I have been trying to figure out the significance in the caliber of bullet for rifles. My buddy just bought a Savage 110, when he bought it the man selling the gun recommended 7mm Rem Mag but I have been reading different forums and most people suggest the 30-06 caliber for this rifle. I was hoping somebody could help me to understand the difference.
Difference in caliber-- Savage 110 in 7mm Mag or .30-06?
- Thread starter colton23
- Start date
I'm going to let you get advice from the guys in the Rifle forum. I think you'll get a lot better information there.
Personally, I'd expect the 7 Mag to shoot a little flatter and further than .30-06, but I wouldn't think the difference would be huge. People will probably ask what you intend to do with the rifle before they try to recommend calibers. I'm trying to think of something you could do with .30-06 that you couldn't do with a 7mm, and I can't come up with much, unless it's buying cheaper surplus 30-06 ammo from the CMP.
Personally, I'd expect the 7 Mag to shoot a little flatter and further than .30-06, but I wouldn't think the difference would be huge. People will probably ask what you intend to do with the rifle before they try to recommend calibers. I'm trying to think of something you could do with .30-06 that you couldn't do with a 7mm, and I can't come up with much, unless it's buying cheaper surplus 30-06 ammo from the CMP.
It is pretty easy to see the difference if using any of the major ammo manufacture's tables. Example: if you are using a 150 grn pointed SP Remington Coreloc bullet in both and both are sighted in at 245 yds, then at 300 yds the 30-06 will be almost 1" lower.
If you handload, the difference will be less noticable as factory 30-06 loads are not loaded to their full potential (Hornady light mags being the exception).
If you handload, the difference will be less noticable as factory 30-06 loads are not loaded to their full potential (Hornady light mags being the exception).
7mag. vs. 06
Did a little research a few years ago. Averaged all top loads for 7 mag. and 06 in hand-loading manuals. Found that there was only 100fps difference in the averages for similar bullet weights (145 vs. 150, 175 vs. 180) This is significantly insignificant inasmuch as there can be that much difference (100fps), in identical rifles of identical calibers. Also, the rifles used for the 7mm mag. had barrels of 24 inches compared to 22 inches for the 30-06's used to develop the data. Furthermore, 7mm mag. is loaded to higher pressures than the 30-06. In short, the creators of the 7mm mag. used all tricks that they could think of to give an advantage to the 7mm mag. over the 30-06.
The difference in ballistic coefficient of 7mm compared to similar 30 cal. is greater but bullets at 3,000fps. at 300 yards (200 yd. zero), was only 3 inches.
Therefore, I concluded that despite the popularity of the 7mm mag. for its followers, it is not far fetched to call it a "ballistic twin" of the 30-06 in that its ballistic superiority is insignificant if it exists at all.
Further, the brass of the 7mm mag. is more expensive, takes more powder due to its volume just to equal the 06, and has a fierce muzzle blast and more recoil than a 30-06. The choice is obvious, you can go with "show and blow" or with a classic by which all others are still compared.
Did a little research a few years ago. Averaged all top loads for 7 mag. and 06 in hand-loading manuals. Found that there was only 100fps difference in the averages for similar bullet weights (145 vs. 150, 175 vs. 180) This is significantly insignificant inasmuch as there can be that much difference (100fps), in identical rifles of identical calibers. Also, the rifles used for the 7mm mag. had barrels of 24 inches compared to 22 inches for the 30-06's used to develop the data. Furthermore, 7mm mag. is loaded to higher pressures than the 30-06. In short, the creators of the 7mm mag. used all tricks that they could think of to give an advantage to the 7mm mag. over the 30-06.
The difference in ballistic coefficient of 7mm compared to similar 30 cal. is greater but bullets at 3,000fps. at 300 yards (200 yd. zero), was only 3 inches.
Therefore, I concluded that despite the popularity of the 7mm mag. for its followers, it is not far fetched to call it a "ballistic twin" of the 30-06 in that its ballistic superiority is insignificant if it exists at all.
Further, the brass of the 7mm mag. is more expensive, takes more powder due to its volume just to equal the 06, and has a fierce muzzle blast and more recoil than a 30-06. The choice is obvious, you can go with "show and blow" or with a classic by which all others are still compared.
They are both very common hunting rounds in North America.
They both kill the same stuff dead as anything else.
Where I hunt there isn't much need for long range shooting, but if I were going to be taking long shots at elk I'd give the nod to the 7mm Rem Mag. The higher BC bullets traveling at a faster velocity also have a better sectional density for deep penetration.
But I don't take long shots at animals, 30-06 is plenyt for me, but I am a fan of the 7mm Rem Mag.
Jimro
They both kill the same stuff dead as anything else.
Where I hunt there isn't much need for long range shooting, but if I were going to be taking long shots at elk I'd give the nod to the 7mm Rem Mag. The higher BC bullets traveling at a faster velocity also have a better sectional density for deep penetration.
But I don't take long shots at animals, 30-06 is plenyt for me, but I am a fan of the 7mm Rem Mag.
Jimro
Ballistically, there isn't any difference between the two cartridges, especially if you reload or are rich enough to afford to shoot premium ammo all day long. If you want to shoot for cheap, the 30-06 is the way to go because 150 grain white box M2 equivalent loads are far cheaper than 7mm Mag
BusGunner007
New member
I prefer the 7mm Rem.Mag.
If you had a chance to shoot them side by side, you might like the 7mm Rem.Mag. better, too.
I find the .30-06 feels sharper in recoil than the 7 Mag.
