If I were in the market,it would come down to the 300 WM or the 7mm RM.

Quick trip over to midway shows 71 available loads for the 300 WM vs. 37 for the 300 WSM. Of those, the 300 WM offers more non premium but effective loads that are less expensive. The 300WM also provides heavier grained bullet options.

The 7mm RM offers 61 bullet choices, many of which are premium or heavy for caliber loads. They are also less expensive than the 300 WM offerings.

Either the 300 WM or the 7mm RM can easily handle the game and range the OP originally mentioned.
To the OP: the nod goes to the 300 WM, IMO, but cost and recoil might be the most important factor in your decision. In that case, the 7mm RM prevails.

Good point game stalker, I was only considering reloads and not factoring commercial offerings

I know what you are saying about the bullet offerings and prices but.............if we all based our decisions on this, we would all shoot a 30.06. Just saying.....

I have to force myself to think about factory loads for anything for others cause I've been reloading since 1972 and bullet caster started not long after that and it's been quite a few years (well over 30) since I even bought any centerfire ammo of any kind!

CLd,
the answer to this IMO seems pretty simple. The OP is only 17 yrs. old. We know nothing about his finances or his ability to handle recoil. Finances may be a consideration for anyone here, so that deserved mention. The OP knows his financial circumstances and can purchase accordingly. The point is, IMO, the 300 WM and 7mm RM have proven themselves in the game fields over the decades and premium and non premium bullets are readily available in light and heavy loads for smaller and heavier games species. Both said calibers will handle Olympic/Roosevelt elk at his stated range.

Where deer and pronghorn size game is concerned, a practiced shooter w/a .308 winchester can kill said game handily out to 500 yds. Magnums in most cases aren't required. A magnum in this case is a wise choice and simply icing on the cake.

Every shooter should be well versed at shot placement at the ranges they intend to engage game. Practice ='s shot placement skill and practice involves plenty of expense and in this case, recoil, as most of us more experienced folks know. Throwing out range distance expectations is the easy part. The real work is reaching our objective.

gunnerhmr, I posted 2 links on page 3 with the records and it even has pictures! First post on page 3 of this forum.

Now lets have a little looksie at your statement. While yes there can be some fantastic information gleaned from bench gun shooters, a lot of it can't be used in the hunting rifle world simply because of the nature of the rifles. Bench guns are heavily barreled with blue printed actions and many other customized parts and gizmos. I don't know about other hunters, but this old man here aint carrying a 25+# rifle out on an Elk hunt! So we, as HUNTERS, have to find loads that will work from the rifles we can carry out in the woods. Barrel harmonics play a key role in shots past 300 yards and the hunting profiled barrels of our rifles have much more "whip" than a bench gun.

Like StalkingBear and many others on this forum, I have rolled my own ammo for many many years so taking factory options in ammo into account for me is a bit difficult seeing as I have bought very little factory ammo in 40+ years. We have a fairly broad knowledge base on many cartridges and the vast majority of our knowledge is based on performance on GAME ANIMALS not paper targets.

Now, the op said within 400 yards on his post. Of the 3 mentioned cartridge choices, an Elk wont know a bit of difference between any of them at what killed it as long as he uses a good performing bullet with good TERMINAL BALLISTICS to get the job done. I myself am not a big fan of the magnums simply for the cost and recoil. Inside of 400 yards I can tell you that I would take anything on the North American Continent including Brown Bears with the trusty old .30/06 and HAVE done so!

