Author Topic: 7mm RM or 30-06 for Elk? (Read 6105 times)

ourabmen · « **on:** December 30, 2003, 12:32:04 PM »

Hello and thanks in advance. I am planning my first Elk hunt next year and need some advice on these two rounds: 7mm RM or 30-06. I have been reading ahere for a couple fo weeks and admit that I am as confused as when I started.

After quite a bit of reading and thinking (always a dangerous under taking) I narrowed it down to these two rounds based on some expereince with shooting some of the candidates. The .338 WM and 300 WM were just not enjoyable for me to shoot, while the 7mm RM and 30-06 are both pleasent enough to me to spend the required time at the range to make the most of this trip. Secondly, I just am not a "400 yd shot guy", stalking and field craft are important and integral to my enjoyment of being out in the field.

Currently I hunt white tail's in Oklahoma with a .243 Ruger MK77II and like the flexibility of these rounds to double as a good deer gun should I ever wont to change things up a bit,

Thanks so much for your input and patience.

Sincerely,

OUrabmen

Lawdog · « **Reply #1 on:** December 30, 2003, 12:46:47 PM »

Seeing that you're not into "long range busting" then I would go with the .30-06. A Nosler 165 gr. Partition will work just fine on any elk walking out to whatever range you are comfortable shooting. Lawdog

huntsman · « **Reply #2 on:** December 30, 2003, 03:11:21 PM »

Shooting the right loads there isn't much appreciable difference. The -06 is a bit more versatile and has more variety available in both handloads and factory loads. The 7 mag is a tad flatter with slightly better energy, but not noticeably so under 300 yards. You can probably get a better deal on an -06, since it is one of the most common calibers around. Really it is a coin flip; whichever suits your fancy will do the job nicely.

stork · « **Reply #3 on:** December 30, 2003, 09:10:13 PM »

Use the 30-06. An 06 with a good well constructed 180 grain bullet is enough for just about anything in north america if you hunt the way you say you hunt. A 150 grain is very well suited for deer.

Mikey · « **Reply #4 on:** December 31, 2003, 04:07:22 AM »

You can do anything with an 06 that you think you can do with a 7mm Mag. Even if you are not a 400 yd guy, I would take the 06 over the 7mm. Just my 2 cents worth. Mikey.

Muddyboots · « **Reply #5 on:** December 31, 2003, 05:22:47 AM »

Ok, I will be the lone dissenter on this. Yes, the 06 can do everything a 7 RM can up to a point. If you never intend to take a shot past 300 yds. (yeah right 6x6 standing broadside at 400) then the 06 is for you. You just dropped $450+ for license, god knows what if guided hunt, transportation costs, gear costs (like you won't buy the must have for an elk trip), vacatio time, countless hours on range, maintenance on vehicles etc. Personally, I want every edge I can get when I invest this much into a hunt. The 7 RM will give you an edge over the 06. It does shoot flatter (not much but it does). The 7 RM will out penetrate a 06 due to sectional density. This has been written about extensively and is a proven fact and not just an opinion. When you have the less than perfect broadside into a big old tough bull, you want and need maximum penetration. The 7 will do that for you. But if you NEVER will take a less than perfect shot and NEVER take over a 300 yd shot, then the 06 is for you. I just don't suscribe to the notion that someone can resist that temptation especially if it is the only bull you have seen and it is last day of hunt. Too much is invested and you want to maximize your ability under most circumstances. Unless you hunt elk on a regular basis, you will take those shots since you have limited opportunity. That is a fact of human behavior. I personally prefer the 300 WM and if you purchase one in slightly heavier rifle, the recoil isn't so bad as most folks think. How many times are you going to shoot it at elk? I shoot it with 200 gr Acubonds and it lays down the smack way better tan a 06 or 7RM can dream of doing. If you want to use it later, shoot with 165's and it is a much nicer deer rifle as well.
My 0.02!
Happy New Year Guys, it's been fun on the forum!
Muddyboots

helobill · « **Reply #6 on:** December 31, 2003, 06:13:32 AM »

