Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles How good is a 7mm remington mag for a longer range rifle.

im wanting to have a longer range rifle and i really like the 7mm remington mag. i would proble be getting it in the tikka t3 with the bushnell elite 6500 2.5-16x42 and ill be handloading. what do you think of this combination. in your opinion would their be a better combo for around $1500.

ill be shootin proble up to around 500 yards.

You could do plenty with that, although it would not be my first choice if putting together a LR .284 rifle. The 162 AMAX is a good bullet in 7mm.

You can do awesome with that combo. I think the scope is +/- $700 so you have 800 for the rifle alone. What other rifles might you be considering?

i have taken game at 300- 350 range with 7 remmag .thats my comfort level bob in nh does 400 500 with no prob with pratice of course!

There's a HVA in 7 Mag for $319 sitting at the local fun store, wish I had the money.

The 7mm mag should fit the bill nicely for you. It is capable of sterling accuracy and has plenty of punch out to 500 yards for deer or elk. Mine shoots the 150 gr Ballistic tip half moa out to 500 yards and my load follows the Burris ballistic reticle almost precisely.
The 160 gr Accubond has a nice BC as does the Berger 168 gr VLD and the 162 gr Amax as previously mentioned. Those T3's really have a reputation as shooters. Buy it and have some fun!

One of my buds used to routinely thump deer out to 600 yards, with his 40XB in 7mm Rem. mag. That was his usual opening day rig and regimen: Spend morning watching mountain side with binocs, kill something that presented a shot. No longer recall what bullet he favored, though?

Looks like a good choice to me.

Should work as well as a 270.

This ought to get it rolling.....

270=7mm Mag......Riiiiiight


500 yds is a pretty good distance for your average hunting rifle, I think 400 yds would even be a good shot. Try shooting 2 liter bottles filled with water at 400yds....that will tell you if your rifle is dialed and you are up to it. I think that past 400 yds is really getting into territory where specialized rifles and gear will help increase your success by leaps and bounds.

I would go 300 win mag and not look back,as far as I am concerned it's clearly better than the 7mm rem mag.Shoot some 180 gr accubonds at 3100 fps, hard to beat, My tikka 300 win mag will drill 5 shots into a 1/2 inch

I'd save the money on that scope and run a Leupold. I have owned both and it seems everything gets a leupold these days. Won't throw the balance off quite as bad as that heavy 6500 will. Plus with the money you'll save you can spend some extra time at the range.

Would be hard to be a 7mm mag for long range work. Good bullets with high BC's. Never really warmed up to the cartridge myself but note sure why.

My LR rig is a 300 Win Mag currently throwing 200 grain Accubonds. Hard to beat that as well.

The 7 RM would be excellent as a long range bomber. The only limitation you would have would be your own.

I just bought a new Sendero for that purpose. I have a few mods in mind, but I'll post a pic when shes done.

Joseph

The 7mm RM is a fine cartridge, but perhaps I�m biased because it was my choice in 1982 and my only bolt gun for the next 20 years. It was � and still is � a boringly reliable elk killer.

The scope on my 7mm RM will soon be the Burris Fullfield II 4.5-14x with Ballistic Plex reticle that Santa brought me. You can pick them up new for about $250 on ebay at �Buy now� prices. This is my third such scope and I�ve lost track if you count my 3-9x�s. I like them.

Most any bullet will get you to 500 yards with good energy and velocity, although I prefer bonded core or monolithic or other selected premiums. These days I shoot the 140g and 160g North Fork SS and 140g Barnes TTSX and would have no qualms about elk at 500 yards with any of them. A higher BC bullet, like the 150g Scirocco II at .515 can deliver 1500fpe and 2100fps past the 650 yard line.

One of the great things about the 7mm RM is the recoil is on par with a .30-06 and bullets of the same sectional density. You can �step up� to a .300 magnum of some sort but you won�t gain much at 500 yards except more recoil.

In short, I think a 7mm RM is a pretty good choice for 500 yards and it can reach further when you want to.

This is common knowledge among the older guys on here,but the younger guys may not be aware of it....

