My buddy frequentflyer sent this to me and I am really looking forward to watching this when all the testing is complete.. Count me in the group that has never seen or heard of anyone getting close to 3000 FPS from a factory 175 gr 7 PRC! And, I have a 26" barrel.
I started to hand load for it and will hit the brakes around 2900 fps. with a 180 Scenar. Have not gotten to the range yet. Does an extra 100 fps matter? Nope, I just wish Hornady was more honest in their trumped up marketing.
I still find that very interesting given the almost identical case capacity as the 7 RM. I've not shot the 180s but have shot various 175s. My current 7RM will launch a 175 ABLR at 3050 give or take a few ft/sec. It does have a 26 inch barrel.
Good video. I like the 7's in general, particularly the 7mm Rem Mag. Have some limited experience loading and shooting the 7 PRC as well, but have not yet taken game with it.
Looking forward to the rest of the series as the four cartridges are tested.
For a Geezer...Why not stick with the .280 Rem or AI. Not getting it.
Did you watch the video? He likes the 280 AI. Lays it out that there are pros and cons to each of the four cartridges they're going to test. I like that attitude. Nothing wrong with the 280 AI, it works great!
I'm really looking forward to the rest of the series.
Good video. I like the 7's in general, particularly the 7mm Rem Mag. Have some limited experience loading and shooting the 7 PRC as well, but have not yet taken game with it.
Looking forward to the rest of the series as the four cartridges are tested.
Regards, Guy
Same here. It’ll be interesting to see what he gets with each cartridge optimized for their guns.
I still find that very interesting given the almost identical case capacity as the 7 RM. I've not shot the 180s but have shot various 175s. My current 7RM will launch a 175 ABLR at 3050 give or take a few ft/sec. It does have a 26 inch barrel.
I've always been a big fan of 7mm's, the first deer rifle I ever bought was a 700 Mtn Rifle in .280. Since then, I've added 7mm TCU's, 7x57's, 7mm-08's, and a couple 7mm Rem Mag. Haven't gotten too interested in the newer PRC cartridges, just don't offer me anything I couldn't do with a Rem Mag (or even a .280 for that matter).
Watched the video. Interesting. Horn 160 CX is the best bullet.......
I was of the same head tilt myself. Guess it’s a decent all rounder to keep things on an even playing field. I’d have thought a 175/180 would’ve been a better choice myself but it might be good to see what they all do with the same bullet.
As long as they're using the same bullet in all the tests it doesn't make any difference. I think their choice of a 160gr bullet is a good one as I'd bet more hunters use that weight or even a 150 than folks using the 175-180 class.
My other immediate thought is his discussion on COAL of the various cartridges. He claims all of them are "handicapped" because of 3.34" COAL. He opines they reach their full potential at 3.6 or 3.7 COAL. Using a modified Homer Powley spreadsheet, the difference in case capacity in a 7 RM between 3.34 and 3.6 COAL using a Nosler 175 ABLR is 4.3 grains. Using Homer's speed calculation, which I modified a bit to match actual velocities, this difference is 38 ft/sec. Using 3.7 COAL, the differences are 5.9 grains increase case capacity and 52 ft/sec. And I'm not aware if a Rem M700 can actually contain a 3.7 COAL in its mag. Maybe, I've never tried it and its been 15+ years since I owned a Rem 700.
I'm all about maximizing case efficiency but I'm not sure I'd sweat those differences.
As long as they're using the same bullet in all the tests it doesn't make any difference. I think their choice of a 160gr bullet is a good one as I'd bet more hunters use that weight or even a 150 than folks using the 175-180 class.
Does that change if you had added the 7-08 to the group? I shoot 162s in mine but I bet most are 140/120 class there.
I have worked with nearly all of the contemporary 7's. The only two I have not is the 7x57, 7 PRC & 7 RUM. None of them offer anything I cannot obtain from the 280 AI or 7 Wby.
My other immediate thought is his discussion on COAL of the various cartridges. He claims all of them are "handicapped" because of 3.34" COAL. He opines they reach their full potential at 3.6 or 3.7 COAL. Using a modified Homer Powley spreadsheet, the difference in case capacity in a 7 RM between 3.34 and 3.6 COAL using a Nosler 175 ABLR is 4.3 grains. Using Homer's speed calculation, which I modified a bit to match actual velocities, this difference is 38 ft/sec. Using 3.7 COAL, the differences are 5.9 grains increase case capacity and 52 ft/sec. And I'm not aware if a Rem M700 can actually contain a 3.7 COAL in its mag. Maybe, I've never tried it and its been 15+ years since I owned a Rem 700.
I'm all about maximizing case efficiency but I'm not sure I'd sweat those differences.
I think a 7 Rem is a bit more flexible if you can get it past the 3.34" mark myself with the longer bullets. Saying that, my favorite rifle I own is Bob's old Brownell 1-10 twist 7 Rem and it's only 3.4" max. But that rifle was made in 1965 when 175's were blunter nosed and picking a bullet was way easier than today
I would agree on the 3.6 length in the 700. My follower measures 3.65. I load 180 Berger Hybrid to 3.6 and with Retumbo and it chronys at 3020 fps., 26 inch barrel. I believe the 7RM cartridge potential is hindered by short mag boxes and throats in factory guns cause Remington wanted the case to function in all of them, unlike Wby. That being said, in a pinch, factory ammo is everywhere. Properly set up, there`s no flys on the 7 RM.
As long as they're using the same bullet in all the tests it doesn't make any difference. I think their choice of a 160gr bullet is a good one as I'd bet more hunters use that weight or even a 150 than folks using the 175-180 class.
Does that change if you had added the 7-08 to the group? I shoot 162s in mine but I bet most are 140/120 class there.
I'm sure it would change, but for the ones listed I believe the 160gr is the best all around choice.
#2. To keep things equal, he has chosen the 160 CX because he feels like it is a quality hunting bullet with a good BC capable of killing Elk cleanly and humanly to 600 yards. I had the 175 ELD X blow up on an Elk (7 PRC) ant 247 yards. Through another video he does not recommend them for Elk. I will never use another one for hunting!
#3. He is using an 8 twist 26” barrel for all. We don’t care what your 7 mag barrel will do.
#4. He wants to dispel any myths and wants to present facts about each cartridge including the bullschit 3K fps of the factory 175 ELDX 7 PRC. With my 26” Bartlein, I am getting 2880. I bought into that cool aid.
#5. He is not going to declare a winner. Just facts.
#6. It seems to me that when this subject turns up, a lot of folks say I have this or that and I am not interested in the PRC. Fine, but don’t knock someone for buying something new. New stuff is fun!
I really do think that the 7mm PRC makes the other long action & mags superfluous, a little better than the AO, no belt, modern case design, effective and easy to shoot. Haven't shot my 7mm RM since I completed the PRC, don't imagine I'll use it much again.
He wanted to give the other cartridges a chance, beretzs!
This should be interesting. I like that they're going to test the best factory options at 100 and 600 yds as well as all the handloading stuff. I wonder how they'll address pressure differences in the handloading part. This guy seems very knowledgeable but, he's definitely got opinions. How he handles the testing will be make or break. Super smart idea for his company though - tap into all the angst over these questions and personal feelings. If done methodically and fairly, it'll be great and sell some rifles, too I bet!
As he said, mag box length/handloading is huge comparing these cartridges. On a side note that might interest a couple of you, I'm packing up my 7PRC CLR to go back to Outkast for a re-paint. You learn alot about yourself with a custom build if you're open to it and, I've had to admit to myself that I'm just not man enough for a brash paint job on a rifle stock! God bless you guys who are and can handle the sideways looks from your hunting buddies when you uncase those tawdry shootin irons. Anyway, I emailed Glenn to let him know it was on the way and asked him about lengthening the mag box. He told me he had just finished a fixture to make that a standard option on his CLR jobs - milling the mag box well and ejection port and installing a Rem 3.7 mag box. Those guys are killing it. So, that's on the work order. When I get around to handloading for this thing or rebarrel it for the Mashburn I'll be all set!
