ORIGINAL: HEAD0001
The original comparison was between the 280 and the 30-06. The 7mm Rem was not even mentioned(by me). I agree with you on the mag, but I disagree on the 280(remember most hunters do not reload). I was merely trying to defend my position on the 280 vs 30-06. I do not prefer the 30-06. As a matter of fact I enjoy doing most of my deer and elk hunting with my 1886 Winchester in 45-70.
I do not believe an elk guide would throw anyone out of camp. However I do believe he would rather see a 30-06 with 180's or 200's, insted of a 280 with 150's or 175's.I think the 280 has it's place. The problem is it can be grouped with alot ofcartridges that are pretty much the same.I just believe that in this current market alot of the cartridges, and some of the oldies are going to go the way of, dare I say 284 Winchester. I believe the 280 is one of those cartridges.
You appear to be struggling with this whole physics thing. There are two components to the kinetic energy a bullet generates: mass and velocity. You can get the same result by pushing a light bullet faster or by using a slower heavier bullet.
This is why a 5.7 will penetrate class III body armor but a 9mm wont. So much for your big bullet theory.
If you think that 20 grains in bullet weight between a 7mm and a 308 big game bulletshas any dropoff in performance than you're fooling yourself. A 150 gr bullet pushed faster than a 180 grain bullet can out perform the 180 gr.
It's simple physics. If everything though like you we would all use the biggets bullet we could get our hands on. Fortunately we have realized that mass is only part of the equation and not the most important factor.
A 7mm bullet shape is closer to the scientific "ideal" bullet, so it moves more efficiently through the air, enabling it to go faster with less powder and retain more energy downrange.
I should have known you use a 45-70. It's one of what I call "the big wanderers". It's a big bullet that kind of wanders out there at a lesiurely pace. Super ineffecient.