Muddy Boots,
Guess I'll take the "penetration" argument to the extreme by saying your logic says a smaller diameter bullet that's really heavy will have the best penetration (which is a true statement providing the bullet doesn't change shape during that penetration). Eventually however, you penetrate through the animal and additional penetration is not advantageous. That's where terminal ballistics come in, you need good sectional density and penetration to get through the hide/bone/muscle to get to the boiler room, then you need a bullet that expands to make a good wound channel and cause enough damage to kill quickly. Lots of bullets do that and taking one aspect (sectional density) of design doesn't tell the whole story. Because by using just SD a 22 caliber bullet that weighed 180 grains moving 3000fps but didn't expand would NOT be a good elk round (kinda like what we found out about the M-16 when we started stabilizing them better than originally designed, they put a small hole directly through what they hit) but it would have GREAT sectional density (.531 vs .271 for a 180gr .308 and .319 for a 180gr 7mm). But the 300 WinMag shooting a 180gr is considered more than enough for elk. Guess what I'm saying is you reach a point where more penetration (SD and velocity related) isn't necessary and terminal performance become of greater importance. I think both the 30-06 and 7mm have ammo options that will perform acceptably and the disagreement will hinge on whether you think a .284" hole is big enough or if you want to make a .308" hole. Good performing bullets will expand to up to 3X that diameter. Does it make a difference on elk? I couldn't tell you, never shot one with either round but I'm sure folks on this board have, and some will argue you need to make a .338 hole (and we can take that up the ladder too and end up using .416 rigby's and 50BMGs :shock:

). Eventually enough is enough.
Where do I pay my nickle, cause I just spent it. :grin:
Bill

eroyd · « **Reply #7 on:** December 31, 2003, 08:03:08 AM »

Both rounds are similiar enough that the elk won't know the difference. I'd go for the slightly better reach of the 7mm because I have experienced the "long shot's the only shot senario", enough times that I went out and bought a 300 wby. I'm not an advocate of long shots but sometimes the set up is just right and being able to take advantage of it may make the difference. It has for me!
There is also the unfortunate situation of screwing up the 1st shot. ( it does happen ). If you wound an animal it is your duty to finish him ANY WAY you can, which may mean shooting a fleeing 1000 lb elk up the hoop. In this situation extreme bullet penetration is necessar,though this is more of a bullet choice question than the diff. of an '06 and a 7mm mag

Mikey · « **Reply #8 on:** December 31, 2003, 08:51:30 AM »

Muddyboots, Helobill and eroyd - nice arguements for either caliber and with straight factory ammo, whether normal or higher pressure loads like the Federal and Hornaday high end loads, the distance limitations would dictate the use of the 7mm over the 06. However, fer those of us who handload, the 06's 190 gn at the same velocity as the 7's 175 or the 06's 200 gn loadings and up give the handloader a more serious consideration for the 06. Truth is, it ain't the caliber, as we all know - it's where and how you place the boolet. This being said, whatever caliber ourabmen decides on will have to be the one he needs to practice with for those long shots. I think he will find that regardless of caliber, practice will be his main concern and learning where his loads hit at different ranges. I think he will find little advantage, if any, in the 7mm over the 06.

I think that if I was goind for Elk and wanted to use my 06, I would develop a 190 gn load that will shoot (accurately) to 500 yds - that should cover me. However, May the Good Lord help me if I find one of my 8mm Mausers accurate enough to shoot at that distance or if I can ever develop a long range heavy bullet load for my 444, 'cause then I'll prolly be too confoozed to figger out which one to shoot. LOL. Mikey.