The 7 Rem Mag was cobbled together as a wildcat on the 338 case by Les Bowman when the 338 was introduced in the late 50's.Bowman ran an elk hunting camp in Wyoming that featured above-timberline elk country that offered pretty long range shooting at elk;the area also held mule deer,sheep,black bear,moose, and grizzlies.

Bowman and his guides noted that many clients shot better,and wounded less game with 270's and 30/06's than they did with the 300 Weatherbys so popular at the time,due to excessive recoil.Bowman and his guides understood that BG animals at any distance are killed by putting good bullets in the right place;not by theoretical mumbo jumbo.Moderate recoil helps people do this.

He wanted a cartridge that shot as flat as a 300 Weatherby,out performed the 30/06 and 270,but kicked less and was more shootable than the 300's,but was flat shooting and accurate.

He necked down the 338 case to 7MM and Fred Huntington of RCBS helped him put a rifle together for the round.The 7 Rem Mag was then used by Bowman,by his clients,and by Remington representatives(Mike Walker and Wayne Leek?)while it was still a wildcat,on elk,grizzlies black bear,mule deer, etc.Early on they relied on 160 gr Sierra's,and the later 160 Partitions for this work at a velocity of about 3050 fps.

At the same time this was going on,Warren Page ,gun editor at Field and Stream was unning around the world killing all manner of big game with the 7 Mashburn, a wildcat similar to the 7RM.Page also hunted elk at Bowman's ranch with the Mashburn;Remington had the chronograph data on Page's wildcat Mashburn.The 7 Weatherby was around,but rifles for it were expensive,proprietary,and the twist for the 7mm Weatherby early on was a 1-12;it would not stabilize 160 gr bullets.

Remington brought the 7 RM out in 1962,and it was very popular.So,its' pedigree is as a long range cartridge at recoil levels that most people can manage nicely,tested and designed for long range use on elk sized game since the late 50's.It continues to do the same work now as it did then,except that with todays bullets and powders,it is likely better than it ever was.

History lesson over....test in the morning..... haha!

I agree with all the other posters. I will add that I have two and even have a custom reamer.

I used to shoot the 120 nosler ballistic tip. It sure shot fast and flat at approx 3550. I killed a coues wt at just over 700 yds with it. The wind drift was excessive but with some thought to the drift I managed a one shot kill.

As time went on I moved up to bullets that had higher BCs.
If I were to buy a factory barreled rifle I would look hard at the 160 accubond, 150 TTSX or the 150 E-tip as the all around bullet.

Now if you were to go custom and were to exclusively shoot deer sized animals you could have some fun with the 180 Berger VLD. It does require a slightly faster twist than the factory tubes. I did just that and built a 14 lb specialty rifle that could shoot 1000 yd matches or be used for long range glass and shoot coues wt type hunting. The amazing part of this is the performance. 68 gr of RL-25 in that 30" barrel launches the a non moly coated 180 VLD at 3050 @ 60 degrees. With a BC of .659 its drift and retained energy are amazing.

I recently worked up some loads for a 26" LSS Rem 700 in 7 RUM. The 180 Bergers were moly coated and the rifle maxed out at 3100 fps. The powder charge was 89 gr of RL-25. That 30" 7 mag is running right with it. Amazing what 4 extra inches of barrel can do.

Get that 7 mag and have some fun!

the 7mag will work great at the range you want to shoot. i also agree that most deer hunters can't make shot a 400-500 yds. there are lots of things that come into play at those ranges. you have to rock steady,know the wind drift,know your bullet drop.then you must get the animal in the right place ,standing still long enough to kill it. plus you can throw in a little excitment. i shoot my 7mag on paper out to 500yds .

Bob, as always, great info. And to the original poster--I am also in the process of setting up a newly aquired Tikka Lam/SS 7MM Rem. Mag for 400-500 yard shooting with 160 Accu-bombs. Your choices sound good to me.

BobinNH...

Enjoyed reading your post about the birth of the 7mm Rem. magnum. The names you named (Warren Page, Mike Walker, Fred Hunington of RCBS and Les Bowman) bring a LOT of nostalgia and gun-know-how with 'em. In fact, Fred Huntington made up a set of custom reloading dies for my .338 Win. Magnum 'way back in the early 1960s when he was getting RCBS on the map!

