Home Forums Hunting & Shooting General Big Game Lets discuss the 7mm STW and 175 Partitions

It was my 7mm Rem Mag loaded with 160 gr TSX's.

Well, sometimes you have to choose between two evils, and try to pick the lesser. In this case the two evils were: a) ruining the cape
and
b) the bull was running AWAY from camp. I was already past the invisible land mark we call "stupid" and had just shot 2 bull caribou that I would have to pack back over the hummocky tundra.

You can tell which evil was the lesser

Jordan,
Wise man.

bwinters,
See, you don't need no stinkin' STW.

Hey D,

I never said I needed an STW...........

But a 140 TSX from a STW drops ~ 21" at 500 yards, 26" for the 175 Partitions. Thats hairline on most big critters with a bullets capable of doing the job when it arrives and buck the wind on its way.

It doesn't get much better than that with any combination of projectile, cartidge or sane rifle combination. All at a reasonable level of recoil.

There is always the matter of diminishing returns beyond the 7mm RM but the numbers posted above should be attainable. That's damn attractive and what prompted me to start this thread. Being a math geek, I love ballistics and gacking.

What's an extra 6" at 500 yards?

I have owned three 7mmstws and still own two.I drive the 140gr mrx at 3500fps for all of my elk and moose hunting and would not even consider a heavier bullet.Between myself and my hunting partners,we have used the 140gr tsx,140gr mrx and 160gr and 175gr partitions,and the 140gr barnes bullets provide as much or more penetration than the heavier partitions.

Funny you mention that, Stubble, I think I may give the tried and true 160 gr TSX a rest and try out the 140 grainer and see how it shoots. Maybe even the TTSX if I'm feeling spendy

Do you mean the difference between the STW and the RM version?

You have a point but when did common sense come into the equation?

Seriously, I'm not sure it does make a huge difference but I've always liked the potential of the 175 Partition but also thought the 7RM at 2850 or so wasn't a huge step up from the 06. 3000 ft/sec with the 175 seems serious but I do not have much experience with big game and the 175. The conversation I had with my buddy intrigued me to the point of asking folks on the 'Fire - there the best source of info.

Yeah, I was referring to the 6" difference in trajectory at 500 yards between the STW and the RM.

If you can accurately place a bullet within a couple of inches at 500 yards, then holding 6" higher won't break the bank.

It's funny that you are going the opposite direction of the current trend, which is to shoot lighter TSX bullets faster, flatter, and with ample penetration.
I'm not sure why you would want to shoot a 175 gr Partition when you could penetrate whatever it is you're likely to shoot stem to stern with a lighter bullet?
2850fps for the 175 out of the 7RM is a little conservative if you ask me...I would suggest that 2900-3000 fps is a common max load.

The TSX is a great bullet but I've not abandoned the Partition. All my rifles shoot either TSX's or Partitions. Some shoot Partitions better than TSX's.

The last several deer I've shot with TSX caused me to pause though. I shot 2 whitetails last year with 25-06 shooting 100 TSX's. They basically drilled nickle-dime size holes right through the deer. One deer took 2-3 minutes to die from a lung shot (quartering to, center of near lung, rear of far lung). I posted the thread last fall. Deer # 2 was shot through the shoulder blades - died instantly but the hole through both blades was the size of a dime - maybe. Internal damage was fair but neither deer bled well. In fact, downright poor.

Both deer died, had sufficient (re not excessive) internal damage but very little blood outside of the body cavity. Others on the 'Fire have had sufficient "bleeding holes" shooting identical loads - 100 TSX, 3300 ft/sec. Maybe I'm unlucky, but I'll explore all possibilites.

I'm thinking part of the issue is the fact that deer are not very big to start with so my experience may reflect that fact.

On the other hand, 2 of my buddies over the past 2 years have shot bulls with 7mm RM and 175 grain bullets at 2860 ft/sec. Both elk died quickly, left large blood trails and did not ruin large amounts of meat. I helped quarter both bulls so did the "autopsy". I know the 175 works well.

Push it fast enough and it won't lose much to the 140/160 TSX - the 5-6" you mentioned in your last post. Seems like a viable alternative to the 140/160 TSX.

