Roskoe

I remember seeing this same concept used by Remington to advertise the 7 Rem Mag back when it was first introduced. There was an ad in Outdoor Life magazine that touted it as "shoots a flat as a .270 . . . hits as hard as a 30-06" or words to that effect.

NVMIKE

regardless of what some say here, people DO have MORE problems w/ elk as the caliber gets smaller. You can drop an elk in its tracks with a 22short "If you hit it right". I would rule out all calibers that dont offer 165gr bullets or larger. However, dont get something that is uncomfortable to shoot. My wife shoots a 300win mag and its ported. there is nothing wrong with a brake or porting, especially a brake that screws off when you go hunting. the big calibers DO perform better, but you must be able to handle them. if the 7mag was a bit much, try a 30-06, if it was ok get a 300mag ect or stick w/ the 7mag.

hobie11

i say the 7mm mag for any hunter

ELKampMaster

NVMIKE,



but don't you think that is a little too straight forward for most folks?

================================================== ==

Of course, Barnes makes the 180 grain "original" for the 270 but in my years here I have not heard it mentioned once.... but, but, but then I won't have a "flat shooter" any more! Only the infamous BeaverJack mentioned the 160 grain Partition as a 270 "patch". Both are semi-solutions, but no....

James B

I have used the heavy bullets in the 270 but they are not needed for elk as the 150 grain X and Partitions and even the 130 X and Partitions work perfectly fine. By those standards then you would have to forget the 140 grain 284 bullets which are used as much or more that any other bullet weight in the 7MM's. By that math, the 264 Win Mag would be out but the 30-30 and 35 Remington would be in. Math won't properly rule in or rule out many cartridges. I would suspect that SD. is as important or more important that bullet weight. What will pentrate better a 180 grain 44 bullet or a 160 grain 264 bullet? I will get out of this one though because its hijacking the original posters intent.

eldeguello

"about animals shot with regular .270 Winchesters using deer bullets - maybe not hit all that well - "

I believe this about says it all. The capabilities of all the various and sundry cartridges ranging from .277" up to .323" are pretty muchtotally dependent upon the design of the bullets that are used.

For example, not too many years ago, the great Elmer Keith was fond ofsaying "the .30/'06 is barely adequate for shooting jackrabbits," and "even the .30/40 Krag is a better killer of deer, elk, and moose than the .30/'06", etc. Actually he was basing this opinion on the fact that early on, the '06 was loaded with bullets which were too fragile for the higher velocities at which the '06 launched them. So although he was damning the cartreidge, his opinbion was actually based on poor bullet performance!

If you use a tough .277" bullet, such as the Nosler Partition or Barnes X, at .270 Win velocitiesor faster,you will be hard pressed to tell the differencein performance on game between it anda .30 or 8mm of comparable sectional density and constructionthat hits the same place! I have examined enough wound channels from rounds of this type over the years to know! Despite the fact that I own rifles in 7mm Rem. Mag., .308 Norma Mag., .375 H&H, 416 Rigby and .45/70, these days I find myself using a Ruger No. 1A 7X57mm with 175-grain Nosler bullets at a MV of 2720 FPS more and more for all game, and have yet to feel handicapped.

James B

I agree. However from my manuals, thats a very, very hot loaded 175 grain. My Hornady shows a max of 2300 fps. However thats just a 22 inch barrel.

eldeguello

You are absolutely correct. However, most loads given in manuals for the 7X57mm are kept within the SAAMI pressure standards of not much over 40,000 PSI in deference to the pre-M98 Mausers out there, and even worse, the old 7X57mm Remington rolling block rifles which some people insist on shooting.

In a modern, strong action, with slow powders, (I started my heavy 175-grain loading experimentsout using N205, then switched to MRP, and now I useRE 22) and a LONG THROAT, I am convinced that IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO GET ENOUGH RE22 INTO THE 7x57MM CASE to cause excessive pressures when using175-grain bullets IN ANY OF MY 7X57MM'S! 54 grains of RE22 is all I can settle into the case and still be able to start and seat a 175-grain bullet without bulging the case shoulder. I have fired this load in a Ruger M77, a Ruger No. 1A, two Chilean M1935 ('98's) cavalry carbines, a Venezuelan FN M1924, and an M1956 Mannlicher Schoenauer. In these rifles, even the primer shows no signs of flattening whatsoever, and extraction is "normal".It gives 2729 FPS at 10' from the muzzle from22" Ruger barrels. From the 20" tube of the M/S, it only shows 2680 FPS @ 10'.

Naturally, any such load must be approached very cautiously from at least 10% below! As Bob Hagel cautioned in his book GAME LOADS AND PRACTICAL BALLISTICS FOR THE AMERICAN HUNTER, "All rifles are individuals, and what may be a maximum load in one might be quite mild in another, and vice-versa"!

James B

Thanks. I do most of loading from the 48th Ed Of the Lyman handbook. Mainly because they are a good source for cast bullets. The same cautions extend to loading my 6.5x55's. Another cartridge thats easy on hunters and hard on critters.

eldeguello

I too like the Lyman handbooks. Primarily because they are not in the business of selling either powder or jacketed bullets, so have no particular ox in the show, so to speak, and use all suitable bullets and powders in their data. Then, of course, the fact that they do publish cast-bullet data for the majority of rounds is also of great value. In addition, they give information for a lot of great, old obsolete cartridges too, which I like because of my interest in the old ones......