What's up with the 7 mag at the campfire?It doesn't seem to get much attention on any of the forums.Have the newer short mags overshadowed this great cartridge.Lately I have had the urge to buy one to play around with.I have plenty of rifles, my primary shooter being a 270 and my only magnum a 300H&H, so it's not a matter of need but of want.Comments please.

Must not be the "hot" thing right now. It is a good cartridge, but it seems to not shoot as fast as the reloading manuals claim. I have one in a #1, have taken several elk with it, however will probably take a 30-06, and 45-70 this year and use one depending on conditions It is the same with the .300 H & H. There are newer offerings, but it still does everything you need. It is still one of the big 5 around here. As usual, the hype goes to things that go a gazillion fps and break bones in you shoulder.

A 7mm remag does everything all the other 284 hotshots try to do: 284 win, 280 AI, even the 7WSM. But it a long, belted, boring cartrige. kind of like your fathers oldsmobile. I rather play with the 280AI (buillt 4), or the 7WSM (none yet), as a challenge than just buy the odsmobile.

Jameister

Both of my adult (mid-40-ish) sons have 7mm Rem. mags, one a Winchester Model 70 (new model) and the other a Remington 700 BDL with exceptional wood... and both boys seem satisfied with 'em.

I've shot both rifles off the bench rest at my club's outside rifle range... and both rifles shoot pretty well with recoil (using 150 gr. factory loads) a tad greater than 150 grain factory loads out of a .30/06.

I'd just as soon have a .30/06 or even a .280 Remington (a .30/06 case necked down to 7mm aka ".284"). While the 7mm Rem. mag. a bit of "over-kill" for deer (except for extremely long shots), I wouldn't turn one down since it's a good elk & moose cartridge as well and very close to being a great "all-around" caliber for N. American game. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />


Strength & Honor...

Ron T.

There is nothing wrong with the 7mm Remington that can be construed as a legitimate argument.

The firearms industry goes in circles that coincide with each new generation.

All the under 40's today, have realistically been interested in firearms during the last half of their life., ie 20 years.

If you look at it like that and remember the firearms industry has been vibrant in the US for nearly 10 times that amount in years, you can see the repetition in marketing.

Let me example that by stating that the gun industry was in an almost frenzy in the 1970's with this new fad of trying to cram the longest cartridge into the shortest action length.

We got litterally drowned in articles about efficiency, recoil excesses, muzzle blast being the equivalent of garlic to a vampire and all sorts of drivel that really turned many people away from the commercial magazines and many of the writers of the day.

Some of the most famous among them were blithering idiots in the way they portrayed a smart hunter as the man who chose the thimble sized case that used 3 grains of powder to get a million fps in a 22 inch barrel with 30% less recoil and mild blast.

Sound familiar?

If you are a hunter and not a theorist, as many shooters and good writers are, you are conscious of the responsibility you bestow upon yourself when you hunt, to apply self imposed ethics in the way you conduct yourself in the field.

This also means taking the animal into consideration, the terrain, the likely range you will get a shot and the power level necessary to provide an efficient kill when the moment arrises.

One of the things I have noticed about Barsness, and I do not know him and never even heard of him until a few months ago, is that he bases his cartridge choices on common sence more than ballistic hype compared to many other writers.

I have read questions to him on the forum about why he chose certain cartridges (such as the 9.3 X 62) over supposedly higher performing cartridges surrounding the chambering and I guess I can best answer that by saying that experience, and I mean genuine experience with a cartridge teaches you what it can do and how it well performs in the field.

That cartridge is utterly reliable in the field on a huge range of game from deer and black bear up to elephant simply with a change of bullet. It has almost a century of history, mostly by hunters that only had one rifle to provide for their family and efficiency and performance is paramount under those conditions.

I understand him because I have been there. I still fall into the performance trap on occasion, but only on occasion.

I have never owned a 7mm Remington but I have reloaded for, reviewed and hunted with many of them. It never appealed to me becuase it was always overshadowewd in my mind by the 300's that hit so much harder.

Did I actually need that extra power? NO. If I hunted an animal that was larger, that would have been the upper limit in demand from a 300, I stepped up to something larger if not only to get the chance to use a heavier rifle on game.

No point have a 1, 2, and 3 wood in your golf bag and only trying the #2 all the time.

I just bought a 7mm Remington Magnum for my eldest son. It was a particulary beautiful rifle with wood far better that usually found on a model 70. It has the 26 inch barrel, top bluing job and the claw feed extractor. Nice rifle.

That was the reason my son thinks I bought it for him. The aditional and and very real reason I bought it for him is that he shoots that recoil level very well and I want him to be comfortable with recoil and accept it as a part of the deal when hunting. Somthing not to be feared.

Sure, he can shoot my 340 Roy but not with the consistency I expect a hunter to demonstrade when he is in control of the rifle. He will get better for sure, but it is more important that he not be shyed away from the sport by getting belted more than necesary, so in the end, I applaud your suggestion that the 7mm Remington is an under appreciated cartridge on the forum.

It suffers the same image as the .30/06, it is common, easy to shoot, practical, available, and suited to the majority of game animals available to most riflemen.

Always trust your gut. Go get your 7mm.

While I don't have a 7mm RM now I have had two of them and shot quite a bit of game with that cartridge.

The latest report of die sales from RCBS shows that the 7mm RM is far more popular than the 300 WM!.

.30-06 SPRINGFIELD
2 .22-250 REMINGTON
3 .270 WINCHESTER
4 .45 ACP / G.A.P.
5 .300 WINCHESTER SHORT MAGNUM
6 7MM REMINGTON MAGNUM
7 .44 MAGNUM / .44 SPECIAL
8 .357 MAGNUM / .38 SPECIAL - ROLL CRIMP
9 .223 REMINGTON
10 .308 WINCHESTER
11 .204 RUGER
12 .243 WINCHESTER
13 .500 S&W
14 .270 WINCHESTER SHORT MAGNUM
15 .45-70 US GOVERNMENT
16 .300 WINCHESTER MAGNUM
17 .40 S&W / 10MM
18 9MM LUGER
19 .45 COLT
20 .30-30 WCF
21 7MM-08 REMINGTON
22 .223 WINCHESTER SUPER SHORT MAGNUM
23 .300 REMINGTON ULTRA MAGNUM
24 .308 WINCHESTER
25 .25-06
26 8 X 57 MAUSER
27 6.5 X 55 SWEDISH MAUSER
28 .222 REMINGTON
29 .338 WINCHESTER MAGNUM
30 .300 WEATHERBY MAGNUM
31 .243 WINCHESTER SUPER SHORT MAGNUM
32 .22 HORNET
33 .357 MAGNUM / 38 SPECIAL - TAPER CRIMP
34 7MM WINCHESTER SHORT MAGNUM
35 .375 H&H MAGNUM
36 7 X 57 MAUSER
37 .260 REMINGTON
38 7.62 X 54R RUSSIAN
39 .25 WINCHESTER SUPER SHORT MAGNUM
40 .220 SWIFT
41 .257 WEATHERBY MAGNUM
42 .300 REMINGTON SHORT ACTION ULTRA MAGNUM
43 .454 CASULL
44 7MM REMINGTON ULTRA MAGNUM
45 .257 ROBERTS
46 .17 REMINGTON
47 .41 MAGNUM
48 9.3MM X 62 MAUSER
49 .444 MARLIN
50 7.62MM X 39 - .308 / 311 RUSSIAN
http://forums.accuratereloading.com/groupee/forums/a/tpc/f/3221043/m/127107852/r/482106062#482106062

I would buy a 7mm RM if a nice rifle comes my way. I like the cartridge much better than any belted 300 mag.

