if you are wanting to use it in the high country to chase elk, I'de pay close attention to the rifle weights before settling for one. A light 300wm is going to get meat on both ends, but it beats walking around with a heavy one with not much kick.

Thanks to all for the help, opinions and suggestions. Ill prolly be looking for a 300 wm in the Remington 700 XCR. Id like to find me a camo with the stainless barrel one day. I think thats what I want! This has been a fun read and I apprecaiate all the comments!
Danny

you should like it... I rigged mine up with a timney trigger and merc in the stock so my wife could shoot it as well and haven't been able to hunt with it for her using it. (in a 270wsm instead of the 300wm though)

I was going to say that I had the exact same situation and boiled it down to either a 300 win mag or 7mm rem mag... cant go wrong with either one for what you described. Both have plenty of down range energy to take an elk.

I ended up going with the 7mm Rem Mag. Only reason was because for similar loads, it had about 18% less recoil energy (based on some charts I viewed). I figured this way I could practice with it longer before getting worn out....more practice hopefully yields a more confident shot on that Elk you finally found.

If you have not already made a purchase decison I'd like to add my own thoughts here. I answered this very same question back in the late 1960's & early 1970's...mebbe with a little different insight that has stood the test of time.

I had fallen in love with a 270win after being unsatisfied with a 243's performance on game, with the ammo available at the time despite perfect or near perfect bullet placements.

I chose a 300WMg, after shooting a friends 300Wby, because I could use the same exact sighting patterns of holdover & still do...between the 270 and a 300WMg in 130 gr 270 & 165gr 300WMg, or 150gr 270 & 180gr 300Wmg. Now you may say there is not enough difference in bullet weights but look at the differences in penetration, energy levels and added range in Max Point Blank Range in those bullet pairings.

These days some 40+ almost 50 years later bullet performance has improved dramtically, but these days I have almost stopped shooting the 300WMg at full power loadings, but closer to 300WSM speeds, to reduce the 300's quicker recoil a smidgen in 165's & 180's - I have hand loaded extensively since 1969 - and started shooting a 9.3x62 Mauser round that is almost as powerful & fast as a 375 H&H on the upper end of the bullet selections and as fast as a 338WMg in it's heavier bullets that are closer to the smallest 9.3 bullets available ... with recoil at 30'06 levels in a 9 1/2lb CZ 550 rifle "All UP" ie scoped, loaded & slinged. FYI the CZ 550 will hold 5 rounds in he magazine too...not 3 like everything else on the market and comes with a 2 stage or set trigger - one with super light letoff for bench work and the regular hunting trigger & both are fully adjustable.

The 9.3 at it's .366 diameter is super close to a 35 Whelen's .358 diameter but is faster by about 10-12%...or the same margin slower than a 375 H&H is in about the same bullet weights ...but without the overly long receiver length necessary and additional 1-2 lbs in rifle weight that is common in the H&H full magnum length caliber rifles.

I will always own a 270Win it seems...but I could hunt anything in the US and Africa I wanted to eat or protect myself from incuding Grizz and Cape Buffalo and everything in between... except mebbe prairie dogs with a 9.3x62 if my experience with a 125 lb WT Spike last year was any proof.

I hit him at about 130 yards shooting a 270 gr bullet running about 2550-2600fps in the crease close behind his right front leg...and picked him up over 30 feet down the trail where he FIRST landed DOA...with less meat damage than if I had hit him with my 270! Entry wound was 36 caliber diameter or about the size of a nickel, and the exit wound was about 50 cent piece sized with no bruising around the wound. OBTW See what author & gun guru John Barsness says about the 9.3x62 in the current 6th Edition of the Nosler Reloading Manual on page 529...and look at the moose he is sitting beside.
Bullet Placement is king no matter what you shoot though...have fun.
Ron

7mm-08 or 6.5 x 55, lil recoil, flat shooting, cant beat em

300wm

With that variable thrown in we step up to magnums in the 270 to 300 range, theres a buch of good ones out there.

And the price of 7mag ammo is not cheap also.

Like a lot of the others, I would go with one of the 300Mags.

Thats easy. The Ruger Stainless M77 compact in 308win

WileyCoyote -- interesting choice there, the 9.3x62. I considered it before getting the .35 Whelen. I can't emphasize enough how my African outfitter wanted a big hole punched in the plains game. Either one of these is a better choice than the 30 magnums, IMO.

I'd also like to add that John Taylor, who shot more game than most of us can dream of, believed that an impact velocity of 1900 fps was all that was needed to cause tissue disruption leading to quick downing of animals.

Don't get a .308. You have a .270, no point in the 308. The .25-06 is a great gun, very similar to the .270, just lighter bullet weights. I do like the .35 whelen, not much more recoil than the .270. So if I was in your position, I would learn about reloading, and get a really good scope for the .270. The .270 has taken down every animal in north america, its all about shot placement.

.300wm, hands down.

^^^^^X2^^^^^^^^^