Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Long Range Hunting 7mm Wby and LRAB results...........

Bob,

I have a 7mm Weatherby custom built on a Remington M700 by Mcwhorter rifles. It is a dandy rifle and pushes a 160 accubond to 3150 fps with really fine accuracy.

I mention that rifle to say that McWhorter has done a lot of work with various custom 7mm magnum chamberings and he really likes the Weatherby but also chambers for the 7mm-300 Winchester and the 7mm STW.

He will tell you that if these rifles are chambered with comparible throats/leads,a bigger case will give you higher velocity at the same pressure or the same velocity at lower pressure.

Which is all I hear you saying,your Mashburn gives really good velocity without excessive pressures with the bullets you want to use.

It operates in a sweet spot,and what's not to like about that.

Have a nice season.

Bob, I can get the very same safety margin from my Weatherby, now. No problem.

From the Hornaday Manuel 9th edition. Shooting 175 grain bullets.

I shoot the max load of 75.9 grains of RL25 for 3,160 fps. It's probably at 65K.
I have also loaded 74.0 for 3,050. That load probably is at the lower pressures, and speed that you speak of and like.

Same speed and probably same pressures as you get.
No safety margin advantage by the Mash.

Free bore, whatever, it has worked for over 60 years. I haven't heard of any free bore rifles blowing up in my lifetime.

I bought a factory rifle and use recommended loads that are proven safe to get the very same thing you are getting.

I also use Federal brass of which I have had no problem finding. Nosler/Norma 270 Wby can easily be opened up with a stroke of a press as well.

Advantage Mashburn----0

John,
Thanks for the reply. I tried some factory Rem 7mm Rem mag ammo in my custom rifle and it shot much better than handloads. The factory cartridge length was such that the bullet was over 0.1 from the rifling. From this discussion I'm guessing it may be because the pressure is "better behaved". I'll try it with some handloads, which are more consistent and concentric than factory ammo but prior handloads were also loaded much closer to the rifling.

David

Oh, SU you meant you are moving a 175 gr 7mm bullet at 3160 fps? Sorry I misunderstood. Thought you meant a 160.

Quite a cartridge this 7mm Weatherby....

Not only does this 2.5 inch case with under 90 gr of capacity equal or exceed the Mashburn, it also moves a 175 gr bullet at higher velocity than the 7mm STW and the 7mm RUM,both of which have a lot more capacity.....sometimes exceeding those cartridges by as much as 100-200 fps; at least that's according to Sierra, Barnes, and Hodgdon data,none of which shows those cartridges hitting anywhere 3160 with a 175 gr bullet,as we are expectd to believe the 7mm Watherby does..

The only thing coming close is the 7mm RUM in the Nosler Manual.





So, I am now expected to believe that the 7mm Weatherby is the velocity equivalent of the 7 RUM? I'm sorry that I can't meet your expectations of "stupid". SU the logic completely escapes me and I don't believe this stuff for a second, not at sane pressures anyway.

Pretty remarkable magic for 3/8" of free bore. Wonder how and why it snuck past Page and Hagel so long ago.

Now I understand why Dober stopped posting here.




This place has gotten over the top for me.

If anyone cares to discuss the Mashburn (or anything else for that matter) they can feel free to PM me. If I don't respond, take a hint why and don't bother to try again....

I've often looked at the 270wby and 7mmwby numbers and said, "damn!"

And I'm expected to believe that the 7mm Mashburn is the
velocity equivalent of the 7 RUM?

According to the Nosler Manual

(comparing cartridges with bullets of like sectional density)

This is what Nosler shows.

The 300 win mag (base case for the 7mm Mashburn)case
holds 81.4 grains of water.

The 7mm Wby holds 82.0 grains of water.






And John Barness too? I guess the good folks at Hornaday are in the category as well.

Bob, my goodness, friend, its just a cartridge.



It didn't sneek by John Barnsness.

I'm going off published proven data from a Manufacture and getting the speeds they declare.

The Mashburn folks are going on what they hope or wish for and don't really know.

Now who is over the top?

SU35 your case volumes are off. The .300 Win goes 89-90 grs full to the top of the neck. My velocities are chronoed from a 24" barrel. The Mashburn has approx. 4 grs. more case capacity to the top of neck than the Bee and about 8 over the Rem. I don't have numbers for either case to the base of the neck.

No, they are not.

I'm going exactly by what NOSLER shows in Loading Guide #7 with a seated bullet.

This shows the REAL case volume.

Pg 375 shows the (water) case volume with a bullet SD of .248
7mm Wby 82.0
Pg 450 shows the (water) case volume with a bullet SD of .248
300 Win mag 81.1 (not to mention it would be slightly less than that due to the case being reduced from .308 to .284)

Also, in comparing the case capacity of a seated bullet with longer high BC bullets.

The 300 win mag 30/200 grain SD bullet of .301 has a capacity of 77.4 grains of water.

The 7mm Wby 28/175 grain SD bullet of .310 (longer) has a capacity of 80.0 grains for 2.6 grains more water capacity than the 300 win mag, case with seated bullets.

So, therefore, loading 7mm/175 grain Partitions, the 7mm Wby will have more case capacity than the 7mm Mashburn.