I have 7x57s, 7mm-08s, .280s (both factory and AI) and one 7mm Rem Mag (a custom rifle that I bought more as an investment than as a shooter). I have bought, sold and traded more than a half-dozen 7mm Mags over the years and have found that they burn a lot more powder and weigh more than the '06 based rounds that perform just about the same on game. I have shot several mule deer and a couple of elk with the round and the only problems I had were with bullet failure--not the fault of the caliber itself.

I am going to take my custom 7mm Mag to Texas in January to "hunt" whitetails. The drill there is stand-hunting with the possibility of long shots, and my custom Model 70 shoots 120 grain TSXs fast and accurately. It won't get beat up like it would on a Coues whitetal hunt and the extra weight doesn't matter in a deer stand. I have nothing against the round, but there are others that I prefer for most of my hunting.

I bought one just to have a belted magnum after I sold my 458. I already had a 30-06 and a 270. It will shoot flatter than the 30-06 but recoil and muzzle blast is more.
If you reload you will find that most powders do not fill the case, which makes a good agument for the short magnums.
If you have a chronograph you will find out that you should really get the 26" barrel otherwise you are converting a lot of gunpowder into noise and heat for nothing.
I would stick to a premium bullet in the 270 unless you really have a specific need for one. I would trade mine for a 7mm-08 any day. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />
GWN

The 7mm RM is an excellent cartridge for everything in the lower 48.

However, I fail to see the difference between a 160 gr partition at 3100 out of the 7mm RM, and a 150 gr partition at 3050 out of my 270. (Yes, I can get that without pressure signs.)

So, if you want one, get it. It will work well, and you'll be happy. But don't expect a quantum leap over the 270.

What a pile of BS. Getting 3000fps with 160 gr bullets in the 7MM Rem Mag is not rocket science. This cartridge is a great round, and more than one person has used it as their principle rifle to kill big all over this world. Joe Bishop is a prime example.

It's hard to stop a 160gr 7mm premium bullet that started at 3000fps. This all despite the rumours that big game bullets start at.308.

Chuck

Chuck,
Maybe mine has a slow barrel? I just ran some over the screens yesterday and compared my handloads against some Winchester factory ammo. They were both 150 gr bullets and neither of those were 3,000 fps. Factory loads were 2955 fps from a 24" tube.
GWN

Now there's a tactful entry into a discussion...

I've had two 7mm Magnums, both shot fine, but when I shot them with the loads they liked (160@2900) they weren't that much better than the .30/06 I was also shooting (165@2800) and I liked the lighter, handier '06 better, so off they went. I seldom shoot anything over 300 yards, so the better BC was not important, anyway. It turned out that I just didn't care for the big case, more powder, etc. thing for a plain old whitetail deer. No flies on 'em, just ain't excited by them.

Actually, there is quite a leap betwixt the two. Just observe the level of muzzle blast, recoil and the price of ammo....

I shoot a 7mag, because that is the big game rifle I started with. It works fine, but it's like running a big V10 up and down the interstate. It does the exact same thing as a V-6, but you "have the extra power when you want it". Even though I've never needed it. FWIW, Dutch.

Somehow I knew that some fires would be ignited with this post.The rifle I'm interested in is a Browning Stainless Stalker(used) and it has a 26" barrel.

The earlier post about not expecting a lot of difference from the 270 I agree with. My M70 w/24"bbl. shooting 150 NPT isn't far off.

Tactful or not, its the truth. My father has hunted with the same "7 Mag" since the early 70's with nothing but resounding success. He seems to have no problem reaching manual level velocities (these aren't pie in the sky numbers anyway). It seems to kill things quite dead. My brother hunts with a 7 Weatherby and has killed a greater variety of game (whitetail, mule deer, bear, pronghorn, elk, moose, bighorn......) with that rifle before the age of 25 than most men do in a lifetime.

A spade is a spade.

Chuck

I am sure it will do anything a 30-06 will do. But I would rather have the 30-06 and not have the extra recoil or carry a 24"tube. Now if I'm going to carry a 24" tube it will be a 300 WM or more. I pity the gun dealer who is trying to move a 7mm RM up here. They can't hardly give them away. Things start with the 30 Caliber here (anyway) to be well thought of. To me the 7 RM is a boring cartridge. YMMV If you like it go with it or better yet go find the many used ones for sale and make a deal.

Not everything we do makes sense! I had a friend who owned a 300 Win Mag with a 19" tube. It was "handy". <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />
I have a 25-06 with a 19" tube because it looked different with the full length stock. He got his because he wanted his rifle to be bigger than mine. I never shot his but he said it would part his hair right down the middle every time he fired it!
<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" />
I didn't have a chronograph back then but I would like to chronograph that 19" 300 winmag now. (If he was shooting it)
My feeling on cartridges this week is that when you need more cartridge than a 270 then you need more bullet weight.
Jack O' Connor said that a long time before I did. He used a
30-06 with 180 gr or a 375 H&H I believe. I like the 35 Whelen or a 338-06 just because not everybody else has one. That might not be a good reason for anyone else but it is for me.
<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />
GWN

I have had a 7 mag in both Rem, and Weatherby. I could not get 3000 fps out of a 160 gr bullet, and I used several differnt powders. The Rem had a 26 inch barrel. For me the extra powder, short case life, worring about bullets c performing ok,and recoil didn't add up.

I stepped back down to the.06. Very few of my kills have been over 300 yds, which the .06 wil do on both elk and deer without problems. I do like the 7mm caliber, but I shoot a 7mm mauser for antelope. I just tagged one last week with a 140 gr Rem cor Lokt at 305 yds ( Lieca reading)

