Hunters: A question por favor...

[Okla-homey]

Wadday'all think about the 7mm Rem Mag cartridge? A buddy of mine, whose firearms judgment I respect greatly, believes the 7mm Rem Mag is the best "all-round" (deer and up to, and including, bears) cartridge on the planet. In short, he believes a feller can hunt any four-legged game in the western hemisphere with that cartridge. I'm thinking of getting me a new rifle and I'm srsly considering buying one chambered for that cartridge.

TIA

[Jerk]

The .300 Weatherby Mag would be another good choice.

It's one of the flattest shooting .30 cal rifles on Earth.

I'm looking at my reloading handbook and it can shoot a Barnes X 180 gr. bullet at 3100 fps. What can you not kill with that?

Then to hunt deer you can go with a 150gr. bullet at 3400 fps but if you reload you can tone it down somewhat...hell just aim for the head or neck so you have something left to eat.

By comparison your 7mm Rem Mag shoots a 175gr. bullet at 2500 fps and a 154gr bullet at about 2800 fps, which would be much more suited for white-tail.

The 7mm is a good choice if your primary goal is to kill deer but if you are going to hunt Elk and such then go with the .300 Weatherby Mag. If you are going to hunt Grizzly Bear then we need to get much more serious.

[Okla-homey]

The .300 Weatherby Mag would be another good choice.

It's one of the flattest shooting .30 cal rifles on Earth.

I'm looking at my reloading handbook and it can shoot a Barnes X 180 gr. bullet at 3100 fps. What can you not kill with that?

Then to hunt deer you can go with a 150gr. bullet at 3400 fps but if you reload you can tone it down somewhat...hell just aim for the head or neck so you have something left to eat.

By comparison your 7mm Rem Mag shoots a 175gr. bullet at 2500 fps and a 154gr bullet at about 2800 fps, which would be much more suited for white-tail.

The 7mm is a good choice if your primary goal is to kill deer but if you are going to hunt Elk and such then go with the .300 Weatherby Mag. If you are going to hunt Grizzly Bear then we need to get much more serious.

Here's my conflict. I'm kinda an Old School guy. I like the .30-06, especially since I own rifles chambered for that round, including a sweet low serial number M-1 that is in "very good" condition. I'm generally a fan of ammunition commonality whenever it makes sense. But my friend says 7mm Rem Mag is waaay better because it travels much flatter.

Therefore, my question is, is the 7mm Rem Mag appreciably better than .30-06, or is this like audiophiles arguing about who makes the best stereo component? IOW, can 95.5% of people tell the diff?

This is important. I gotta get this done before the Inauguration, cuz Lord knows what we're in for after that on the "gun control" front.

[StoopTroup]

I'd check with SicEm...he's friends with lots of bears.

Homey...I've shot both but never any bear. I bagged all my deer with the 30-06. I think it was a fluke I never took one with the 7mm mag though but in closing...since I never took a deer with it...I can't help here at all...sorry.

[Okla-homey]

I'd check with SicEm...he's friends with lots of bears.

That boy wouldn't know the muzzle end from the buttstock if a nekkid lady clacked-up to him in stripper heels and said "do me now!"

[Jerk]

A quick look at raw numbers seems to suggest that you will gain about 200fps with the 7mm Rem Mag over the 30'06 for bullets in the same weight range. Good ballistic coefficients can be found with both calibers if you search for the right bullet.

I plugged in the following at Norma ballistics:

168 gr bullet
.475 BC
200 yard zero

At 2800 fps, the bullet drops 22.2 inches @ 400 yards

At 2600 fps, the same bullet drops 26.2 inches @ 400 yards

If you're trying to hit a prairie dog, the difference could be huge.. An Elk...probably not.

[Jerk]

doh, if you read that more than 30 seconds ago then you need to re-read it.

[Jerk]

btw - the 200 fps difference will show itself as you go further out in range

600 yards:

2800 fps = 77.7" drop

2600 fps = 91.7" drop

The caliber of bullet doesn't matter, so long as we're comparing two bullets that have the same weight and same B.C.

[Curly Bill]

If you might hunt elk or moose sometime in the future as well as white tailed deer then by all means go for the 7mm mag. I used to think that I wanted one until I realized I was probably never going to go elk hunting, and would therefore be better served with a .270.

I dare say that most peeps that hunt with a 7mm mag, or any of the magnums for that matter, don't really need that much gun, and would themselves be better served with a .270 or .30-06.

