't help. It just seems like an unnecessary use of space that could be used for extra powder capacity.

The 7mm magnums in general just don't make much sense to me. The 30s offer a greater bullet selection, the 6.5s offer less recoil. I don't have much use for the 7mm Mags as a hunting cartridge because they're too big to be small and too small to be big. They're entirely unnecessary for any deer I've seen and a 30 caliber is better in every way when elk are in the picture. If I were looking for a dedicated elk rifle I'd look to the 338s anyways, not because they're necessary but because I'm partial to 250gr+ bullets for bigger critters.

There's nothing wrong with the 7 Rem Mag, but there's nothing great about it either. It's the mid-sized SUV of rifle chamberings; versatile enough to work for all round use, but not the best at anything.

I would agree with a few points, but I would argue one. I've worked for an outfitter in Wyoming, plus between my buddies and I, I've seen more elk die than I can count. Elk are very tough. This leads people to believe they need a 50 bmg to kill them. It comes from people making poor shots, using poor bullets/ammunition, or shooting farther than their ability. Of all the ultra mags, 338, 300, even 7mm cartridges, the fastest I've seen an elk die (not DROP from a spine shot, but actually DIE) was a double lung shot, no bone hit, from a 6.5x284 with a SST bullet at 300 yards.

Point being, the "superior preformance" cartridges you mentioned, are just more expensive and 1-200 fps faster. Nothing that truly makes a difference in putting meat on the ground. It's just harder on the wallet, making that elk tag that much more expensive.

I haven't shot a whitetail so I wouldn't know, but the 7 mag is not overkill for the big bodied mule deer in my neck of the mountains.

The other way to word "too big to be small but to small to be big" can also be worded "not too small, not to big...just right."
 
I started off my hunting career with a 7mm Remington Magnum. It never failed me but eventually I was bitten by the "bigger and better" bug. I switched to a 300 win mag which I believed would serve me well with a little more knock down power, if I ever made it to Alaska to hunt big bears.

I shortly realized elk, dear, antalope, and black bear don't know the difference between the 300 and 7mm... it's more about shot placement and the type of bullet being used.

So I went back the the 7mm because of less recoil and better wind fighting capabilities.

Then I was bitten by the "newest shinniest" bug. I picked the next cartridge by going backwards. I wanted the highest BC, highest SD bullet made, which was at the time the 7mm 195 Berger EOL. Then found the cartridge which would push it the fastest and flattest, the 28 Nosler (besides the Allen mags and other wildcats).

After messing with the 28 Nosler for probably 2 rifles, 5 barrels, maybe 2000 rounds within the last year... I don't know it's worth it.

The 7mm Remington Magnum will kill anything. It's cheap. It doesn't kick bad with a muzzle brake. I could hunt around the world and if I lose my hand loads, I can find ammo. I believe it is the best all around, do anything, caliber ever made.

It has better ballistics and more power than all the small target cartridges (6mm, 6.5mm Creedmoor and x47 Lapua, 6.5- 284, the BR range of cartridges, and 308 win). Yet is far cheaper, less recoil, more available and easier on barrels than the "bigger and better" or "new and shiny" cartridges like 26 and 28 Nosler, 300 rum, 6.5-300 weatherby and the like.

I guess I want a valid argument (I hope you win) as to why any caliber out there is better than the 7 mag, because the more I try new things, the more I get pulled back to my 7.
I just found this:

"More specifically, on tough game species weighing around 150-200kg (330-440lb), speed of killing can be reduced from 45 seconds (7mm Magnum with conventional bullets) to either instant collapse or a few second delay (with the 300WM)- at all ranges. Once this is seen in the field and fully understood, arguments about trajectories and wind drift quickly fall by the wayside."

from:
https://www.ballisticstudies.com/Knowledgebase/.300+Winchester+Magnum.html
 
"I guess I want a valid argument (I hope you win) as to why any caliber out there is better than the 7 mag, because the more I try new things, the more I get pulled back to my 7."
. . .
270, poor stepped on step child...150 grain Nosler partition going 2800....hmmm
. . .