I really do think that the 7mm PRC makes the other long action & mags superfluous, a little better than the AO, no belt, modern case design, effective and easy to shoot. Haven't shot my 7mm RM since I completed the PRC, don't imagine I'll use it much again.
You may think the long actions and belts are superfluous, and that's everyone's choice. For myself, I think the PRC is a marketing gimmick to sell more rifles and ammo. It does nothing for me as a reloader because I can load any bullet I want and match or beat it in velocity and accuracy. Gotta love choices and maybe for the majority of hunters that shoot nothing but factory ammo it may have an advantage for now. But as more gun makers put 8 twist tubes on their 7mm Rem mags that could very well change.
I have worked with nearly all of the contemporary 7's. The only two I have not is the 7x57, 7 PRC & 7 RUM. None of them offer anything I cannot obtain from the 280 AI or 7 Wby.
The real problem is that they don't make animals as definitively different as cartridges within the same caliber, so that there can never be a separation of these cartridge with this one will kill this animal and this one won't.
That's why comparing cartridges can only be separated by different bullets used and different ranges of application.
BUT, and there is always a BUT, if the same bullet is used in each cartridge, something universally respected such as the 160gn Accubond, there is no appreciable difference between any of them if the bullet is placed in the same spot.
Something else I learned culling, the more cartridges you use, the more similar the performance over a number of animals. When they all work, it negates most arguments.
He wanted to give the other cartridges a chance, beretzs!
This should be interesting. I like that they're going to test the best factory options at 100 and 600 yds as well as all the handloading stuff. I wonder how they'll address pressure differences in the handloading part. This guy seems very knowledgeable but, he's definitely got opinions. How he handles the testing will be make or break. Super smart idea for his company though - tap into all the angst over these questions and personal feelings. If done methodically and fairly, it'll be great and sell some rifles, too I bet!
As he said, mag box length/handloading is huge comparing these cartridges. On a side note that might interest a couple of you, I'm packing up my 7PRC CLR to go back to Outkast for a re-paint. You learn alot about yourself with a custom build if you're open to it and, I've had to admit to myself that I'm just not man enough for a brash paint job on a rifle stock! God bless you guys who are and can handle the sideways looks from your hunting buddies when you uncase those tawdry shootin irons. Anyway, I emailed Glenn to let him know it was on the way and asked him about lengthening the mag box. He told me he had just finished a fixture to make that a standard option on his CLR jobs - milling the mag box well and ejection port and installing a Rem 3.7 mag box. Those guys are killing it. So, that's on the work order. When I get around to handloading for this thing or rebarrel it for the Mashburn I'll be all set!
Unless they have pressure testing equipment I have to wonder if the testing will really be fair. Brands of cases can vary in softness or hardness and that can skew results to a fairly large degree.
#2. To keep things equal, he has chosen the 160 CX because he feels like it is a quality hunting bullet with a good BC capable of killing Elk cleanly and humanly to 600 yards. I had the 175 ELD X blow up on an Elk (7 PRC) ant 247 yards. Through another video he does not recommend them for Elk. I will never use another one for hunting!
#3. He is using an 8 twist 26” barrel for all. We don’t care what your 7 mag barrel will do.
#4. He wants to dispel any myths and wants to present facts about each cartridge including the bullschit 3K fps of the factory 175 ELDX 7 PRC. With my 26” Bartlein, I am getting 2880. I bought into that cool aid.
#5. He is not going to declare a winner. Just facts.
#6. It seems to me that when this subject turns up, a lot of folks say I have this or that and I am not interested in the PRC. Fine, but don’t knock someone for buying something new. New stuff is fun!
SL, No personal attack intended, but these minutia topics are funny when you understand that a plain old every day Model 70 Featherweight with a boring 10" twist in a heaven forbid, shortish 22" barrel can comfortably send a 175gn Barnes LRX at over 2800fps and do anything any cartridge a week either side of it can do.
The only surprise is that no gunsmith has named his company "Minutia Barrels", "When the littlest things matter".
He wanted to give the other cartridges a chance, beretzs!
This should be interesting. I like that they're going to test the best factory options at 100 and 600 yds as well as all the handloading stuff. I wonder how they'll address pressure differences in the handloading part. This guy seems very knowledgeable but, he's definitely got opinions. How he handles the testing will be make or break. Super smart idea for his company though - tap into all the angst over these questions and personal feelings. If done methodically and fairly, it'll be great and sell some rifles, too I bet!
As he said, mag box length/handloading is huge comparing these cartridges. On a side note that might interest a couple of you, I'm packing up my 7PRC CLR to go back to Outkast for a re-paint. You learn alot about yourself with a custom build if you're open to it and, I've had to admit to myself that I'm just not man enough for a brash paint job on a rifle stock! God bless you guys who are and can handle the sideways looks from your hunting buddies when you uncase those tawdry shootin irons. Anyway, I emailed Glenn to let him know it was on the way and asked him about lengthening the mag box. He told me he had just finished a fixture to make that a standard option on his CLR jobs - milling the mag box well and ejection port and installing a Rem 3.7 mag box. Those guys are killing it. So, that's on the work order. When I get around to handloading for this thing or rebarrel it for the Mashburn I'll be all set!
Unless they have pressure testing equipment I have to wonder if the testing will really be fair. Brands of cases can vary in softness or hardness and that can skew results to a fairly large degree.
Yes....its a good entertaining story, but without all the real data, its a lot of guessing going on..
Folks can buy their own equipment for less than some scopes cost !!!! But they wont do that. It's a lot of work learning how to use it. And a lot of time. Charlie
He wanted to give the other cartridges a chance, beretzs!
This should be interesting. I like that they're going to test the best factory options at 100 and 600 yds as well as all the handloading stuff. I wonder how they'll address pressure differences in the handloading part. This guy seems very knowledgeable but, he's definitely got opinions. How he handles the testing will be make or break. Super smart idea for his company though - tap into all the angst over these questions and personal feelings. If done methodically and fairly, it'll be great and sell some rifles, too I bet!
As he said, mag box length/handloading is huge comparing these cartridges. On a side note that might interest a couple of you, I'm packing up my 7PRC CLR to go back to Outkast for a re-paint. You learn alot about yourself with a custom build if you're open to it and, I've had to admit to myself that I'm just not man enough for a brash paint job on a rifle stock! God bless you guys who are and can handle the sideways looks from your hunting buddies when you uncase those tawdry shootin irons. Anyway, I emailed Glenn to let him know it was on the way and asked him about lengthening the mag box. He told me he had just finished a fixture to make that a standard option on his CLR jobs - milling the mag box well and ejection port and installing a Rem 3.7 mag box. Those guys are killing it. So, that's on the work order. When I get around to handloading for this thing or rebarrel it for the Mashburn I'll be all set!
Unless they have pressure testing equipment I have to wonder if the testing will really be fair. Brands of cases can vary in softness or hardness and that can skew results to a fairly large degree.
Yes....its a good entertaining story, but without all the real data, its a lot of guessing going on..
I really do think that the 7mm PRC makes the other long action & mags superfluous, a little better than the AO, no belt, modern case design, effective and easy to shoot. Haven't shot my 7mm RM since I completed the PRC, don't imagine I'll use it much again.