Yep... the ol' 7mm Rem. Magnum is a fine cartridge, not doubt about it. It's hard to beat an almost "perfect" hunting cartrige when it does everything well and doesn't kick your brains out.

Both of my sons (now in their late 40's) shoot 7mm Rem. Magnums as their deer & big game rifles... and their rifles get the job done.

And if you want a little "softer" recoil, the 7mm Rem. Magnum can easily be "loaded down" a bit by a handloader to make the recoil closer to the .270 Win. range. Although, frankly... I've shot my son's 7mm's... and the recoil isn't bad at all... not nearly as much as my .338 Win. Magnum in which I usually shoot a hot load of 210 grain Nosler Partitions.

It's hard to believe that just 70 more grains of bullet weight (.338 = 210 grains vs. 7mm = 140 grains) can make such a big difference in "sensed" recoil, but it does.

If I were going to buy and own just one big game rifle, it would be in 7mm Remington Magnum.


Strength & Honor...

Ron T.

Yep, and this is why I have always felt that the 7mm Remington Magnum and .375 H&H Magnum are two of the most practical and useful belted mags ever dreamt up. I've always felt that the 7mm Remington Magnum is about as close to the perfect all-around cartridge (for a North American hunter) that there is. There certainly are a few cartridges that shoot flatter, but they tend to be either far more specialized or lots harder on the shoulder.

Agree with all who say it is hard to beat. I started hunting with a 7 mag in the late 60s. It was considered 'way to big' by most folks around here. I gradually upgraded rifles but the caliber stayed the same. Used to hand load for the 7 Rem and it was awesome to say the least. It became a round used for 1000 yard competition which tells you about it's accuracy. The 300 Win is a good cartridge but doesn't perform as well as the 7 Rem at longer ranges. Close up the 300 has more power but then starts dropping more and losing energy as well. Back in the 'old days' it was hard to find ammo for it. Now you can't hardly go into a store without there being plenty 7 Rem mag ammo on the shelves. It's survived the test of time and will be here for a very long time.

Have to add though that the 270 Wby mag sure has come on strong as a long range rifle. Shoots very flat and hits hard. It too is a heck of a cartridge and doesn't have the kick of the 300 Wby.

Should do just fine. One might get more informed answers though if we knew what it was intended for. Paper, squirrels, deer, elk?

Edited: Ability to rectify parallax issues would be an extreme plus.

Ron/WildBill:
There's no denying the effectivesness of rounds like the 300 mags and the 338's etc.But the subject of recoil is a legitimate one,and such cartridges come with a bit if baggage for some riflemen;some handle them easily and with impunity,and for others they are excessive in terms of their rifle weight and/or recoil.

There is no magic in the 7RM,and today there are other cartridges that perform in a similar manner,as another poster points out,the 270 Weatherby being one,along with Weatherby's 7mm,the 7WSM,the Rem SAUM,280AI,etc.But this takes nothing away from the 7RM,and it still does a great job across a wide spectrum of game,at recoil levels tolerable for most of us.

Bob covered it pretty well. The only thing I'd add is that for a 500 yd rifle scope I'd go with a 3-9 Burris with a BP in it and or the Leo 3-9 with dotz.

Then I'd take the money I saved on the scope and buy a bunch of components and shoot the heck out of the rig from field positions. Bench rests need not apply...grin

Dober

Absolutely spot-on Dober!

There is NO substitute for trigger time...

Ingwe

Hard to beat the old 7-mag.

A 3-9 power(9X) seems a little low to me to be shooting at 500 yds. You're gonna need a rock solid rest anyways so you may as well be able to see what you're shooting at and be able to shoot at a spot on the target or animal rather than just shooting at it. I have a 4.5-14 on my 7 Mag and to me 14x is ok but I wouldn't feel over powered on magnification with a 6-18 either.

I guess that coyote I shot at 942 yards the other day with my 3-9x40 Burris never got the memo that 3-9x was inadequate beyond 500 yards

Winging bullets at Coyotes is a lot different than being able to make a clean shot on a big game animal. If 9x works for you at 1000yds, then that's great. I would still recommend more scope....just my opinion. Take it for what it's worth...