my gripe is all those efficiency claims
its not anymore efficient, your claim is 2860 fps with a 210, vs the wm with a 190 at 2900 with 9 gr more powder
1) a 300 wsm will not run a 210 that fast as it comes from the factory due to longer seating length of the long action box mag and perhaps a longer throat, so to shoot a 210 in a factory wsm your using up a lot of powder space for bullet storage.
2) also your wsm has a 29" barrel
3) the custom barrel is faster than a production barrel, at least every one I ever chrony'd was
my 6.5 gibbs will flat outrun a 264 win mag with 9 gr less powder, but it has a 30 " barrel, that 1/2 foot of barrel doesn't make it efficient.
you will always hit max pressure in a smaller case using less powder
Inherrent accuracy
once you full house customize a rifle, inherent accuracy is a moot point, I have a rifles built by some world class smiths, they have case capacities anywhere from 20 couple to 122 gr of H2o they will all shoot bugholes from the bench, very little difference in group sizes which cannot be proven to be related to inherent accuracy
RR

Look at all the available cartridges for the 7MM, versus that of the .300 WSM, lightweight to heavyweight.

The 7mm and the .308 are the best calibers for most of us that can only afford or desire (1) gun that works for many differing types of hunting animals.

You need to take the "records" with a grain of salt. The quality of parts that go into rifles is MUCH better these days. The number of "match" barrel manufacturers has grown exponentially in the last decade, as has action and stock makers. Scopes have gotten much much better too, better tracking, glass, parallax, everything...And we all know when a record is broken with a certain cartridge then everyone and their brother must have one because it's "the best"...even tho the parts, shooter and guy that screwed the gun together have much more to do with it then the piece of brass holding the powder and bullet.

Look at factory rifles these days...a decade ago if you had a factory rifle shoot sub-MOA it was a "shooter" and "rare"...now if you get one that doesn't shoot sub-MOA it's junk and needs returned...

Gee Golly!!!!!!! After reading a BUNCH of posts online on different groups/pages/forums, I'm going to have to throw most of my ol homemade guns in the trash! All anybody has to do is ask a question and they'll get a LOT more answers varying as widely as possible. It pisses me off that I have to throw away my whole collection and start over again every time I read a bunch of posts online! If not for this I might have became a multimillionaire!

Jeep, I have to disagree with you a little there bud. Rifles of today are getting better but the fact remains that rifles built pre 75 or so were things of beauty and functionality. You take a factory Model 70 of today and put it next to one of my pre 64 model 70's and you can bet mine would win hands down in both beauty as well as precision. I wouldn't give a cup of spit for over 3/4 of the rifles made today. The terms hand built and precision hand craftsmanship are things of the past. As well as quality control and people giving a rats rear about what product they turn out. 8 out of 10 rifles you go out and buy today you have to do SOMETHING to them to make them shoot well or feel well. Be it a trigger job, relieving some wood in the barrel channel, bedding, or something that you SHOULDN'T have to do to a brand new rifle. Things that rifle makers of the past would have had the care to do because they gave a damn about what people thought of their work. Nowadays, if it can't be done on a CNC machine then you youngins are totally lost. Quality craftsmanship seems to just be a thing of the past and we are at a sorry loss for it.

I got busy studying for finals last week and didn't even think to check back on my question. Thanks everybody for all the feedback!!! From what I heard, it seems like it won't make too much of a difference either way. I don't plan on doing competition matches or anything like that. Now I don't know too much about reloading so I would probably be buying factory ammo. I'm guessing even with factory ammo each caliber still has similar ballistics. I will go with either the 7mm or the 300 win. I didn't realize how hard it is to find 28 nosler ammo.

Either the 7mag or 300WM will suit you fine for life. If I were to choose a factory made gun that will shoot right out of the box, I would save up the money for a Remington 700 Sendero. That would be my choice. Save up for some good optics that makes all the difference in the world. Good luck to you.

The Sendero is nice rifle. It seems a tad heavy though. I think I'm gonna go with either a rem SPS stainless or a tikka super lite.

when you get past 300 yards the extra weight helps,an example, I have 2 7mm rifles,one is a 7mm stw, it weighs 8.5# ready to hunt, the other isa 7mm Allen mag, both have lilja 9 twist barrels, both will shoot sub 1/2" moa at 100, the stw will not break 8" at 750 yards, the 7mm AM will do 3", the 7mm AM weighs 14#
RR

For a lot of people, me included, a little bit heavier rifle aids in off hand shooting as well. I steady up MUCH easier with a 10-12 pound rifle. I usually do tons of hog hunting over the spring and summer and early fall so I have to take a lot of off hand shots at running sounders. A heavier rifle aids a lot in making smooth sweeps for running shots.