You may think the long actions and belts are superfluous, and that's everyone's choice. For myself, I think the PRC is a marketing gimmick to sell more rifles and ammo. It does nothing for me as a reloader because I can load any bullet I want and match or beat it in velocity and accuracy. Gotta love choices and maybe for the majority of hunters that shoot nothing but factory ammo it may have an advantage for now. But as more gun makers put 8 twist tubes on their 7mm Rem mags that could very well change.
The guys that biotch about the belt affecting feeding, need to get a different rifle. I have never seen or had issues with rifles chambered for belted magnums. And that even includes the Ruger m77. The pre 64 and classic model 70's feed those belted magnums with ease too. You buy or put together a piece of schidt, I guess you could have problems.
BSA1917HUNTER I've never understood the belt problem either. I hear folks say there is the "headspacing off the belt" problem. What problem ? Then they say its hard for a gunsmith to cut that chamber and head space it correctly. Any smith who cant cut either belted or non-belted equally as well, needs to get some training or another job.
And if you are hand loading, why not size the brass like this: adjust the die so you size the neck, then only bump the shoulder enough that the bolt closes without unnecessary force. This allows the case to set against the belt and shoulder. Surely I'm not the only one who does this. Charlie
And if you are hand loading, why not size the brass like this: adjust the die so you size the neck, then only bump the shoulder enough that the bolt closes without unnecessary force. This allows the case to set against the belt and shoulder. Surely I'm not the only one who does this. Charlie
It's exactly how I do it. Not forceful but not easy/sloppy either. Snug close.
I have worked with nearly all of the contemporary 7's. The only two I have not is the 7x57, 7 PRC & 7 RUM. None of them offer anything I cannot obtain from the 280 AI or 7 Wby.
The real problem is that they don't make animals as definitively different as cartridges within the same caliber, so that there can never be a separation of these cartridge with this one will kill this animal and this one won't.
That's why comparing cartridges can only be separated by different bullets used and different ranges of application.
BUT, and there is always a BUT, if the same bullet is used in each cartridge, something universally respected such as the 160gn Accubond, there is no appreciable difference between any of them if the bullet is placed in the same spot.
Something else I learned culling, the more cartridges you use, the more similar the performance over a number of animals. When they all work, it negates most arguments.
I'll be the first to agree, 100%. I learned that the hard way. My two chosen cartridges are a matter of enjoying the rifles each are chambered in.
I used Reloder 22, Magnum, and IMR 7828, H1000. Magnum worked the best, lowest pressure with most velocity and best groups. Still, mid 70's is way too high for me. But for some, that's just getting started good !
He wanted to give the other cartridges a chance, beretzs!
This should be interesting. I like that they're going to test the best factory options at 100 and 600 yds as well as all the handloading stuff. I wonder how they'll address pressure differences in the handloading part. This guy seems very knowledgeable but, he's definitely got opinions. How he handles the testing will be make or break. Super smart idea for his company though - tap into all the angst over these questions and personal feelings. If done methodically and fairly, it'll be great and sell some rifles, too I bet!
As he said, mag box length/handloading is huge comparing these cartridges. On a side note that might interest a couple of you, I'm packing up my 7PRC CLR to go back to Outkast for a re-paint. You learn alot about yourself with a custom build if you're open to it and, I've had to admit to myself that I'm just not man enough for a brash paint job on a rifle stock! God bless you guys who are and can handle the sideways looks from your hunting buddies when you uncase those tawdry shootin irons. Anyway, I emailed Glenn to let him know it was on the way and asked him about lengthening the mag box. He told me he had just finished a fixture to make that a standard option on his CLR jobs - milling the mag box well and ejection port and installing a Rem 3.7 mag box. Those guys are killing it. So, that's on the work order. When I get around to handloading for this thing or rebarrel it for the Mashburn I'll be all set!
And if you are hand loading, why not size the brass like this: adjust the die so you size the neck, then only bump the shoulder enough that the bolt closes without unnecessary force. This allows the case to set against the belt and shoulder. Surely I'm not the only one who does this. Charlie
Charlie, I think a lot of us are sizing our brass like that. It's really the only way to do it properly as far as I'm concerned. Size to the shoulder, with around a .002" bump. Works great that way..
BSA1917HUNTER I've never understood the belt problem either. I hear folks say there is the "headspacing off the belt" problem. What problem ? Then they say its hard for a gunsmith to cut that chamber and head space it correctly. Any smith who cant cut either belted or non-belted equally as well, needs to get some training or another job.
I really do think that the 7mm PRC makes the other long action & mags superfluous, a little better than the AO, no belt, modern case design, effective and easy to shoot. Haven't shot my 7mm RM since I completed the PRC, don't imagine I'll use it much again.
You may think the long actions and belts are superfluous, and that's everyone's choice. For myself, I think the PRC is a marketing gimmick to sell more rifles and ammo. It does nothing for me as a reloader because I can load any bullet I want and match or beat it in velocity and accuracy. Gotta love choices and maybe for the majority of hunters that shoot nothing but factory ammo it may have an advantage for now. But as more gun makers put 8 twist tubes on their 7mm Rem mags that could very well change.
I used a 7mm RM for almost 20 years, great cartridge, maybe better than the PRC for most deer hunting but I think it's the best of the 7RM and 300 WM when distance increases with 175 projectiles. BTW, it is a "long action".
Marketing gimmick??? Hardly, it's the slow evolution of a better/improved cartridge which has been very subtle since the '06 in 1906!
Belts have been a useless "gimmick" since they were introduced with the exception of the 300 H&H that actually needed a belt to headspace. Belts have been marketed for "magnums" to give the hunter/shooter the impression that his cartridge is something extra special that needs the extra support. Totally useless and a disadvantage if the cartridge actually headspaces on the belt. The "belted-mag" is the epitome of marketing gimmick!
For handloaders (I was one for years, don't have time or interest now), your choices are almost limitless, but for someone who buys off the shelf, specialty ammo is hard to find.
I used Reloder 22, Magnum, and IMR 7828, H1000. Magnum worked the best, lowest pressure with most velocity and best groups. Still, mid 70's is way too high for me. But for some, that's just getting started good !
Thanks for the intel Charlie.
For the initial shot, it seems too easy to neck up to 30 and then false shoulder them.
It can’t and doesn’t Scotty. That’s why we hear all the complaining about factory ammo not coming close to the published 3000 fps the boxes have printed on them. They can’t get that speed without going way overboard on pressure. Something any ammo maker is not gonna do.
I really do think that the 7mm PRC makes the other long action & mags superfluous, a little better than the AO, no belt, modern case design, effective and easy to shoot. Haven't shot my 7mm RM since I completed the PRC, don't imagine I'll use it much again.
You may think the long actions and belts are superfluous, and that's everyone's choice. For myself, I think the PRC is a marketing gimmick to sell more rifles and ammo. It does nothing for me as a reloader because I can load any bullet I want and match or beat it in velocity and accuracy. Gotta love choices and maybe for the majority of hunters that shoot nothing but factory ammo it may have an advantage for now. But as more gun makers put 8 twist tubes on their 7mm Rem mags that could very well change.
I used a 7mm RM for almost 20 years, great cartridge, maybe better than the PRC for most deer hunting but I think it's the best of the 7RM and 300 WM when distance increases with 175 projectiles. BTW, it is a "long action".
Marketing gimmick??? Hardly, it's the slow evolution of a better/improved cartridge which has been very subtle since the '06 in 1906!
Belts have been a useless "gimmick" since they were introduced with the exception of the 300 H&H that actually needed a belt to headspace. Belts have been marketed for "magnums" to give the hunter/shooter the impression that his cartridge is something extra special that needs the extra support. Totally useless and a disadvantage if the cartridge actually headspaces on the belt. The "belted-mag" is the epitome of marketing gimmick!
For handloaders (I was one for years, don't have time or interest now), your choices are almost limitless, but for someone who buys off the shelf, specialty ammo is hard to find.
