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

And to think Selby thought highly of 270's and 30-06's......

Wow! That is one old Ruger.

Well if he's trying to stir the pot I think he was successful. For the record I like my 7mag. Yes it's not much more than an 06 or a 270 but it is more. It never hurts to have more and sometimes you just might need it.

I have both and like both a lot. My buddy was hunting sheep in the Yukon back in the early '80s and killed a mountain grizzly with his .270 and 130 partitions. The Grizzly fell at the shot but he shot it again whether he needed to or not.

I will never be able to put up the money it takes to hunt brown bear or grizzly, but I would use a .300 mag 200 partition if I did. But does anyone believe a .270 Win. could not kill a brown bear with a 150 partitions?

I've only killed deer with the 7 mag and .270 and for deer my memory cannot distinguish any difference! I've had dramatic bang flops with both as well as sprints after the hit with both. In regards to deer I think a 25-06 kills just as quickly, but I had a land owner ask me to not bring my 25-06 again to use on his deer!

When I'm in the mood, I personally find a 7 mag more exciting than a .270.

Dave would like to thank all present and future contributors to this thread. Here's what was likely said over a sammich or a non-alcoholic drink a day or so ago (paraphrased) - Once again, readers, friends and others have spoken to my longevity and relevance. Thank you.

MD - thank you for a refreshingly common sense post. Petzel makes me laugh - I like his style - I enjoy what he writes. I don't have enough experience to agree/disagree with what he writes (or any other professional gun writer) so I take everything with a couple grains of salt. Then again my collection of hunting rifles is relatively small and "plain" - 2 30-06, 1 7x57, and a .243. All very poor choices I know....

Whatever my LRF says, I just add 400 yards to it and call it good and use a short barreled 270 with Partitions as well-Just hate that .284 bore.

I never understand it when .277 guys say they hate .284 bores. But you're certainly not the first I heard say it. I like both.

Same as the .277 haters. Sometimes the rig itself takes precedent over the chambering. I have a late 60's PF M70 270 that I wouldn't have bought on a dare, but it belonged to a late family member so I roll it. Unfortunately it shoots too....

I was being sarcastic.
I hunt and compete at distance with 7mm's.
I don't have a 270 Win., but I don't hate them.

Who are the .277 guys that hate .284s?

I agree with Tanner and what Dogshooter says about the magnum 7's.It was always good even with yesterday's bullets,as a LR cartridge.Moderate recoil (for what you get),and reasonable rifle weight have always been by products of the cartridge.

I've been puzzled by folks who say a 7mm or .300 would be too heavy to tote around the mountains.

You can build or buy a rifle in ANY chambering exactly the way you want it. I'll only own 7.5 # hunting rifles from now on. I couldn't care any less about how much powder it uses or how heavy the bullet it pushes happens to be.

You only have to shoot them in the field once

You carry them for days.

Personally I tend to agree, but I shoot a lot and even at a semi-advanced age can take more recoil than some. The first Ultra Light Arms rifle I sot extensively was also the first .300 Winchester Magnum I shot extensively, and it weighed right around 7 pounds with scope. I mostly hunted with 200-grain bullets at 2900 fps, and had no problems. Have hunted with a 7-1/2 pound .338 Winchester Magnum for over 15 years and killed a pile of game from Alaska to Africa.

But I once guided a guy after pronghorn who thought a .338 Winchester was the ideal all-around North American cartridge. I wouldn't argue with that, except he couldn't shoot it worth a damn, and thanks to shooting it too much flinched even when somebody loaned him a .25-06. I finally had him use my .220 Swift, and after flinching BADLY on the first shot, he settled down and shot it very well. He killed a very good pronghorn the next morning with a perfect shot at 150 yards.

One of the problems with many Campfire threads is most shooters assume (whether out of ignorance or arrogance) that everybody else is exactly like them. But I've guided several people who couldn't handle the recoil of a 9-pound 7mm Remington Magnum, despite shooting quit a bit--or perhaps because of shooting quite a bit. Have also hunted with world champion shotgunners who shot tens of thousands of rounds for so many years they couldn't handle the recoil of 1-ounce loads in an 8-pound gas autoloader. But they couldn't stop shooting, because they were addicted.

Humans vary considerably, the reason threads like this go on and on and on and....

John,

Just a little trick I learned with novice/first timers. Be sure to MAKE them wear muffs that muffle sound as much as possible, and don't let them hear you shoot if they don't have muffs on.

All guns kick less if you can't hear them.

Bruce,

Believe me, all the people mentioned were muffed to the max. All of this took place LONG after you and I started shooting when any sort of ear protection wasn't "manly."

In recent years I've also found that properly fitting rifle stocks make just as much difference as ear protection. Of course, that wasn't manly for many years either!

luv2safari
I have seen that in print a time or two, also.
I believe one thing that will make a person flinch for a long time afterwards is to get severly scoped.

In and of itself, it isn't, until you start living out of a pack for days, and carrying all that schidt uphill. Then the weight of EVERYTHING matters, even the rifle, to a point. I'd be the first to agree that you can reach a point of diminishing returns on a rifle PDQ by stripping weight off of it.

Phug it. Let's all just build 7.5 pound 50 BMGs. We only shoot it once in the field.

The limit is different for everybody, but somewhere around 20 lbs. of recoil (often less) is where most people hit the wall in terms of utmost field accuracy. Far better to err on the side of less recoil and more shootability then the alternative. A rifle with less recoil and blast will be shot more than the fire breathing alternative. Every time.

He wasn't advocating a 7.5 pound 50 BMG.

He was simply stating that you don't have to forgo having a magnum if weight is a concern.

Which is true.

A brake and a stock of proper design that fits the shooter will mitigate any increase in recoil.