Best post of this entire thread! :lolabove:

Thank you BTM! I knew at least somebody would get a chuckle out of that! Seriously though a lot of times a poster will suddenly read that what has worked for him (or anybody) for YEARS is now extinct and no longer worthy if you believe some of the posts. I'm not talking specifically about any posts in this thread or any other, just keep watching when someone posts a very simple basic question (perhaps too basic?), and all of a sudden the game is on & unless it's the latest whizzbang magnum or a 293 Bremingchester supermag Loudenboomer it's not effective any more! This is more a general observation compiled from forums & facebook groups. I do have to admit to having done the same thing in the past, but try to carefully think out my posts before making that final click. Maybe I should have made a new thread for this by itself instead of inserting it in an existing thread?

WS
 

The best gun should be one that you can shoot well. We all want lots of power and range however recoil and rifle weight matter a lot!

Long ago now many found that what a 7mm R. magnum could do was about all most could shoot well. That's still true.

Today I like the 'modern' Kimber Montana's I have in 270 WSM and 7mm WSM.

To each his own.

The Kimber Montana in this picture is of my 270 WSM with the Leu. tactical scope.

Good thread! Before I put together any of the OP's choices I would get a nice 30-06 built (Mauser or Springfield) to my specifications by someone that makes accurate rifles and hunt with it until I see a reason to get something with more power or velocity. Learn where it hits out to 500 yards and burn a lot of ammo doing it. Might take a bunch of years to find anything less than acceptable performance from that rifle. Don't do as I did, building rifle after rifle testing the 6.5, 270, 7MM, .308, .338, .358 bore diameters in multiple case sizes, trying to find something that measurably outperformed my Springfield 30-06. Thank God I still have that first custom 30-06!

LOL I totally missed this post SB!!! Danged if I aint right alongside ya bud! Hell I only have 5 rifles made in this century!! The rest are from 1864-1973. Except for a few custom builds off actions 60+ years old. I guess all them old rifles are junk even though every single one of them that shoot (a few are wall hanger military rifles) and shoot dang well! I have several rifles made pre 70 that I would match up against ANY factory rifle made today. Some German built, Some Belgium, Some American, and Some English. Rifles today just don't measure up in my LONG experience of shooting. It's pretty damn sad when you have to spend 2500+ on a damn rifle just to get a rifle that you could have gotten the same quality in a STANDARD factory made rifle 50 years ago from the Winchester factory for a couple hundred bucks and a smile! Even more sad is the fact that these kids today think the quality is better today!! Bunch of plastic junk with absolutely no care for detail of craftsmanship! :sad:

I prefer a 30 cal so the 300 WM would get the nod for me. 7 mag would be second.

If you reload I would say a 28 Nosler, just because I like to be different lol but in my eyes 300 win mag and 7mm mag will be 6 in one hand half dozen in the other. Both ammo you can find everywhere, both do great out to long range. If you don't reload and still want to poke at distance I would look and see which one has a better bullet selection in factory ammo at shooting at distance. Both have been proven time and time again....

But in all honesty if it is for elk and deer under 400 yards I would just pick something like a 30-06 or something along those lines. To me, with bullet technology, you won't reap the benefits of a magnum caliber unless you are hunting at extended ranges and reload. Because today you have stuff like Hornady Superformance that is pushing a 180gr bullet at 2820 fps and compared to 300 win mag Hornady standard factory load the 180 gr bullet is going 2960. Not much of a difference for me to justify buying a 300 win mag unless you reload.