Opinions are what makes the world go round, but just to clarify, nobody is "winging" anything. If a person can hit the vitals of a coyote at any given distance with a cold-bore shot, then they can surely hit the vitals of a big-game animal at the same distance. I also thought that I would point out that 500 yards is a heck of a lot closer (and MUCH easier) than 1000, so if I can see the target past 900 yards with 9x, then pretty much anybody should be able to do it at 500.

This is interesting to me.....I have no quarrel with someone using exactly what they want for scope power because we all get used to different things....

But the reticle of a garden variety 4X scope subtends an inch at 100 yards;even at 500 yards,if we get the steady rest(required)the reticle is subtending 5" at 500 yards,an area about the size of your fist.Since many are hard pressed to hold a MOA group under field conditions,and since the vital area of a good sized deer is about a foot square,we have,even with such absurdly low power as a 4X,enough precision to do the job nicely even at 500 yards,if we know what we are doing.

Not suggesting that more power may not be helpful at times,but the notion that you are holding with great precision at 500 yards with a 14X,but sorta only shooting "at them" at 9X stikes me as a bit simplistic.I would respectfully suggest that if you miss at 500 yards with a 9X,best take a hard look in the mirror for the reason.....

Everyone's eyes are different. Some folks just see better than others. A 4x is enough for those with good vision at 500yd for any big game animal...a 3-9 adds more capability for those that don't.

With that in mind, although the 6500 is a fine scope it is heavy, pricey and a lot more mag than necessary for 500yds. A nice scope for a dual purpose rifle that might challenge smaller targets, but a 7mm doesn't fit that exactly, and it's a bit much for a sporter rifle IMO, but if you want optics capable to twice that range then it is a viable option.

Same could be said of the 7mag...it's more than necessary. At 500yd, a 708 would do about the same work with the same bullet. It really just depends on the type of rifle you like to hunt with. If you like a heavier rifle with more recoil then go big 7, but the bullet is the more important choice these days.

TC

I've never shot any BG at 500 yards. But if I were so inclined, I think a 7 mag with a good 3x9x40 pushing a 160gr bullet would be a good start.
I do know it will make holes in paper that are very close together at 600 yards. And that's from field positions. The only difference is my 7 mag has a 2x7 on it.

Idahostalker: I have used a couple of the Bushnell 6500 series variable scopes at the range - they are awesome!
I have NO idea whether or not they will hold up to heavy recoil and/or inclement weather and sub-zero temperatures (i.e. Hunting).
For the money they should!
I have a Remington 700 Classic in 7mm Remington Magnum with a Leupold 3.5x10 A/O variable scope on it.
I have taken all manner of Elk, Mule Deer, Antelope, Black Bear and Whitetailed Deer with this rig.
I killed a 6x6 Bull Elk at 325 yards using just one shot to do so a couple years back.
I think the furthest animal I have harvested to date with this Rifle is just at 400 yards.
I use the wonderful Nosler 160 grain Partitions in this Rifle, exclusively!
With as much scope power as you are contemplating I am sure you can harvest standing Game with that rig at 500 yards - easily.
Get a good rangefinder (I use the Leica 900 myself) and use it as well.
Best of luck to ya.
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

I think you guys might just give BobinNH a listen with his posts regarding the 7mm RM. It seems he is pretty squared away on the cartridge. Good insight Bob. Tom

Thanks,Tom.

From 500 yards on in, on a hunting rifle, a 3x9 seems about perfect, to me! Or a 2.5x8.

It is amazing what the old dogs have learned over the years through field experience.
You are looking at purchasing the excellent T3, a lightweight, accurate rifle. Then you want to hamstring it with a big, heavy scope. The 6500's are great scopes, but for this rifle a 3x9 or 2 1/2-8 Leupold would balance the rifle much better and make a great hunting rig that you could shoot accurately as far as you need to. Listen to the likes of Dober, Ingwe, BobinNH, ect. They have been there, done that.

For what it is worth, I made the longest shot I have ever attempted this past fall using a puny 1 3/4-6 Leupold and didn't feel, or think, I was underscoped to try the shot.

