Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Elk Hunting 160 Partiton or 175 Partition in 7MM Rem Mag

Morning.

In the midst of new load development for next year already with the mild weather in the Midwest.

I already have a good load with the 160 Accubond in 7 rem mag that I used sucessfully on a cow elk this past fall, but I want to add a partiton load to the list.

I am debating going with the 160gr Partion or the 175gr Partition.

This is a load that would be used for elk primarily, but could be used for smaller critters as well.
Maybe for moose someday also.

For those of you with experince with these bullets in the 7 Rem Mag is there any real difference in performance and which would you choose.

Thanks.

Most will probably suggest the 160 NP, I like the 175's in The 7X57 and 7MM mags, have not used personally on elk, but have loaded the 175 Partitions for a few buds over the years and they have always done a spectacular job on elk.

I have also talked the guys into using their elk loads for deer when they return from elk hunting, many, many, deer and hogs have fallen to their elk loads, works fine, and a bunch less trouble for me at the loading bench

Gunner

I can't believe that an elk will be able to tell the difference, or any smaller critter, for that matter. However, the 7 Mag has made its reputation on the bigger end of the big game spectrum with 175 grain bullets. I would use whichever shoots best in your rifle and not sweat the small stuff.

I say pick whichever one your rifle likes best, both are excellent bullets that are more than capable.

I've used the 160 NP's quite a bit. I suppose that the terminal performance of 175 would be as good or better.

Most 7mag shooters seem to feel the 160 best utilizes of the flat shooting aspects of the 7mag.

Personally, when practicing at longer ranges I like to keep it as simple as I can, i.e., try to minimize the amount of 'aim here for this load and aim there for that load', etc. and I do see a difference in the drop from the 160s to 175s.

Compare your groups at various ranges. In my own 7mags I see little difference from the 160 accubond to the 160 partition.

All 3 bullets you mentioned have killed truck loads of elk. Pick one that shoots well and learn its ballistics.....done.

The 160's will get er dun but my lord the BC and SD on the 7MM 175's is sexxy! It make me want another 7 mag or 7 STW. Fill it will RL22 and use the one that shoots best as said.

Got that right except fot the RE22 part....I haven't been getting the velocities I want with it and some other funny things going on so I'd go RE25 instead....

Nailbender59,

Many years ago I did some penetraton testing when I was using my .454 for most of my hunting. I wrote almost one hundred pages of notes about hunting with it. I once killed a deer with it that was behind a log. The deer was filled with wood chips and yet the 260 grainer exited. Anyway to answer the question.......

We will have a comparison between a couple of the partitions and a couple of the Casull loads. The test media used was dry oak shavings. Oak shavings are not the same as an elk shoulder or the brisket of a deer, but the medium was the same for all the bullets. Several of each were fired across the chronograph during the course of testing for accuracy. Those velocities will be listed as the impact velocities because the dust was closer than the electric eyes were. I fired a 300 grain XTP (old style) into the dust at about 1,630 fps. I spent the next ten minutes searching for it. It weighed 291 grains and had opened into an advertising quality mushroom with a rough diameter of 5/8". It traveled forty-six inches into the shavings.

The shavings were restored to approximately their original condition. A 7MM Coyle Wildcat, which later was legitimized as a 7MM Shooting Times Westerner, fired a 160 grain 7MM partition into the dust at 3,375 fps. The little high velocity projectile went fifty inches. It weighed 106 grains. All lead in front of the partition was gone. The bullet mushroomed all the way back to the partition exposing a frontal diameter of about � inch.

The 175 grain 7MM buried itself fifty-two inches with its impact velocity of 3,150 fps. It weighed 111 grains and still retained a little lead in front of the partition. The mushroom was about 7/16 inch across.

The real surpriser was the 260 grain Freedom Arms. There are two surprises. Despite the fact it is called soft point, and has a lot of �lead� exposed, there was no deformation or discernable weight loss. The only evidence of hitting the shaving at 1,925 fps was the edge of the meplat looked as though one had smoothed it with fine sandpaper. The second surprise: The depth of penetration was a winning, if there was a contest, fifty-six inches. You can extrapolate from this info to determine what your firearm might do.

I'm with the others on this one. Let your rifle tell you which one it likes best. Either of them are deadlier than anthrax when you sling them out of a 7mm Rem Mag.

yepper that covers it

Dober

My 7mm likes the 160 NP's!

I would let my rifle decide which one to use, but would start with the 160 gr first.

Fixed it for ya mark

Yep.

Only difference MIGHT? be close shots at the South end of BIG, North bound bulls in the thick, dark stuff if you go there. Otherwise, as above.

Wayne

Thanks for the replies.

Guess I will give them both a try. Seems I get a few good loads for each rifle and tell myself I am going to let it be at that.

Must be the heart of an experimenter. I'm always playing with something new.

I'd stick with the 160 AB

But if you want to add a NP in the mix then I would choose the 175 since you already have the 160gr division covered with the AB.

I have been shooting both the 160 AB and the 175 Pt in my STW. Both bullets will shoot sub 1" groups at 100 yards. I use the PT because I have 50 years experience with the Nosler PT and have yet to have a failure. The BC on the PT is great and "if" I remember my ballistics chart the 175 is only 3 inches lower at 600 with the same sight setting. More bang for the buck with the 175.

I've shot both elk and moose with my 7mm RM and 160 and 175gr Partitions. Game dies with both - although I did have an "experience" with the 160 on an elk. The bullet seemed to tumble after hitting the joint of the upper leg. It still damaged the heart and made it to an off-side rib (which is where I recovered it). The bullet had lost the rear core. The bull went ~100 yards or so before expiring. It was kind of an odd thing and I doubt the 175 would have been different.

I have yet to fling a 175 NPT at game,but after a lot of use of the 160 NPT in 7 Rem Mags,I am going to make the 7mm Mashburn a "one load for everything" rifle,and the bullet will be a 175 NPT.

I can start the 160 gr 100 fps or so faster, but have noticed they both land the same place out to 600 yards,with the 175 started at 3075....so it gets the nod far as I'm concerned...

Pals who have used it here and in Africa for a good bunch of plains game tell me the 175 Partition a wicked killer on everything started that fast,and two of them also say(after years of 300 Weatherby use),that the 175's started over 3000 fps kills just as well as the 300 with 180's.

I hate looking at ballistic tables, but a glance at the Nosler tables shows the 175 Partition started at 3000-3100 as hanging pretty good to 600 with a a 180 gr 30 cal started at 3200 fps.

I hope to find out,since I have used the 300's myself a good deal.