Bob Hagel did a piece on the 7mm Rem in the July/August issue of Handloader Magazine circa 1975. It was the most thorough piece I ever read on that cartridge. He tested barrel length and velocity, throat length and velocity, and thought the pressure spikes attributed to this cartridge were due to the short throats in Rem rifles.
A surprise to me was how little velocity was lost when he cut the barrel to 22 inches. The loss from 26 to 24 was small also.
I had a 7mm Weatherby and by 1975 I had killed hundreds of big game animals with it, but was tired of the sole source for components. Hagel throated his personal rifle for the 160 Nosler seated to the base of the neck. He published data in his article, and John Wooters, Sundra and others Gw's did the long throat thing. I bought a Mod 70 after reading the article and found I did not have to lengthen the throat. It came from the factory in that condition. I still have the Mod 70. It is about 100 fps slower then the Roy, but will launch a 175gr at close to 3,000 fps and will penetrate just as deep as the 200gr in a 300 Win and shoot just as flat. With 150 gr bullets at 3,200 fps it is a 270 on steriods.
SO WHATS NOT TO LIKE ???
S---can the magazines and get off your butts and do some hunting then you will know what works.
I gree with AGW comments on John Barsness. John grew up in Montana and was most likely a "hunter" before he became a knowledgeble gun writer. Most of todays hunters spend very little time in the field, but read magazines and shoot targets. Thats what I did when I had to work for a living and that is what most of the current crop of GW's do. They are not "hunters" they do not live in Montana they live in Calif with me and we shoot at Petersen's ranch. The best hunters I know do not know a damn thing about ballistics, but they know how to hunt. They do not have trajectory tables taped to their stocks because they would not shoot unless they were close enough to place the shot.
Most of these dumb dudes shoot 30/06's and have never heard of Boone & Crockett.
-Doc-

The 7mm Remington Magnum is a fine cartridge--and is still considered one of the Big Four by the ammo/rifle companies, because along with the .270, .30-06 and .300 Winchester, it sells more ammo and rifles than any other big game rounds in North America.

But it seems to have suffered more from recent hype than any of the other traditional rounds. I base this on seeing more used 7mm Remington Magnum on the racks of local stores than rifles in any other caliber.

In some ways this is understandable. The 7mm Magnum itself was the recipient of one of the greatest sales promotions since WWII. When it appeared in 1962, supposedly it made all other cartridges under .375 obsolete, doing the same things as the belted .300 magnums with less recoil, flatter-shooting bullets. etc. etc. (Sound familiar? Of course the original factory ballistics of 3020 with a 175 got toned down quickly....)

A great many hunters who bought 7mm Remington Magnums also thought they had Big Rifles. I remember that it was considered a real macho move back in Montana in the 1960's to trade off the old '06 or .270 for a Big Seven. They'd roll their shoulders and act like African PH's because they could withstand all that recoil!

Of course, 40+ years later the hype has rubbed off and Big Sevens are getting traded off on all sorts of new wonder magnums.

I have owned several 7mm Remington Magnums and they did right well. Anything that can't be done with a 160-grainer at 3000 fps or a 175 at 2900 probably shouldn't be attempted with anything less than a .338/250. But the 7RM is no longer the hot topic, so gun writers have to make do with WSM's and RUM's and all the other alphabet-soup rounds.

Personally, if I were a 1-rifle sort of hunter and owned a 7mm Remington Magnum I knew and trusted, I'd keep it and ignore the newer stuff. The 7RM has proved itself all over the world, the reason it ranks alongside the .270, .30-06 and .300 Winchester Magnum in steady sales.

MD

To me it settles the old debate between the .270 and the 30-06 because it shoots as flat as the .270 and hits as hard as the 30-06. And I can shoot 40 rounds or more from the bench without having a sore shoulder.
Mine is reasonably accurate I can shoot a group of 160 accubonds into a 400 yard target with about a 5" group from a good rest.

LOL! And no, I've nothing really to add. Although the last critter I shot with my 7 mag, an AK black bear, didn't do anything but die. After backflipping onto his nose, that is.

Another blemish on the 7 Mag was it got a bad reputation for wounding elk and other gritters. This in every case I have been able to get the facts, was due to operator error and poor bullet choice. As Mule Deer pointed out, macho dudes were shooting a "magnun" and gritters would die of fright just having one pointed at them. A 150 Power Point is not an ideal choice for a shoulder shot or raking shot on a elk as a lot of western guides will tell you. Most guides I know hate the 7 Mag and share their opinion with clients.
I had a fellow offer me his 308 when I uncased the 7 Mag on a recent elk hunt. When they stopped elk ranching in Montana a few ago I helped remove a herd from a property and took 38 elk with 40 shots. The 175 Nosler should get the credit, however I will take credit for putting it in the vitals.
With a rifle that does not knock my glasses off every shot, it is not that difficult.
That is what Phil Sharp, Les Bowman and Warren Page had in mind in the first place.
I have to agree with Mule Deer about the hype. It was the wonder weapon of the 60's with magic bullets that never lost velocity and killed like a bolt of lightning.
Jack O'Connor was a friend and mentor and liked to bad mouth the 7 Mag because that is what "Ole Lefty"( Warren Page) the competition used.
I had lunch with Jack in LA at Pete Petersen's Scandia Restaurant in Hollywood. That is a very unlikely place to meet Jack O'Connor. Jack told me he had killed 30 or 40 big game animals with a 7 Mag and thought it was a helluva round. That was a surprise. Then he said ,"Ole Lefty was right that 175gr will penetrate forever but the 150gr kills quicker. He was stone sober I might add but not long for this world so perhaps he was confessing.
-Doc-

One of my dad's friends was a custom gunmaker on the
east coast for over 40 years and when the 7MM Remington
Magnum came out in the early 60s he had dozens of people
come to his shop with every type of Mauser 92,93, 95, 98
etc. and Remington Rolling Block 7MMs that they wanted
rechambered to the mighty 7 mag. He declined all except
the Mauser 98s and built most on FN Mausers and Winchester
Model 70s. He said the demand lasted about 4 or 5 years.

XX Bob:
This thread is better than any article on 7mm Magnums that I�ve ever read. Especially your last two posts.

I love 7mm, and most of my few rifles are that caliber. 7x57, 280 Rem, 7mm RM, and 7mm Webby. In my limited experience, the 7 Mags are conducive to one-shot kills.

I had the throat on my 7mm RM lengthened, but eventually may have it rechambered or rebarreled to 7mm Webby.

Thanks for the interesting commentary.
Smitty of the North

I have and use one because I bought into all the hype of the 60's and 70's. I was just ignorant, I didn't know the '06 or the .270 would do me just as well.

I still use it cause I'm not only ignorant but lazy too as it turns out. It's killed everything I've shot with it, is a dandy little sheep rifle for me and I just can't get motivated to get rid of it and get a suitable cartridge.

I guess my 7mm mag is ignorant too, it just goes on killing stuff no matter what is written about it or by whomever happens to be the hot writer of the day.

I also like the .338, guess it's a character flaw or sumpthin.

In the 1970's I worked in a gun shop here in Northern California. Lots of locals traded or put away their 270s, '06s, and 308s and bought 7mm Remington Mags. I noticed that there wasn't a lot of rational thought involved in these guys' decision to get a new gun. Some proudly took their new big guns to other western states to hunt elk and larger game. The 7 Mag seemed to work well for them, especially with 175 gr bullets (we sold more Remington factory corelokts than anything else)-- although nobody I talked to had ever complained about the performance of the 270s and 30-06s they had used for years. Most of them seemed satisfied with the flat trajectory and power of the 7 Mag and stuck with it, as far as I know.

However, most of the new 7 Mag shooters didn't leave home much, but hunted the local blacktails-- all of 100 lbs on the hoof. Several were shocked at how the fast 150s from their new 7mm RMs blew up deer flesh, especially at close range. Many of them went back to their old rifles. Some went all the way down to 243s and 6mm Remingtons.