Everyone is different, but I find 3-9x perfectly adequate for big game at 500 or 600 yards. I will admit that when shooting clay pigeons at 600 yards or even for groups at 100, I prefer a 4.5-14x cranked up all the way. Big game is very different, however. With big game you have a much more visible target and it is easy to position the crosshairs in relation to the rest of the animal, even if the specific aim point is covered by the reticle.

CoyoteHunter and MM are spot on IMO...there are times when more magnification is a very good thing,especially for deer-sized stuff in open country,and I use a variable topping at 9-10 myself occaisionally...and it's helpful as my eyes get a bit older....but there are very few hunts on which I would not be pretty comfy with a regular old fixed 4X...

I shoot 600 yards frequently with a 6X...

But like everyone says,all eye balls are different!

Scope magnification is a personal decision and it really depends on you and how you shoot. I find that I use 5-8x in the field, depending on range. For whatever reason, I find it significantly harder to use 10x than 8x on live game. The point about a large scope destroying the balance of a light rifle is well made; I'm not sure that I'd put a large scope on a rifle without a bipod.

I may get smoked for this but I think a scope with a high end power will sometimes tempt a hunter into trying a shot that he shouldn't.
I don't carry a range finder but I know how to use the plex in my scope to determine if the animal is within my rather modest limits.

You won't be smoked by me stillbeeman but I will say that I find nothing wrong with the use of a high end power scope. I use a 4-14 a lot, and I practice with it a lot as well. I like to be able to pick the spot I am gonna hit at long range instead of hitting the animal in the vitals at long range. 4 me it works best to have some power to crank up to.

Practice and discipline is the key to this, not many x's one's scope has. Practice tells you when you can and can't make a first shot one round kill and discipline tells you when you should or shouldn't shoot.

Many times I've taken shots in the 400-600+ zone and I knew wihtout any doubt that when I dropped the hammer that things were gonna be one and done.

I've also passed on shots of sub 100 or sub 200 cause I didn't know I could do it right. Practice and discipline once again taught me when to shoot and when not to.

As far as you not carrying a range finder I find that a bit odd but it's your choice. I feel it's a poor choice if the country you hunt affords you opportunities to shoot past 300 yds but the choice is yours.

Dober

Tikka is a great rifle and if you do your part no reason why you can drop deer or sheep out to 700 yds with a 7mm. Scope wise I am partial to the Big Sky by Sightron in 4-16x42 great glass.

Mark, obviously you missed the word "modest" in my post. I've only shot one head of BG beyond 300 yards and it was an antelope that I ranged, using the plex of my scope, at 400 yards. Actual distance was 384 yards. To me, the stalk is the thrill of the hunt.

I used to hunt in Ozona Texas in the late 70's when the Redfield Accutrac scopes first came out. I had a stand on a hill. There was a windmill-water trough down hill 575 yards. The A dial on that scope fits a 7 mag with a 140 grain bullet perfectly. It was no problem to hit deer at that water trough when the wind wasnt blowing. If you only had one deer rifle the 7 rem mag would be my choice. A 300 win mag would be my second. Just my opinion.

A good friend of mine shot a beautiful ram in Alaska with a Hill Country rifle in 7 Mag and 160 Partitions at 600 yards. That should answer your query.

The only thing better than a 7 mag is 3 or 4 of them. Only have 3 right now.

Nothing wrong with the 7 rem mag, but a 06 or 308 will get you to 500 yards with ease and with less recoil....just a thought. A 280 or even a 7mm08 if your set on .284

I saw the old thread being brought back out and said, "damn it's got to be hanco again"..... To the OP, the question in the title is really rhetorical. I get it...

If I could only pick one cartridge for all my western hunting,this would probably be the one.

Hard to deny the fact that the 7mm rem mag is one of the best long range cartridges ever designed...

Don't need one myself, but it's a good one for those that want just a leetle more oomph. It's got a good reputation for accuracy, doesn't kick all that much, and with all the rifles in existence, ammo and brass should never be a problem. It doesn't get much airplay these days, but remains a World standard round.

My late brother had a Brown Precision rifle in 7 Rmag built on a Mark X, and it was a dandy.

