Tikka/Sako in a 30/06 or 7mm mag

Coot22 · 02-26-2002, 09:55 PM

I know that both of these guns are more than adequate to do anything that I plan on doing here in the NW. I narrowed my choices down to these two guns. I will be buying a tikka or a sako...either or. I know that The 7mm has more fps however it has fewer choices of bullet grains. The 30/06 may have less fps but it releases more of its energy within the carcass of the animal as it goes through than a 7mm. Yet, the 7mm shoots flatter and has a longer range...not that I would really need to take any shots over 300 yds. here in the NW. So now you see my dilemma. :whazzup: What are your expert opinions? I am leaning towards the 30/06...talk me out of it! Thanks in advance.
-Coot

birdhunter · 02-26-2002, 10:19 PM

What? Who you been talking too Cooter?

Not that you'd have to shoot over 300 yrds in Oregon?

You ever been to Eastern Oregon? 300 is going to be typical for a lot of your shots. 400 to 500 are common too. I won't shoot past that, but I know a lot of people that do. Go with the 7 mm. I've seen them take an elk down (and I meand dropped and didn't even struggle to get up) twice now. They have more than enough power.

If you're worried about bullet grains (which you shouldn't be) you can hand load your own stuff.

You better order that soon as you only a few more months till bear season.

Coot22 · 02-26-2002, 11:30 PM

Birdhunter,

Loaded with the 180-grain bullet, the .30-06 will retain over 1,300 ft/lbs of energy at 400 yards.
That is plenty to knock an Elk off it's feet dont you think? However the bullet drop at at that range is nearly 50 inches. That is more the reason why i am leaning towards the 7mm mag...because it is has a flatter shot. With the 30/06 you get a range of bullet weights from the 110-grain bullet to the 220-grain bullet...this is definitely a plus. And you can buy ammo anywhere for a 30/06 and, not that it is that important, there are more choices for bullet manufacturers...not to mention that rounds are cheaper.
the 7mm Mag has a slightly larger case. That means that the 175-grain bullet from the 7mm Magnum retains nearly 2,000 ft/lbs of energy at 400 yards. That is 700 ft/lbs more than a 30/06. Bullet drop is about 42 inches at 400 yards which is 8 inches less...which is another plus.

However, like i said in my first post...the 30/06 loses most of its energy in the carcass of the animal which creates more fatal damage. Now I am not saying that a 7mm wouldnt kill an animal as well as a 30/06...however, a 7mm cartridge loses only a 1/3 to a half of the energy that a 30/06 round does. The 7mm round has a better chance of going clean through the animal instead of detoriating within the animal like the 30/06 and thus causing more internal damage.

ok, in all honesty, I only know this stuff through too much research...I have no experience with big game rifles as of yet. I am planning on purchasing my first gun this spring and considering that I will be dropping anywhere from $400-$700 on a gun...I want to make the right choice. So what are your opinions? Bird, I keep on going back and forth between these two guns. I have my scope ordered...just need to get the gun.

-Coot

Tilla · 02-27-2002, 08:36 AM

I've shot Antelope, Blacktail, Mule Deer, Elk, Moose, all with the same 7mm.
I'm pretty sure I could have done it with a 30.06 too.

birdhunter · 02-27-2002, 08:57 AM

Coot,

Get the 7mm. Trust me. Paper doesn't do any gun justice. If you are really interested, come out and try some shooting with us. We've got 7's and 30/06's.

BTW I've yet to find any gun that will consistently knock an elk off it's feet at 400 yrds.

Norm · 02-27-2002, 09:43 AM

I went up to Alberta on a moose hunt. The outfitter would not allow 7mm's to be used in his camp. He had been guiding for 25 years and had to many wounded moose with 7MM's. He did allow 30-06 with 180 noslers as a minimum. Both myself and my father dropped one with our 30-06's. I mostly bowhunt, but when I rifle hunt I only use the bonded round nose style 180 grain bullets. They stay together better than balistic tip/ high shock crap. If your like most of us, you can't see, let alone shoot something at 300YDS. If only had one gun for big game in the NW it would be a 06, and I do.
Just my 2 cents.

Artwo · 02-27-2002, 12:03 PM

Cootr...Cootr...Cootr,
The only rifle I have ever owned was the Remington model 700 30-06. I've used it for deer (mulies and blacktail), elk and bear and never had a problem putting down anything I hit with it. The thing I like the most about the 06 is the versatility of this caliber. Like you said, you have a wide variety bullet sizes and types and you can buy shells for it in about any store in the northwest or from most other hunters on the side of the road (another story later). My favorite factory loads are the Remington 150 gn coreloc for blacktail, Remington 165 gn ballistic tip for mulies, Remington 180 gn coreloc for rocky mountain elk and bear and Remington 225 gn coreloc for rosevelt elk. I do agree with Bird that the 7mm mag will definately out perform the 06 down range of 300 yards but I still like the 06 for the diversity. I think you would be happy with either weapon but decide based on the type of hunting you think you'll be doing the most of.