Is the 7mm Remington Magnum any good? Sure it is, but everything has its place.

284, run a stw reamer in that 26" tube ifn' ya' wanna' stretch its legs <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

woofer

AW SHucks Smitty you made me blush.
-Doc-

GWN, I get 3015 with 160's in a 24 inch barrel without pushing the envelope using IMR 4831. Also, excellent accuracy, .25 to 1 inch depending on how steady I am.

Factory ammo for the 7mm mag bullets of the same weight as the .30-06 run neck and neck. A 165 grain factory .30-06 load will run about 2,840 fps. A 160 grain factory load in 7mm mag runs about 2,850 across the board. A 150 grain 7 mag load runs 2,900 as do 150 grain .30-06 loads. These figures don't change in premium ammo either, which is mostly what I have been chronographing. I have owned several rifles in both calibers and have built several others in both calibers with 24-27" barrels. The .30-06 fetches about 37 fps when the barrel moves from 24-26 inches. The 7mm mag fetches about 49 fps when the barrel is moved from 24-26 inches. It isn't a huge difference no matter how you slice it.

When an individual starts hand loading, the 7 mag picks up 150-200 fps with the same weight bullets that the .30-06 shoots. I have proved this many many times over by chronographing lots of different loads, factory barrels and custom barrels. With proper bullets, they both kill extremely well.

I know the 7mm mag has caught a lot of flack over the years from guides and outfitters that had clients use it with poor success. 90% of the problems were due to poor shot placement and bullets that weren't designed to hold up to 7mm magnum velocities. IN both cases, the round was the guilty party, not the bullet or the shooter.

The vast majority of 7mm magnum loads 30 years ago were 140 grain soft points made for the 7mm-08, 7x57 and .280 rounds. Ammo makers have now fixed the 7mm problems by offering it loaded with mostly premium bullets. They just need to juice it up a bit!!!

All the high energy and light magnum .30-06 loads easily trump factory 7mm magnum loads in equal bullet weights. One of these days the ammo makers will load the 7mm magnum up to snuff. Until then, it is better to hand load it and reach it's potential. I can't say I like the 7mm mag better than the .30-06. The recoil of both in equal rifles is very similar, contrary to the hype that the 7mm mag kicks a whole lot more. The 7 kicks "slightly" more, but not much. Flinch

I never said I didn't like it but I did say it would be wise to get the 26" barrel!
I don't like 22" 30-06 barrels either. I was just at the range yesterday sighting in my 30-06 with 22" barrel at 200 yards.
Then I sighted in the 7MM Magnum at 200 yards. After shooting them both from the bench with heavy loads I really felt like I had gotten my moneys worth. I was only getting 2600 fps with 180 grain bullets in the 30-06 with the short barrel and probably will use my 35 Whelen which shoots a 225 gr bullet at 2681 fps out of a 22" barrel. The 35 Whelen seems to recoil about the same as the 7mm Magnum but the muzzle blast is not nearly as bothersome. The 7MM Magnum does shoot a little flatter though! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> Why is the hunting season so short?
GWN
GWN

1ak:
The closest I ever came to being a celebrity, was when I got that old 338, I'm fixing up.
Smitty of the North

Whatcha doing to it Smitty? For my money the .338 up here is kinda like the '06 to the lower 48. Long past being sexy, but does an adequate job on just about anything we have to hunt.

Since I got my McMillan Binster lefthanded Kevlar stock on mine, I've fallen in love all over again! Let my gunsmith talk me out of shortening the barrel to 22 inches, and he's probably right, but I may buy another some day and put a short tube on it just to see. But probably won't I just hunt with what I have and seem to be happy.

Considering I have a 270 and a 30-06, I am not sure where the 7mm rm fits in. Still, I have one and it is my most expensive rifle. It is a win 70 with a 24" douglas barrel in a brown precision stock. it fits me like a glove and shoots well. since I mainly hunt deer, I like 154 to 160 gr bullets. it shoots 150s like a 270 shoots 130s. I'll take it over any of the short mags with the exception of the 300 wsm (I have one anyway). I do not care for recoil at all but have always found the 7mm rm easy to shoot. can't say the same for the 300wm. there is nothing new about the 7mmrm but I like it and I will keep mine.

Flinch--

The reason the factories don't load the 7mm RM up any hotter (and downloaded the original ammo) is that it shows somewhat greater pressure spreads than most other rounds.

This DOES NOT mean it experiences pressure "spikes," as some who have read this information from me in the past have interpreted things. But high and low pressure in a straing of 10-12 rounds can often vary 12,000 psi, while highs and lows in the .30-06 rarely exceed 5000 psi.

The factories found this out after the use of piezo-electric pressure testing gear became universal. This is much more sensitive than the old copper-crusher equipment used to develop the original 7mm fractory loads.

The factories do not work up meximum loads just on average pressure, but also on maximum of individual loads. Since some 7mm RM rounds tend to exhibit a little higher pressures, they have to drop AVERAGE pressures to compensate. Thus, the facory ballistics of today.

Yeah, you can exceed those ballistics by handloading, but not usually by much more than 100 fps. Many manuals suggest safe loads in that range, made possible by using powder/bullet combinations that the factories don't use because the powder doesn't lend itself to mass production.

Push the 7mm RM harder than that and you're playing a slightly dangerous game. Luckily, such ballistics are still plenty for anything the 7mm is likely to be used for, especially with better bullets.

MD

I think one thing that has hurt the 7 Rem Mag is what actual pressure testing equipment is showing.

It is the larger than normal "range" of pressure. Because of that ammo manufactures are not loading it to it's full potential.

Also current reloading data shows a very large difference in powder charges for the equal bullet weights, and sometime for the same powder/bullet combo.

Speer has done this for years and gives this very explaination why their data has the 7 Rem Mag with such low velocities. They even make the comment "We have been critized for doing so." Hogdon does the same.

Alliant is the only current powder manufacture that publishes reloading data that gives the 7 Rem Mag it's due. IMR use to do the same, but if you look at their website (now that Hodgon has bought them) you will see that they are "redoing" their load data for IMR powders. I'll bet you will see lower powder/velocity for IMR powders when completed.

GB

It would hypothetically have been interesting if the 7 STW and 7 Rem mag had been introduced at the same time with uninflated ballistics. Because the hyped ballistics of the 7 Rem mag were closer to what the 7 STW actually is.
I will probably never be without a 7 Rem mag.

I have had both rounds, but I kept the 7 Rem mag because of the difference in recoil for only a slightly flatter trajectory didn't seem worth it. To me the STW kicks a lot more, as much as a 300 mag. and at that level of recoil I would rather have a 300 mag.

I think another round that does'nt get much coverage anymore is the 270 win. Last fall I was looking for a 7 mag. I handled a 700 bdl ss in 7 saum and bought it instead. Not because I thought it was better but because the rifle handled and felt better. I get 3015 f.p.s with a 160 accubond and 66 grs. of H-1000. The best shooting load so far is the 140 gr. accubond with 58 grs. of H-4350, have'nt chronographed it yet. I think the 7 mag is one of the all time greats.