I've had an 06 for game hunting most of my life, but a 7mm RM can do things as well as the old 06 for many game. I think I'd take an 06 with heavy bullets for big game though.

I have three 7mm RM's and I like them.

Your ability may be a more important factor in long range ....an accurate 7 mag .will do the job..

I've made a habit of smacking deer sized game out past 500yds without anymore than 8x. I've also found no issue messing up a 10" gong at 550yds with a straight 4x easy as eating pie.

I've used a 14x to make sub MOA groups at 900m. That's all clean on game accuracy.

Steady with 4 is the same steady with 24.

This thread wasn't dead, it was just sleeping for 6-1/2 years.

I had a Burris 4.5-14x on my 7mm RM for a few years but have gone back to a Burris 3-9x. Both have Ballistic Plex reticles, as do most of the scopes I currently use.

The OP isn't clear what he meant by "longer range". My limit with my 7mm RM is 600 yards because that is the limit of my practice.

Hunters develop loyal attachments to cartridges based upon subjective criteria.

The .300 Win Mag is an excellent cartridge. But you'll have to come up with new material because no one's buying that it'll kill deader than a 7MM Rem Mag. In fact, I'd go with 175 grain .284 caliber bullets as winning penetration contests.

Whoever wrote that the 7MM Rem Mag is the biggest gun most shooters can shoot from benches without flinching was on target. I've seen well put-up dudes flinch like old women when firing 180 grain .300 Win Mag bullets. And they ain't gonna kill any deader than 160 7MM Rem Mag bullets.

Go with a 7MM Rem Mag.

I forgot: the 7MM Rem Mag will kill big game a whole lot farther than 99.9% of hunter can shoot.

I haven't seen any real difference on deer or elk sized animals between a 270 WSM, 7mm Rem Mag or 300 Win Mag with similar if not the same bullets (Nosler Partitions). I have seen elk take the hits a little harder with my Whelen and 338 Win Mag.

Saying that, I picked the 7mm Rem Mag as my first rifle and could've stopped right there and been just fine. Whenever someone asks me about which cartridge they should look at, the 7mm Rem Mag is first. Especially for a non hand loader, a box of 160 Partitions as loaded by Federal is amazing as is the Winchester loaded 160 Accubonds.

I really liked the 7mm's so much I had a 7mm Mashburn made up. Fires 175 PTs the same speed as my 300 Weatherby does the 200 Partition. Lighter recoil and a lighter rifle.

If I could rewind 20 years I'd be just fine with an excellent 7mm Rem built by a great smith that weighed 8lbs loaded. Probably be money ahead in the search for perfect.

Today is the first time I've read any of this, but before the scope discussion I was thinking Leopold 2.5X8 with the B&C Reticle.
I use one on a 338-06 with 210 Noslers and getting over 400 yards is a cinch
A seven Mag with the same should do 500 easy.

Very little left to add here. For me, the 7mm x 180 grain x 3000 fps bullet hits the recoil sweet spot while yielding great ballistics.

Meaning it's about all I care to shoot (a lot) in a hunting weight rifle. The T3 may or may not be twisted right to optimize this.

However, for the range you mentioned, I would not go that big. .280 Rem is fine. Some have allegedly run the lowly 30-06 and .270 just fine a longer ranges ...

But the 7 RM should sizzle at 500.

With today scopes and bullets,the 7 RM gets to 500 and way beyond that easily.


Actually it always did. I've killed with it to 500 yards and with nothing more complex than a fixed 4X scope and seen the same on mature bull elk at the same distance. This with common 140-160 gr bullets.

Loaded to full potential and sighted correctly,it offers a substantially flatter trajectory to 500-600 yards, than anything on a standard case I can think of....sort of a game saver at times.

Bob,
For the 160gr bullets (Partition/Accubond), what is "full potential", about 3000-3100fps? zero at about 250-300yds?
Inquiring minds who own a 7mmRM want to know.

160 AB @ 3000fps, zero for MPBR. In my case 3" high @ 100 yds.

Sponx: Yes. Or a 140 at 3200-3250....or a 150 at 3100-3150.....

