7mm WSM - Your thoughts.....
 

My buddy is buying a Winchester Model 70 synthetic (w/scope) for $450 from a buddy of his. I told him to jump on this deal. the 7mm WSM is ballistically a little better than the 7mm Rem Mag so you can't really go wrong there. The one complaint I've heard about the WSM cartridges is they don't feed smoothly.

What are your thoughts on this round?

If it's the super shadow I feel that's to much. You could have gotten them new from Wal-Mart when they first came out for around $350 with scopes. I know two people that bought them in that same caliber 7mm wsm bought sold them after first deer season. That caliber did not feed good and had problems opening bolt after the round was fired. One of them load it down to about 7mm/08 levels and then it worked ok.

Does anybody make a rifle any of the wsm other then the 300 and anymore. I know they stoped the remington rsum family. My cousin has a 300 rsum and it does not impress me at all.

I don't know. I never saw a Winchester M70 for less than like $600-700. I didn't know they had a bobo version. Is it like a Remington 770?

Yes right before they stoped making model 70s walmart had a black shadow I was wrong that was about $350. It was a plain push feed action with a a cheap stock and scope. I personally don't like model 70s no matter when it was made I like remington 700 and ruger 77. A super shadow was a regular model 70 with synthetic stock.

Good thing I checked here. I did some quick research. Seems people are still pretty happy with them and they are a great deal for the price. But I wouldn't pay $450 for a used one. I'd offer $300 and be happy with it.

How about the round itself? Never shot or hunted with a short mag. Have plenty of experience with 7mm Rem Mag and the 300 Win and Wby mags.

Seen deer shot with the remington version 300 and deer ran like not hit. They where shot in both lungs at about 100 yards and ran about 100 yards. Also on the black shadow the gun Smith I used had about 2-3 of those black shadows and the bolts should not close on a round, he checked head space and all where off. The customers sent them back to Winchester but I don't known what happened. I personally think the wsm and rsum were hyped up to much by outdoor writers.

I believe Browning, Savage and Tikka still sell rifles in the 270WSM as well as 300WSM...Browning also makes rifles in the 325WSM.

I have a Tikka T3 Stainless Lite in 270WSM and a Browning A-Bolt Medallion in 25WSSM...have a brother that hunts with a Winchester Model 70 (not sure which one) in 7mm WSM and another brother with a Browning A-Bolt in 243 WSSM and several friends that hunt with 270 WSM and 300 WSM's and none have ever been disappointed with their performance....deer properly hit with a premium bullet will die, even from a 22LR. I have personally killed or seen a TON (over 100 easily) deer killed with all of the above calibers and have yet to see a deer not die right there with proper shot placement. I also have not had feeding problems with either of mine even-though the 25WSSM is often reported to have such issues. My brother has harvested elk, deer, yotes and everything else with his 7mm WSM....his only complaint has been that it kicks like a mule (more so than the 7mm Rem Mag he use to have)....I think it's because it happens to be a 7 pound rifle fully loaded...LOL!

I happen to be a fan of the SMs and own several; 6.5RM, .270WSM, 7mmSAUM, .300SAUM, .300RCM, .325WSM and .350RM. All the ones I own feed just fine. Most of mine are Remington Model Sevens (or 673s) with one Ruger and one BLR. I'd not call them superior to any of their standard mag cousins, but I like them because they are shorter & lighter. My 20" barreled .300RCM will spit out a 150gr bullet 200 FPS faster than a 24" 30/06 in a much shorter & lighter package, which is what I want & like from it.

I have a Kimber Montana in 325 WSM. No feeding problems with the short mag round at all.

I have no experience with the 7mm WSM but it should be the equal of the great 7mm Rem Mag ballistically with all but the long 175 grainers. The lighter and shorter rifle is always nice too.

Am I missing something? 7mmRM has more case capacity. I'm not around factory loads though so maybe they do list the WSM faster..
Great round though. Get the 7mmRM punch in a shorter/lighter package.

