Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters What's Petzals beef with the 7mm RM?

The 7x64mm is *the* cartridge in this class..Very popular in Europe, but I never hear it mentioned on here.

Hello Pete, it is because those outside Europe that have a rifle chambered in the cartridge already know what they want and have so do not feel the need for other's opinion on the matter.

But it smells just like a .280, only older by a wide margin! Yeah, we know about it, but since it's basically just another 7mm/06, we don't get excited.

Nothing wrong with it, but we've already got it with another name.

What I have noticed is that those folks who've owned riifles in both .270win and a 7x64mm all tend to like the 7x64mm better, typically saying it tends to have less muzzle blast and recoil..

The top comes up for discussion not infrequently over here and I 've heard two main theories, one being the shoulder angle of the cases are different and the other attributing to the fact that the 7x64mm tends to be seen in upper end Euro rifles which some how have better ergonomics.

I am not sure if I buy either theory, but the 7x64mm is certainly a nice round, and is very readily available over the counter in Europe filling the same niche as the .270win and the 30-06..

Pete E, you're onto something.

Bearing in mind how awesome the 7x57 is according to so many, why wouldn't another 7mm of case length make it even more awesome?

Out of interest, what's easier to get where you are, 270 Win brass or 7x64? 270 is a lot easier to get here but we tend to be under the American influence mainly.

- Bob

For loaded ammo, I'd say the .270win is far more common, but the 7x64mm is gaining popularity. For components, you probably have a better choice of heads in the 7mm, but it would be easier to find .270win brass. However, these days with being able to buy b brass online, that's probably no longer a problem..

Well that right there is the whole point!

But if you load it like a 270,never torch either off at more than 300 yards,it's going to smell like a 270 and you're never gonna see the difference.Neither is the guy who buys one and lacks the incentive or disposition to run it at longer distances.

If he shoots both at animals enough,and loads a 7 mag to potential, he will see that a 7 mag expands tough hunting bullets better at distances past 300 yards.

Jordan those are the "laggards" you refer to above. There are plenty of them out there.They don't hangout here.

The guy is getting a heavier rifle, burning more powder,that "free" extra barrel,and a wee jump in recoil for basically nothing in the way of advantage.I figure if you want a 7 mag,treat it like one.

BTW I don't consider either cartridge to be ideal for a person shooting 50-100 rounds strings at gongs and rocks in a afternoon; or for that shoot that rc and dogshooter are running at Wittington.For that sort of thing I'd rather have a 6.5 Creedmoor or the like.You can learn everything you need to know about a 7 Rem Mag with less strenuous sessions.

I know how old you are, I did the math. I only called you old because of the tone you were taking with me. I never had a problem with you on here so I was kind of taken aback when you started hammering me. I'm in my thirties and I'm on the Campfire for two reasons, to have fun and to learn. There is a wealth of knowledge here because there are a lot of guys on here like yourself who have done a lot of things for a lot of years. I like asking questions so I can glean what I can which is pretty much.

Yeah, those 760's and 7600's are good rifles. Very popular here. I've even taken a few antelope out there with one. And yeah, I'd sit down and have a beer with you.

This discussion certainly has has gone downhill. I stand by my previous statement that it is mostly beating a dead horse. When it gets to the point of name calling things have gone too far. Do you act like that when having a face to face conversation?

Everyone has favorite cartridges and there is nothing wrong with that. If what you are using gets the job done under your conditons it is the correct one,period. You cannot argue with meat in the freezer.

Maybe Iam spewing as has been suggested. Us old folks, just turned fifty, tend to do that.

If you keep replying to me you'll double your post count in no time.

When I discuss build ideas and the merit of different cartridges with friends, it usually gets much, much, much worse.


Travis

Amen!! Good post..




I agree...

By now, he'd be LOL-ing.

The laggards comment was said partially in jest. In the short term, there are early jumpers, who are eager to adopt any new advancement in technology, and there are laggards who will eventually come around after all their buddies are already using the technology. But over the long term, the average guy progresses. What's the proficient distance of the average rifle hunter today- 200 yards? 300? What was it 150 years ago- 50 yards? 100?

Jordan,

I agree that the 7RM offers more than the 270 especially for longrange.

But for the average hunter shooting game at 200 yards or less, does it make any difference? Even the occasional 400 yard shot? I think that was the intent of Petzal's article, and what Mule Deer, Goat, and others have been stating. Joe-Average probably doesn't need a 7RM. Joe-Average probably doesn't shoot much to begin with, so the extra recoil from a magnum probably isn't going to help any either.

By the way, all my rifles in 270 are long gone and I probably won't be buying another. But, my next rifle might just be a 7RM for longrange Either that or another 7mm-08, or 6mm-06. Can't decide...

Jason

Jordan,

A bit of advice...

Never underestimate Americans appetite for mediocrity!

MANY of the groups I see shot at the range literally would be touch and go at 200 and definitely 300 yards.

Speaking of 7 RMs...the last one I saw personally was a guy shooting at the bench next to me a couple of seasons ago before hunting season. Wood stocked rifle (Ruger, IIRC) with a low end Bushnell 3-9. He is resting the BARREL directly on three pieces of carpet covered 2x4 pieces to 'sight in'. NO hearing protection. I carry extra muffs and earplugs and offer them to him, but he says,no thanks, it doesn't bother him...

He shot a whole box of Rem factory. I leave the results to your imagination....

(BTW, this is no way a condemnation of the cartridge)

I know what you're saying and in general would agree with it but to be honest, I think the proficient distance of the average hunter is still well under 200 yards.

That's based on helping out on numerous sight in days at the range and watching lots and lots and lots of people who can't hit a 14" gong at 200 yards with the rifle resting on sand bags.

Now I would definitely agree that the "ability to hit stuff way out yonder" of the top 10-20% of hunters has increased markedly over the years and I would attribute that mainly to the widespread use of laser rangefinders coupled with repeatable scope adjustments.

Target shooters were hitting targets at 1000 yards with precise aperture sights or primitive scopes since the 1870's at least. They already knew about wind drift and trajectory - but they also knew the exact range to their targets.

JOC loved the .270 because it gave one a leetle more room for error in estimating ranges out to 300 yards or so. Now people can know to within a yard or less the exact distance of their target out to as far as their rangefinders will lase. Adjust turrets, watch the wind - still the most important art form in the science of shooting - and a .45-70 will lay'em in there. And now today people are taking laptops and portable weather stations into the field to try to reduce the art of wind gauging to as much of a cut and dried computation as possible.

The combination of accurate, perfectly balanced bullets, accurate rifles and good scopes allows us to shoot smaller groups than we used to, but laser rangefinders are the trump card that allows us to adjust those scopes to precisely intersect the path of the bullet and the point we want to hit.

It still takes a certain skill set to breathe, aim and squeeze properly and consistently and that hasn't changed in hundreds of years. And based on my observations of lots and lots of hunters shooting, I'd say that only a small percentage has really mastered those basic skills which then allow them to take full advantage of the technology available today.

Agreed, But IMO if the 7RM is too much gun for the average guy to handle, then the .270 is likely too much, as well. I think the average guy would be better served by a .243 or .260 than any of the larger cartridges.

Great post. Ross Seyfried was dragging around a 3ft long artillery rangefinder decades ago.

That's what I'm talking about! The average guy around here has a cheap RF, so at least he knows when an animal is out of range for him. In JOC's day, most guys would guess, shoot, and pray.