Using 140 grain Partitions and Reloder 22 to push them as fast as reason allows what is this combination especially good for?

Just about anything.

I think I would like at least a 160 grain bullet for elk but figure it will work for big feral hogs down thru Mule deer, Whitetails and Antelope in a fine fashion.

I use 75gr of Retumbo behind 140gr accubonds for 3330fps. and great accuracy, and 71.5gr behind a 160gr accubond also with great accuracy.

The 7mm Rem Mag and 140 partition is fine for a host of critters as long as you only shoot dinks...

It seems pointless to shoot a 140 in a 7 Mag. when you can get around 3,000 fps with a 160.

Smitty of the North

3000 fps is a useful velocity for sure but around 3200fps is too. Having shot a lot of game with Speer 160 grain Hotcors I figure a 140 grain partition would do just as well and could be pushed a bit faster to boot. My intended use is as a trophy Whitetail rifle in north Texas.

rickt300:
You're probably right, with whitetails, anyway.

The BC is better with the 160, so there wouldn�t be much difference in trajectory with the lighter bullet at long range.

The 160 should give you more reliable terminal performance, especially at short ranges, and they make 160 grain Nosler Partitions too.

That's why I think it's pointless to use a light bullet in a high velocity Magnum, where the heavy bullets go fast too.

Smitty of the North

Rick-the 140 Noz bullet will do you just fine and has done well for me over the years in various 7 RM's and my Mashburn Supers.

The bullet will easily handle all game up to and including elk to long range.

I certainly don't agree with Smitty's sentiments but I can only go off what I've learned from using the big 7's and various bullets weights for 2.5 decades.

The bullet will be just as effective as a 160 at the closer ranges and at ranges on the farther edge.

It will take quite a long ways for the 160 to begin to surpass the 140's.

And, I could easily say that as effective as the 140 has proven to me over the years that I see no good reason to run a 160 @ 200 fps slower.

My take is you've a darn fine choice.

If you're wanting to consider any others take a close look at running R22 with a 120 TSX. It'll shoot lights out and it will be a darn laser for a long butt way!

Just a thunk

Good luck to ya

Dober

Mark,

We all know the 120grBT is thee bullet for all 7mms!

MtnHtr

I have 300 of the 140 grain Partitions, 200 150 grain Ballistic Tps and 100 150 grain Sierra Gamekings. In all liklyhood at the age of 51 I won't shoot all these bullets up in ten years. Too many rifles.

No doubt you've plenty of bullets unless you decide to kick azz on a small 3rd world country....grins

A quick note from the throne, looking at the Nozler manual and comparing the 140 @ 300 to the 160 @ 3100 (both top end speeds for the most part).

The 140 NPT has a .434 BC and the mighty 160 has a BC of .475.

I zeroed em both right dead nuts on @ 100, as that is IMO the only fair way to really see how they stack up in terms of drop. Heres what the good book says about it.

140 @ 400= -20.2"
@ 500= -37.6"
@ 600= -62"

And now it is about to soundly get its clock cleaned or should I say "trumped" by the mighty 160 and its huge BC.

Ready.....

160 @ 400= -23"
@ 500= -42.5"
@ 600= -69.4"


Oucha, I sure do hope that bullet can picks its butt up off the floor some time soon after that sound butt kicking, I guess I should say the bullet being the 160!

Seriously either will work just fine, pick one and go forth and fill up an ark.

Dober

I am telling you Stacy if you gode that L24 guy into this I will fly to Cali-shoot one of your big bruins and then make you buy my dinner...grins

Dober

It will be fun backing up you since you will be bringing along one of your 22 centerfires. Just be sure to pack some extra skivvies, you will need them!

MtnHtr

Good to hear you like spectator sports as that will be the extent of your backing me up.

Now packing game for me is a whole nuther thing...grins

Make it a good day!