When it comes down to it though there's nothing at all wrong with the 7mm, so if that's what you want, then that's what you should get.

[Jerk]

That boy wouldn't know the muzzle end from the buttstock if a nekkid lady clacked-up to him in stripper heels and said "do me now!"

I found a video of Sic'Em shooting an AR-15


Bkt1vAX0MRM

[Okla-homey]

A quick look at raw numbers seems to suggest that you will gain about 200fps with the 7mm Rem Mag over the 30'06 for bullets in the same weight range. Good ballistic coefficients can be found with both calibers if you search for the right bullet.

I plugged in the following at Norma ballistics:

168 gr bullet
.475 BC
200 yard zero

At 2800 fps, the bullet drops 22.2 inches @ 400 yards

At 2600 fps, the same bullet drops 26.2 inches @ 400 yards

If you're trying to hit a prairie dog, the difference could be huge.. An Elk...probably not.

Thanks for that. I can't imagine engaging a deer/elk/moose at >300 yds., so I think I'm sticking with good 'ol .30-06.

[olevetonahill]

Wadday'all think about the 7mm Rem Mag cartridge? A buddy of mine, whose firearms judgment I respect greatly, believes the 7mm Rem Mag is the best "all-round" (deer and up to, and including, bears) cartridge on the planet. In short, he believes a feller can hunt any four-legged game in the western hemisphere with that cartridge. I'm thinking of getting me a new rifle and I'm srsly considering buying one chambered for that cartridge.

TIA

Do It .
I dropped MY Bear shootin OFF hand at 225 Yrds One shot One Kill ;)
Ruger M77 :cool:

[olevetonahill]

Thanks for that. I can't imagine engaging a deer/elk/moose at >300 yds., so I think I'm sticking with good 'ol .30-06.

I have , Or have Had Both , A 7mm Mag Is By far a superior weapon
Just MHO.

[StoopTroup]

I found a video of Sic'Em shooting an AR-15


ROTFLMAO....

[12]

(reminder to self): tread lightly around some of these ****ers.

[StoopTroup]

I plugged in the following at Norma ballistics:


Very cool calculator they have there.

Thanks!

[Rogue]

Homey, I really think your analogy about the audiophiles arguing is a spot-on analogy here. I can tell you I've never hit/missed a deer or elk because of the gun or round I was using. My old .270 is good enough for any critter I hunt. Probably the best because I'm comfortable and confident with it. I may take the 30/30 when I plan to trapse through heavy brush or just on a whim. But I've never looked through the optics or sights and wished I'd brought a different gun. And I doubt it'll happen unless East Tennessee gets overrun with herds of African Musk Ox.

I know you're partial to your .45 auto for a handgun, but I get just as big a kick out of listening to fellers argue about the relative virtues of the 9mm vs 10mm vs the 40 caliber or the 38 special vs the 357.

For most of us mortals, stopping power and a clean kill vs an injured critter usually comes down to shot placement. Now I'm not saying you should carry a .22 on the police force or hunt moose with a .17 caliber rifle, but you get my drift. Bullet energy on impact has so many variables that it makes sense for a sniper and his mathematician spotter to figure it out, but not me when I'm out hunting for meat.

Now, all that said and because I like you, the advice I think you need here is that when yer faced with the question of whether or not to get that new gun, you should get it. I've seldom regretted buying a gun, but often had non-buyer's remorse the morning after not buying a gun.

Over

[Jerk]

Homey, I really think your analogy about the audiophiles arguing is a spot-on analogy here. I can tell you I've never hit/missed a deer or elk because of the gun or round I was using. My old .270 is good enough for any critter I hunt. Probably the best because I'm comfortable and confident with it. I may take the 30/30 when I plan to trapse through heavy brush or just on a whim. But I've never looked through the optics or sights and wished I'd brought a different gun. And I doubt it'll happen unless East Tennessee gets overrun with herds of African Musk Ox.

I know you're partial to your .45 auto for a handgun, but I get just as big a kick out of listening to fellers argue about the relative virtues of the 9mm vs 10mm vs the 40 caliber or the 38 special vs the 357.

For most of us mortals, stopping power and a clean kill vs an injured critter usually comes down to shot placement. Now I'm not saying you should carry a .22 on the police force or hunt moose with a .17 caliber rifle, but you get my drift. Bullet energy on impact has so many variables that it makes sense for a sniper and his mathematician spotter to figure it out, but not me when I'm out hunting for meat.

