Pros/cons of each for medium + game? I'm about to load work some of each, and leaning 150....just on old theory, but everyone raves over the 120s, and I'm sure they'd be milder.

Input appreciated.

How far do you shoot stuff ? If you shoot much over 300 yds., I'd opt for the 150's as they would probably drift less in the wind.
But, to be honest, if it's deer class game, I could easy just flip a coin.
7X57's have long throats for the standard 175 gr. RN ammo. So yours might not shoot real well with the short 120's. But you can't be sure until you try.
I'm about to test 120 gr. BT's in my 7-08. I plan on using the 120 gr. TTSX when we have to go to lead free bullets for Kalifornia hunting. E

Typically, I don't 'anticipate' anything past 300, but I've had to push that on occasion, and tend to prepare for the longer stuff...plus I do like to practice/play out to 600 or so. Last season, all but one critter was over 150, which is unusual for SE hunting. New lease in LA has some HUGE grain fields, where 500 could present often. My Ruger 77 in 7x shots 139 SST factory loads well, already.

Personally, I tend to like heavier for caliber.

I use 140 grain Ballistic Tips in my Model 70 Featherweight, at 2800 fps MV. I have no issues with that combo right out to 400 yds so far...solid rest needed.. but the bullet did its job easily a that distance...

I went with 120s in my 7-08 and 140s in the 7x57. They work for me.

donsm70

The 120s flat out rock in the 7-08, whether NBT or TTSX. I prefer the flatter trajectory provided by 3100+ fps.

been pushing the 120BT at 3000-3100 for years and several deer, no problems, like them better then the 139SST

Well, I think I've got enough brass, that I can work up a load in both the 120s and 150s, and just keep any scope dope on the boxes. I could just play with both. I figure the 120 has to be more pleasant to shoot. The 150s will likely be better way out there.

The 120s do well, but at longer ranges correct, the 150 will hold up longer, little more recoil, more energy, less drift.

Recoil energy is closely related to bullet energy (equal but opposite reaction). Lighter weight bullets do not necessarily equate to lighter recoil. Dwell time is typically lower with the lighter bullet, which means the recoil impulse is shorter. And if the energy is the same or higher than loads with the heavier slug, recoil velocity goes up very quickly, and recoil velocity is a big part of perceived recoil. Loads with lighter bullets kick less if bullet velocity remains the same as with the heavier bullet.

I shoot 139/140gr in my 7x57. They shoot better than 120's in my gun. Try both and shoot 100yrds to 500 and see which groups the best. Have fun! Sweet calibers for coyotes to elk. 58gscott

Yep. I've actually thought of loading some 130gr flat point 7mm bullets, to about 2400-2600, for a 'woods' or kid load...similar to 7-30 Waters. I'm thinking the 120s at 3000-3100 will recoil no more than a 25-06, which will certainly be less than the 150s, pushed to the edge at 2800-2900 (if I can get there)...which is more 30-06 - like. 2750 for the 150s is more reasonable, on both ends.

All I have to play with right now are 120&150 NBTs....getting ready to see what H4895 will do with those. I passed up some 150 LRABs today that were tempting....but I don't consider a 7x57 to be a 500+ gun, so they're kind of a waste. I have plenty of Prvi 139s to shoot up for the brass, but no 139/140 bullets to load, yet.

Not sure exactly what you are saying. But in the 9 years I've been reloading and shooting 7-08s, I can say "to me", a 150 gr bullet definitely recoils more than a 120 gr bullet when loaded up to a reasonable velocity for both, say 3050 vs 2800 fps. And I would bet this is true with most others.

Going through the same exercise myself, for a new to me 700 mtn rifle in 7x57.(only took me 8 years to find one after letting another one get away!)
I'm starting with 120 ballistic tips, 139 hornadys, 140 ballistic tips and some 140 partitions which I have on hand. Intended targets will be deer, with some heavy mule deer a possibility.
For me, if the partitions shoot decently (my definition is consistently 3 shots in a nice 1", or so, triangle), that will end load development for hunting. Otherwise, whichever of the other 3 that shoots well will get the nod. I'd be happy enough if the hornadys shot decently as a practise load for the partitions as they are 1/3 the cost up here.

I don't think we have all the facts, plus this maybe apples vs. oranges so to speak. Are you building a new rifle or this a factory 7mm-08? If its a Rem it will have a 9.25 twist which is fine for lighter bullets at SAAMI standard velocities but too slow to 'best' stabilize heavier bullets - I think you mentioned a Ruger in 7x57, if I'm not mistaken the twist in that is 8.5 or 8.75 - the point is not assume that the two will have similar performance. I'm curious as to why the fascination with the 150 grain? For a 7mm-08 especially a factory rifle chambered for SAAMI standard rounds, the heavier the bullet the more it's going to project back down in the cartridge case and reduce usable case capacity. I built and still have 7mm-08 and 7x57 rifles both built with identical 24" 9-twist Shilen barrels and deeper than standard throats which was still limited with the 7mm-08 because it was on a 700 short action. I was much happier with 125-140 grain bullets - the velocities starting falling dramatically doing load development with anything heavier. In the 7x57, I loaded up to 160 grain Noslers and was able to achieve adequate velocities but the 140 was still at the top of performance curve with most powders when considering down-range energy. Even though I was able to safely achieve accurate velocities at 3000fps, I loaded my wife a very mild pleasant load with 140 NBT's at around 2800fps and she never lost an animal with that combo. Just my thoughts for what they're worth

I've used the 120 BT at 200 yds and my daughter at 250 yds out of a 7x57 carbine. It killed the deer fine but I much prefer the 150 BT at those ranges. The 120 BT does kick marginally less but in the field shooting at game I can't tell the difference. in recoil.

Dan