Doe Dumper

For some reason my Vanguard in 7mm Rem Mag is a slobberknocker....I dont shoot it too many times without feeling it. That is shooting the 175's in it though.

oldelkhunter

Different design stock I guess may cause that



Exactly . I may also add that shooting at game with a 7 rem mag and a 300 win mag all these years and I have yet to see a clearcut difference between them none at all if you ask me. I think the original designer of the 7 Rem mag knew what he was doing when this cartridge was designed. On the other hand my 300 WSM is easier to control from the bench 180 grain @ 2950 and I find more accurate then the 300 WIN.

eldeguello

Yes, I can. To be fair about such a comparison, it would be necessary to shoot the 7mm Rem. Mag.with a maximum load of the heaviest bullet it will handle, then rebarrel the rifle with an identical weight barrel in .300 Win. Mag., then shoot a maximum load with it using the most comparable bullet weight in the .300. Right??

So we'll use a 175-grain bullet in the 7 Mag., and a 180-grainer in the 300 Win. Mag. Only five grains difference, and with max loads (NOT factory loads!!) in each, almost the same MV's as well!

My 7mm Rem. Mag. (26" Ruger No. 1B) will attain a MV of 3070 FPS with a 175-grain bullet. And, it is possible to fire a 180-grain bullet at 3100 FPS from a 26" .300 Win. Mag.

So, I'm going to use the formula at:

http://www.biggameinfo.com/RecoilCalc.aspx

to do my calculations. My 7mm Rem Mag., loaded, weights 8.5 pounds with scope mounted and sling. IT produces 28 foot-pounds of recoil. The .300 Win Mag., shooting that 180-grainer at 3100 FPS from a rifle identical in every way with my 7 Mag. produces 30.9 foot-pounds, assuming it takes 5 more grains of powder to do it.

So what is 3 more foot-pounds of recoil?? Considering that the .220 Swift has around 6 foot-pounds, this extra 3 foot-pounds is totally insignificant!

What really matters here is the shape of the stock, how it fits you and how this recoil is applied to your body. I have fired lever-action .30/30's that cracked my cheekbone pretty badly, and .300 Weatherbys and .300 Rem. Ultra-Mags that were downright pleasant to fire. So if you are considering buying a 7mm Rem. Mag. instead of a .300 due to recoil considerations, just be sure to get a stock on whatever you buy that will not beat you up when you are shooting.(Personally, I do not believe there's enough difference between the way either of these rounds perfoms on game to really prefer one over the other-just put the bullet where it belongs, and either will do the job!)

If you want to compare other ammo, gun weights, velocity levels, etc.,just go on that site & plug in the numbers!

SwampCollie

I have shot several rifles in both. I've found that shooting position has a lot to do with recoil... always does. Bench and prone hurt in a heavy hitter. Next consideration is weight, lighter the rifle, harder the punch. Followed closely by stock configuration and recoil pad. Lastly, bullet weight... just my experiences. The build of a shooter has a lot to do with how much recoil you can take as well... not to mention practice and experience with such things.

Having acctually shot Browning A-bolts in both calibers on the same day, I can say that there is a difference in punch, at least I thought there was. There is no difference in blast. They are both loud, and noise makes me want to jump more than kick. Shooting them kneeling, offhand, or supported standing, I don't think either are that terrible. Sit on the bench, and you can tell the 300 from the 7mm. Someone posted up 85%..... I guess if I could quantify it that would be close. It ain't much, but its there and you can tell.

EKM

One effective solution, put some time in with 338's, 375's, 416's, etc. etc. and all of a sudden you'll find BOTH the 7mmRemMag and the 300WinMagto bejust plumb easy and a pure joy to shoot recreationally.

SwampCollie

Thats kinda what happened with me ironically....

HEAD0001

PUT PERFECTLY. I wish people would just throw their charts away and get out and shoot what they have. Tom.

iloveto4x4

I notice the differance between my 300WM and my mom's 7RM. I can only stand to shoot about 15-20 rds from a bench with my 300, I can shoot her 7mm all day. Hers is a stainless stalker and mine is a Ruger M77 mk2 laminate.

DM

Many years ago i decided to build a switch bbl rifle, using a left hand 700 Rem. action and numerous Douglas bbls, to test bullets with. All of the bbls were full sizeblanks, the same length and diameter so the same stock could be used. I had a Lyman target scope on this gun.

As i was into bullet design/mfg., and living in Alaska,i was testing heavy bullets for DG. My test showed me that the 175 NP from a 7mm Rem. mag. out performed many of the bigger calibers.

One day i was testing the 300 Win. mag. with 200 NP's against the 7 Rem. with 175 NP's. I fired the 7mm and then switched the bbl to the 300 Win.Mag.. First thing i noticed was enough added recoil that i had to be VERY carefull to keep from having the scope hit me. I was surprised how much more recoil the 300 had over the 7mm, and the 7mm 175 NP would do anything the 300 with 200 NP's would do in my test.

When i got back to the shop that evening, the first thing i did was to change out the Lyman scope to a Weaver T seriesthat hadmore eye relief.

DM

Doe Dumper

So the 7MM Mag with 175's would handle most anything on the continent?My Weatherby shoots them better than it does anything I have tried so far. Seems only right that with a case capacity that large it would like the heavier bullets.