For years I relied on a .270 Win. for all my big game hunting. Then about 15 or 16 years ago I put four 150 gr. Partitions into the chest of a moose at 300 yards and he turned around and walked away! As we learned later he only went far enough to get out of sight before falling over.
At that point I decided to get something with a little more power. Since I am not very big I wanted something not having too much recoil. With this in mind I bought a Winchester M70 Custom Super Grade in 7mm Rem. Mag. This is the nicest (& most expensive) gun I have ever owned.
Then I tried to work up a suitable load. It seemed to be impossible. For 2 or 3 years I wouldn't take it hunting because it didn't come up to my standards for accuracy.
Then one day while at the shooting range I found a longitudinal crack running up the right side of the receiver rail. Neither the gun shop owner where I deal or the designated Winchester repair gunsmith in the area had ever seen anything like it. The repair shop decided the gun had to go back to the factory. To go along with it I sent a note commenting about the poor accuracy the rifle had been producing.
After about 8 or 9 months I received the rifle back completely rebuilt. Accuracy was now extremely good with many different loads. I finally took the rifle hunting and shot a moose with it. The strange thing is, I have never hunted with this gun since! I liked shooting it so much in its restored form that I bought another 7mm Mag. (Remington 700 Sendero) to shoot at the range so I wouldn't shoot the Winchester barrel out. In total I have probably shot at least 4000 rounds through these guns.
About the time I began to think about taking this gun hunting again I bought a 700 Rem. in .338 W.M. complete with muzzle brake from the factory. With this gun I found out that the .338 isn't a monster and have used it exclusively for the last 5 or 6 years. I now know why hunters have been saying for years that this caliber will lay the animals down right there!
One thing I did find with the 7mm Rem. Mag. is that you had to be prepared to use a chronograph & to use the velocities given in the reloading manuals as a guide, not the number of grains of a given powder. My preferred load in the 7 R.M. is a 175 gr. bullet driven at 2900 fps. I will not quote the load since it isn't close to anything in any of the books. Cases last for from 10 to 15 reloads and give no problems in extraction, etc. I note that recently J.B. has been extolling the benefits of using the chronograph and working up to the velocities given in the manuals as being preferable to using visual signs or trying to mike cases. Every time I used the maximum loads in the manual they came up well below the suggested velocities. I guess in my own simple way I am endorsing J.B's recommendations. I still think the 7 mag. is a good hunting caliber.

Cleaned it up, got a nother stock at a Gunshow, got the barrel recrowned, the trigger adjusted, and a Limbsaver recoil pad put on it. I replaced the extractor, the scope, and did minor repairs.

It's an early Win POST 64, with a 24" barrel, but it's lighter than both my 7 mags. It's easy to handload. I can get 1" groups. I'll be loading cast bullets for it pretty soon.

It's not real pretty, but I'm not apologizing for it. I've become attached to it.
Smitty of the North

IMO rifles are kinda like women it's fine if they start out pretty, but the only ones that really get a piece of your heart are the ones with some wear and tear on them. Preferably of your own wearing and tearing! (grin) I'm hard on my rifles and my wife, but I love them dearly, and they've never let me down.

1akhunter, there's a lot of truth in that for each of us.

I've never owned or loaded for a 7mm RM, but have shot several and will be loading for one soon. What can I say? Nice to shoot, good trajectory, accurate, lots of power for lots of things and I like it. I know of one fellow who believes it's way too light for moose, but I know of others who believe a .270 Win .150 or .160 Nosler PT is just the ticket.

It's in the "great big middle" of the best non-magnum cartridges and the better magnum cartridges at or under .30 caliber. Having a .300 Win Mag and a .270 Win, I wouldn't buy one for myself these days, but wouldn't criticize anyone who did.

This might infuriate some people, and I will apologize in advance for that.
I have had three 7 Magnums and have killed deer and elk with them. They do kill deer and elk handily, but so do many other calibers. I don't like the 7 Magnum because in the rifles I have owned, the recoil has been severe, even compared to 300 Magnums and a 375 H&H magnum I have owned.
In my field experience it has seemed that it takes a tremendous difference in rifles to produce a difference in rifles in terms of pwer to produce a noticeable difference in killing power on animals. This seems to be confirmed by the oft mentioned study from Europe regarding moose killed with various calibers. Penetration test of various calibers also seems to bear this out. A lowly 32 Special will not penetrate as much as a 200 grain Nosler from a 30-06, but the difference is much less than I would expect.
Given the above factors which have influenced my thinking, I would be curious as to a comparison between the 7-08 and the 7 Magnum, under field conditions, both loaded to the max loads in a loading manual, any manual, you pick. I think there would be very little difference, and I would guess that in average hands, the 7-08 would bring more game to the ground.
Please remember, before you send the professional assasins to my door, I am offering this as my guesses, opinions and am not holding it up as undisputed fact.
Good hunting, everyone, I have to go cut up the fat white tail doe I shot Monday with my 7 Magnum- one shot kill, 150 yards, good old Hornady 139 grain BT in front of 65 grains of H 4831 SC- Got about 17 inches of penetration.

Royce

GWN, I did not mean to imply anything, just wanted to share data with ya. Tak

Royce I don't see where your statement would merit any flamage.

Always has been and always will be, it boils down to
"It ain't the arrow, it's the Indian"

Give a rilfeman and a guy with some woods savy and understanding of his quarry and he's almost always a better bet on bringing home the bacon on a regular basis.

It's been interesting to get to know some of Big Stick on this forum. For years I've always heard that the number one deer cartridge for the blacktail deer on Kodiak is the .375 cause of the bears and the dinner gong etc. etc. but it seems Stick goes armed with a 7 shamu, or 25-284 on Kodiak for most of deer season and he must feel reasonably armed.

I'd say you take the average hunter and he is better served by the 7 rather than the 7 mag for most applications. I'd never used anything bigger than a .30-30 (well okay a 12 gauge for quail hunting) till I bought my first big game rifle, yep you guessed it the 7 mag that's about 3 feet away from me right this minute. I knew I was coming to Alaska and I had read where the 7 mag was capable of taking any game in NA and I bought it hook, line and sinker. Recoil of it has never been a big issue for me with it, maybe all the 12 gauge shooting had better prepared me than the few shots I took per year with a .30-30, if so I was lucky.

BTW I see ft. lbs. of recoil for big game rifles often, does anyone have the info ready at hand how a 12 gauge shotgun with 2 3/4 or 3 inch loads compares to some of the big game calibers? I'd be curious to see how it measures up.

Anyway Royce I thought your post made sense.

An 8 lb shotgun shooting a 3" mag load of 1 7/8 oz shot is in the low to mid 40 ft/lb of recoil. This is according to SST's recoil calculator. http://sst.benchrest.com/recoil.html

FYI a 338 win mag weighing 8 lbs shooting a 250 gr bullet 2800 is about the same.

I have had my share of 7 mags and find them useful for longer shots on coues wt.

Two of my friends who don't shoot much have 7 mags. They are both afraid of it's recoil!

