7mm WSM VS 7mm rem mag
#1
Typical Buck
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2005
Location: northern colorado
Posts: 749

After owning both wsm and rem mag, I have come to the grand conclusion that: I cant hardly tell the difference between them with the same bullet. They both seem to be accurate, deadly on game and work best with 140-160 grain pills. The only difference I found was that the 140 grainer seemed to come out about 100-150 FPS faster out of the WSM on my rifle. Part of that was the special powders now available for short magnums. The Rem mag seemed less finicky about bullet brand or weight. I'd sacrifice a few FPS any day for accuracy. SOme folks saw the exact opposite in velocity. its too close to call in that respect.
The conclusion? I kept the WSM and got rid of the rem mag only because the WSM was set up to be a mountain rifle, lighter, shorter barrel.
My advice? go with the rem mag if your buying one and get it in a lighter premium rifle. EJ
The conclusion? I kept the WSM and got rid of the rem mag only because the WSM was set up to be a mountain rifle, lighter, shorter barrel.
My advice? go with the rem mag if your buying one and get it in a lighter premium rifle. EJ
Last edited by ejpaul1; 12-18-2009 at 05:59 AM.
#2

I'll stick with the 7mm Rem mag I already have-it's long since paid for and shoots great. I'd be somewhat concerned that the 7mm WSM won't be around as much (easily available ammo) in 10-20 years even though I reload.
#5

How many plus does that make me !?!?
Love the classic cartridges - 7MM Rem Mag, as flat as a .270 and hits like a .30-06 (gotta lov it !)
No need for a short mag....................ain't broke, don't fix it !!??
Here is mine in stainless;
http://www.sakoa7.net/
Love the classic cartridges - 7MM Rem Mag, as flat as a .270 and hits like a .30-06 (gotta lov it !)
No need for a short mag....................ain't broke, don't fix it !!??
Here is mine in stainless;
http://www.sakoa7.net/
#7
Fork Horn
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 260

After owning both wsm and rem mag, I have come to the grand conclusion that: I cant hardly tell the difference between them with the same bullet. They both seem to be accurate, deadly on game and work best with 140-160 grain pills. The only difference I found was that the 140 grainer seemed to come out about 100-150 FPS faster out of the WSM on my rifle. Part of that was the special powders now available for short magnums. The Rem mag seemed less finicky about bullet brand or weight. I'd sacrifice a few FPS any day for accuracy. SOme folks saw the exact opposite in velocity. its too close to call in that respect.
The conclusion? I kept the WSM and got rid of the rem mag only because the WSM was set up to be a mountain rifle, lighter, shorter barrel.
My advice? go with the rem mag if your buying one and get it in a lighter premium rifle. EJ
The conclusion? I kept the WSM and got rid of the rem mag only because the WSM was set up to be a mountain rifle, lighter, shorter barrel.
My advice? go with the rem mag if your buying one and get it in a lighter premium rifle. EJ
I'm not going to fight for the WSM over the standard version.
#9
Typical Buck
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2005
Location: northern colorado
Posts: 749

Yeah, another buddy of mine up in wyoming has the 7MM RSAUM and likes it of course but he has been as well contemplating the differences and he says he wouldnt want to live on the difference between them.
Now, a 7mm that I am blowing the whistle on (for myself only) is the 7MM ultramag. Man, for the extra FPS you get, you sure pay for it in recoil. The ammo is astronomical as well. I cant shoot far enough to justify one.
Now, a 7mm that I am blowing the whistle on (for myself only) is the 7MM ultramag. Man, for the extra FPS you get, you sure pay for it in recoil. The ammo is astronomical as well. I cant shoot far enough to justify one.