Now, all that said and because I like you, the advice I think you need here is that when yer faced with the question of whether or not to get that new gun, you should get it. I've seldom regretted buying a gun, but often had non-buyer's remorse the morning after not buying a gun.

Over

Excellent post! Another thing to add to your last paragraph is that guns, as an investment, are doing very well right now! I wish, starting in 2004, I had put all my savings into firearms instead of my 401k:mad:

[AlbqSooner]

Thanks for that. I can't imagine engaging a deer/elk/moose at >300 yds., so I think I'm sticking with good 'ol .30-06.

Having done most of my deer hunting in eastern Oklahoma I was usually sighted in for about 75 yards. Given the timber and brush cover there it worked well for me. THEN, I was invited to go on a mule deer hunt in the Big Bend area of Texas. Most shots available were in the 300-450 yard range. On the second day I re-sighted. On the second day I got my deer.

[Okla-homey]

Excellent post! Another thing to add to your last paragraph is that guns, as an investment, are doing very well right now! I wish, starting in 2004, I had put all my savings into firearms instead of my 401k:mad:

Indeed. I may be an admitted gun-nut, but the fact is, like a woman can't be "too pretty," you can't have "too many" guns. I have sold more than a few guns in my day for more than I originally paid for them, even after discounting for inflation.

[Okla-homey]

I know you're partial to your .45 auto for a handgun, but I get just as big a kick out of listening to fellers argue about the relative virtues of the 9mm vs 10mm vs the 40 caliber or the 38 special vs the 357.



The thing is, the good 'ol .45ACP was originally developed because soldiers and Marines armed with .38 and .45Colt couldn't reliably stop hopped-up half-naked Filipino insurgents during the decades long Phillipine Insurrection following our acquisition of that real estate in that glorious bit of late nineteenth century US imperialism called the Spanish-American War.:D

9mm rather approximates .38, although with a bit more zip.

Therefore, IMHO, the .45ACP remains King of Personal Defence rounds. Especially in jacketed hollow-point flavors.

[Jerk]

38 special vs the 357

This so very simple. At the range when teaching the new-to-guns wife how to shoot a revolver in this caliber for home defense, you let her shoot .38 special only.

Then, when you get home and it's time to store the pistol in the nightstand, insert 6 rounds of .357 Magnum in the cylinder and don't tell her it's anything different than what she shot at those paper targets.

[Rogue]

Uncanny how much Jerk and I think and act alike.
Mrs. Rogue has never shot .357 rounds through her S&W. But it's loaded with 'em. She prefers her M9 though and I can't hit a thing with it.

So, Homey, you're gettin' a new gun right? Just deciding on caliber?

[Okla-homey]

Uncanny how much Jerk and I think and act alike.
Mrs. Rogue has never shot .357 rounds through her S&W. But it's loaded with 'em. She prefers her M9 though and I can't hit a thing with it.

So, Homey, you're gettin' a new gun right? Just deciding on caliber?

I'm gonna buy one of those Rem model 700's in stainless w/a synthetic stock. Just trying to decide between .30-06 and 7mm Rem Mag. You guys have helped me make up my mind towards .30-06. Especially since I already have a ton of it on hand. Some of it is even match grade -- one of my subordinates used to compete at Camp Casey for the USAF team.:D Light loads, but tack-driving rounds.

[captain_surly]

I'm gonna buy one of those Rem model 700's in stainless w/a synthetic stock. Just trying to decide between .30-06 and 7mm Rem Mag. You guys have helped me make up my mind towards .30-06. Especially since I already have a ton of it on hand. Some of it is even match grade -- one of my subordinates used to compete at Camp Casey for the USAF team.:D Light loads, but tack-driving rounds.

The Remengton Model 700 in 30-06 is a solid choice. Academy has them here for $459. I slightly prefer the Ruger M77 Hawkeye. Either way invest an extra hundy or so in optics. I have a a Leupold 2X7 Vari-x 2 on my Ruger and would be comfortable shooting anything but a Grizzley Bear with it. Simply put, when properly sighted the bullet strikes within a very small circle where the crosshairs meet.

[achiro]

When I was reloading a lot several years ago, there were many more choices for 30-06 and they shot very well. You could easily out perform the 7mag. There may be more choices available with the 7mag now.
I am of the opinion that if you are getting a new rifle it should be for a different caliber. But I know guys that have a few different rifles in the same caliber set up for different grain set ups(one varmit, one deer, one bear, etc)

FWIW, I bought a .300 WSM 3 years ago and it is my go to rifle now, I love it.