7mm wssm?

[boarbuster71]

Hello,does anyone here own a 7mm winchester short magnum?if so how do they like it.My soon to be ex wife lost my Rem 7 mag in the pawn shop awhile back that i have had for 17 years and i am plannin on purchasin a winchester model 70 7 mag but i am seriously considerin a short mag just cannot find anybody who can tell me much about em guess they are just new.I always reloaded for my 7 mm rem mag and have lots of brass for it and bullets for it but i do like the looks of that short mag is the preformance much different or would i do just as good by stickin to the old standard 7mm rem mag?Anyway thanks and any input would be appreciated.

[James B]

There is really no seeable difference in performance with bullets up 150-160 grains. Beyond that bullet weight, the 7MM Rem mag has the advantage. Heavy bullets need to be seated to deep in the WSM and it costs powder space and limits performance of heavy bullets. I would go with the full size version. If you don't mind the limitations posed by the lack of powder space for heavy bullets then go with the WSM. I don't think the 7MM WSM will survive in the market. I would take that into consideration also if it were for me.

[stack62]

I have one and I like it, but I wouldstick with the Mag if I were you. Bullets are cheaper and can be found alot easier, but if you reload I guess thats not a problem. I am looking to trade mine for a rifle my wife could also shoot 270,308 etc. Except for that I would keep it.

[charlie brown]

I would stick with the Standard length one here. There will not be a major difference in performance, and since you already have the brass and dies, etc, then you are one step ahead of the game. I don't the the 7 WSM is going to survive very long. It is far less popular than the .270 and .300 WSM's from what I have seen.

[salty]

Go with the 7mm Remington Ultra mag.. check the ballistics and you will be pleasantly surprised! It has the lowest drop at 500 yards out of ANY cardridge on the market... Go to remington.com and see for yourself..

[chma]

I would have to go with the crowd here I would go with the 7mmrem. mag. I live in N.W. Missouri and any of the WSM ammo is pretty hard to find and I am still not convinced the WSM rifles are any better than thier stancard counterparts. chad

[boarbuster71]

Thanks for the input guys,I think i am gonna just stick with the standard 7 mm rem mag.It has always done anything i needed it to do just wanted to check and see to make sure that the new short mag was not about to kill off the standard one.Anyway thanks alot.

[manitou210]

I think your making a wrong decission go to Federal ammo Balistic tables and take a look at 140gr BT Nosler load in both calibers the wsm is a better cartridge, I like making up guns and load for them and from my experance the short stubby is the way to go. Look what happened over the years.with those short stubby cartridges 6ppc the deuc is history,
.284win is tacker and also the 6.5/284. go to shortmags.org and see what these short mags do in factory guns, amazing cartridges
I had700 action made up by Hart in7mmwsm 24" barrel 6.7 lbs total weight and it shoots .125" unbealivable for such in a hunting gun.and I can get 3300fps 140gr Lost River Bullet, thats only 175fps behind the 7mm Rem Ulta Mag, with almost 30% less powder and a lot less recoil.You can get a lighter,quicker gun by going with short action gun.
Give it another thought, you won't look back with a short mag.

[stubblejumper]

I can get 3300fps 140gr Lost River Bullet, thats only 175fps behind the 7mm Rem Ulta Mag

I have yet to see a 7mmultramag(mine included) that would not produce around 3600fps with 140gr bullets.That is a difference of 300fps.

[Doe Dumper]

I dont think the 7wsm has any chance of killing the ol Rem Mag off. Too many 7's out there for the wsm to gain a large market share.