I can't see a 7 PRC doing anything the 7mm Remington hasn't been doing for decades. Plenty of mag space in a 700 for the Remmy and 180/195 grain bullets. Plenty of brass, dies, factory ammo. I'll happily slum a 7 Remington if I feel the need.
For now a rather pedestrian 6.5-284 is working for my long range needs. And oh, not a lot the 6.5-284 can't do compared to a 6.5 PRC. But I digress.
I'll happily take the 7PRC strictly for reloading purposes of getting around the belt that they put on then 7 rem mag. Whoever invented that belt that serves zero purpose should be kicked in the nuts IMO
Just a random question, but how does the belt hurt anything? I agree, it isn't needed, but if you load the case the same way you'd load a 7 PRC how would it ever hurt/hinder anything?
Beretz, the main benefit of the PRC and Creedmoor rounds is chamber and die specs. There is a noticeable advantage to minimal working of brass that shows up biggly in the long run. Why put a useless belt on a cartridge and than design it to maximum size your brass everytime?
Chamber & die specs ? The truth is the PRC cartridges have been plagued with this very problem, Hornady .. in their infinite wisdom royally screwed the PRC's up from the very beginning, but fanboi's avoid the obvious and are now doing all they can to "invent" problems with the older cartridges, namely the belt ... every creediot on the planet is now an expert on the belt "issue", citing how great an advancement the PRC's and Creeds are over every existing cartridge ever developed ...
I've been handloading the 7mm Rem Mag for over 30 years and have never experienced any problems with the belt or any sort of pressure spiking conditions, that bs is more of an idiot operator error than anything else .....
With that said, I'm no fan of the 7mm RM, as it is underpowered for my use, so that makes the PRC's grossly underpowered ...
or simply, just gross !