My family has had at least one 7mm Remington floating around for as long as I can remember. For the most part they have been the older FN Browning Safari or Medallion grades. My own personal 7mm is a Ruger #1. We do not handload and our preferred loading is Federal Premium with 160 Partitions.

I'll be honest, I find the recoil of those rifles to be less than that of say a standard 30-06 with 180 grain bullet. These rifles are however, significantly heavier than todays Ruger, Remington, and Winchester.

Thanks Azshooter! Didn't have the numbers, but it made sense to me, funny you never hear guys make that big a deal out of the recoil in shotguns, sure it's mentioned in passing in some articles, but not near the hoopla concerning recoil that the medium bore cartridges generate (.338, .375, etc.)

I think Cooper is largely correct concerning recoil, it is kinda mind over matter, if you don't mind it really doesn't matter. With that said I've only touched one round off outa my pards .458 Lott, I can honestly say you know some chemical reaction has occurred <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />, it's a good round though.

straydog, I had the fever for a 7mmstw for a time, good fotune my fever cooled. that round disappeared faster than my money at a football game concession stand ($3.50 for a coke at a FSU football game - take all three boys). I was never crazy about layne simpson anyway and his stw stuff, simply not my style.

Thought to look at the recoil comparison between the 30-06 and subject 7mm rm.

the '06 with a 165 gr bullet has a recoil factor of 24 ft lbs, it's 23 ft lbs with the 180 gr bullet (recoil is less with heavier bullet due to lower velocity)

the 7mm rm has 26 ft lbs with a 160 gr bullet

all comparisons are based on a 8 lb rifle

I like my 7mm rem mag and recoil is fine, I think this has more to do with the brown precision stock and fit. I have had three 7mm rem mags and they were all fine.

Still, if I had to choose, I would take the '06 all day long as I think it is a better fit when loading for 180 gr and up stuff.

TAKMAN, no problem. Does the 4831 have good loading density? ( Is the case full?)
I think the reason people mention recoil and 7Mag is that it is advertised as a long range round. In order to utilize it you first need to sight it in from the bench. With todays light rifles that isn't fun. If you handload and want to experiment with seating depth, primers, different powders, bullets, etc. in order to milk all the potential accuracy out of it, you are in for a lot more bench time than a quail hunter for instance. (They
hardly shoot from the bench at all) <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />
I have come back from the range after playing around and chronographing etc and can barely remember my address. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />
I enjoy the 270 a lot more but I'm not much of a big game hunter. (Just deer) If I was hunting bear or moose I would more than likely grab the 35 Whelen anyhow. If a guy shot factory loads he might be better off in this case I think.
If I go elk hunting again I would probably use the 160 Nosler Federal Premium and skip the whole load development scenario. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />
GWN

GWN, might make for a good station at the local trap club. You make a good point, recoil is most severe from the bench or prone, what you gain in steadiness of position you give up in being able to roll with the recoil. Oh well all of life is trade offs. Still it would crack me up to see a bench setup for trapshooters! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Hey that seems like a big jump from 7 mag at 26 ft. lbs. of recoil to .338 at around 40!! Azshooter and 257Bob you guys sure you're on the same page? Never seemed like that much difference to me in recoil between 7 mag and .338, although my 7 mag weighs about a pound less than my .338, maybe that's why, but still it seems like a big jump in ft. lbs. by my recollection.

Last year at a general auction I bought a nice older Rem. M700 in 7mm RM, gun is from 1963, has the original Weaver K4 and Williams Receiver sight as b/u, original strap and leather scabbard. Doesn't look like it got much use. This is one of the early 7mm's.

The barrel seems to be a touch less than a full 24".
I bought it on a whim, may never actually use it except at the range, but after reading this thread should I have the throat lengthened?


Thanks, Rob

1AK:
My 338 with a 250 grain bullet recoils a lot more than either of my 7 Mags, (160 grain bullets) but it�s a couple of pounds lighter too.

Still, I think the most important aspect of the effects of recoil is how you hold the rifle. When you are shooting from a bench and lean into the stock, your gonna feel it a lot more than if you sit lower, and more upright. Sometimes you hear stories about some kid, or small lady, who doesn�t mind shooting a heavy recoiling rifle. There-in lies a plausible explanation. Since they are shorter, they aren�t bending over, and leaning into the rifle stock.

That said, I�m not that interested in anything bigger than a 338. Well, maybe a 358 Norma.

Smitty of the North

Rob: I would say no, unless you have a reason.

I did it so I could seat 160 grain bullets so the base of the bullet would be near the base of the neck, which gives some greater case capacity. Others reject this as being of any real advantage. Also, some people want to seat their bullets closer to the lands because they think that will be more accurate. If you subscribe to that, lengthening the throat would be the last thing to do, unless you are having the throat set for a particular bullet.

Another thing, it would be pointless to lengthen the throat of your rifle, to have a longer OAL, if your magazine won't hold or feed the longer rounds. The Remington 700s are long, so you could do that, but it�s not something that everybody does, or that everybody thinks is the wise thing to do. In my case, (With my Early Remington 700) it hasn�t hurt a thing. I�ve shot factory loads that are really far from the lands, and accuracy hasn�t suffered.

Smitty of the North

It's been fun reading up on my favorite caliber. Been shooting one for over 20 years. Got my first one in a remy adl wood built in 1983. Wanted to be the one gun guy, living in Mn. I knew I'd head west and north at some point. Always enjoyed shooting, until I read more ,didn't know the recoil was suppose to be so bad. Yes it's a little louder, my neighbors can tell when I shoot a deer. I took my tikka ss/syn 7 mag to Ak. last year, had brown bears right outside the tent, was still confident in the 7 mag. Now I also have a sako 75 in .270 when I shoot that and my tikka 7 mag (which is 2 pounds lighte ) I still don't notice a recoil difference. Now the 300 ultra mag I had has recoil worth mentioning. All in all I love the 7 mag, with almost the same energy as a 300 mag it will kill anything I 'll ever hunt.

1akhunter, I think I notice recoil more in a rifle because I am peering thru the scope which is closer to the eye than an open sighted shotgun and also I am shooting at a piece of paper rather than a moving claybird. I never notice recoil in a rifle when shooting at a live target. Just an observation.

GWN, I use 66gr. and have plenty of room for different types of bullets. I have had good accuracy with Nosler AB's, Partitions, and Sierra Gamekings, all 160 Grain. My rifle is 8 1/2 lbs with scope versus my 270 which is 7 1/2 lbs. My 7mm shoves me while my 270 kicks. Probably a combination of weight and barrel length. I use the 7mm for eastern Montana Mulies, wide open spaces.

SmittyoftheNorth, shooting from the bench, almost all of my rifles kick more than I like, has more to do with my physical geometry at the bench more than anything else. Aside from the bench, stock fit has the most impact on shooting comfort. My brown precision is the most comfortable shooting stock I own, it is on my 7mm rm. I have read that the guys at Rigby, in CA, not England, shoot the big bores standing up for testing. They have some sort of contraption where the rest the forend of the rifle on a carpeted dowel and shoot standing so they can "rock" with the recoil.