I don't mind the new cartridges coming out. Being "marketing gimmicks" or not. If a guy already has a 7mm RM, then he probably won't really benefit from buying a PRC. Especially if he's just your ordinary hunter. Most hunters making shots on big game animals at less than 400 yards anyway, just about any 7mm works. Yes, even the little 7mm-08. Just don't try to blow smoke up someones azz by saying the belt is a problem on a cartridge. It may not be needed, but it really poses no adverse problem.
Where the newer cartridges really shine is in the twist rate, but if we are talking 160gr bullets in the 7mm, that is a moot point. Because every 7mm will shoot a 160gr projectile with ease. Hell, even the 7x57 earned its reputation with a 175gr bullet. W.D.M Bell used his 7x57 rifles to kill over 1,000 elephants with 173gr military ammo..
I really do think that the 7mm PRC makes the other long action & mags superfluous, a little better than the AO, no belt, modern case design, effective and easy to shoot. Haven't shot my 7mm RM since I completed the PRC, don't imagine I'll use it much again.
You may think the long actions and belts are superfluous, and that's everyone's choice. For myself, I think the PRC is a marketing gimmick to sell more rifles and ammo. It does nothing for me as a reloader because I can load any bullet I want and match or beat it in velocity and accuracy. Gotta love choices and maybe for the majority of hunters that shoot nothing but factory ammo it may have an advantage for now. But as more gun makers put 8 twist tubes on their 7mm Rem mags that could very well change.
I used a 7mm RM for almost 20 years, great cartridge, maybe better than the PRC for most deer hunting but I think it's the best of the 7RM and 300 WM when distance increases with 175 projectiles. BTW, it is a "long action".
Marketing gimmick??? Hardly, it's the slow evolution of a better/improved cartridge which has been very subtle since the '06 in 1906!
Belts have been a useless "gimmick" since they were introduced with the exception of the 300 H&H that actually needed a belt to headspace. Belts have been marketed for "magnums" to give the hunter/shooter the impression that his cartridge is something extra special that needs the extra support. Totally useless and a disadvantage if the cartridge actually headspaces on the belt. The "belted-mag" is the epitome of marketing gimmick!
For handloaders (I was one for years, don't have time or interest now), your choices are almost limitless, but for someone who buys off the shelf, specialty ammo is hard to find.
I don't mind the new cartridges coming out. Being "marketing gimmicks" or not. If a guy already has a 7mm RM, then he probably won't really benefit from buying a PRC. Especially if he's just your ordinary hunter. Most hunters making shots on big game animals at less than 400 yards anyway, just about any 7mm works. Yes, even the little 7mm-08. Just don't try to blow smoke up someones azz by saying the belt is a problem on a cartridge. It may not be needed, but it really poses no adverse problem.
Where the newer cartridges really shine is in the twist rate, but if we are talking 160gr bullets in the 7mm, that is a moot point. Because every 7mm will shoot a 160gr projectile with ease. Hell, even the 7x57 earned its reputation with a 175gr bullet. W.D.M Bell used his 7x57 rifles to kill over 1,000 elephants with 173gr military ammo..
"Just don't try to blow smoke up someones azz by saying the belt is a problem on a cartridge" - well, they actually are! They headspace on the belt, not the preferred shoulder and they take up space in the magazine and "can" impede feeding from said mag. I have no plans to sell my 7mm RM but when lots of $$$ (at least for me) is on the line for a new build, I chose the 7 PRC.
I've owned several "7mms - the 270 is actually the true 7mm (7mm = .27559") but let's not get sidetracked, including the 7mm-08, 7x57 and the aforementioned RM, of the lot, I miss the 7x57 the most!
I recently tried some Federal Terminal Ascent ammo in 7 Rem mag, loaded with 155gr TA bullets. It went 3060 fps according to my Garmin unit. Now if we sub in a 175gr bullet, loaded to equal pressure I’m certain it’ll be at least 100 fps slower. The factories are loading to a SAAMI max pressure level, so if this 7 PRC ammo is only doing 2800 or thereabouts I doubt any handloads that exceed that by 150 fps or more are at or below the 65k level. If the factories can’t do it safely with available powders I don’t know how any reloader can either! Same goes for any other cartridge!
The real problem is that they don't make animals as definitively different as cartridges within the same caliber, so that there can never be a separation of these cartridge with this one will kill this animal and this one won't.
That's why comparing cartridges can only be separated by different bullets used and different ranges of application.
BUT, and there is always a BUT, if the same bullet is used in each cartridge, something universally respected such as the 160gn Accubond, there is no appreciable difference between any of them if the bullet is placed in the same spot.
Something else I learned culling, the more cartridges you use, the more similar the performance over a number of animals. When they all work, it negates most arguments.
John,
This has been experience as well. While I haven't killed nearly as many animals as you have (and never will!), have used a wide range of cartridges including the 7mm-08, 7x57, .280 Remington, .280 AI, 7mm SAUM, 7mm Remington Magnum, 7mm Weatherby and 7mm STW to take 19 species of big game, ranging in size up to at least 1000 pounds, along with many in the "elk-sized" category, including 6x6 bull elk and African plains game including kudu and blue wildebeest. ALL of those rounds worked fine, and in fact the biggest animal taken (a Canadian bull moose) was killed with the 7x57.
Hit 'em in the right place with a bullet that expands and penetrates sufficiently and they all kill similarly.
The real problem is that they don't make animals as definitively different as cartridges within the same caliber, so that there can never be a separation of these cartridge with this one will kill this animal and this one won't.
That's why comparing cartridges can only be separated by different bullets used and different ranges of application.
BUT, and there is always a BUT, if the same bullet is used in each cartridge, something universally respected such as the 160gn Accubond, there is no appreciable difference between any of them if the bullet is placed in the same spot.
Something else I learned culling, the more cartridges you use, the more similar the performance over a number of animals. When they all work, it negates most arguments.
John,
This has been experience as well. While I haven't killed nearly as many animals as you have (and never will), have used a wide range of cartridges including the 7mm-08, 7x57, .280 Remington, .280 AI, 7mm SAUM, 7mm Remington Magnum, 7mm Weatherby and 7mm STW to take 19 species of big game, ranging in size up to at least 1000 pounds, along with many in the "elk-sized" category, including 6x6 bull elk and African plains game including kudu and blue wildbeest. ALL of those rounds worked fine, and in fact the biggest animal taken (a Canadian bull moose) was killed with the 7x57.
Hit 'em in the right place with a bullet that expands and penetrates sufficiently and they all kill similarly.
John
I seem to remember you writing a paragraph or story about moose hunting with a 7-08. Shot moose, moose dies quickly and when the guide asked you what you were using all you said was "7mm" and the guide said it's a good/big gun or something to that effect. You didn't mention it was 7-08. Might have been an intro in reloading manual. Man, my memory is crud these days.
I used Reloder 22, Magnum, and IMR 7828, H1000. Magnum worked the best, lowest pressure with most velocity and best groups. Still, mid 70's is way too high for me. But for some, that's just getting started good !
Thanks for the intel Charlie.
For the initial shot, it seems too easy to neck up to 30 and then false shoulder them.
The real problem is that they don't make animals as definitively different as cartridges within the same caliber, so that there can never be a separation of these cartridge with this one will kill this animal and this one won't.
That's why comparing cartridges can only be separated by different bullets used and different ranges of application.
BUT, and there is always a BUT, if the same bullet is used in each cartridge, something universally respected such as the 160gn Accubond, there is no appreciable difference between any of them if the bullet is placed in the same spot.
Something else I learned culling, the more cartridges you use, the more similar the performance over a number of animals. When they all work, it negates most arguments.
