RE: .270 vs. 7mm Rem Mag
 

i think it comes down to " how do you like recoil " ?


i think both are excellent rounds for deer. just that the 7mm rem mag has more selection of bullets out their and grain sizes to choose from.
if shooting in texas at ranges like i see o those hunting shows. i would go with the 7mm rem mag just because i don't mind recoil and i don't reload so it works better for me.

JMHO

RE: .270 vs. 7mm Rem Mag
 

The .270 is a great round. I used to hunt with one myself until I started reloading. Like Quilly said, there are a lot more options available for the 7mm mag. I personally don't have a problem with the recoil, but you can load some 120 or 140 gr rounds that kick considerably less. For larger game, 160 and 175 gr bullets loaded up will stop just about anything on the continent. Either way, both calibers are great and both are capable of taking large game.

RE: .270 vs. 7mm Rem Mag
 

I would go with the 270. However I would rather just go to work than to hunt with or shoot any 7mm Mag. The performance of the 7mm mag compared to the extra recoil and muzzle blast just is not justified. I have chronographed dozens of them and they seldom exceed 280 ballistics. Just my opinion but I think the 7 mag is by far the most over rated cartridge in the world.

RE: .270 vs. 7mm Rem Mag
 

James B-I have chronographed several 7mm mags and a few 280's myself and my findings are just the opposite of your own.I have found that the 280 is underloaded due to it being chambered in some of the older remington pumps.The 7mm mag's do offer noticeable more velocity than the 280.As for the 7mm mag being the most over rated -this is not possible as the 30-06 has that title all locked up.

RE: .270 vs. 7mm Rem Mag
 

stubblejumper preach it bro. I would if I was you get the 7 mag. I do like the 270 but I don't have a plain 270 I got the one on steriods the 270 weatherby mag and love it. But I do have a 7 mm mag and love it. I can load 140 gr bullets at 3300+ fps with no problem at all. I can go up to 175 gr to almost 3000 fps and have a great elk moose gun. I would not feel under gunned at all in NA. It is truly one of the most versital rounds out there. It is on my short list of all around guns for NA. BUt both will do what you want to. If you hand load deffinately get the 7 mag. YOu wont regret it at all.

Brian

RE: .270 vs. 7mm Rem Mag
 

I own both now. Well the 270 served me and I loved it then. I have taken all I can take in Sask with the 270 from a 15" loper to a 50" bull moose but I always worried about it when chasing the big critters. The 7 mag would be my choice, it can do what the 270 can but better. IMO it is all you'll need for NA game. Recoil is more but definitely tolerable, like mentioned bullet selection isn't as limited as the 270.

I am finding out it is even more capable with handloading. I don't do it know but have access to a guy who does and is widely respected. That will be my next purchase and adventure. That being said I have a buddy who is an execptional hunter and taken many trophies with his 7 mag and all with Premium Factory mo. He use to be a true and blue 06 man, BTW.

[Deleted]
 

[Deleted by Admins]

RE: .270 vs. 7mm Rem Mag
 

I have a 270 and a 7 Rem Mag and a hunting buddy has a 280(we both have 300 Win Mags as our "real" big game rifles)My 7 Rem Mag will chrony a 140 Ballistic Tip at 3300-3335fps, with 67 grs of IMR 4350.I've loaded 68 grs for a bit more speed but the accurracy dropped off a bit.Buddy's 280 will nearly hit 3000 with a 139 Hornady SST.I've never chronyed my 270 but it will probably do about the same as a 280.I know which one I'd rather be shooting when that 170 class buck is standing 350+ yards away and there's no way to get closer.I have to agree with stubblejumper on the 30-06 having the "most overrated cartridge award" all sewed up.The 7 Rem Mag is usually thought of as being overrated by people who have never used and handloaded for the cartridge.It's true, most factory ammo is way under potential and it's not a giant killer like some people believe just because it says "magnum" on the case.If you think of the 7mm Rem Mag as a 270/280 on steroids you will see it from a different perspective.The 270 and 7mm Weatherbys can be considered the same. Shoot nothing heavier than a 140 for deer and the 7 Rem Mag will shoot flat enough out to where most of us should be shooting.As for recoil,if that's an issue get a 243.There's virtually no difference between the 270 and the 7 Rem Mag when rifle weight is taken into account.But then again I don't feel a whole lot of difference between my 7 Rem Mag and my 300 Win Mag either.

RE: .270 vs. 7mm Rem Mag
 

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote<font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
I am about to buy a new whitetail rifle. Since it will be primarily a whitetail rifle, I am leaning towards the .270. However, since I want to make occasional elk hunts, I was wondering if I should get the 7mm instead. I guess the question is, will the 7mm be too much for average Texas whitetail hunting? And will it recoil substantially harder than the .270?
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>

RE: .270 vs. 7mm Rem Mag
 

With my 280 I was reading 3040 fps. With my 7 mag I was reading 3110. Both with 150 gr X bullet. However the 7 mag required 21 gr power powder for 70 fps difference. Never made sense to me to live with the extra recoil for a totaly insigniferent ballistics difference. That same small difference held true through the total range of bullet wieghts I tried. All loads were handloads for both rifles in my last test. I had one 7 mm winchester that would not equal the 280 ballistics. As I reached max loads on that 7 mm the velocity would start to fall. It could not burn all of the powder with the heavier loads regardless of primer or compaction. I have not hunted with a factory round for 26 years.