Muddyboots · « **Reply #9 on:** January 01, 2004, 09:54:26 AM »

Hey Mikey,
Just curious, you stated 06 with 190 same velocity as 7RM with 175? My 175's come out of my No.1 at chronographed 2950 at 1/2 gr. under max load. My 300 WM will push 190's at 2950 (actually closer to 3050) but I would bet the 06 is in serious pressure territory whereas the 7RM is not. I would be very cautious of an 06 pushing these types of pressure limits. If you are not experiencing pressure, I'd like the load info to try in my Encore 06 with 26" heavy barrel.

Helobill,
I agree with one exception is when the 7RM provides the "extra" penetration where the animal doesn't provide you the best shooting scenario. Unfortunately, it has been my experience, those critters never want to give me a nice broadside shot. It goes back to my statement that we all say we will take nothing but the best perfect shots blah blah but reality is you just dumped pretty of time, energy, money and so on into a trip and guess what, you take the shot. That is where the 7RM gives the edge. Under most circumstances I'd say the 06 is the way to go but in unique hunting trips like elk hunting, I'd still like the best edge I could get. I also agree that I'd prefer heavier round such as 300 WM which is what I hunt elk with these days. My Sendero pushes Nosler 200 gr. Accubond out at 2950 and groups exceptionally well under 1.0" at 200 yds. If I could sway anyone, I would say step up to the 300WM at a minimum for elk. Heck, if recoil is the problem, shoot slugs off bench for few rounds then shoot the 300WM it will seem like a .270 after slugs.

Muddyboots

Doghunter · « **Reply #10 on:** January 01, 2004, 10:27:01 AM »

The 30/06 with 180gr. nosler partition bullet with 48.5 gr. of 4064 IMR will take care of any elk. Go with the /06! Good luck with your elk hunt.

Mikey · « **Reply #11 on:** January 02, 2004, 04:36:11 AM »

I was looking at factory stats of 2800'/sec for the 7mm mag with the 175 grain load and a handloaded 190 gn 06 to the same velocities. I think my old Sierra manual gives me 5 different 2800'/sec loads with that 190 grainer - all I have to do is pound up my shoulder finding out which is the most accurate. I see that some of the high end performance loads in the 06 with the 180 grn are right close to 2900'/sec as well. But again Friend, I'm not shuckin' my old 06 for a 7mm.

On the bright side, no matter which caliber he chooses, I'm certain he can now find suitable ammo choices almost anywhere he goes. Mikey.

Sask_Hunter · « **Reply #12 on:** January 02, 2004, 06:27:43 PM »

i dont eveb thihk that you need a 175 for elk. a 140 barnes bullet will shoot right through both shoulders of a bison. i would go for the 7mm just because it is chocolate and not vanilla.

the 30-06 is almost a 100 years old. most people retire when the are 65 or so. that means that the 06 should have retired 35 years ago. i think that we shooters should put the old, tired boring round in and old folks house for really lame and boring cartriges. the 7 mag is in the prime of its life. work it untill it is 65 years old or so and then get the new round and run it hard.

Bear Wallow · « **Reply #13 on:** January 05, 2004, 09:53:57 PM »

Go with the 06, it has more frontal area, and I think deadlier than any 7mm. Plus the ammo is everywhere.

JBabcock · « **Reply #14 on:** January 06, 2004, 03:34:54 PM »

30-06. 22" barrel instead of 24". Lighter gun. Lighter ammo. Better choice. :shock:

Zachary · « **Reply #15 on:** January 07, 2004, 05:58:28 AM »

The only other thing that I would add that I don't think has been mentioned, is the use of Light Magnum or "High Energy" ammo. If you use these loads, then you can get almost, if not equal to, 300 Win. Mag. performance out of your .30-06. Combine that with 180 grain Nosler Partitions, good shot placement, and shots under 400 yards, and you shouldn't have any problems.