John,
This has been experience as well. While I haven't killed nearly as many animals as you have (and never will), have used a wide range of cartridges including the 7mm-08, 7x57, .280 Remington, .280 AI, 7mm SAUM, 7mm Remington Magnum, 7mm Weatherby and 7mm STW to take 19 species of big game, ranging in size up to at least 1000 pounds, along with many in the "elk-sized" category, including 6x6 bull elk and African plains game including kudu and blue wildbeest. ALL of those rounds worked fine, and in fact the biggest animal taken (a Canadian bull moose) was killed with the 7x57.
Hit 'em in the right place with a bullet that expands and penetrates sufficiently and they all kill similarly.
I’m a cartridge testing junkie so have killed big game with an awful lot of different cartridges. Wildcats included. I have said for years that a spectator watching the show would never get it right if asked to name the cartridge used in the situation they just witnessed.
And if you are hand loading, why not size the brass like this: adjust the die so you size the neck, then only bump the shoulder enough that the bolt closes without unnecessary force. This allows the case to set against the belt and shoulder. Surely I'm not the only one who does this. Charlie
It's exactly how I do it. Not forceful but not easy/sloppy either. Snug close.
I used Reloder 22, Magnum, and IMR 7828, H1000. Magnum worked the best, lowest pressure with most velocity and best groups. Still, mid 70's is way too high for me. But for some, that's just getting started good !
Thanks for the intel Charlie.
For the initial shot, it seems too easy to neck up to 30 and then false shoulder them.
I'm with you Mathman..."Less is more", ha. The "only issue" I ever had with the belt is back when A-Square sold ammo in their A2 brass. I bought a large amount in 7 STW in a 140 something to send to my friend when he ran out of my 140 NBT in his STW handloads. Not one round would chamber and there was no ammo returns where I had ordered them! Bummer. The belt was out of spec.
To Charlie’s point, how does a 7 PRC get 3k with a 175 but a 7 Rem can’t do it under 70k
Special shoulders?
Extra special speed from its short length?
It’s not from extra case space I’d guess
Fairy dust, brother. I've noticed some in the ones I've pulled apart.
Fair enough! Seen that stuff do some amazing stuff!
Ok Hunter. ha ha..
I just got the joke - pretty funny, bsa1917hunter.
I will add that all the hand ringing about the Hornady 175 load doesn't take into account that the Federal 175 load is significantly faster. In my 24" barrel I get a 2,876 avg with the Hornady and a 2,927 avg with the Federal. That's 73 fps from what the box says, which ain't too bad for the marketing dept folks.
I’m a cartridge testing junkie so have killed big game with an awful lot of different cartridges. Wildcats included. I have said for years that a spectator watching the show would never get it right if asked to name the cartridge used in the situation they just witnessed.
ALL of those rounds worked fine, and in fact the biggest animal taken (a Canadian bull moose) was killed with the 7x57.
Hit 'em in the right place with a bullet that expands and penetrates sufficiently and they all kill similarly.
John
Quote
I seem to remember you writing a paragraph or story about moose hunting with a 7-08. Shot moose, moose dies quickly and when the guide asked you what you were using all you said was "7mm" and the guide said it's a good/big gun or something to that effect. You didn't mention it was 7-08. Might have been an intro in reloading manual. Man, my memory is crud these days.
It was a 7x57, not a 7mm-08--but ballistically they're the same thing.
It was a hunt in Alberta, with my old friend Pat Frederick's Ameri-Cana Expeditions. Pat had a cancellation on a moose hunt, and I bought the hunt. At the time Pat recommended a minimum of .300 magnum for moose, but when the guide asked what my rifle was chambered for I said "7mm," figuring he'd think I meant 7mm Remington Magnum. He just nodded--probably because his favorite hunting rifle was a 7mm RM....
Turned out my moose went down just as quickly as the only moose Pat had taken in the same area--with his .300 Winchester Magnum....
Hey MD, I bet you can appreciate my new Mod 70 fwt with the Shilen #2 in 7x57, 9 twist, its 25" and "seems" to be a fast barrel to boot! In its first session, I zeroed with some milder Remington cased 175 Hornady RN handloads. They were just "OK". I then just shot 5 rds of some squirreled away factory Lapua 170 RN, kind of quickly, and they just wadded up under an inch! I didn't clock it, but it was a snappy load! I shot a few handloads with the 150 ELDX and Hunter, same thing. I am jazzed! I'm tall so the length seems fine to me. BTW, I really enjoy your writing sir!
I used Reloder 22, Magnum, and IMR 7828, H1000. Magnum worked the best, lowest pressure with most velocity and best groups. Still, mid 70's is way too high for me. But for some, that's just getting started good !
Thanks for the intel Charlie.
For the initial shot, it seems too easy to neck up to 30 and then false shoulder them.
I thought long and hard about the 7mm PRC and figured the 7mm RM on a 700 clone and a 23” barrel will get me pretty far and comfortable even if I don’t focus on maxing out the velo. So there I am. Smallfry
I recently tried some Federal Terminal Ascent ammo in 7 Rem mag, loaded with 155gr TA bullets. It went 3060 fps according to my Garmin unit. Now if we sub in a 175gr bullet, loaded to equal pressure I’m certain it’ll be at least 100 fps slower. The factories are loading to a SAAMI max pressure level, so if this 7 PRC ammo is only doing 2800 or thereabouts I doubt any handloads that exceed that by 150 fps or more are at or below the 65k level. If the factories can’t do it safely with available powders I don’t know how any reloader can either! Same goes for any other cartridge!
I got exactly 2,900 with the 170gr factory Terminal Ascent load with a 22” barrel.
I recently tried some Federal Terminal Ascent ammo in 7 Rem mag, loaded with 155gr TA bullets. It went 3060 fps according to my Garmin unit. Now if we sub in a 175gr bullet, loaded to equal pressure I’m certain it’ll be at least 100 fps slower. The factories are loading to a SAAMI max pressure level, so if this 7 PRC ammo is only doing 2800 or thereabouts I doubt any handloads that exceed that by 150 fps or more are at or below the 65k level. If the factories can’t do it safely with available powders I don’t know how any reloader can either! Same goes for any other cartridge!
I got exactly 2,900 with the 170gr factory Terminal Ascent load with a 22” barrel.
I wished I could get my hands on those. The bullets that is.
I used Reloder 22, Magnum, and IMR 7828, H1000. Magnum worked the best, lowest pressure with most velocity and best groups. Still, mid 70's is way too high for me. But for some, that's just getting started good !
Thanks for the intel Charlie.
For the initial shot, it seems too easy to neck up to 30 and then false shoulder them.
Smallfry; Sounds like you need a Bergara B14 in Hunter or Ridge. They have 24" barrels. Mod 700 Clone, good rifles.
They certainly are. My son uses a 7mm Rem Mag Bergara. Excellent accuracy. I worked up a fast load with IMR 8133 (discontinued now doggone it) and the Hornady 150 gr ELD-X.
I've always been a big fan of 7mm's, the first deer rifle I ever bought was a 700 Mtn Rifle in .280. Since then, I've added 7mm TCU's, 7x57's, 7mm-08's, and a couple 7mm Rem Mag. Haven't gotten too interested in the newer PRC cartridges, just don't offer me anything I couldn't do with a Rem Mag (or even a .280 for that matter).
Only reason for a new 7, IE the PRC is the inherent accuracy. The 7 Rem Mag over the years has consistently been known to throw weird flyers at long range. Not often, but often enough to make one leery of using it if you shoot it to its ability.
Nothing much new on speeds is going to come. Powders are basically the best they can be. Bullet shapes are the best. Now the case vs burn to get the inherent accuracy can be shape, powder column, percentage full, and then how the reamer is designed.