Would also note, I've never come close to 3000 with a 24" 7mm RM using 175's. To me, 2850-2900 is what I've seen in 3 - 7mm RM's with the 175 but would like to see the load if you have it handy.

I hear ya, not all guns like the same bullets. If you look at that pic of the Caribou I posted above, you can see that the TSX left about a 1.5" exit wound on the body shot and about 1" on the head/neck shot.

Those bulls were about 400lbs on the hoof.

In my 7RM I use loads that are quite a bit above book max, so I won't post the exact load here. I've talked to several other people who've had the same results from 175's. I typically can load my rifle with 5gr of IMR4831 over book max before I start to see pressure signs...

bwinters,

Cut and pasting my post from another thread...

"My favourite rifle over the past 8 years has been my custom 7MM STW.
I did not build it, or choose the chambering...it kinda found me. Was built in New York, but by who, the salesman at the gunstore could not tell me.
It is a left handed Sako AV action, mated to a 24" stainless, fluted MacLellan barrel (anyone have any info on this barrel maker?), bedded in a Fajen nutmeg laminated classic style stock. Without rings, bases and scope, the rifle weighs just a bit under 7 lbs.
Up until last year, it wore a Leuplod Vari-X III 3.5-10 x 40 scope zeroed at 200 yards.
My first trip to the range with the rifle, and Federal's Premium 160 gr Sierra GameKing ammunition, it produced 100 yard groups of 3/4", and a 400 yard group of 3". Attempts at handloading the 150 gr Scirroco could not even come close, so I haven't attempted again.
In 7 years it accounted for 15 animals - elk, moose, mountain goat, bighorn sheep, mule deer and whitetail deer, at ranges from 35 to 475 yards. Not all were one shot kills, but none required any tracking.
Last year, when I found out that Federal had stopped loading the Sierra GameKing, I was very disappointed. The first trip to the range with their new 160 gr Nosler AccuBond ammunition did not live up to my expectations. But, that improved with a really good cleaning of the barrel (Wipe Out works pretty good). The next couple of trips to the range, with a rigorous cleaning between three shot groups, brought the group size down to .7", and the 300 yard groups to 1.6"! (great little lesson)
I had also mounted a Leupold Vari-X III 4.5-14 X 40 with the Boone & Crockett reticle, in gun metal gray on it. Looks great on this rifle.
It accounted for another elk and nice whitetail buck this past season.
This rifle is joy to shoot, light to pack, versus my 300 WSM or 338 Win Mag, and extremely accurate. Kills like lightning at short range, and shoots very flat to way out there, without any holdover, and still provides quick, clean kills."

I have not used the 175 gr Partition in this rifle, as the factory loadings have worked so well. The 160 gr Sierra is running @ 3100 fps and the 160 gr AccuBond is @ 3220 fps from my rifle. On animals that bullets completely penetrated, there was good expansion and plenty of blood, had trailing been necessary.
When I had my 7MM Rem Mag, it shot the Federal 165gr Sierra GameKing (a great bullet that was only available in this factory load @ 2950 fps) into 1/2" groups consistently, and worked wonderfully on moose, elk, mule deer and mountain goat from 20 to 220 yards.

As for recoil, I don't find it any worse than my 300 WSM shooting 180 gr bullets @ 2980 fps, with a similar type stock, and definitely less felt recoil than my 338 WM Model 700 BDL LH shooting 200 gr BT's @ 2950 fps.
Stock design makes a definite difference on felt recoil.

I really like the performance I get out of my STW.
I don't regret selling my 7 Rem Mag at all (especially since it was a right handed rifle).
I don't feel that I would be gaining anything by moving up to the 175 gr bullets, and I'm not inclined to fix what ain't broke on this rifle and it's proven performance.

But, don't take that as my saying that the 175 grainer wouldn't be a stellar performer in this cartridge. If you want to use it, then go for it!