Is it not obvious that the Mashburn operates at high pressures and not the moderate easy going pressures that it's proponents "guess" at.


Prove me wrong......please. For Bob's sake! And all those others who bought into the Mashburn myth.

Oh the drama!!!!
All over a few cartriges that basically do the same damn thing.


Bob- don't forget to post a goodbye thread. I hear reporting your premature demise is also a proven tactic

yeah he could will me a few rifles just to make it believable.

haha

Nothing like ballistic gack arguements. The ghost of Dober would approve! Lunacy, but in a healthy way. Totally there myself..... (Grin)

This is getting really interesting now. For the past several years I've found Bob to be one of the most rational guys on the Campfire, and earlier in this thread even basically said, "Sure, why shouldn't Bob use his 7mm Mashburn if that's what he wants?"

But now Bob is the one denying handloading data that's been tested by not one but SEVERAL companies. He's insisting they're wrong, that the 7mm Weatherby Magnum couldn't possibly be doing what Hornady, Nosler, Norma, etc. say.

All of those companies are members of the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers' Associated (SAAMI), a voluntary organization that consists of ALL the major ammo and firearm manufactuers. Their purpose is to make sure all ammo in a certain chambering not only fits in every SAAMI-member's rifle, but is safe to fire and comes as close as possible to the listed specifications--including pressures.

The many members of SAAMI use the most advanced modern electronic equipment available to test pressures, at consistent temperatures and humidities, indoors where the lighting makes sure chronographs costing several thousand dollars record the correct velocities. They know what the hell they're doing.

But Bob doesn't believe all this, apparently because he believes all the SAAMI members are in collusion, publishing false results to prop up Weatherby. That isn't the rational Bob I've read for so many years. Yeah, this is all ballistic gack, but....

I'm braced for what will inevitably will come....

Your logic on case capacity is flawed. You are comparing the two cartridges held to 30/06 OAL; in the case of the 7mm Weathervy Nosler data shows 3.360; and in the case of the 300 Win Mag,3.310 with a 180 gr bullet.

All of this has nothing to do with the Mashburn because my chamber( and those of friends who have built similar rifles) is set up for an OAL of 3.6" with a H&H mag box;so that the 175 gr Nosler Partition is not seated into the case at all. (emphasis added) he bullet is up in the neck where it belongs, not down into the powder space, which is the "right" way to set it up in the first place.

We won't even get into the differences in how much more case capacity is consumed by a 30 caliber bullet vs a 7mm bullet seated into the 300 Win Mag case the same distance....I ain't that good at math an it doesn't matter anyway.

In any event I have been all through this seating depth thing with Johnny B before, concerning the Mashburn.

But I can read, John.... and know what SAAMI is.


I notice that SU's load for e 175 ABLR was 70 gr H4831 for 3080 fps) and taken from the Hornady Manual,which shows a max load of 70.1 gr H4831 with the 175 gr Hornady bullet.

He then used that data, to load a 175 gr Nosler LRAB bullet (not a Hornady)in his 7mm Weatherby. Does not matter, right?

The fly in the ointment( and is a big one) is that the Nolser manual lists 70 gr of H4831 as MAX with its 160 gr bullet...and Nosler lists no loads for H4831 whtasover with the 175 gr bullet.

So, SU offers as evidence of the superiority of the 7mm Weatherby over the Mashburn, the Nosler MAX load for the 160 gr Nosler bullets.......with the 175 gr Nolser bullet....offering up the Hornady manual max load as "evidence" that he is a careful and prudent handloader ........and that we Mashburn people are bunch of dangerous nuts who drink KoolAid.


And then jumps up and down with glee because his 7mm Watherby delivered Mashburn level velocities....no small wonder. He was using a max load for a 160gr Nosler bullet with a 175 gr Nosler bullet.....no wonder the 175 ABLR did 3080....I ain't surprised! And people will continue to tell me no one pushes hard on the 7mm Weatherby!

C'mon.

And people are preaching...to me...about the sanctity of SAAMI specifications,and pressure guessing,and Mashurn KoolAid? And loading hot?


How many times have we heard Johnny B tell us that we can use 62 gr of h4831 with a Hornady bullet in the 270 because Hornady bullets have less bearing surface than other bullets from other manufaturers?.... and I know this because I blew a primer once by switching from a Hornady bullet to a Nosler bullet after dropping the charge only two grains.You learn some stuff the hard way.

So if we are to be completely consistent and I am to be spanked for ignoring all this SAAMI data I would gently suggest that SU, in attempting to prove his point, be held to the same standards and not exceed Nosler's recommendations for suggested maximum loads by using a 175 gr bullet with the Nolser maximum load for a 160.

But he loads every thing to the friggin' gills anyway so I see no reason why this half-assed comparison should be any different.


I knew all this when I called "bullshidt" to his comparison from page 1 of this thread but did not wish to embarrass anyone but you know what? [bleep] it.

Anybody else gotten anything bloody lately?




Tanner

Tanner

How close were you that you got Arterial Spray on the scope


Kids

Bingo...

Arguing the objectively "known" vs. the non-objectively "known" is sorta silly.

This is where Gack Mountain becomes the slipperiest, stinkiest hill to die on