The only way we get more speed anymore is by going larger and shorten barrel life or run up pressure like the sig fury thing.
As to factory speeds, thats been known that they inflate for the most part. I never buy assuming I can get to whats advertised.
My other immediate thought is his discussion on COAL of the various cartridges. He claims all of them are "handicapped" because of 3.34" COAL. He opines they reach their full potential at 3.6 or 3.7 COAL. Using a modified Homer Powley spreadsheet, the difference in case capacity in a 7 RM between 3.34 and 3.6 COAL using a Nosler 175 ABLR is 4.3 grains. Using Homer's speed calculation, which I modified a bit to match actual velocities, this difference is 38 ft/sec. Using 3.7 COAL, the differences are 5.9 grains increase case capacity and 52 ft/sec. And I'm not aware if a Rem M700 can actually contain a 3.7 COAL in its mag. Maybe, I've never tried it and its been 15+ years since I owned a Rem 700.
I'm all about maximizing case efficiency but I'm not sure I'd sweat those differences.
The 700 has been chambered for many long action cartridges including 7mm STW, 300 H&H, 300 Wea.
"Just don't try to blow smoke up someones azz by saying the belt is a problem on a cartridge" - well, they actually are! They headspace on the belt, not the preferred shoulder and they take up space in the magazine and "can" impede feeding from said mag. I have no plans to sell my 7mm RM but when lots of $$$ (at least for me) is on the line for a new build, I chose the 7 PRC.
I have several belted mags in the safe, including 7mm STW, two 7 RM, and a 264 Win mag.
For another potential heartbreaker, measure a factory load for your favorite belted mag with your comparitor and then measure the same case after you fire it. (Helps if you use the same comparitor.) I have seen some high dollar rifles with really long chambers, from the belt to the shoulder. Not much of a problem if one shoots and then leaves the brass on the ground. One of the newer premium brass guys was making 300 Win and I believe 7MM Rem brass with a bit longer base to shoulder measurement to address this.
When I started handloading for a belted magnum, I picked up a Wilson headspace gauge. The gauges for belted cartridges are adjustable. Take a fired (1x or 2x) unsized brass and adjust the gauge to that brass. Voila, there is your chamber blueprint (at least close enough) to adjust your die so you headspace on the shoulder.
Yeah, yeah hear it all the time about no big deal loading for belted brass, but given a choice, no thanks. No choice? Sure, no problem.
It is not just belted mags which get false shoulders formed on virgin brass.
I prefer to and often buy brass which needs necked down before use.
I’m with you. I’ve just seen the worst headspace and case head stretch on belted cases.
Same here. 300 Wins and 7 Rem's from my little corner. Once I was learned to neck em up one caliber and size to fit, stretch and such has mostly become a thing of past.
For another potential heartbreaker, measure a factory load for your favorite belted mag with your comparitor and then measure the same case after you fire it. (Helps if you use the same comparitor.) I have seen some high dollar rifles with really long chambers, from the belt to the shoulder. Not much of a problem if one shoots and then leaves the brass on the ground. One of the newer premium brass guys was making 300 Win and I believe 7MM Rem brass with a bit longer base to shoulder measurement to address this.
Should be an interesting video. My take on the 7prc is that unless you want to shoot the heaviest highest BC match type bullets (eldm) for hunting it is nothing special compare to other 7mms. With hunting bullets - whether thicker jacket cup and core, tougher bonded bullets, or monos (even the new high bc like TA ir ablr) there is not much gain over cartridges with other advantages. I personally have no interest in using that type of bullef for hunting but for those that do and need the utmost precision at extreme range the 7prc looks great.
Several popular podcasters/influencers will droll over the BC of the 180 eldm and use that in all their ballistic comparisons with similar rounds then say use the cx load for elk hunting. While the BC of the 160 cx is high for a mono the 7prc there is not much if any gap over even on paper over lots of other stuff. Probably in the genius of hornady marketing. Sell the sizzle, not the steak
"Just don't try to blow smoke up someones azz by saying the belt is a problem on a cartridge" - well, they actually are! They headspace on the belt, not the preferred shoulder and they take up space in the magazine and "can" impede feeding from said mag. I have no plans to sell my 7mm RM but when lots of $$$ (at least for me) is on the line for a new build, I chose the 7 PRC.
I have several belted mags in the safe, including 7mm STW, two 7 RM, and a 264 Win mag.
NONE of them headspace on the belt.
"I have several belted mags in the safe, including 7mm STW, two 7 RM, and a 264 Win mag". If you had a 7mm PRC, you wouldn't need the STW, RM or WM :-)
I think the reason to buy the 7mm PRC is accuracy (hopefully), good factory ammo and maybe a cartridge that will be easier to load without some of the things for which the 7mm RM a reputation.
I don't have extensive experience with the 7mm RM. With that said, I've never gotten great velocities or accuracy with the few I've played with so have quickly lost interest. Regarding the .30-06, I've never gotten accuracy that met my expectation and that over dozens of rifles I've tried, though I do have an AI that meets my expectations. A 30-06 that is accurate with most loads is the holy grail and about as easy to find.
Those about .30-06 ballistic of the 7mm PRC (and 7mm Rem Mag) are for my hunting, pretty much perfection for much of all big game. I have high hopes for my PRC but need to spend more time wringing it out.
My experiences with 7mms are pretty limited. I have had one 7 mm mag that had a lot of pressure excursion issues and never really gave velocities close to 7 mag performance. without questionable loads. Only load it shot consistently accurate nad with out any pressure issues was with H870 and 160s . On the flip side, my 7x57 is two shots for two elk and never not ready to go hunting.................
My experiences with 7mms are pretty limited. I have had one 7 mm mag that had a lot of pressure excursion issues and never really gave velocities close to 7 mag performance. without questionable loads. Only load it shot consistently accurate nad with out any pressure issues was with H870 and 160s . On the flip side, my 7x57 is two shots for two elk and never not ready to go hunting.................
If I still handloaded I'd have to have a 7x57 again!
I never followed the .284 diameter other than a 7x57...but a hunter friend of mine who has more of his wife's money than he can ever spend, bought every new offering that came along. He also buys other related stuff, like when borescopes came along. Rainy, boring, windy winter here...he gets out his trusty bore scope and examines his .28 Nosler....my phone starts ringing, along come the cell phone text and pictures of the .28 Nos throat area. Of course I know nothing about throats, alligator cracking, borescopes or the .28 Nosler. He is sick, the pictures do look a lot like a dry lakebed. I asked how it shot, and he said it never was a tackdriver, but he thought it was about the same. But here's the corker, he claims the rifle only has about 140 rounds through it...he bought 5 boxes factory when he bought the rifle, fired them up, reloaded with some magic load from the Nosler forum, and fired about 40 more in load development, testing, and zeroing for the CDS dial. My question is, could it be possible to burn a throat a little in 140 rounds? I wonder if someone bought the rifle, tried it, maybe a lot of shooting, didn't like it and resold as new. I just can't imagine an alligator throat at 140 rounds...but I know beans about that.
It's possible with cartridge like that to get "gator skin" within 140 rounds--but that doesn't mean the barrel's burned out. They'll keep shooting about the same for quite a while, but eventually chunks of the throat start flaking off, which is when groups often start to open up.
In have seen traces of throat erosion in .223 Remingtons after a couple hundred rounds--but they still kept shooting well. The most interesting one I know of belonged to my late friend Chub Eastman, who worked for Nosler for years. His favorite prairie-dog .223 kept shooting "minute of dog" out to 300+ yards for around 20,000 rounds, and at that point he had the guys in the Nosler gun department section the barrel. There wasn't a trace of rifling for about 10" in front of the chamber....
