RE: 300 Weatherby vs 7 mm REM MAG
 

You could go with the 30-378 Weatherby if you want more than the 300 RUM!

RE: 300 Weatherby vs 7 mm REM MAG
 

I own both and there's no question the .300 Wby is more gun than the 7mm Rem Mag. If I was hunting bears I'd certainly want the .300 over the 7mm.

RE: 300 Weatherby vs 7 mm REM MAG
 

I have a Weatherby Vanguard in 300 WBY Magnum and a Remington 700 BDL in 7mm REM Mag and it is my impression that the Weatherby actually has less felt recoil and is more pleasant to shoot than the Remington, even though the Weatherby fires the more powerful carteridge. Therefore, you also should consider the recoil pad and stock of the rifles you are looking at as well as the calibers. Another consideration is, if you are on a budget, ammunition is more expensive for the 300 WBY Mag, though it is by no means cheap for the 7 mm Rem Mag. Looking at the balistics of the two rounds, while the Weatherby is the more powerful, I think it is likely that either would easily kill any game animal in North America, including large bears, with decent bullet placement.

Californiadoctor

RE: 300 Weatherby vs 7 mm REM MAG
 

The .300 Weatherby is substantially more gun than the 7mm Rem Mag. I have both, and like both. But if I were hunting Bears, something that if it got mad at me and decided, unlike other animals that almost always run away, to kill me, I'd have to stop it with my gun, I'd go with a .340 Weatherby Magnum. The .30-378 is one cannon too.

The .338 Winchester Mag, as is mentioned above, is a thumper too, but won't gain you enough over the .300 Weatherby to bother.

I wouldn't go with a 7mm Remington Mag for big bears.