JK

BuKuBass · 02-27-2002, 12:40 PM

Not to stir the pot here, but three years ago I neck shot and dropped a royal elk at a "lasered" 383 yards across a canyon on a calm day. Rifle? A custom Remington 600 .308 with 165 grain handload. Using a rest, I held a foot over and six inches behind the ear.

fishuntr2 · 02-27-2002, 12:49 PM

My favorite rifle is my Winchester Model 70 30:06. The main reason is that it fits me like a shotgun. When I bring it up and look thru the scope I am right on target. It kills deer and elk well. Shot placement is everything! I don't take shots farther than I can see and hunting western Oregon means usually under 200 yards. If I had a 7 mm that fit as well it would be a tossup. If it is true that an :06 round releases more energy than I think I would go wih the :06.
My .02 cents worth...
Bob

shawn2010 · 02-27-2002, 07:17 PM

What about the 300 ultra mag? I shoot my dads 7mm with 150 grain for deer, but I am thinking about buying model 700 sendero sf in 300 ultra. They make 150, 180, 200 grain for it.

Washington Hunter · 02-27-2002, 07:50 PM

There really is not that much difference between the two cartridges, as some of you seem to think. A 7mm Rem Mag with a 175 grain bullet at 2900 fps muzzle velocity, and sighted in 3 inches high at 100 yards will be approximately 15 inches low at 400 yards. a 30-06 with a 180 grain bullet at 2800 fps muzzle velocity will be 19 inches low at 400 yards. Now, 400 yards is a long, long ways and 4 inches is not a significant difference at that range. You will still have to have a pretty good idea of the distance, and you will have to hold over some. I guess what I'm trying to say, is the 7 mag is really no better at long range shooting than the 30-06. Either one will work fine. I would look at other factors besides how each cartridge will kill. For one thing your theory about how the 30-06 bullet will stay inside the animal and therefore provide more energy into the animal is totally wrong. A bullet through the lungs of an animal will kill it. It does not matter if the bullet exits or not. The amount of penentration you get will not have so much to do with the cartridge as it will with the type of bullet you are using. A bullet like a Nosler Ballistic Tip or a Sierra boat tail will open up faster than a "premium" bullet like a Nosler Partition or Barnes X bullet, and therefore will not penetrate as far and is less likely to go all the way through the animal, especially at longer ranges. In my opinion, you are better off to have complete penetration and an exit wound because it will make tracking much easier since there will be more blood to follow. But like I said, the amount of penetration doesn't really depend on whether you are shooting a 7 mag or a 30-06, it depends on the type of bullet. To me, the only real difference between the two cartridges, is the amount of recoil. In the 7 mag you are burning a lot more powder, and getting just a little more velocity. So you will get quite a bit more recoil. The 7mm Mag rifle will also be about a half a pound heavier than the 30-06. If I were you I'd go with the 30-06, because it will be more enjoyable to shoot and you will most likely shoot it better than a magnum. And accuracy is the most important thing, not 100 to 200 feet per second more velocity.

Washington Hunter · 02-27-2002, 07:56 PM

Oh, by the way Coot...I like your choice in rifles. The Sako or Tikka are both excellent rifles, the only differnce is the Sako costs more.

SeanD · 02-28-2002, 12:52 AM

Washington hunter you are right on. I think its is funny how people always talk about the difference between calibers that are as close as these two, and how flat they shoot. My book shows the .06 with 200 yard zero and 180's at 2700 24.5 inches drop. At 400 yard the 7mag with 175's at 2800 has 21.8 inches drop. What in the heck is three inches when you already have to adjust for over 20? I remember one of my first elk hunts i went on i heard a guy fire what seemed like a whole box of ammo at a herd of elk. Dad and I went over there and the guy was shooting probably 300 yards and said he missed on every shot. Said he needed a 300 mag because it was flatter shooting. Wow.
I believe energy is overrated. Compare the foot pounds of energy of a 22/250 and a 45/70 govt. Is a 22/250 with 1600 lbs of energy adequete to kill an elk? Energy is affected much more by velocity than bullet wieght and it doesnt translate directly to killing power. Bullet weight is more important. Bullet quality is more important.
The 7 and the .06 are very close, and i dont see much difference at all in killing power or trajectory. I would get a 30.06 for the cheaper ammo and they handle heavier bullets better. If you want more punch step up to the 300 mag. I have an .06 and i wanted an elk specific gun so i bought a 7 mag. After a couple of years I sold the 7 and bought a 300 mag. Couldnt see the differnce between the .06 and the 7, so why own both? But if i could only own one, it would be a 30.06.
Good luck coot.