Dober

Mark,
I fully agree. I'm 24 years and over 40 species of game into my love affair with the 7 Rem mag. Without over-"gacking", and specific only to the 140 vs 160 partition I'd offer:

Objectively - As far as what I call "ballistic alphabet soup" the bc's of the 2 bullets are too close for the 160 to overcome the 140's speed advantage at any practical distance, and the sd's are so close as to not be a factor for those that think energy kills. My home range is 660 yards, and at that distance in my favorite rifle the 140 at 3230ish flies just at 1 moa flatter than the 160 at 3020ish. Wind correction is identical.

Subjectively - what I call the "killability factor", the 140 just seems to kill the crap out of stuff. "Bullet integrity" has never been a problem on game from 30 pound roe deer to 2000 pound eland from 20 yards to farther than I'll admit to. As always, one's mileage may vary, but mine sure hasn't...

Rick - let my 14 year old son at that stash and you'll be re-upping in just a few days!

rick,

For years, I handloaded 160 gr. bullets, mostly Sierra Gamekings and NP's, for 7mm Rem. Mag. Velocities were modest- around 2950 fps- but this combo, with either bullet, was and is a great killer of game. I used it on the range of pronghorn to big mule deer, elk, and moose, with great results.

More recently, I have worked up loads for my .280 Imp., using the Nosler Partition, Barnes TSX, and Accubond bullets. I can safely push them to around 3175-3200 fps, from my 24" barreled Ruger #1. I have used this combo, with the NP's, on elk, with great results. The difference between the velocities I get with the .280 Imp., vs. what you might achieve with the 7 Mag, is negligible.

Main difference, in my opinion, between well-constructed 7mm 140 gr. and 160 gr. bullets, is the reduced recoil with the lighter bullets. To me, at least, the difference is noticeable enough to want to continue with the 140 grainers.

Bighorn-I am a bit confused where on earth did Rick ask about how the 280 AI compare to the big 7?

Thx

Dober

"DWS" (darn well said) there Journeyman!

Dober

I toyed with the idea of building a 280AI but why get a wildcat when I can get a paltry 50 fps more using easily attainable factory brass and just might get even more with the heavy bullets. Then I also have a 270 and a 7x57.

What a bunch of nit pickers... Its all in your head if you think that a 140 is better than a 160 or vise versa.

Get yourself a pound of RL22 and start punching paper. BTW, I'd go with a 140 Accubond, and get the "BC" of a 160, and the speed of a 140. They seem to kill animals alright.

Mark:

Maybe you shoot at game at 4, 5, and 6 hundred yards, and maybe that is a responsible thing to do, for you. I consider 300 yards as max, and if I misjudged and it was nearer 400, there's only 2.8 inches difference.

At hunting ranges, as defined by me, there really isn't much difference in trajectory.

I wouldn't want to have defend myself from a bear with a 140 grain bullet in a 7 Mag., be it a Nosler Partition or whatever.

160 grain NPs in my 7 Mags. always go clear through Caribou. Maybe a 140 would too.

Smitty of the North

I seldom shoot anything past 200 yards I just happen to buy a 7MM Remington magnum that I like and want to use with a bullet that I can confidently use on deer to a max of 250 pounds from any reasonable angle. I might even use it night hunting feral hogs at very close range but mostly my 35 Whelen will pull that cart. I like the idea of the flattest shooting combination because deer a lot of time don't stand there waiting for me to come up with a rangefinder.

rickt300:

If I wanted to use a 140 grain in a 7 Mag. It would be the NP, like you were talkin about.

Smitty of the North

I may not have as much experience with the 7 Rem Mag as some on here, but I've been using it with 140 and 160 Partitions since the late 70's, along with a host of other cartridges; and when I don't mind lugging a 24" barreled rifle,and want to shoot something at (my definition of)long range, which is out to 500; the 7 mag and 140 Noslers Partition gets the nod.

I agree with Mark and Journeyman who have stated that the 140 @3200-3300 is flatter than the 160 @ 3100, as well, though not by much. I zero the "old way" with the 140 @3250 or so, which is 3" high at 100 yards; the 140 is POA at 300,and down 7-8" at 400; mid range at 200 is only 3.5" or so. I have had no problems "overshooting" with this combo (gimme a break)at mid range, and it hits about 2 ft low at 500.Recoil is moderate.