Zachary

Lawdog · « **Reply #16 on:** January 07, 2004, 08:15:58 AM »

JBabcock,

Please take no offence but how much weight do you expect to loose by going to a 22 inch barrels compared to a 24 inch barrel? The reason I ask is I keep hearing from different hunters about how much weight they are going to save and I don't see it as that great a savings. I don't see 2 inches of barrel weighting that much. Lawdog

Zachary · « **Reply #17 on:** January 07, 2004, 09:40:25 AM »

I tend to agree. I think that it might make a 1oz or maybe 2 oz difference. Granted, I always hear from "mountain hunters" - meaning those who hunt game up in the steep mountains, like elk and sheep, that "every ounce counts" - but come on? Is it really that important to loose 2" of barrel length? I think that I would rather have a 24" barrel for extra velocity.

Zachary

longwinters · « **Reply #18 on:** January 07, 2004, 11:46:09 AM »

I guess my question would be, why load up a caliber to reach a bigger calibers velocity? Why not get a bigger caliber and then load it down if you need to later on? I love the 06 and the 7mm. I really dont think the difference is worth worrying about. I would also agree with LD and Zachery in that I think 24" barrels are not significantly heavier than 22" barrels. I also think the longer barrels have a tendency to get more out of most any caliber you use.

long

Big Tom · « **Reply #19 on:** January 07, 2004, 06:52:51 PM »

Go with th 06..... I've had experience with both and they are fine calibers. You answered your own question......"Im not a 400 yd guy".
Any quality bullet from 150-165 gr will kill any elk on earth with an 06, and will be easy on the shooter. You go back home with a 125 gr load and be flatter and more effective than a .243 with near the same recoil.

helobill · « **Reply #20 on:** January 08, 2004, 03:31:12 AM »

longwinters,
SWAT guys took a 26" 300 Win Mag with factory ammo and cut it down to 18" in 1" increments, total velocity loss...32fps! Interesting reading.
http://www.tacticaloperations.com/SWATbarrel/
They did concede that the longer barrel might be necessary with slower burning powders, but they didn't attempt to try handloads.

Other folks did the same thing with a .223 from 22" down to 10"
http://www.accuratereloading.com/223sb.html
They did use a bunch of different handloads and it's interesting to see how each performed, they list both velocity and 5 shot group size.

I was pretty amazed it didn't make more of a difference than it did.
FWIW,
Bill

Zachary · « **Reply #21 on:** January 08, 2004, 03:38:27 AM »

I read those articles some time ago. Yes, I was pretty amazed. It kinda goes against everything that we have been taught - which in turn has been based on practical tests. I can't explain it. I guess its kinda like faith - faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. Regardless of the sniper test, I just have to believe that a 24" barrel will yield higher velocity than a 22" barrel.

Zachary

Graybeard · « **Reply #22 on:** January 08, 2004, 06:11:08 AM »

Trouble with it is that it also goes counter to many many other such experiments run by other folks and also reported. When one single test proves so counter to all that have gone before which do you believe? Personally I'm not inclined to believe the one that is so different from the others.

While I've never cut down the same barrel and tried this I've sure used same ammo in guns with different barrel lengths and the longer barrels always delivered more fps. I'm speaking of guns from 14" to 22" generally but also with 14" to 26" in .223 Rem. Never yet seen a shorter barrel deliver as much as the longer barrels. This of course is more of an apples to oranges comparison that cutting a single barrel is.

GB

helobill · « **Reply #23 on:** January 08, 2004, 06:52:02 AM »

I hear ya GB, the Remington ballistics table has said for years that a 1" change in barrel length (from the 24" test barrel thier chart is based on) with a 3000-3500fps muzzle velocity will result in approx 30fps. By that standard, cutting the 300WinMag down to 18" should have resulted in a loss of 180fps. (also means everyone with 26" barrels should be getting 60fps more than the chart says) Guess my point is, the only way you know for sure is to test it. If I ever have more money than I know what to do with, I'll buy a 26" contender barrel in some big capacity case and turn it into a 14" in 1" cuts. Okay, so I don't see that happening anytime soon.

