30-06 or 7 Rem mag?

[bobcat]

A good bullet out of 7mm will outperform a poor bullet out of 30-06.  A good bullet out of a 30-06 will outperform a poor bullet out of a 7mm.   Use the same bullet type in each, and 99 elk out of 100 won't be able to tell any difference.

I have to disagree.


It would be 100 out of 100 elk that can't tell the difference.

[Bob33]

Bobcat, you just have to concede that one of the those 100 elk is going to be a genius and a ballistics expert who studies foot/pound of energy tables.

[GreggHunts2hard4u]

go with the 7mm Rem Mag. and reload ur bullets u will be soo happy. if u wanna blow a big hole in somthing use nosler acxubonds hahaha. my dad shot a muley buck at 150yrds with 7mm Rem Mag reloaded with 165gr accubonds and there was no exit wound and a fist sized entrance hole!!! kinda a meat waster tho. if i didnt shoot a Rem 300 win mag i would shoot a 7mm mag

[DuckDr.Duke]

Light meaning what? Bullet diameter? Weight? Velocity/energy? I think bullet construction is the biggest factor in performance on game and the '06 will do just fine against any elk with the proper bullet.

How about 180 grain Nosler Partition, 2900 ft per sec. A 7mm shooting 165 Nosler Partition will drop an elk in its place. There is a huge difference between a magnum round and non-magnum round (energy and velocity). I am not saying the 06 can't shoot elk, because it is a well proven rifle. But, I think it does not have the down range velocity and energy, compared to a 7mm magnum.  Oh well, agree to disagree

[bobcat]

There is a huge difference between a magnum round and non-magnum round (energy and velocity).

Boy the marketing guys for gun and ammo manufacturers sure fooled a lot of people when they came up with the term "magnum."   

[high country]

must be compareing the 7mm tcu with the 7mm ultra.

[Tony 270]

Using Federal loads, the 7RM's three best loads that I checked are in the 1730-1777 ft-lbs of energy range at 400 yards. That was for the 160 Partition, Accubond and Tipped TBBC.

Looking at the '06 I quickly found two loads that are 1922 and 1991 ft-lbs at 300 yards, one of which has 1741 ft-lbs at 400 yards (the MRX). Less than 100 yards difference, to no difference.

You can take the MRX load of the '06 and put it against any of the three 7RM loads and you have equal power for elk at the 400 yard mark. How is that a "huge" difference? That is ZERO difference in energy and considering the velocity is still 2087fps, that won't be a factor either.

I can hear it now, what about the trajectory? Okay, with a 200 yard zero, the '06 is 23 inches low at 400 yards while the 7RM is between 19.5-20 inches low. Three inches won't make any difference on an elk at 400 yards, especially with BDC reticles, turrets, etc.

Just take which ever one you like more, flip a coin, get the rifle on sale... it won't matter unless you need the "magnum" name. They're both good.

[Bob33]

Light meaning what? Bullet diameter? Weight? Velocity/energy? I think bullet construction is the biggest factor in performance on game and the '06 will do just fine against any elk with the proper bullet.

How about 180 grain Nosler Partition, 2900 ft per sec. A 7mm shooting 165 Nosler Partition will drop an elk in its place. There is a huge difference between a magnum round and non-magnum round (energy and velocity). I am not saying the 06 can't shoot elk, because it is a well proven rifle. But, I think it does not have the down range velocity and energy, compared to a 7mm magnum.  Oh well, agree to disagree

I suggest you do a bit of reading on ballistics.  A 7mm 165 grain bullet at 2950 ft/second has about 3200 foot pounds of energy at the muzzle. A .308 180 grain bullet at 2900 ft/second has about 3360 foot pounds of energy at the muzzle.  That's not an agree to disagree point; your conclusions are simply incorrect.

[DuckDr.Duke]

Bob33:This is directly from Federal: 30.06-180 Gr. Nosler Partition 2730 fps @ muzzle / 2978 Ft lbs energy +1.97 / 100yd- 2535 fps / 2567 ft lbs +0.00 / 200yds 2349fps / 2205 ft lbs -8.23 / 300yds 2173fps / 1887ft lbs -23.85 / 400 yds 2006fps / 1609ft lbs -48.15 / 500 yds 1849fps / 1366ft lbs

I suggest you do a bit of reading .  A 7mm 165 grain bullet at 2950 ft/second has about 3200 foot pounds of energy at the muzzle. A .308 180 grain bullet at 2900 ft/second has about 3360 foot pounds of energy at the muzzle.  That's not an agree to disagree point; your conclusions are simply incorrect.

I would have to say you are wrong, you are comparing a .308 load to 7mm load, not a 3006 load to a 7mm. Yes, the .308 bullet and 06 are the same, but different powder charges. I don't shoot a .308, no comment on that rounds. Didn't this forum start with what rifle choice 7mm or 3006, not the stats?

You should read your stats before you jump on me. I suggest you read the 06 and 7mm ballistic charts, I was talking about the 06 in the first sentence, not the 7mm. I reload for both of these rifles.

I was also saying that I agree to disagree with the rifle of choice between a 3006 and 7mm, not the loads. Get with it man. I think both rifles (7mm or 3006) are highly qualified to kill elk, I personally prefer the 7mm.

 

[high country]

duke, I am of the belief that bob generically used the .308 measurement as a baseline to coincide with the velocity, thinking that any self respecting armchair ballistician would know the 308winnie is not going to shove the 180 gr bullet at 2900fps without trouble. the nomenclature of said round is irrevelent to its terminal performance.

[GreggHunts2hard4u]

Yup i switched to Nosler Partitions this last year. ive used accubonds for a few years and wasnt impressed at all by how they performed huge entrance holes and no exit hole with 180g shooting out of a 300 min mag. didnt get a chance to see how my partitions performed this year tho. ive heard alot of good things about them

[gadwall]

Here is a trajectory comparison of two Federal loads from Federal's website: a 180 grain Nosler Accubond in 30-06, and a 160 Nosler Accubond in 7mm Remington Magnum.  Both zeroed at 200 yards.

[smg id=10066]

That will do nicely!!

Gadwall

[7mag.]

You can't go wrong either way. I have both. I prefer my 7mag. because it is the rifle I have been hunting with since I was 16, but I have killed plenty of deer with my .06, and wouldn't hesitate to shoot and elk or bear with it. Marine snipers in Viet Nam, used the 30.06 a lot out to and past 1000 yards, it's a great round, but the 7mag. shoots a little flatter, especially at long ranges.

[Schwag173]

The #1 question for me is what ranges will you be firing?  The country I hunted (elk) in central Idaho demanded long-range performance so I traded my .30-'06 for a 7mm Weatherby Magnum.  My scope was zeroed at 300 yards and I religiously practiced at 300-500 yards.  If your ranges are under 300 yards, I'd stick with the .30-'06.  Be sure to use good, heavy bullets for bears; 180-200gr.  180s are good for elk and I love 165s for deer.  Whatever your choices; paractice, practice, practice.

[Bob33]

duke, I am of the belief that bob generically used the .308 measurement as a baseline to coincide with the velocity, thinking that any self respecting armchair ballistician would know the 308winnie is not going to shove the 180 gr bullet at 2900fps without trouble. the nomenclature of said round is irrevelent to its terminal performance.

Yes; thank you: .308 bullet, not .308 caliber rifle.  As for the velocity of 2900 ft/second, that was quoted from an earlier post.