Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters What Happened to the 7mm Rem Mag?

What can it do that a .270 with a quality 150gr bullet can't or if a monometal guy 130gr TTSX?

Mike

I have played with a bunch of cartridges over the years, trying to find a "perfect" all around cartridge for the range of typical applications that a western hunter faces (antelope to elk; longer ranges; often windy, etc.) Fads come and go, but I keep coming back to the 7 MM Rem as best suiting my needs. I can throw heavier bullets than the .270 Win, shoot flatter than a 30-06, and have less recoil than a 300 Win Mag.

Every time I read the cartridge profiles in the Nosler reloading book, the eloquent authors convince me that I need each and every one of them. When push comes to shove, more often than not I grab my Penrod/Legend long-throated 7 mag.

And aoudad, elk, kudu, zebra, oryx, wildebeest, hartebeest......

The essence of it all...

When someone explains to me what's "wrong" with a 160-162 gr 7mm bullet loaded to 3000-3100 fps, I might understand what happened to it. No one has.

The cartridge was conceived as a wildcat outside Cody, Wyoming to kill elk and other BG animals (including grizzlies and moose), in above timberline, open basins at long range, in a place called "Elk Heaven"; intended by Les Bowman to replace the 300 Weatherby's that his clients did not shoot so well, yet have more reach than the 30/06 and more power than a 270,in a portable mountain weight rifle (no not 11-17 pounds, how ridiculous) that did not kick your molars loose.

This was some years before it was actually adopted, so it's fair to say it didn't spring from some Madison Ave marketing consultant and had as much or more field time and experience actually killing BG animals than many cartridges designed just to sell hunters something "different". Bowman did his home work well.

I know from using them or actually seeing them at work, that the 300's and 338's are supposed to kill elk sized stuff "better" but honestly can't recall seeing it happen. Any of the 7 Rem Mag "failures" I hear talked about usually get traced back to lousy shooting or poor bullet choice....more the former than the latter.Talk of its ineffectiveness is just mostly "wind" and bullistic gack. I wouldn't pay any attention to any of it

I watched a big 6x6 herd bull dropped mid bugle on his nose at about 500 yards from a properly applied 160 Partition. Last 6x6 I killed was dropped so fast by the same load that he lost all holds and cascaded down the mountain like a runaway Ferris wheel.In either case a 300 or 338 would not have done any better.

I am not too concerned about short actions, or cases with no belts, or worn throats (since I keep spare barrels here).Feeding and function in bolt actions with belted cases was perfected long ago,and makes no difference whether Remington, Ruger, Winchester, Sako or properly modified Mauser or Rem clone, they all function with the cartridge.I can't say the same for the short/fats IME.

It would be easier to make a list of animals i would not hunt with the cartridge than of those I would. If I had to pick one cartridge to hunt the west and Canada this would likely be "it". I am certainly not going to choose a BG cartridge based on the personality profiles of some who shoot it, or because some do-do shoots it poorly; that would be silly.....I got three over here.

Ubiquitous,moderate of recoil in portable rifles,flat shooting, heavier bullets and more potent than anything smaller (bullets that nudge into the middle range of 30 caliber slugs while driven at true magnum velocities),and enough power to cleanly take anything in North America.

What's wrong with that?

Anyone?

Would love to hear the answer to this.

Not holding my breath though..........Just sayin'...........

It doesn't help help when guides are telling Elk clients they need a .300 mag of some sort. I know a lot of guys who own .300's because they went on an Elk hunt once and it was what the guide recommended to them. They never seem to talk their clients into 7's from what I see.

I've always liked the 7MM mag, but don't own one right now. That being said, I have run into a definite bias against the round literally every place I've hunted out west. Seems everyone out there has a "lost too many elk (or mule deer, pronghorn, etc)" story regarding the 7mag. Might just be a statistical thing...since there are so many out west, then that would leave one to believe that if an animal was wounded and possibly got away, then statistically, more might be from that round. I don't know...but the bias against that round is very real in the circles I travel out there.

Interesting...........
I wonder what the experienced 7x57 users would think?