[ 02-28-2002, 02:03 AM: Message edited by: SeanD ]

Jedediah · 02-28-2002, 06:44 PM

Well, Coot...you should be good and confused now :whazzup:

You say this if your first hunting rifle. I think either one would be a good choice. However, in my opinion, you really should add one more into your final picks: the 300 Winchester Mag. This is a tried and true cartridge that will give you the same bullet weight ranges as the '06, and the energy and velocities of the 7mm. If I was forced to keep only one rifle for all hunting, it would be a 300.

Washington Hunter · 02-28-2002, 07:14 PM

Well if you want to give him more choices, how about the 7mm WSM or 300 WSM? If I was buying a new rifle, I'd be tempted to get one of those. But I still don't think you can beat the 30-06 for a good practical all-around cartridge.

shawn2010 · 02-28-2002, 09:25 PM

300 ultra mag, large range of bullet weights 125,150,180,200,220, 125grain shoots 3800fps, 180grain shoots 3200fps, 220grain shoots 2980. That is quite a selection

SeanD · 02-28-2002, 11:13 PM

Shawn, id opt for a 300 win mag myself. Its been around longer and its not going anywhere. With all the new 30 cal magnums i wonder if they will all last. And how much do you really need? 300 win is my limit for recoil. Then again im getting 3150fps with 180's so maybe recoil would be comparible with the ultra mag. Course you could go even bigger and get the 30-378. :grin:

BuKuBass · 03-01-2002, 12:28 PM

Cooter: I've noticed that a lot of hunters shoot big game like they shoot pool ie. "If you can't hit 'em good; hit 'em hard." (see my above post) Shot placement is the key. Back when I was young, stupid, broke and hungry I headshot a muley or two with a .22 rimfire. To all of those who use .300 mags, try this next time you're at the range. Have your buddy load your rifle and tell him to randomly mix in two empties with your loaded cartridges. Shoot thru your magazine and notice the flinching. With a loaded round you're probably unaware that you're doing so. Increased "down-range energy" is not the way to compensate for poor marksmanship.

willametteriveroutlaw · 03-01-2002, 02:14 PM

If it walks on this continent a 30-06 can kill it.

Shawn2010, The 300 ultra is the hardest kicking S.O.B. I have ever shot. Granted I shot it in a Model 700 Stainless Synthetic. I have shot some pretty nasty kickers before too. It hit harder than my friends 340 weatherby on my shoulder. Plus I have heard of more than one case splitting. The brass doesen't really hold up I guess.

Leatherneck · 03-01-2002, 06:59 PM

If you put the round in the kill zone of your prey it's pretty much meat in the freezer. You can debate all you want about what the best rifle or round is for your hunt but it boils down to marksmanship. I use a 3006 for all my biggame hunting in oregon,the coast being my favorite place to hunt. I don't take 400yrd or 500yrd shots. Its not worth wounding a animal. Instead i place myself where i know i can place a round in the kill zone.

roundbelly · 03-04-2002, 05:23 AM

i would recomend the 30-06 as a proven all around caliber. the factory loads are always on sale, at the discount stores and avaliable at any country store. the sako seems to always hold its value. i have shot more elk and deer with a 30-06 than any other. i also own a 300 H&H, and have owned a 300 win mag. the 300 win mag would reach out and touch something but slapped the heck out of you, just to much punshment for me. above all get something you enjoy shooting.

Snapset · 03-04-2002, 04:10 PM

From what I have seen, the 7mm is inadequate for Roosevelt Elk, but I cannot explain why. I have seen several good breadbasket shots wander off with no blood, and no dead animal before it is no longer possible to follow the animal. Those were with Nosler Partitions.

Several years ago I decided Head and neck shots only for all elk on the wet side.

The 30-06 is a faster killer in my experience, again, I can't explain why. Both guns are splendid for all deer, though. I would be more willing to use the 7 for dry side elk, which I hope to be doing this fall.

Dogfish · 03-05-2002, 07:57 AM

I must not be a good shot. All the elk I have ever shot were within 30 yards. Bullet drop? Windage? Retained energy???? What's that.

All I know is that when my 400 to 600 grain slug hit the elk, they didn't go further than 25 yards.

Go muzzleloader, avoid the crowds, and get close.

Washington Hunter · 03-05-2002, 08:47 PM

Dogfish,
I used to hunt the muzzleloader elk seasons in Washington, and what I finally realized, is that they are more crowded than the rifle seasons! No wonder, there are only a few units open, so hunters are much more concentrated than during the general rifle seasons. Unless of course, you hunt private land and/or a special permit area.