With those velocities and zeroed 2.75"-3" high at 100 (precisely! Don't cheat!), you will be app. POA at 300 yards,maybe a tad low....,anywhere from 8-12" low at 400 depending on the bullet,and app. 2 feet low at 500 yds.

But you have all those lines, dots and turrets to help you today once you get past 400.


Before someone tells me I will miss at mid range with this sight setting, forget it. I am used to it having done it successfully for about 40 years now.

Thanks,
That is what I had calculated, and trying to load to. Dang work doesn't allow much time for tweaking loads and shooting.



With 3" high at 100yd, unless you are holding on the back of really small critters at less than 300yds you shouldn't miss.
What is max altitude of that MPBR? 4"?

Yes...maybe less. It depends on the bullet but those numbers are for Nosler Partitions,Sierra's etc. More standard bullets.

The plastic tipped bullets may show more midrange and I found the formula did not work for Swift SS 150 gr. I had to lower 100 yd zero to 2" high and I still had a 300 yd zero, or close to it.

A 162 Amax will also shoot "flatter" than the stuff I typically use.

Good idea to shoot the distances to confirm which I always do.

Probably about a 340 yard MPBR.

I have always used the 140 Nosler partition. It fit the A dial on the old Redfield Accutrac scopes real well. The built in range finder worked real well too. A 140 partition will punch through both shoulders of a 150 buck at 600 yds. You can't beat a 7 mags if you consider how much power vs recoil. In my opinion

If that was a guess it is pretty close. At 7500 ft altitude and 50F degrees my calculator suggests about 348 yards. That is with a max rise or fall of 3.85" above or below line of sight or MPBR for a 7.7" target. Zero range would be 295 yards. Approximate retained velocity and energy of 2624fps and 2446fpe.

Not much different than a 140g AB @ 3214fps and 3" high at 100. 307 yard zero, 360 yard MPBR. Approximate retained energy and velocity of 2666fps, 2208fpe.

At 600 yards they measure up about like this:
140AB: -39.3", 2335fps, 1694fpe, 17.1" 10mph drift
160AB: -42.7", 2309fps, 1894fpe, 16.2" 10mph drift.

My own preference is to MPBR sight for a smaller 6" target (vs 7.7" in the above calculation.) Max rise/drop from line of sight is 3", zero is 277 yards, MPBR 326 yards. with a 140g AB at 3214fps/7500ft/50F. (3214fps is my chrono'd M.V.) Since 1982 when I started all but 4 or 5 of my kills have been closer than 326 (including antelope) so the 6" target MPBR works well for me. For mule deer keep it on fur out to around 450 yards, about 500 yards for elk. (This obviously depends on where you want to hit, shoulder joint, vertical center, heart, etc.). And, obviously, you need to check the trajectory at the range, not just with a calculator.

you shoot to confirm??
... "buh..., but it was boresighted at the store"
I may need to push the 160PTs a litte more to get 3000fps, try different primer. Will kill just fine at 2950fps though

I have shot the 7mag for many years. I have killed gobs of deer using the 139-grain Interlock loaded to 3100 fps. The 140 Accubond or Partition is also good.

My favorite elk load is a Partition loaded to 3000fps. I have killed elk at 326, 400 and 443 yards using this load.

Out to 500 yards, you will not need to worry about splitting hairs with bc. All that bc crap is good for, is if you intend to push it to 800-1000 yards and beyond.

I got my first rifle cheap in a trade, or I would probably be shooting an 06, but I have sure had good luck with my 7 mags.

They have been pretty much shelved, as I do not hunt elk much anymore and my .308s get the most use on deer. I will soon be adding a .260 Rem to that group, too.

You laugh but the first elk I saw on the ground was killed with a Browning 7mm RM with a scope that was bore-sighted at the gun store. The hunter had never shot the rifle. That was my first year big game hunting, 1982.

The lack of practice wiht the rifle and scope didn't matter as the hunter and the bull were standing under the canopy of the same pine tree when the shot was fired. The hunter couldn't see "anything but brown" through the scope so he used the rifle like a shotgun.

Luck happens.