It's slightly faster because they case is more efficient. The shorter and wider case allows the powder to burn more completely and over a shorter span. So, they can develop full velocity in shorter barrels than the longer cases.

it may be more efficient, but loaded to the same pressure the larger case capacity creates more gas, which makes more velocity, no way can the wsm make more velocity than the 7 RM, cubic inches makes horsepower no matter how ya look at it
RR

I still say the 7mm rem is a better round then the 7mm wsm.

Completely agree...I'm not saying the short mags are necessarily any better than other similar calibers. I have several 25 cal rifles (25WSSM, 257RAI, 250 Sav)...I like them all for different reasons but i really like the 25WSSM because of the super short action which also leads to a lighter rifle. I also have a 270 Win I really love and the valocities I get from my 270WSM is very similar than my 270 WIN (just with a littl less powder) and again a short action (lighter rifle) and i think it actually recoils a little less than my 270 WIN...I just like them.

That's what I was thinking no way the 7and is greater then the 7mm rem.

They're pretty much equal if you look at Hodgdon load data for those two 7mm's. Bigger isn't always better.

Classic cartridge guy.


Give me my 7mm RM.............. and I'll be fine.

Yeah, but would the 7mm Rem need more barrel length to achieve its maximum potential? As the powder is burning and gas is expanding and bullet is pushing down the barrel, the end of the 7mm powder column is running down the barrel, ahead of the reaction. In a short barrel, wouldn't a large charge drop a few grains on the ground? I think the short mag gets all the coals cooking evenly. Like a charcoal grill. :D

There's no replacement for displacement, right? :D But there are high compression engines with fuel injection and twin turbo chargers. :D

I was gonna say the small block motor has replaced the big block motors in racecars for years because the power is about the same but the weight savings and the cars handle better, put it over.:party0005:

Hey if you got one, No point to changing :happy0001: But if a guy doesn't have one. You really need to look at them.

If you have the money, you should really own every caliber there is. :D

But there a big block is so much cooler, and demands respect.

7mm Rem Mag isn't broke so there was no reason to "fix" it by doing the whole WSM treatment. I've shot a 7mm Rem since I was 14. My brother shoots one, my late grandfather shot one, my late father shot one and none of them needed "improving".

It was a brilliant marketing concept and helped sell a lot of rifles but 100-200 fps from any 2 different rifles of the exact same caliber don't make a bit of difference in the performance on either game or targets.

In a lot of cases building superior long range accuracy is better in a larger case thus being able to use a slower burning powder and a longer barrel. The major bonus is the bigger case and slower burning powder builds it's pressure as it burns down the barrel behind the bullet. The smaller case and faster burning powder has it's pressure build in half the time and a lot of the pressure is right there on the chamber. Compare the two and you'll find the 7mm Rem mag can reach same velocity's with 5,000-7,000 less psi. It's just more efficient if you look at it the other way. A magnum in a 22" barrel is a waste of powder in the first place. Minimum would be 26" barrel for a magnum .338 and smaller. Makes no since to compare apples to apples unless you use something it can gain full potential from.

I use the 7mm rem since I as 16 the best caliber in my opinion. That's why I bought my nephew one when he was about 5. He is 8 now and uses a 7mm/08. I like the 28 caliber bullet.

That's an interesting way of looking at it. I'd say, however, that the more efficient cartridge would be the one attaining like velocities with less case capacity & powder (that would be the SMs). Not sure pressures matter all that much since the same actions (action strengths) are used for the vastly differing pressures produced by different cartridges. Look at the difference between a 7X57 and 7mmRM, both produced in the exact same action.

The 6.5-.284 also seems to discredit that way of thinking as well being a darling of the long-range accuracy bunch while using what would be seen as one of the very first SM type cases, along with the .350RM & 6.5RM. Matter of fact, the 6.5-.284 has almost identical case capacity as the 6.5RM (which should probably now be called the 6.5 RSM :biggrin:)

i have a M70 in 7wsm i have no feeding problems and shoots great

And there ya have it folks, the only answer of value so far... :woot:

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.

:hit::hit::hit::hit:

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.

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.

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.

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....:patriot:

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.

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.

winner winner chicken dinner...:action-smiley-099:

I'm working on it as fast as I possibly can when my wife isn't paying attention ;)

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.