As a side note, I'm saving the lightweight TTSX and TSX experiment for a rechambered B-78 270 Wby with a 28" barrel. Looks as if the 110 gr bullets should get about 3700 fps! Can't wait to start that experiment (and going to try the 110 gr AccuBond's as well). Shoot be alot of fun for shooting laser flat to way out there for coyotes, and deer in the wide open spaces!

blk - thanks for the input. I've had several other folks indicate similar things. The reason I keep coming back to the 175 is the monster BC. In looking long, the long range crowd shoot heavy for caliber bullets due to the ballistic advantages inherent. Their definition of long range is different than mine but all bullets start dropping like rocks somewhere around 350-400 yards. Fast bullets with big BC's make a difference between 400 and your personal limit. I'm also trying to not use turrets. My thinking and associated goals has been to dream up a rifle combination that:

- shoots a high BC bullet pushed fast enough to reduce drop to the mimumum possible
- retain less than a 3.5" inch mid-range maximum rise
- use a stadia wire scope
- comfortable recoil

Plus, I do have concerns about Barnes bullets expanding at long range. I have a handful of non-expanded TSX's taken from my moist clay "bullet test media" (aka dirt pile). Add my experience from last fall with 100 gr TSX from my 25-06, a similar experience with a 140 TSX from my 7mm RM and I'm concerned. I may have gotten bad batches of TSX's but in conversations with Ty, he's seen TSX's fail to open when striking something hard. My dirt pile is not hard, nor does it contain rocks but I still keep finding un-expanded TSX's. Dirt piles are not animals but it is more than a little discomforting to find so many unexpanded TSX's, and very small exit holes in the critters slain. I'm confident they expand in animals but can't explain some of my recent experiences.

I still think TSX's are the ticket for high velocity, smaller for caliber bullets. Noslers peel off the front portion and I've seen ugliness generated from broken bones resulting from close range shots. The trade off is simple: Weight retention (TSX) smaller exits, or Weight loss, larger exits, chance of making a mess (Partition). I'll usually go with weight retention but in looking long, I also want to know my bullet will expand reliably. I'm comfortably on the fence with the TSX and long range.............

You want a monster B.C take a look at the 180gr Berger 7mm hunting bullet.

I always think it interesting, after reading through a bit... That folks say you don't need anything more than a 7 rem mag. The STW only nets a bit more speed.... but then why do we need the 7 rm instead of the 7/08.....

BTW I"ve had full expansion on the X series out past 800 yards. By expansion I mean caliber in, IE 338, and double out, Not any larger. I don't like large wounds but we do need the bullet to open a bit generally. I"m not spooked at all with a 1000 yard TSX shot.

I bet a TSX would not open if it hits something hard that closes the nose cavity, how would it not? Any bullet can do that depending on what it hit and at what angle.

Jeff

BTW due to the BIG bullets like the 160-180 I had mine twisted a bit faster just in case... 8 twist.

i have since sold both of my 7 STW's but both seemed to prefer the 150 NPs right at 3300 fps. I currently run a 7 RUM with the 150 NPS at 3400 and am seriously thinking of playing with the 140 x's as i pretty much only use the rifle for long range deer in open wheat fields and occasionally for bear in huge clearcuts with no options to stalk closer.

Now THAT'S a real 7mm

Yup, me too. But I got one anyway. You know, to bracket the slower 7mms in my battery. I wanted something better different.

I imagine that you have looked at some of the "latest", perhaps beltless cartridges? The STWs seem a bit out of style already.

I have no experience with the 7mm STW but quite a bit with the 7mm Ultra Mag. which is very similiar. In fact, I am one of the few people who will admit to liking the round. I use mine in certain long range situations exclusively for Mule and Whitetail Deer and have settled upon the Nosler 160gr Accubond as it really does the job. I did use some 175 Partitions in testing but didn't see the need. My rifle is a Sendero and recoil has not been a factor at all. I have never viewed it as a general purpose rifle but after over 800 rounds the rifle still shoots MOA and I can't imagine a better long range caliber or rifle for my purposes though an STW would do as well. Honestly I bought the rifle just to get something different not expecting to like it nearly as well as I do. In fact, I had heard it was touchy to load for and hard on barrels and bought it anyway. Glad I did. There are always legitimate differences in opinion but I'll bet that many critics of both the 7mm STW and Ultra don't have much experience with either.

Any chance you can hang a pic of some of those TSX's? I have yet to see any pictures of unexpanded TSX's.

Appreciate it much.