I only have one 7mm. It's a BDL 700 that Hill Country Rifles tuned. I added a Williams steel guard/floorplate and it's ready to go. I haven't killed anything with it yet, but that'll soon change. It shoots quite well at 200 with 160 Partitions. I wouldn't feel too sorry for myself if this was my only big-game rifle.
Bob

Oh I dunno. I checked zero on my '06 last night, then picked a gallon of wild blueberries while I was out there on the tundra.

Aim point was a white 4x5 1/2 inch card at 325 long paces, taped to a 30 inch square of brown cardboard. I forgot the rangefinder but was probably within 4 yards plus or minus. Rifle wears a 3.5-10x Leupold used on high, previosly (last November) zeroed at 300 yards. A 3 round group using only a front rest strung along the bottom edge of the card with only about a half inch vertical separation and about 5 horizontal. That was me of course. One shot at target out another 90 paces with a hold about one card height over the card and both a front and back rest (day and fanny pack) centered the card and I called it good enough ! 150 grain factory Hornady Superperformance with an advertised 3080fps.

Last year I popped two caribou maybe 2 minutes apart with the rig , using the snow machine windscreen for a rest ( forgot I had the Bog-pod with me. The first was an eyeballed 300 ( actually worked out to 290), the second was a ranged 433 yards, using line of back holdover. Both were double-lunged, one shot each.

I'd say a 3-9 scope will do just as well - ain't that much difference. I've never liked the 7 Mag personally, but it will do fine. It doesn't have anything ballistically on the '06 to 300 under hunting conditions but then it becomes marginally flatter after that, assuming similar bullet weights. It will kill anything at 500 that an '06 or 300 Mag will with proper placement.

Oh yes - a few years ago I killed a caribou at 356 long paces with a 17 inch barreled '06 wearing a 2-7 Leupold, one shot. Using a prone position and literally rock solid rest that I built up myself from a few flat slate pieces and my cap for a pad. That was not an "under-powered" scope either.....

True, I estimated the range (pre rangefinder) at 300, but a heart shot works as well as a lung shot. That had nothing to do with the scope's power. It's good when one gets lucky!

Personally, I could hunt with a 6x fixed power the rest of my life and never look back. I'd not feel underscoped to 500 yards. In fact the longest shot I ever made - well in excess of 500 yards- was made with a 3-9 steel tubed Weaver set on 3 power. Long story why. but my eyes were 40 years younger then and certainly seeing the first bullet kick up snow on the hillside below her didn't hurt any for applying Kentucky windage on the second shot, which centered her lungs.

Alas , I only have one 6x ....and several more rifles than that. Tho I love the 3.5-10x Vari-X III that I have on my Tundra gun. It was given to me so what's not to like?

Nothing wrong with the higher powers tho if you don't mind the bulk and weight. Compromises are everywhere.

Sponxx,

With 160 grain Partitions and H-4831. According to my chrono, I get just over 3100FPS. Keep in mind this load was taken from circa 1975 loading data. It shoots well in my rifle, and will one-shot kill huge elk. Newer data list my H-4831 load as above maximum, which is ironic because it was listed as 3 grains under max when it was printed.

My 150 grain load come right outta Nosler's manual: 63 grains of IMR 4350 for just over 3200 FPS. This will shoot very tiny groups.

I'm prone to thinking that a 150 grain Partition might be the best single bullet for all North American big game. If I were to hunt the biggest bear, I'd go with a 175 grain Partition.

I don't shoot anything lighter than 150 grain bullets. If a lighter bullet will get the job done, I'll take a .270 Win, which I'll assuredly do from here on out.

R-22, which is really Norma's MRP, will give highest velocity. H-4831 might be the most versatile 7MM Rem Mag powder. It also provides excellent accuracy.

BTW, I've bought a 100 Norma brass. It was expensive, nearly a buck a piece. But they ought to last many, many years.

The 7MM Rem Mag was created as a long range elk rifle. In that capacity, none are better. In really it is more gun than necessary for the largest mule deer. But for a hunter who wants to own only one gun, a 7MM Rem Mag is hard to beat, especially if you hand load.

I own a Belgian Browning, a beautiful rifle. It is closing in on 50 years old. I've never hunted with it. I've never brought it on a hunt. It's chambered for .338 Win Mag, which is far too much gun for everything in North America except the largest bear.