7 MM Rem. Mag bullet choice

Greg Nolan

Handloader
Nov 25, 2004
2,143
18
I found a Wby Vanguard Deluxe in 7mm Rem Mag that I'd like to use for mule and white tail deer. I'm trying to decide between 140 gr or 160 gr. Accubonds or the Long Range AccuBond if I can ever find some. What works for you and what loads do you like.
Thanks
Greg
I'll post a picture as soon as I can find my camera. Moving can be a pain even if it is to Montana.
 
Greg,

The 140 gr AB is all the bullet you need for deer. RL 22 works very well in the 7mm Rem Mag.

JD338
 
Thanks Jim,
That's the very load I have ready to try out of the Nosler manual but I wasn't sure if that was a heavy enough bullet. I'll go ahead and work it up and post the results.
Greg
 
I use 139/140 grain bullets almost exclusively for mule deer and for whitetail. None have ever walked away. Certainly 160s will work, but the 140s will do the job, and with aplomb.
 
I was impressed with what I saw from Stephen and Storm using their .280 & 7mm-08 rifles and the small, 120 grain Ballistic Tip last fall. Instant kills and great penetration...

In the past I've usually favored the 160 - 175 gr bullets for the 7mm Rem mag, but I'm starting to get interested in the 120's and 140's.

Guy
 
Greg, I started out loading the 140 PT's with a pretty good load of H870. This was way before I ever had my first chronograph, but I would imagine it was trucking along North of 3100 pretty easily. I got to shoot that load really well, shot a bunch of Whitetails at home, turkeys, woodchucks and pretty much anything that would sit still. I can't remember anything that ever moved. It was lightning!

I switched to the 160 X bullet for a moose/caribou hunt and those did decent with H870 and I took a moose and caribou with them. I honestly don't think I gained anything with their use though, and honestly, the 160's didn't work nearly as well on deer. Not saying a 160 PT or AB wouldn't have, but a 140 screaming along at 3200 or so, is going to wallop deer. Elk too I think.

I have sorta gone to 160's lately for both the 7mm WSM and 7mm Rem Mag, only because their primary duty is as an elk rifle. I will say this though, RL22 is pretty much king in both, but I am going to try some RL25 would pretty soon, as there looks to be a little more case fill and a little extra speed, so it's worth a shot.

Good luck with your new rifle, the move to MT and I hope you get everything you need out of both.
 
I don't shoot a 7MM Rem. Mag. just yet but my hunting partner used his with the 160 gr. AccuBond and his first shot at 317 yards laser measured anchored his elk. his was a cull hunt for cow elk and he shot literally tore up half her liver. He did have to shoot her againt to put her down. He recovered both bullets and they really did a number on that cow. I have to say that I was impressed. When I think of the possible velocity of a lighter bullet from the 7MM Mag., I wonder just how badly will good eating meat be mangled should I mess up and hit a large bone? :?:
Paul B.
 
A 140 gr screaming out at 3200-3300 fps is a bang flop on deer and antelope. It really doesn't matter if its a BT, AccuBond, or PT. Reloder 22 "IS" the ticket with that bullet weight. If its a problem for ya, they do make very large exit wounds. I prefer the 160 AccuBond and H1000. It shoots one hole groups in my Win 70 7mm Rem Mag and its a one stop bullet for the 7mm mag, that is if you want a one stop bullet.
 
Bruce, Hate to be dumb .... what do you mean by "one stop".

I am evaluating bullets for a 7mm SAUM.
 
This is just one more opinion, but there is a statement in the old Number 8 Speer Manual that is pretty to the point. It says "However the criterion should be just what any 7mm Magnum does with a 160 grain bullet."

I used to shoot 145 grain Speer bullet in my 7mm Rem Mag with great success. But I finally switched to 160 grain Partitions and never looked back. A buddy took shells I loaded to Wyoming one year and with 160 Partitions he killed a deer, elk, and moose. (All with one shot each)

I can no longer shoot the 160 Partitions here because of STUPID California laws, but I now shoot 160 Barnes TSX in my 7mm Weatherby Magnum.

It just seems simple to me, 160 grain bullets in 7mm Magnums, 180 grain bullets in 300 Magnums, done deal.
 
Wow!

Maybe I better try both 140 and 160 A/Bs and see which shoots best although this would be strictly a deer rifle. Ultra mags are for elk.
 
Greg Nolan":138ctoxz said:
Wow!

Maybe I better try both 140 and 160 A/Bs and see which shoots best although this would be strictly a deer rifle. Ultra mags are for elk.

I'd agree. See which shoots better. Dad's 7mm Wby doesn't seem to like the 160AB's but loves 150 TTSX Barnes.
 
Al, "one stop", "get it all in one place", "it'll do for everything" , "don't need nuthin else"

get the picture? :grin:
 
At the end of the day, I like having one load per rifle. Simple is good.

I save the 120 and 140g for my 7mm08. For the 7RM, it's the 160. It will handle antelope to elk without having to relearn my drops or changing my thinking about wind.
 
I have teken a lot of game with 120bt,140bt, 140ab, and 160I ab out of my 280ai. I really really like the 160ab doing nearly 3000 fps. They have all taken game in impressive manners. If you are not going after elk with it I would have to say go with the 140ab or even the 140bt. If there is ever a chance for something bigger, the 160ab will make you a happy camper.
 
The 150 gr. TTSX was my third option. I just can't find any locally I can probably get some on line. I'll try the Accubonds first because I have both weights.
 
I guess between the 150 gr and 160 gr for deer it would be based on which shoots better which in my rifle has always been the 160 gr Partition for 50 years now. Either bullet will flatten deer to 500 yards, if you can make the shot.
 
Back
Top