If you need a valid argument for not shooting a 7MM Mag I can not find one for you. I have never had so much BS tossed at me ever since I have built a 270 variant of the 7MM R/M. I am not a 7MM fan, not a 6.5 fan, or a 6MM fan. I like the older cartridges. I own 270's, 338's, 444's, 25-06's, 300 Win Mag, 45-70's, and some varmint cartridges. the only 6.5 I will ever own is a 264 Win Mag. now back to the 270-7MM R/M. it was so easy and when the dies came; they came with a note (WHY!?!) I wanted to ruin a perfectly good cartridge with an inferior slug. not going to repeat what I told the die manufacturer. I built the rifle to shoot the 170 grain VLD Berger slugs for long range deer, and all heavy slugs for the 270. I hope they make more selection for us 270 guys. I am hoping for a 175, 180, and 185 grain slug for the 1-7" twist barrels.
Personally you like the 7MM R/M stick with it. new, shiny, and all that other stuff is for people that are not comfortable with what is useful. I might like your choice in chamberings but you like it and you use it well. it's like my 270's I use them well and they are effective. why change?

Yes, rifles are tools that we pick for a job. Rifles revolve around weight of rifle to carry, caliber, and sometimes whether push feed or controlled-round-feed. (CRF is probably irrelevant for deer hunting.) Caliber choice revolves around bore size, powder capacity, and sometimes COL. (Magazine capacity is probably irrelevant for dee hunting.)
Lee Goodwin listed a bunch of calibers but did not give the 270 a fair shake. Why limit it to the 150Nosler P at 2800fps? (Disclaimer: I've taken a lot of plains game with the 270 and 150NP, it works great. But there are better bullets these days.) He also left out one of my all time favorites: the 416 Rigby handloaded to Weatherby ballistics. It's comfortable, impala to buffalo. I shoot bigger, too. But I digress. Let's talk deer.

Even though I like hunting deer with an accurate 338WM, I would say that a deer caliber falls in the range of 24 to 30 caliber, and I lean toward the top half for better terminal results from all angles.
How much powder capacity? I like over 3000fps for deer. My wife shoots 110grain TTSX in 270Win at 3350fps and bullets have all exited so far. The 129gnLRX is very accurate at 3125-3150fps. We're doing load development for some 117gn and 126gn HammerHunters this Fall and expect 117 at 3250-3300fps, 126 at 3150-3200fps. If she wanted over-600 yards with that rifle (she doesn't) I would recommend a rebarrel with 1in7" twist so that she could shoot the 168gn Hammer Hunter and have high bullet stability. The rifle? A Tikka T3x stainless, for a lightweight, easy carry. So I agree with Freddie. If a hunter wants to take a belt off, think about a modern rendition of the Jack OÇonnor special. Amazing little caliber. Yeah, a 28Nosler could outshoot it for the over-600 thing and a 338WM or 338PRC might be nicer for elk, but the 270 has satisfying, delightful, clout and reach 0 to 600.
 
I love my 270, it was my first center-fire rifle. I guessed at the 2800 fps on those NP 150s. My hunt load for next month is 180 woodleighs going 2550 in my old 270. Also, Gonna take the 700 300wm with 180 Hornady interlocks going 2900 plus a little.
 
Dude, You need a history lesson. Early Weatherbys were a joke. It took "Roy" and staff 20+ years to get it right. Study the video on the 7mm Rem mag by The Gunsmith and you will get it straight! It's no wonder no one has Liked your post!

Yep I get they used the 338 case. Just odd that the 264/7mm/338 case will fireform to the Weatherby case developed while big green was still trying to get more shapes and diameters out of the 06' case. Sorry for the tangent. There is no reason to use anything but the 7 mag, to the OPs point.[/QUOTE]
 
There is no reason to own a 7 mag.

Yeah it carrys energy better than a 300 win at long ranges with more manageable recoil while using bullets that are still constructed lightly enough to expand/fragment even at slower speeds in smaller animals than the 300s.

Yeah it carrys more energy at all ranges than the trendy 6.5s. While still bucking wind incredibly effectively and having a killer reputation for accuracy.

Yeah there is a huge range of bullets available for it that are suited for making everything from mild recoiling short range white tail rounds to precision long range elk rounds to hard hitting deep penetrating big game rounds adequate for even the biggest animals north america has to offer.

