Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Why did the SAUMs fail?

OK, so I realize this is Remington we’re talking about, so there’s that. But why did two really good cartridges fail?

Ammo too expensive?

Silly name?

Too much competition at 7mm and 30 cal?

Wrong rifles or twists?

IMHO, the SAUMs have a great blend of performance, balanced case size and configuration, and they both do a very good job of being able to extract a great deal of performance while also coming in at or under recoil-tolerance thresholds much better than their competitors. I like them better in almost every way than the 7mm WSM and 300 WSM and like them better in absolutely every way than the old standby 7mm Rem Mag and 300 Win Mag. In fact, I’d say a hunter equipped with an accurate, 22-24” sporter 7 SAUM (if it was popular) would be well-equipped for just about anything. And the case could have been used to create and commercially introduce many more useful variants from .24 - .35 cal.

I feel the combination of very expensive factory ammo and a stupid name did them in. In a time when newer shooters were far more open to common sense in cartridge design and performance (see: 7mm-08 then 6.5 Creedmoor), Remington decides to name a short cartridge an “Ultra Magnum.” I know I really didn’t give it much of a look because of that name.

What does the ‘Fire think?

seattlesetters,

They failed because Winchester beat them to the starting gate, with the WSM cartridges that offered a little more powder room and hence velocity. Hunters didn't see any reason to buy rifles chambered for slower short, fat beltless "magnums."

The story I heard through the business was that Remington was offered the concept before Winchester, but turned it down, for whatever reasons, instead designing their own rounds. Winchester introduced the WSM's slightly before the SAUM's, which made it look like Remington was copy-catting, but copy-cat cartridges don't usually sell well if they don't offer velocity gains over the originals. (Witness the Ruger Compact Magnums, introduced several years after the WSM's and SAUM's.)

Of course, now the SAUM case is considered by some to be "better" than the WSM's, especially in short actions, due to offering more room for longer, high-BC bullets. The WSM's and SAUM's appeared over 15 years ago, before the long-range, high-BC trend became really hot. Now the 7mm SAUM necked down to 6.5 is one of the trendy rounds.

Another problem was the .280 Ackley Improved--introduced as a factory round by Nosler--did the same things as the 7mm SAUM in any action suitable for the .30-06--and there are zillions. The .280 AI already had plenty of traction among rifle loonies, so sold better.

Another problem was the 7mm SAUM, as far as factory rounds go, didn't do anything the .270 Winchester didn't. I know this from owning a 7mm SAUM for a number of years, and using it on big game from northern Canada to South Texas.

SKane,

I've probably killed more big game with the 7mm SAUM than 99% of the people who've owned one. That doesn't mean it wasn't a commercial failure for Remington, the reason it's very difficult to find Remington-brand 7mm SAUM brass: They decided to cut their losses.

Yep!

I might just have to put a 6.5 SAUM barrel on one of my actions. That's all I need, another rifle chambered for a yet another 6.5 round....

shaman,

Good try, but the .257 Roberts was introduced by Remington as a commercial cartridge in 1934.

SKane,

I've probably killed more big game with the 7mm SAUM than 99% of the people who've owned one. That doesn't mean it wasn't a commercial failure for Remington, the reason it's very difficult to find Remington-brand 7mm SAUM brass: They decided to cut their losses.

It's also why Norma and Nosler started offering 7mm SAUM cases. In fact, whenever the original manufacturer gives up on a cartridge so much that other companies start offering brass, it's sure sign the original company was losing money on it.

JB-
There's no disputing that.
And, I still blame all the 6.5 SAUM guys for drying up the supply of RP brass.

Funny thing is, both of those guys shot sub-moa groups off the bench when sighting in.

SKane,

I've probably killed more big game with the 7mm SAUM than 99% of the people who've owned one. That doesn't mean it wasn't a commercial failure for Remington, the reason it's very difficult to find Remington-brand 7mm SAUM brass: They decided to cut their losses.

It's also why Norma and Nosler started offering 7mm SAUM cases. In fact, whenever the original manufacturer gives up on a cartridge so much that other companies start offering brass, it's sure sign the original company was losing money on it.

Someone once said that the 7mm SAUM was the short action equivalent of the 280AI and no matter how you cut it, it's never a bad thing to be compared favorably to the 280AI.

Never the less, I'm much more likely to pick the CLR in 270 when I go afield than a rifle chambered in either 270 WSM or 7mm SAUM. Sort of a private tribute to JOC.