Go Back  HuntingNet.com Forums > Firearms Forum > Guns
7mm WSM - Your thoughts..... >

7mm WSM - Your thoughts.....

Community
Guns Like firearms themselves, there's a wide variety of opinions on what's the best gun.

7mm WSM - Your thoughts.....

Thread Tools
 
Old 12-22-2013, 06:58 AM
  #31  
Nontypical Buck
 
Nomercy448's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Kansas
Posts: 3,905
Default

Originally Posted by Bbj270
Seen deer shot with the remington version 300 and deer ran like not hit.
And there was no other explanation for the deer running "like not hit"? Because the case design obviously effects how a 150-200grn bullet flying at 2500-3000fps (@ 100yrds) will knock down a deer. That has no dependence upon bullet design at all.


Last edited by Nomercy448; 12-22-2013 at 07:33 AM.
Nomercy448 is offline  
Old 12-22-2013, 07:17 AM
  #32  
Typical Buck
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 749
Default

Originally Posted by Nomercy448
And there was no other explanation for the deer running "like not hit"? Because the case design obviously effects how a 150-200grn bullet flying at 2500-3000fps (@ 100yrds) will knock down a deer. That has no dependence upon bullet design at all.

He was using 180 grain remington premierncorelock ultra bonded. That is 2727 fps at 100 yards. Deer was about 100 yards. His rifle is a remington spa stainless with 24" barrel a special offer from remington when that round came out.
Bbj270 is offline  
Old 12-22-2013, 07:32 AM
  #33  
Nontypical Buck
 
Nomercy448's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Kansas
Posts: 3,905
Default

Does the 7RM actually have more capacity, or significantly so? Seems I remember reading that the WSM was within 1/4grn of water to the RM. Not a huge hurdle for a bit of efficiency to make up if we're talking less than 1/3 of 1% difference case capacity.

The "no replacement for displacement" applies to engines because we all run the same fuel, so you're looking at roughly the same compression ratio. Rifle cartridges get to play at different pressures. Really simple example: pistol vs. revolver cartridges 45 ACP vs 45colt, eyeballing it, over twice the powder capacity beneath the bullet it, but I get as much out of 10grns in the higher pressure ACP as I do out of 13grns in the Colt. 9mm Para vs. .38spcl - twice the pressure, half the capacity, little more than half the powder charge, same velocity with the same bullet. Sure, I can +P+ a .38spcl, could do the same in a 9x19.

I'm not doubting that it's possible, even call it easy, to load the 7RM to the same pressure as the 7WSM without having pressure issues, but if we're taking SAAMI + 7% loads for the 7RM, why not talk SAAMI + 7% on the 7WSM? The 7RM taps out at 61kpsi, the 7WSM is spec'd at 65kpsi. Bump the WSM up 7% as well, and I'm sure it'll get faster as well.

I had an RM several years ago in a rebuilt Ruger (remember the skeletonized synthetic stocks?). Eventually got a 7WSM, and would like to have another one now (although it's hard to say either does anything that my 284win doesn't do). Faster? I know factory ammo sure was, and my reloads with the same bullet, loaded to, or just beneath max SAAMI pressures were as well.

End of the day, the gap between the two, whichever is REALLY faster (betting on a case by case basis, they swap heads and tails), isn't so significant that it would make me say that one has a ballistic advantage. Reloading WSM's (or any short, fat cartridge) isn't as hard as people make it sound, and no more difficult than reloading proper headspace for belted magnums.

Personally, I'd prefer the smaller powder charge, no belt, and lighter rifle.
Nomercy448 is offline  
Old 12-22-2013, 07:34 AM
  #34  
Nontypical Buck
 
Nomercy448's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Kansas
Posts: 3,905
Default

Originally Posted by Bbj270
He was using 180 grain remington premierncorelock ultra bonded. That is 2727 fps at 100 yards. Deer was about 100 yards. His rifle is a remington spa stainless with 24" barrel a special offer from remington when that round came out.
Picking up sarcasm online is difficult. I edited my post to convert the text to pink to make sure it's a bit more obvious for other readers.

Moral of the story - bullet selection is why that deer ran, not because you don't like short mag cases.
Nomercy448 is offline  
Old 12-22-2013, 08:28 AM
  #35  
Fork Horn
 
Tnhunter444's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Northern Tennessee
Posts: 128
Default

I suppose if one feels the pinnacle of loading and powder making prowess occurred some 51 years ago when the 7mmRM debuted, then there would not be any reason to have had scientists such as Dave Emary continue to experiment with new powders and powder blends giving us such new things as LeverEvolution powders and Light Magnum and Superformance powders/blends.

Me, I choose to feel that there likely are some better powders and powder blends available since back when Jack O'Connor was in his hey-day, just like there's better TVs, Cars, Planes and coffee makers. Just my personal opinion, mind you....
Tnhunter444 is offline  
Old 12-22-2013, 09:07 AM
  #36  
Typical Buck
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Buffalo, WY
Posts: 992
Default

Originally Posted by emtrescue6
And there ya have it folks, the only answer of value so far...
A noble endeavor indeed. I took a shot at it in my younger days.
Now I own a whole bunch of rifles of which I use 2 regularly. The rest will go to my heirs in relatively new condition I guess.
Bullcamp82834 is offline  
Old 12-22-2013, 09:19 AM
  #37  
Typical Buck
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Buffalo, WY
Posts: 992
Default

Originally Posted by Tnhunter444
I suppose if one feels the pinnacle of loading and powder making prowess occurred some 51 years ago when the 7mmRM debuted, then there would not be any reason to have had scientists such as Dave Emary continue to experiment with new powders and powder blends giving us such new things as LeverEvolution powders and Light Magnum and Superformance powders/blends.

Me, I choose to feel that there likely are some better powders and powder blends available since back when Jack O'Connor was in his hey-day, just like there's better TVs, Cars, Planes and coffee makers. Just my personal opinion, mind you....
Being a nostalgia buff I like using what Jack used. I cut my teeth on Outdoor Life and Jack O'Connor. Therefore the 270 Win is my favorite cartridge to this day.
I suppose there have been advancements in rifles and cartridges that can make a buck or a bull die a couple seconds sooner or can shoot a few yards flatter than what Jack had. I'm just not worried about it.

I'm happy being lost in the past. And my freezer stays full, just like my dad's did back when I was just a pup.
Bullcamp82834 is offline  
Old 12-22-2013, 01:48 PM
  #38  
Typical Buck
 
emtrescue6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 647
Default

Originally Posted by Nomercy448
Picking up sarcasm online is difficult. I edited my post to convert the text to pink to make sure it's a bit more obvious for other readers.

Moral of the story - bullet selection is why that deer ran, not because you don't like short mag cases.
winner winner chicken dinner...
emtrescue6 is offline  
Old 12-22-2013, 01:49 PM
  #39  
Typical Buck
 
emtrescue6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 647
Default

Originally Posted by Bullcamp82834
A noble endeavor indeed. I took a shot at it in my younger days.
Now I own a whole bunch of rifles of which I use 2 regularly. The rest will go to my heirs in relatively new condition I guess.
I'm working on it as fast as I possibly can when my wife isn't paying attention
emtrescue6 is offline  
Old 12-22-2013, 02:26 PM
  #40  
Typical Buck
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 749
Default

I don't think it was the bullet used those bullets in other caliber and rounds and they work great. Then other deer he shot with it he said did the same thing. He now uses his model seven 7mm08. No problem.
Bbj270 is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.