Today we have range finders (which may not work ALL the time, so I use 'em but do not rely entirely on them), but JO'C once wrote that the best range "finder" may be a flat shooting rifle zeroed for the longest point blank range that will not cause mid-range misses;even with all the high-tech assistance today,not bad advice. The 7 mag-140 Partition does the job as a long range outfit of ample killing power,and moderate recoil; I would not hesitate to use it on anything on the continent, cept' of course the large bears.

There is certainly nothing wrong with 140 partitions at 3300+, and a lot of game has been taken with that load up this way. However, yesterday I loaded up some 160 Accubonds, just to see how they shot.

Tried three different loads and they all went into an inch or better, at more than 3000 fps, from my old three-lug SAKO L61R. The fourth load was a tad over 3100 fps. Re22 is amazing stuff!

I may just give these a try on moose this fall.

Ted

Ted- if you get to using that 160 Accu on game let me know what you think.

That is one bullet I'd like to give a run in my 7 Mashburn.

It shoots well in my gun with 7828 but I've not beat on any game with it yet.

Yet...grins

Thx

Dober

Yukoner: That RL22 is good stuff. Goes to show what a shot of nitro will do for you........

You bunch of troublemakers, I chewed it over for a while and ordered 400 160 grain Partitions. I'll run them puny 140's in my 7x57.

That should last you. From SPS I hope?

RickT,
She'll hammer you a little harder (with the 160's) but 140 NP or 160 NP in the running gears and you'll need rubber gloves. I am with Bob on rifle zero. As far out (if you are hunting long range) but not too far as to cause a mid range miss and you can hold on at any reasonable range especially with the 140.

Yeah SPS has a sale right now on em.

Long as its a 140 Partition or TSX runnin at the 3300fps range...Id say you can do most anything a 7mmRM will do with that...lesser bullets might not hold up to high speeds and heavy game.

Agree with a couple of others...in a 7mmRM I'd go 160 at 3000+.

My experience with a Wby Mk V in 7mm Wby and using a variety of 140 grain bullets (including Partitions) was poor. One shot in particular at over 300 yards that hit an animal wouned by my buddy convinced me to go to a heavier weight. The shot hit the animal in the ribs just behind the shoulder, went down the middle, hit the offside hip and smashed it, then was found under the skin on the opposite ham! Started using 160 grain Partitions, far less meat damage, bang flops, even at 300 yards plus. For me magnums exist to throw heavier bullets, but that's just my .02!
Have a Great Christmas Guys!!!

Paul

Sounds like poor performance to me, hit the ribs, down the middle and smashed far hip and was found under the skin. Absolutely pathetic bullet performance!

No, not really rickt. Too light that's all. Too much speed, not enough mass and weight. Nosler Partitions are still my "go to" bullets.

Do what I did.
Push a 150 Partition at 3175fps and call it a compromise!

I don't usually post my experiences/opinions more than once + one followup on a thread EXCEPT for posts on knives and the 7mm Remington Magnum. Again, as if it makes a darn for most...I started with the 7 Mag "seriously" in the mid '80s and have used it now in the USA, Canada, Mexico and Argentina in the Americas, Scotland, England, Sweden and Norway across the pond, RSA, Zim, Namibia and Cameroon in Africa, and finally in Australia for over 40 species, not individual animals (best I can figure some 230ish of those) from roe deer, duiker and and dik-dik to water buff, sambar and eland, with a dozen and a half different bullets..and the 140s are THE TICKET in this chambering...period.

That pic above is of my 21st elk and probably 80thish or so whitetails with the 7 mag, and unequivocally 140s display better "killability" than any other despite bc, sd or xyzwqrpwhatever....and with no apologies that's just the way it is...

Merry Christmas...

Journeyman:I'll swing with you;only bullet that I've seen better than a 140 Partition is a 140 Bitterroot;just because of a wider frontal area and higher weight retention.It has a high DRT track record, but they're no longer made,so its moot.

The 140 at 3200+ is a great load for about anything,and I am not surprised at the results you've had in your extensive experience with the load.