On the flip side, my 7x57 is two shots for two elk and never not ready to go hunting.................[/quote]
What load did you use for the elk sir? I finally had to just have a rifle made up to get an accurate 7x57. The previous four I tried ( 2 Mod 70's, 1 Mod 77 and 1 Mod 700) were all used rifles. I heartily suspect all I got hold of was "other folk's Culls", lol. So I had another nice donor Md 70 fwt in .270 , and had my gunsmith put me a new barrel on it. Yes I paid a little more than most folks, but boy did I get a Gem! I left it at 25" and just preliminary load workup it is plenty fast ( I've only shot some 150 ELDx handloads and a few Lapua factory 170gr) Technically, it isn't "broke in" yet, but with components like they are, I'm thinking "oh yeah it is! ha.
I never followed the .284 diameter other than a 7x57...but a hunter friend of mine who has more of his wife's money than he can ever spend, bought every new offering that came along. He also buys other related stuff, like when borescopes came along. Rainy, boring, windy winter here...he gets out his trusty bore scope and examines his .28 Nosler....my phone starts ringing, along come the cell phone text and pictures of the .28 Nos throat area. Of course I know nothing about throats, alligator cracking, borescopes or the .28 Nosler. He is sick, the pictures do look a lot like a dry lakebed. I asked how it shot, and he said it never was a tackdriver, but he thought it was about the same. But here's the corker, he claims the rifle only has about 140 rounds through it...he bought 5 boxes factory when he bought the rifle, fired them up, reloaded with some magic load from the Nosler forum, and fired about 40 more in load development, testing, and zeroing for the CDS dial. My question is, could it be possible to burn a throat a little in 140 rounds? I wonder if someone bought the rifle, tried it, maybe a lot of shooting, didn't like it and resold as new. I just can't imagine an alligator throat at 140 rounds...but I know beans about that.
I don't have 100 rounds down the tube on my 28 Nosler. The bore scope does not paint a very pretty picture. Thankfully I have what I consider to be a very good load. The barrel that's on it will spend its time flattening deer. It does that very well.
The STW I had some years ago wasn’t easy on the throat, the gator skin look started after around 120 rounds. I’m currently getting a 28 put together so in a few months I’ll be able to compare the two. But I’d bet there won’t be a lot of difference! These type cartridges just can’t be range toys unless you like replacing barrels quite often.
For a Geezer...Why not stick with the .280 Rem or AI. Not getting it.
or 7mm-08....
At 72 years old, I've developed quite an attachment to the 7/08. Deer fall just as dead, and for this old geezer the recoil is next to nothing.
Only reason I did not transition to the 7/08 from my 280's is my original love for the 308, of which I have several. Either the 7/08 or 308 are very fun to shoot. Not that age has anything to do with it, at 65 years of age I am loving my 308's still.....since 1978.
Pixie Dust and BS in fair proportions get really swell velocities in the 7 RM as touted above. I don’t think you’ll get 3,000 fps out of a 24” barrel with 175 gr bullets and stay within SAAMI pressure specs. But some folks don’t care about such. It’s their story and they can tell it however they like. After all, this is Mr. Gore’s innanet.
On the flip side, my 7x57 is two shots for two elk and never not ready to go hunting.................
What load did you use for the elk sir? I finally had to just have a rifle made up to get an accurate 7x57. The previous four I tried ( 2 Mod 70's, 1 Mod 77 and 1 Mod 700) were all used rifles. I heartily suspect all I got hold of was "other folk's Culls", lol. So I had another nice donor Md 70 fwt in .270 , and had my gunsmith put me a new barrel on it. Yes I paid a little more than most folks, but boy did I get a Gem! I left it at 25" and just preliminary load workup it is plenty fast ( I've only shot some 150 ELDx handloads and a few Lapua factory 170gr) Technically, it isn't "broke in" yet, but with components like they are, I'm thinking "oh yeah it is! ha.[/quote]
The load i have in stock now for it is a 160 gr Nosler partition and 49.5 grs of imr4831, but the elk were shot with a 150 gr corelokt and 48 gr of imr 4350 , I know , the powder is not temperature insensitive and the bullets are not trendy, but they just work.......
Pixie Dust and BS in fair proportions get really swell velocities in the 7 RM as touted above. I don’t think you’ll get 3,000 fps out of a 24” barrel with 175 gr bullets and stay within SAAMI pressure specs. But some folks don’t care about such. It’s their story and they can tell it however they like. After all, this is Mr. Gore’s innanet.
+1. Not calling anyone a liar, but I would have to witness it. SAAMI is 62k psi for the 7 mag BTW.
Brand new here, so hopefully nobody minds if I chime in. I'm amazed to see posts from some old timey gun writers and rifle builders that I've been reading, and reading about, for decades! I'm old enough to remember when the 7mm RM was introduced. "Shoots as flat as a .270, recoils like a 30-06 and hits as hard as a .300 win mag!" Seem to recall the initial factory loads were a 150 gr advertised at 3110 fps and a 175 gr RN advertised at 3000 fps. Both Remington core-lokt bullets. "The deadliest mushroom in the woods!" Remington may have used a 26" test barrel and their numbers may have been "pie in the sky", or both? Of course, it's possible my memory fails me. I'll keep my 7RM and leave the new fangled stuff to the youngsters. Thanx for sharing!
The real problem is that they don't make animals as definitively different as cartridges within the same caliber, so that there can never be a separation of these cartridge with this one will kill this animal and this one won't.
That's why comparing cartridges can only be separated by different bullets used and different ranges of application.
BUT, and there is always a BUT, if the same bullet is used in each cartridge, something universally respected such as the 160gn Accubond, there is no appreciable difference between any of them if the bullet is placed in the same spot.
Something else I learned culling, the more cartridges you use, the more similar the performance over a number of animals. When they all work, it negates most arguments.
John,
This has been experience as well. While I haven't killed nearly as many animals as you have (and never will!), have used a wide range of cartridges including the 7mm-08, 7x57, .280 Remington, .280 AI, 7mm SAUM, 7mm Remington Magnum, 7mm Weatherby and 7mm STW to take 19 species of big game, ranging in size up to at least 1000 pounds, along with many in the "elk-sized" category, including 6x6 bull elk and African plains game including kudu and blue wildebeest. ALL of those rounds worked fine, and in fact the biggest animal taken (a Canadian bull moose) was killed with the 7x57.
Hit 'em in the right place with a bullet that expands and penetrates sufficiently and they all kill similarly.
John
My 7mm & 30 caliber magnums have been gone for a long time, & so, far, I don't miss them or regret the decision to not use mid-magnums any more.
But if I were to want a 7 mag of some sort, it would likely be a WSM or a PRC version w/o a belt................but it still wouldn't do anything that my o6, 270, 280 or 7-08 won't accomplish as well.
I don't pretend to shoot 1500 yards or even 1,000.
I prefer lighter rifles with 22" barrels, as a package, much better than longer, heavier rifles, any day, all day.
Brand new here, so hopefully nobody minds if I chime in. I'm amazed to see posts from some old timey gun writers and rifle builders that I've been reading, and reading about, for decades! I'm old enough to remember when the 7mm RM was introduced. "Shoots as flat as a .270, recoils like a 30-06 and hits as hard as a .300 win mag!" Seem to recall the initial factory loads were a 150 gr advertised at 3110 fps and a 175 gr RN advertised at 3000 fps. Both Remington core-lokt bullets. "The deadliest mushroom in the woods!" Remington may have used a 26" test barrel and their numbers may have been "pie in the sky", or both? Of course, it's possible my memory fails me. I'll keep my 7RM and leave the new fangled stuff to the youngsters. Thanx for sharing!
Welcome to the Fire' Stan..
7mag. shooting 175gr. @ 3000fps? That's 7STW territory.