Funny thing, I was shooting my 338 sitting down, legs out in front, using shooting sticks. The recoil just about pushed me over backwards. Was pretty funny actually. The 338 seems to have a big push but not a sharp recoil.

Bought my first Rem 7MM in 1968. I fired over 2000 rounds through it before it was stolen. Since that first one I have owned five other Rem 7MM's and liked them all. Today I shoot a Custom Shop Remington 7MM Mag. I am not recoil sensitive so a 7MM mag does not bother me to shoot it off the bench.

I have used the same M700 KS 7mag for the last 5 seasons and everything I have pointed that gun at and squeezed the trigger has expired post haste. Recoil is managable and not overpunishing. It's like the Energizer Bunny, it just keeps going and going and going......

My next 7mm barrel will be a heavy contour 26" barrel. It might be a 7mm-08. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />
GWN

257Bob:
I agree, they tend to push. You can stop'em from hurting, if you hold them snug, and you move with the recoil, but you can't stop'em from moving. I can understand why it almost tipped you over.
Smitty of the North

Question for Mule Deer,
I was looking at the new Sierra Manual today in the new Cabelas store in Rogers Minnesota.
The accuracy load for the 7MM Remington Magnum and the 160 Sierra gr HPBT is now 50.9 grs IMR 4064. It used to be 58.8 grs IMR 4350. Why would that change? I thought slow burning powder was always the best choice???? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" /> I think this might be the ticket for my new clearcut load for Northern Minnesota whitetail deer.


GWN

I am what one could call a big 7 nut plain and simple, end of story.

That said, I've more than your usual amount of experience when it comes to these rounds. Lot of tubes, lots of guns, and lots of rounds. Cal's I've worked with go from 7 RM, 7 Wby, 7x300 Wby, STW and the 7 Mashburn Super.

My thoughts on these rounds versus say the small 7's is that the greater majority of our hunters would be very well to keep their shots to 300 yards. I've long said that all rounds/shooters and guns are equal to 300. It is after 300 and to farther that things begin to change and challenge equipment and shooter.

About the pressure spike thing, honestly I've not ever experienced anything like this. People say it is out there but I've not seen it and that is not to say it can't happen. I just don't happen to believe it exists any more than with any other round.

As for there being an over abundance of big 7's sitting on the used racks looking like puppys at the pound waiting for someone to take them home. If that is happening then others have noticed it more than me. I get around to the shops in the west quite a bit, and you sure couldn't prove that by what I've seen.

About the issue of noticing the effects of using a big 7 versus a smaller 7. I believe if the shots were confined to 300 and the critter were say elk/lopes/deer and you took 50 of them with each gun. I personally do believe that you would notice that the big 7's were a bit more dramatic (in terms of down and out right now). I also know that with either round if you wreck the lungs, then said volunteer is not gonna be long for this world.

Then take and do the same test but take the range to 300-500 and see what the results yield. I would bet for sure that at that point you would see some fairly stunning results in terms of quickness of the kills. Now don't get me wrong I know that both will get it done, I am just saying that at the longer ranges the kills will more noticeable and most like with fewer rounds and with fewer steps by the critter.

Take the ranges to 500 and beyond and, well I'll just not go there cause I don't want to get into a big dony brook about that issue.

As for speeds, IMO the big 7's are gonna pretty much beat up on the smaller 7's (all things being equal) to the tune of 300 fps. Most likely in a few cases a bit more, and in some a bit less.

In my working with the big 7's I've found it to be quite attainable to run the following bullets at these speeds.

140's=3200 and then some

160's=3000 to 3100

175's=2900 and a bit more (on this one I've seen slow ones that would run at 2850 and fast ones that would run 3045, using 24" tubes)

The whole issue of recoil kind of puzzles me. I mean to hear some folks talk it would appear that big 7's just up and boot them on their butt! This my friends is just not true, IMO they are very user friendly. To me this recoil issue is kind of like hearing a young boy saying I want to play football, but I just don't want to get hit! Oh please, where oh where is the waambalance? Do the big 7's have a bit more of a bump when it comes to recoil say over a small 7 or one of the rounds off the 06 case, yeah they do. Is it caustic and difficult to deal with, absolutely not, and IMO if people are saying this then these just don't have much experience with the rounds! If anything it is a bit quicker and a bit sharper but not really anything to be of an issue IMO.

I am a bit of an anomaly in that I am both a fairly serious shooter and hunter. IMO you'll find people who for that most part one or the other but not often both. In my 7 Mashburn Super to date this year I am very close to 1000 rounds thru it. By the time the year is over I'll be over a grand for sure (toss in the rounds from my 270, 06, 340 and 375 and the number will about triple). Now do you think that if the big 7's were such a nasty bastard when it came to recoil that I'd be for shooting it that much? I may be stubborn but not that stupid!

Lastly, I'd say that I do believe it is a wonderful round, and I would also say that it is a round that is not needed by most of the hunting world. I also would qualify that once more by saying that most of the shooting/hunting world does not have much call to be shooting at past 300. They just don't have the time in behind the butt to be shooting at extended ranges. IMO if people lifted weights, and or drove a car with the same kind of reckless abandon that they shoot at game with then a lot of people would be for getting squashed!!!

Just some of my thoughts on a beautiful fall day.

Mark D

In the August-September 1996 issue of Handloader is an article by Walt Netzel titled "7mm Remington Magnum, Pressure Rated Loads". Walt put a strain guage on a 7 Rem Mag and tested 160 grain bullets with available powders. He gives the velocity and pressure at several levels with different bullets.
He said the pressure rating for most belted cases is 54,000 CUP or 70,000 psi, but the Remington Mag was derated to 52,000 CUP because of some early problems with chambers and pressure gradient.
Walts data shows when the pressure gradient becomes too steep and 51,700 CUP 65,000 psi is about it for most powders.
The article is full of info and it hooked me. I now have terminal RLS. Yes I have Rifle Loonie Syndrome and I put a strain guage on my 7 Rem Mag.
That has been an eye opening experience for me. I have read a little about the Oehler Ballistic lab. I was wondering if that is a similar system.
-Doc-

Mark, great post! I think of the 7 Mag's as "shootable 300's"... ie, the Big 7's do approx the same thing's at the same range but with less recoil.

Doc, I'd be really interested in your results...

Brad with the 160 Nosler Part:

60,000 psi 65,000 psi 68,000 psi
49,100 CUP 51,700 CUP 53,200 CUP
------------- ------------- -------------

RL-22 67.6 gr 69.7 gr 70.7 gr
Velocity 3,070 fps 3,160 fps 3.198 fps

7828 68.5 gr 70.3 gr Gradient too steep
Velocity 3,090 fps 3,170 fps

I was told that 7828 was developed for the 7 Mag and one could not dupe the factory velocities with avaliable powders when it was introduced.
I have used 74gr of 7828 for 65,000 psi with some lots, but not this one. I use a recent surplus 4831 that I call AA4831. Its burn rate is between RL-22 and 7828. Its much slower then IMR or H4831. Walts data showed his 4831 IMR to be slower then H4831. Both peak at 65,000 psi and 3,000 fps approx.
Slow is good when selecting powder for the 7 Mag.
-Doc-

XXBob,

What bullet weight are those figures with?