I have taken several elk and moose,as well as many deer with this bullet with great success,although I now prefer the 140gr tsx.

Not much........

I mean, one could always lay bets with his hunting buddies on whether the bullet will hold up when shooting a critter at 50 yards or less.


Casey

Between myself and my hunting partners we have taken a couple of dozen big game animals including several elk and moose with the 140 gr partition.not one failure to date.That being said,we now all use the 140gr tsx or mrx as they retain even more weight and penetrate even better than much heavier partitions.

I can get 3230 fps with 150 Scirocco's from my 7 Wby, 24" barrel. It is like holding lightning in your hand.

I do intend to switch to the 140 A-Frame soon.

Wow, between you and BobinNH I could never second guess my chosen cartridge, the 7 Weatherby.

I know, I know. One can see spectacular kills with light for caliber, uber-velocity bullets. But when I see bullet "failures" or just plain weird things happen, it is often with the light bullets.

Penetration is rarely a function of velocity. Instead, it's bullet construction and the expanded frontal area.

Even with today's premium bullets, I think Sd still counts for something...........

Casey

More like a function of force/area.

Force is a factor of remaining velocity and weight.

More force,or less area= more penetration.

How about some load recomendations with the 140 NP? Have RL 22,
H1000, H 870.

I worked up to 68.0 grains of R22. Good speed and excellent accuracy. R22 varies a bit so start at 64.0 grains.

In a 25.6" bbl, I've run 70grs of R-22 and a couple of different 140s at 3300+.

66grs of R-22 got me 3080 with a 160 Nosler AB.

Cartridge : 7 mm Rem. Mag.
Bullet : .284, 140, Nosler PART SP 16325
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 3.290 inch or 83.57 mm
Barrel Length : 24.0 inch or 609.6 mm
Powder : Alliant Reloder-22

Predicted data by increasing and decreasing the given charge,
incremented in steps of 2.0% of nominal charge.
CAUTION: Figures exceed maximum and minimum recommended loads !

Step Fill. Charge Vel. Energy Pmax Pmuz Prop.Burnt B_Time
% % Grains fps ft.lbs psi psi % ms

-20.0 79 56.00 2513 1964 29723 10729 88.7 1.552
-18.0 81 57.40 2579 2067 31759 11099 90.2 1.513
-16.0 83 58.80 2644 2173 33937 11459 91.5 1.474
-14.0 85 60.20 2710 2283 36269 11807 92.8 1.436
-12.0 87 61.60 2776 2395 38766 12141 94.0 1.394
-10.0 89 63.00 2841 2510 41444 12459 95.1 1.350
-08.0 91 64.40 2907 2628 44313 12760 96.0 1.309
-06.0 93 65.80 2973 2748 47360 13042 96.9 1.268
-04.0 95 67.20 3039 2871 50596 13304 97.7 1.230
-02.0 97 68.60 3105 2996 54051 13544 98.4 1.193 ! Near Maximum !
+00.0 99 70.00 3170 3124 57744 13762 98.9 1.157 ! Near Maximum !
+02.0 101 71.40 3235 3253 61694 13954 99.4 1.122 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+04.0 103 72.80 3300 3385 65920 14120 99.7 1.088 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+06.0 105 74.20 3364 3518 70447 14260 99.9 1.056 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+08.0 107 75.60 3428 3653 75301 14371 100.0 1.025 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+10.0 109 77.00 3492 3790 80510 14458 100.0 0.995 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!



Cartridge : 7 mm Rem. Mag.
Bullet : .284, 140, Nosler PART SP 16325
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 3.290 inch or 83.57 mm
Barrel Length : 24.0 inch or 609.6 mm
Powder : Hodgdon H1000

Predicted data by increasing and decreasing the given charge,
incremented in steps of 2.0% of nominal charge.
CAUTION: Figures exceed maximum and minimum recommended loads !