Yeah in a pinch ammo for it is available anywhere you look. Reloading data is rampantly available and everyone and their dog has helpfull knowledge about the round.

but other than that no reason at all to get a 7 mag
 
If you want a more legit arguement, Jack oconnor didnt champion the 7mag and P.o. Ackley didnt design it.
Theres every reason you need to go to a .270 and have a gun that's basically a wimpy 7 mag.

Or a .280 ackley and have a...well a 7 mag with a cool name.

Also 7mm is metric and everyone knows real guns come in cal. not mm.
 
Many people have considered the 7mm a Jack of all trades master of none but very few would say the same thing about a 6.5 as most are now considering it a master of all trades giving up nothing. My belief is that there is no replacement for displacement but if I had to be pinned down to the compromise of having one rifle caliber it would probably be something in the 7mm family or larger. Luckily, I'm not very recoil sensitive and I am able to have rifles chambered in several calibers cause that's all part of the fun of it. This is why I'm not a cartridge hater an I'm not going to bash someone's favorite cartridge cause I probably already own or have owned it. In these types of discussions, some one always jumps in and says that it's all about shot placement then another fellow jumps in and emphases ft/lbs energy and/or bore size & wound channel when in truth it has to be a balance of both of those ideas. Otherwise if it was all about shot placement solely, we would all be hunting with 6mm br, 6mm Dasher, or 6mm brx, etc..... You get the idea. And if it was solely about bore size and/or ft pounds enery we would all be running a 338 lapua. So as I said, it's a balance of both and it's not the same for everyone. I'm a big boned fellow, 7mm rem mag isn't that much for me and it does beat most 6.5 cartridges in ballistics when you figure 180 pills vs 140s in the 6.5. I really enjoy shooting my creedmoor. I'm better with the 7 mag and even better than that with the 300 Norma. I was once on a tight budget and only had one rifle, my sendero 7mm rem mag. It served me well and still does. So I have no argument against it. Shooting large game with a 7mm rem mag is probably the equivalent of shooting medium game with a 243 Winchester.
 
Or a .280 ackley and have a...well a 7 mag with a cool name.

Exactly. A nice beltless 7mm with a reasonable powder capacity. It even has a 2% velocity advantage over the 270 (by physics rather than advertizing), but I still like the 270.
 
Last edited:
I will add one more comment to this thread and you all can make of it what you want: If you own hunting rifles in at least 7 different calibers with duplicates of some, it will be a long time before you burn the barrels out of all of them and you shouldn't have much to be discontented with about any of them between now and when they are all burnt out.
 
I just found this:

"More specifically, on tough game species weighing around 150-200kg (330-440lb), speed of killing can be reduced from 45 seconds (7mm Magnum with conventional bullets) to either instant collapse or a few second delay (with the 300WM)- at all ranges. Once this is seen in the field and fully understood, arguments about trajectories and wind drift quickly fall by the wayside."

from:
https://www.ballisticstudies.com/Knowledgebase/.300+Winchester+Magnum.html

I'm very familiar with Nathan's studies and I agree with him, but shot placement and bullet selection also play a huge role in this.

I preffer 7mm vs the 6.5's and yes I know they've killed tons of animals but this is my personal preference, bigger bores cause wider wound channels with the proper bullet of course.

I've dropped many deer in their tracks including the big mexican desert mulies with a 7mm-08 with a 139gr SST up to little over 400 yds and several coues deer just under 500 yds. When I say dead in their tracks I mean did not take one step.

Bullet selection and shot placement also dictate how fast an animal dies, not just a bigger caliber cartridge.

My boring in the middle crossover suv 7mm Rem Mag LOL has effectively killed everything I've shot, due to proper bullet selection and shot placement, just like my 7mm-08, my old 280 Rem and also the good ol' 270 Win. The deer that did not die right away was because of a poor shot, not because of a bad cartridge.

Its a combinations of things that make a cartridge deadly or not.

Just my .02
 
I would have to agree with you, I don't believe any of the newer cartridges are so far out there in superiority that the tried and true need to be retired. I showed up at a hunt camp once with my faithful 270 win, and was told by a few other hunters what a poor choice I had made, because I didn't have a rifle chambered in the latest and greatest caliber. Guess what? I came home with a cooler full of meat at the end of that week and so did a few others and did it with a tried and true cartridge.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 5 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.

Recent Posts

Top