Ted

They are all 160's
Walt calls the following Group 1 bullets because the engraving resistence and pressure is similar.
Sierra GameKing
Speer Mag Tip
Nosler Solid base(BT"s)
Nosler Part
Speer Grand Slam
Trophy bonded
I use the 160 Nosler for just about everything. Elk, Africa etc, but also use the 175 Nosler a lot at 3,000 fps it works.
-Doc-

Doc-for what it is worth I've done the greater majority of my big 7 work using 7828.

Mark D

Mark and XXBob:
What about H1000? I'm using that in my 7mm Webby.
Smitty of the North

Smitty H1000 works in my 7mm Roy and Rem.
Walts numbers for the three pressure levels are as follows.
71.4 grs/3,020 fps 60,000 psi
73.8 grs/3,110 fps 65,000 psi
75.2 grs/3,160 fps 68,000 psi
Mule Deer says RL-22 is not good in cold weather, but most powders in the Hodgdon line are temp stable. I have used H1000 with 175gr bullets and it will launch them at 3,000 fps no strain. I want to try Ramshot Magnum. It works great in the 300 Win with a 200 gr Nosler my favorite elk load.
-Doc-

For what it's worth the load I shoot in my 7 Rem. mag.(an early M700 with a factory stainless barrel, & still a very good throat) is 69grs. of R22 for 3162 fps average. Exactly what XXBob said. That's my #1 elk gun. Pedro

Me too, but I think it varies from lot to lot and might be one of the reasons the 7 Mag was derated. Have you tried the new shortcut 7828 ?? The burn rate of 7828 seems to change as pressure increases in the 7 Mag more then other powders.
-Doc-

Yeah Doc the SSC is what I am burning in my 7 Mashburn Super now. It works just fine and is no different that I can tell. I've used about 3 lbs in the last couple of months.

Smitty-I've not used H1000 for a long time. The last I used it was in a 26" A-bolt and it shot really well with 154 Horn's and 175 Noz. The 150's were running 32 something and the 175's were about 3050 or thereabouts. I've also used R25 in my 7 Mashburn Super with the 160's and 175's and it shoots great with them and I get wonderful speed. Just a thought.

Gotta run guys

Mark D

Pedro-good to hear from you again, you beat up on any EL BUN (yotes) lately?

Mark,

You bet, Me and the Souper are having a great year with the dogs. Pedro

I have always liked the 7mms and have owned numerous 7mm Remington Mags. Now I am shooting a 7mm Ultra Mag and like it even better. No one should have any problem with recoil in the 7mms unless they have a rifle extremely light in weight or some kind of terrible stock design. As far as I am concerned one of the main virtues of the 7mm is the ability to hit very hard with minimum recoil. I have heard of pressure problems with the 7mm Ultra mag as well but have not experienced any to date using Retumbo and a variety of 150 and 160 bullets. My lot of 200 cases has been through five fireings with primer pockets still tight and no abnormal trimming. Accuracy is excellent and chronographed velocities very consistent. I also believe it is the flattest shooting big game catridge I have ever worked with. Most of the criticism I have heard concerning this catridge as well as the other Ultra Mags has come from people who never personally worked with them.

I think most of the criticism of them has come from people who have to sit next to someone shooting them on a firing line. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Ok, I'll concede they are loud...and hell on barrels, and overbore, etc. High performance always has a price and if that bothers some there is always the 7x57 which is a hell of a catridge in its own right. Anyway, have you ever noticed how the open prairie seems to just suck up sound? Very different than shooting under a roof at some range.

[/quote]

I think most of the criticism of them has come from people who have to sit next to someone shooting them on a firing line. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />
[/quote]

I think most of the criticism comes from the 30-06 nostalgic crowd and/or people whose automatic reactions are triggered when they hear the word magnum. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

No, no - you're confusing autonomic reactions with nerves that are just plain shot. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Now - before this gets out of hand, realize I'm just funnin' you guys. I had a 7mm Rem. Mag and thought it was a heck of a flat shooting round. Recoil with Nosler 150's at around 3100-3200 fps wasn't bad at all, no worse than a .30-06 180 grain load.

And man, it did indeed shoot flat. I forget the specifics, but IIRC when I had it sighted in close to 300 yards the mid range trajectory was only about 4" and it was only about 8" low at 400.

Bought it cause one year I saw a cow elk w-a-y- out yonder and wasn't comfortable taking the shot with my '06 180 grain load. So I practiced all year with the 7mm RM, got so I could hit the 14" ringer at 400 yards from prone just about every time. I was ready for those long shots.

So - naturally, the next year, my elk broke out of the trees some 30 yards in front of me. The 7mm RM worked at that range, too. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

I liked the rifle and the cartridge but wanted a .300 Win. Mag. so sold it to a guy at a gun show who now tells me what new stuff he's killed with it every year when he sees me at one of the shows.

I did much the same thing, that is abandoned my 30-06 because I kept seeing big deer it couldn't easily reach. And no, before someone suggests it, I douldn't always get closer. Of course I immediately started getting closer opportunities. This year I took my Muley at 185 which would have been perfect for the 30-06. You know what? The 7mm Ultra kills them close as easily as far. However, when you need to take that long one that big 7 seems to reach out there with the best of them. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />

I managed to get mine to shoot a 3 inch group at 200 yards yesterday. (with factory Federal Premium 160 Noslers)
I guess I am running out of time and will go with that. Since I'm not bringing a bench with me deer hunting anyhow. I am going to join the ranks of the 7828 shooters after I finish off my stash of factory ammo. I stocked up pretty good when they talked about a 1000% ammo tax. First they will have to find it. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />
GWN

after shooting dozens of deer with my 7mm remington mag, it is always my main deer rifle in open country, with the 140gr ballastic tip at a cronographed 3200fps or a 160gr sierra hp gameking at 3020 it has killed everything i ever hit with it. no tracking needed, none ran off, none of the deer or bear i have shot with it went more than 20yds even when shot at a run. i can not say that about the 30-06 and i have shot a bunch of deer with it also. several twice.

As you can tell I am very fond of the 7 Mags, but have not used mine in recent years. When the 7 Roy was the only big game rifle I owned I shot everything with it. It is a bit much for deer but will reach out and touch one on the other side of a canyon. I think bigger is better for elk size critters but have taken lots of them with both the Roy and Rem.
Of late I tend to use standard caliber rifles for deer,pigs and Tex exotics. The 300 Win Mag and 200gr bullets have worked so well on elk I have not used the 338 or my old friend the 358 Norma very much either.
However this thread got me to dig the 7 Rem out of the back of the safe and take it to Utah for elk. One shot at 288 yds put a 360 bulls dick in the dirt. The 175 Noslers at 3,000 fps were loaded in 1993 the last time I used this rifle on an Alaska caribou,sheep and moose hunt. I think I took a bear also on that safari. A 7 Mag is really a good all around caliber for a one rifle dude like I was for a long time.
-Doc-