The .30 feels kind of sharp and obnoxious; the 7 is abrupt, yet delayed at the same time - if that makes sense.
Hard to explain, maybe somebody else that shoots the 7 can help out.
To me, it doesn't have anything to do with romance, magnumitis or whatever, I just LIKE it!
Good luck.
If you had a chance to shoot them side by side, you might like the 7mm Rem.Mag. better, too.
I find the .30-06 feels sharper in recoil than the 7 Mag.
The .30 feels kind of sharp and obnoxious; the 7 is abrupt, yet delayed at the same time - if that makes sense.
Hard to explain, maybe somebody else that shoots the 7 can help out.
To me, it doesn't have anything to do with romance, magnumitis or whatever, I just LIKE it!
Good luck.
Busgunner007:
I know what your talking about, it is somewhat like the .257 Wby Magnum recoil. However, I really do like the .30-06 better. I think its because I reload and there are such a wide variety and source of components for the .30-06. My brother-in-law, on the other hand, loves his 7mm Rem Mag better.
I know what your talking about, it is somewhat like the .257 Wby Magnum recoil. However, I really do like the .30-06 better. I think its because I reload and there are such a wide variety and source of components for the .30-06. My brother-in-law, on the other hand, loves his 7mm Rem Mag better.
VonFireball
New member
It's your lie, tell it any way you want.
biggfoot44
New member
If you don't already have a strong personal preference, a .30-06 is rarely a bad choice. Yes 7mm bullets can have a higher BC and SD, but unless you routinely shoot ( and practice) at well over 300 yds the difference is not signifigent at more typical hunting situations. Now if the choice were between '06, and a smaller 7mm, like 7-08, then that would be an interesting debate.
I prefer the .30-06 because of price and because I reload I have more options.
Shooting out of similar rifles using the same type of ammo the 7mm has a ballistic advantage. Recoil is about the same, but some people feel the 7mm is a bit harder and some the .30-06.
The .30-06 can use heavier bullets than the 7mm, that's important to some people.
The 7mm mag tends to have a preformance edge out of short barrels over the .30-06. The .30-06 with a good hand load has an advantage out of a long barrel.
Your choice depends on use and for some uses you might even be better off looking at some cartridge other than either the .30-06 or the 7mm mag.
If I was to start all over from scratch I think I'd be looking at the 6.5x55 or similar for what I use my .30-06 for.
Shooting out of similar rifles using the same type of ammo the 7mm has a ballistic advantage. Recoil is about the same, but some people feel the 7mm is a bit harder and some the .30-06.
The .30-06 can use heavier bullets than the 7mm, that's important to some people.
The 7mm mag tends to have a preformance edge out of short barrels over the .30-06. The .30-06 with a good hand load has an advantage out of a long barrel.
Your choice depends on use and for some uses you might even be better off looking at some cartridge other than either the .30-06 or the 7mm mag.
If I was to start all over from scratch I think I'd be looking at the 6.5x55 or similar for what I use my .30-06 for.
Art Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
If you're a good enough shooter as to skill, the '06 is as good to 500 yards as most anything, if deer hunting is the deal.
I meddled around some with a 7mmRemMag, and just never did like it as much as the '06. Some of it was the fit of the rifle, I guess, but as long as it was bang/flop at three or four hundred yards with the '06, why bother?
Back before laser rangefinders existed, the 7mmRemMag became popular for elk hunters in the Rockies for the longer range shots. Mostly popular among city hunters who weren't very good at estimating distance in wide-open country. Just enough flatter than an '06 to help. What's overlooked, of course, is that at 500 yards the wind is just about as important to the 7mm as to the '06. At 500 yards, a "nice breeze" can mean holding two feet of windage for a center hit.
I meddled around some with a 7mmRemMag, and just never did like it as much as the '06. Some of it was the fit of the rifle, I guess, but as long as it was bang/flop at three or four hundred yards with the '06, why bother?
Back before laser rangefinders existed, the 7mmRemMag became popular for elk hunters in the Rockies for the longer range shots. Mostly popular among city hunters who weren't very good at estimating distance in wide-open country. Just enough flatter than an '06 to help. What's overlooked, of course, is that at 500 yards the wind is just about as important to the 7mm as to the '06. At 500 yards, a "nice breeze" can mean holding two feet of windage for a center hit.
I agree there isn't as much difference between the two as people are led to believe. The advantage though slight does go to the 7mm Rem Mag, but I have had a couple and never liked them better than my .270 or 06. So I sold one 7mm Rem Mag and changed the other to a .375 Ruger and couldn't be happier about my decisions. If I was going to go back to a 7mm I'd probably choose the WSM, .280 Rem, or 7mm-08 just because they lack the belt on the cartridge, never had a problem reloading belted ammo just prefer not to have any belts if it can be helped.
troy_mclure
New member
ive never heard of 1km kills on antelope with an 06 before, have you?
the 7mm rem mag is better for long distance than the 06, especialy above 400m.
that being said i will be buying an 06 barrel for my encore.
the 7mm rem mag is better for long distance than the 06, especialy above 400m.
that being said i will be buying an 06 barrel for my encore.
davlandrum
New member
My opinion is the just the opposite. I much prefer shooting my -06 to my buddy's 7. Maybe it is his reloads.
Perceived recoil is a totally individual thing.
Either one is fine for most situations.
I refuse to own a 7mm mag. To me the much higher cost of cases, powder and factory amunition is not worth any slight almost not noticable performance gain over a 30-06. Now if I was into antalope hunting where a 139 grain boat tail bullet would be a idea it may be differant,naw think I would go with a 6mm then.