Step Fill. Charge Vel. Energy Pmax Pmuz Prop.Burnt B_Time
% % Grains fps ft.lbs psi psi % ms

-20.0 88 60.80 2493 1932 29767 10518 85.8 1.534
-18.0 90 62.32 2564 2043 31940 10929 87.6 1.491
-16.0 92 63.84 2635 2159 34283 11327 89.3 1.449
-14.0 94 65.36 2708 2280 36821 11710 90.9 1.407
-12.0 96 66.88 2781 2405 39551 12076 92.4 1.360
-10.0 99 68.40 2855 2534 42533 12420 93.8 1.313
-08.0 101 69.92 2930 2668 45755 12741 95.1 1.268
-06.0 103 71.44 3004 2806 49254 13036 96.2 1.224
-04.0 105 72.96 3080 2948 53062 13302 97.2 1.182 ! Near Maximum !
-02.0 107 74.48 3155 3094 57212 13536 98.1 1.141 ! Near Maximum !
+00.0 110 76.00 3230 3244 61746 13737 98.8 1.102 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+02.0 112 77.52 3306 3397 66706 13900 99.3 1.063 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+04.0 114 79.04 3381 3554 72151 14025 99.7 1.026 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+06.0 116 80.56 3457 3714 78140 14108 99.9 0.990 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+08.0 118 82.08 3532 3877 84748 14149 100.0 0.956 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+10.0 121 83.60 3606 4043 92060 14170 100.0 0.922 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!


Cartridge : 7 mm Rem. Mag.
Bullet : .284, 140, Nosler PART SP 16325
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 3.290 inch or 83.57 mm
Barrel Length : 24.0 inch or 609.6 mm
Powder : Hodgdon H870

Predicted data by increasing and decreasing the given charge,
incremented in steps of 2.0% of nominal charge.
CAUTION: Figures exceed maximum and minimum recommended loads !

Step Fill. Charge Vel. Energy Pmax Pmuz Prop.Burnt B_Time
% % Grains fps ft.lbs psi psi % ms

-20.0 88 64.00 2316 1667 24049 10164 75.5 1.685
-18.0 91 65.60 2386 1770 25788 10654 77.7 1.640
-16.0 93 67.20 2458 1879 27674 11143 79.8 1.596
-14.0 95 68.80 2532 1993 29718 11626 81.9 1.553
-12.0 97 70.40 2607 2113 31934 12102 83.9 1.510
-10.0 99 72.00 2684 2239 34346 12568 85.8 1.467
-08.0 102 73.60 2761 2370 36969 13019 87.7 1.425
-06.0 104 75.20 2840 2507 39828 13453 89.4 1.373
-04.0 106 76.80 2920 2650 42950 13867 91.1 1.324
-02.0 108 78.40 3001 2799 46367 14256 92.6 1.276
+00.0 110 80.00 3082 2953 50108 14618 94.1 1.230
+02.0 113 81.60 3165 3113 54218 14949 95.3 1.185 ! Near Maximum !
+04.0 115 83.20 3248 3279 58745 15246 96.5 1.141 ! Near Maximum !
+06.0 117 84.80 3331 3449 63737 15505 97.5 1.099 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+08.0 119 86.40 3415 3625 69265 15722 98.3 1.058 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+10.0 122 88.00 3499 3807 75401 15895 99.0 1.018 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!

Results caused by � 10% powder lot-to-lot burning rate variation using nominal charge
Data for burning rate increased by 10% relative to nominal value:
+Ba 110 80.00 3314 3414 63679 14897 99.4 1.110 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Data for burning rate decreased by 10% relative to nominal value:
-Ba 110 80.00 2789 2417 39299 13225 82.8 1.379

On papar--yes. In real life, doesn't seem to work that way--Sd still plays an important role in my observation (not as important with today's premium bullets as in earlier times--but still important).

It's kind'a like tryin to calculate "killing power" with energy tables.......


Casey

I give very little thought to SD when considering a bullet such as the tsx or mrx.The wound damage and penetration are very similar whether you use a 7mm 140gr bullet or a 7mm 160gr bullet.Either seems to penetrate at least as well and likely better than the 7mm 175gr partition despite the lower SD.



That is exactly how I feel about using SD to decide which bullet will penetrate better.Bullet construction is much more important.

Thanks for the info. Kurt