Bill

Lawdog · « **Reply #24 on:** January 08, 2004, 08:00:59 AM »

I have three .25-06's(like them Quarter Bore) and all have 26" barrels. My son bought a .25-06 and it has a 24" barrel. It doesn't matter what load used but my son's rifle gets and average of 50 - 55 fps. slower than my rifle using the same load. We're talking the same caliber, same twist rate, in fact the same rifle in one instance(both Ruger M77's - his a newer MK II and mine an older M77V. I too read those articles and I don't give much credence to either. I have run to many loads over a chronograph where the only difference was the length of the barrel and every time the shorter barrel got less velocity. Seeing I prefer performance to saving a couple of ounces of weight every rifle we own, with a couple of exceptions, wears at least a 24" barrel. Lawdog

MONGO · « **Reply #25 on:** February 01, 2004, 06:00:40 PM »

I had the same situation,trying to choose and after 9months of planning I took both the .300WM & a 30.06 each in a Rem 700BDL to Colorado.
The biggest issue was I loaded and practiced in Gig Harbor, WA and hunted near Craig CO., a differance of about 6,500+/- ft.
BIG DIFFERANCE sighting in I was very suprised. When the time came I settled on the .300, never felt the recoil and dropped a cow elk at about 120 yards uphill. Next year the biggest change will be in myself. I'm built for comfort not speed 275# more + than - anyway the .300 is my rifle of choice for Elk.

Happiness is a large gut pile

Mongo

rickt300 · « **Reply #26 on:** March 03, 2004, 07:18:11 AM »

Having hunted elk for most of my adult life and seen them taken with rifles from the 243 up to the 338 magnum I don't take any shot past 350 yards and the 30-06 is perfect maybe a bit better than the 7MM Remington magnum. I have not witnessed better penetration by the magnum round , in fact the oposite is what I have experienced. My 30-06 with the 180 grain Speer spitzer HotCor powered by 59 grains of H4831 and a CCI 250 primer gets 2850 fps and is an utterly reliable elk cartridge to 350 yards. I don't know about farther because I won't shoot any farther than this. This year I am going to try the 190 grain Hornady BTSP on top of the same powder just for a change. Make a good shot and you will get your elk.

Coyote Hunter · « **Reply #27 on:** March 03, 2004, 06:45:18 PM »

ourabmen -

I have ZERO personal experience with a .30-06, but agree with the others that it is certainly up to the task. My preference would be a 180g premium bullet.

On the other hand, I have 20+ years experience hunting elk with a Rem 7mm Mag and 160g bullets. In that time I have never lost an animal and never had one go more than 50 yards. The Speer 160g Grand Slams have served me well, and in those 20+ years I have recovered exactly one - the others were pass-throughs, whether at 100 yards or 350 yards. My hunting buddy and I have taken 6 elk with this bullet in the last 5 years.

I don't consider myself a "400 yd shot guy" either, but my biggest bull came hard. After 4-5 hours of watching a herd of 80 or so from 600 yards, we were finally able to crawl to 350 yards just as shooting light ran out. One shot, the bull dropped, and the bullet passed through. I'm not sure how confident I would have been shooting a .30-06 under those circumstances.

rickt300 · « **Reply #28 on:** March 05, 2004, 07:47:21 AM »

Maybe I should add that the poor performance I have witnessed the 7MM mag produce was without exception using the cheapest on sale factory ammo by Remington and Winchester., invariably a 150 grain bullet. Also where I hunt along the forest edge in the mountains a lot of shot opportunities are pretty close. Under these conditions the 30-06 with the 180 grain bullets both factory and reloads outperforms the 7MM mag with the wrong bullets pushed too fast add that the "I've got a magnum mindset" thinking the guy can put a bullet thru an elk from any angle has caused a lot of tracking for me. Oddly the guys shooting the 25-06 seem to wait for good angles and kill elk pretty easily. Another point to be made is that with well designed bullets the old 30-06 comes very close or exceeds the 7MM mags energy figures way out there and does it with more bullet material and frontal diameter. I admit the old girl doesn't shoot as flat but we aren't shooting gophers here.