Brand new here, so hopefully nobody minds if I chime in. I'm amazed to see posts from some old timey gun writers and rifle builders that I've been reading, and reading about, for decades! I'm old enough to remember when the 7mm RM was introduced. "Shoots as flat as a .270, recoils like a 30-06 and hits as hard as a .300 win mag!" Seem to recall the initial factory loads were a 150 gr advertised at 3110 fps and a 175 gr RN advertised at 3000 fps. Both Remington core-lokt bullets. "The deadliest mushroom in the woods!" Remington may have used a 26" test barrel and their numbers may have been "pie in the sky", or both? Of course, it's possible my memory fails me. I'll keep my 7RM and leave the new fangled stuff to the youngsters. Thanx for sharing!
Welcome to the Fire' Stan..
7mag. shooting 175gr. @ 3000fps? That's 7STW territory.
My last 7mm Rem Mag had a 26" factory "take-off" barrel. It took R26 to get 3100 with the 160 and R33 to get an even 3000fps with the 175. Long barrel, new, more efficient powders to get there...safely. I was put off by the weight/length of my first 7RM, a BAR. '73, just out of the Army. Texas. It had a good trigger but its iron sight was hard to acquire a running deer/hog. Of course, I was used to my Mod 94 Classic Carbine. ha After that one was traded off in '75, my next 7mm was a 280( loaded the 139 Hornady) from '77-80, then wife gave me a BDL 7 mag for Christmas, used it the next 10yrs on everything, but loaded the 150 NP. For "Still-Hunting", a bit heavy and long. I think alot depends on where/how you hunt as to what makes any magnum worth it. I tried the "Ultra Lightweight Route" I found out I have a limit I can even use them right, ha. So back to a happy medium. I suppose its called "Light Sporter" weight. I found out Its not the length that ever bothered me (used several mags with 26" plus a brake! Still as handy as a 28" 20ga for small game/birds! I base alot of my "don't want that's" now as back in '91, I dropped down into a big canyon up on Nebo Loop (gorgeous country) with a 10# 1917 Sporter. The day turned off hot, I ran out of water/snacks, and it took me "awhile" to just walk out of that canyon on a Forestry trail, I was 38 yrs old! ha, So, I had to hunt different, for sure!.
Brand new here, so hopefully nobody minds if I chime in. I'm amazed to see posts from some old timey gun writers and rifle builders that I've been reading, and reading about, for decades! I'm old enough to remember when the 7mm RM was introduced. "Shoots as flat as a .270, recoils like a 30-06 and hits as hard as a .300 win mag!" Seem to recall the initial factory loads were a 150 gr advertised at 3110 fps and a 175 gr RN advertised at 3000 fps. Both Remington core-lokt bullets. "The deadliest mushroom in the woods!" Remington may have used a 26" test barrel and their numbers may have been "pie in the sky", or both? Of course, it's possible my memory fails me. I'll keep my 7RM and leave the new fangled stuff to the youngsters. Thanx for sharing!
Welcome to the Fire' Stan..
7mag. shooting 175gr. @ 3000fps? That's 7STW territory.
It’s also 7mm Weatherby Magnum territory. Weatherby listed 3,070 fps for their 175 gr load. My 24” barrel Mark V chronographs that load at 3,009 fps average.
Well I was surprised to get almost 3150fps with the 175 Hammer Hunter from my standard 338/06! I hope I get there again with same or better accuracy after its reamed to the Ackley Improved. I was never able to get any 175 that fast from my 7mm RM! I shot the 150 Partition close to 3200 out of my old BDL 7mm RM for deer for 10yrs, didn't tear them up either. Really, I think it was Jack O'Conner who said it was doubtful any bullet over 3000fps would make any real difference on killing. "Yeah Uncle Jack...but I LIKE IT"! lol
Not my rifle or ammo; guy at the range let me set my LabRadar next to his nice new rifle.
Rifle was braked; I am not sure if that affects LabRadar.....I don't run brakes.
I think he was discourage in the velocity vs what it said on the box.
My 7rem mag handload for 175 Sierra GK is 62.5 of RL-22: prints a nice clover leaf @ 2,800fps from a well used 26" rem700. Book max according to Nosler and Lyman. Goes faster if you add more sauce, although accuracy opens up and you are blatantly over book values.
The load i have in stock now for it is a 160 gr Nosler partition and 49.5 grs of imr4831, but the elk were shot with a 150 gr corelokt and 48 gr of imr 4350 , I know , the powder is not temperature insensitive and the bullets are not trendy, but they just work.......[/quote]
Thanks WY26! I am so glad I had this 7x57's barrel made up to 25". I like more speed than most traditional 7x57 shooters use, and that's not "damming w/faint praise". I just "cut my teeth" on a .280, then went to the AI, but my barrel was 22". So far, with new bullets, stout 120's, I'm a stretched string out to 350yds! ha. I could "say" I'll never use this rifle on elk, but "who knows"? I've had almost all the 7 mags, etc, and that 280AI still killed just as well, just as flat with its 2800/Speer 160HC and 2950 150 NBT,(seemingly) in a slim/trim style of rifle. So...if I just can't stand it, I'll skip the 7x57 AI and go straight to 280 AI. But so far...no complaints!
Apparently in the last 30 years, at least, nothing has really improved for "standard" 7 mag performance. I've owned three 7 Rem mags and one 7 Wby. All, way in the past. My first was a 7 Rem in a BAR. It had a very bad fault, though it was a "special" deal (new) with fancy engraving and a 3-9 x 40 Leupold. The necks on fired brass didnt expand causing extreme pressure, and I was using book loads. At the same time an in-depth article appeared in RIFLE magazine explaining the same problem for 7 Rem Mag BARs and some bolt actions. The reamers being used by certain manufacturers allowed no clearance for neck expansion. That article (don't recall the author, but it was several pages long, and while Wolfe himself still owned RIFLE magazine and any others under his name.) explained the cause of my frustration. It was like the cases had already been sized, I couldn't force a bullet into the necks by hand after they were fired. So, the manager of the store took it back but had no idea when a replacement would be possible since the store was a franchise, and in Canada! So he gave me a new M70 .300 Win Mag with the best scope in stock at the time. My next 7 Rem Mag was an investment piece that allowed me to upgrade my collection in rifles. It was a Ruger No.1 with a 26" barrel that gave a true 3000 fps from the 175 Partition using RL-22. At the same time I picked up a Rem Classic in 7 Wby with a 24" tube that equaled the MV of the Ruger No.1 in 7 Rem Mag with its 26" barrel. Also using RL-22. Years later another investment piece came my way in a nearly new 7 RM in a BDL with a 24" barrel. Using Rl-22 under 175s gave 2935 fps avg . It was way too heavy for my liking.
Investment rifles for me during those years was getting a good to v. good deal and turning it into profit.
So, nothing has really changed in the 7mm sort for big game over the past three decades at least, unless you get into larger and exotic cases. (I've also owned a 7-08 in M70 that I handloaded for a year or so. It was an exceptional deal.)
I'm a sucker for "good deal", ha. My last one was alike new Kimber 8400 Classic in 300 WSM for $600, an older gent hunted with it one time, (I think the recoil bothered him!)
![[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]](https://i.postimg.cc/TYVdJHVd/KIMG2119.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/dJEy88D.jpg)
God bless you guys who are and can handle the sideways looks from your hunting buddies when you uncase those tawdry shootin irons. Anyway, I emailed Glenn to let him know it was on the way and asked him about lengthening the mag box. He told me he had just finished a fixture to make that a standard option on his CLR jobs - milling the mag box well and ejection port and installing a Rem 3.7 mag box. Those guys are killing it. So, that's on the work order. When I get around to handloading for this thing or rebarrel it for the Mashburn I'll be all set! 
