7mm AB

[bullet]

I don't like the Barnes for long distance and don't like the Berger VLD's for short shots, just give me an AccuBond.

Amen!
Barnes does not appear to transfer hydrostatic shock like a BT, Although they are very accurate (my family has harvested several deer and a dozen elk with them). Berger bullets and Barnes work as advertised Barnes hold together and shoot straight, Berger.... a small gernade and very accurate, lots of your elk vaporized. Considering I like eating elk I believe you will have to look long and hard to beat the AccuBond.
AccuBond's shoot very good groups out of every rifle I own and have a good combination of weight retention and hydrostatic shock delivered.
I will say that if a Partition shot like a AccuBond I would never use anything else, partitions performance has always been DRT (dead right there). CW

Yes, the Partition is a real killer. Oh, there is not such thing as hydrostatic shock (static means no movement, shock can not be created by something that is static) so a more appropriate way to express the shock fact would be to say "dynamic shock"

 

[russ808]

Mike,
Thats good to know. Its kind of like a near miss!!!
It should be a near collision.
Russ

 

[Ridge_Runner]

I don't like the Barnes for long distance and don't like the Berger VLD's for short shots, just give me an AccuBond.

Amen!
Barnes does not appear to transfer hydrostatic shock like a BT, Although they are very accurate (my family has harvested several deer and a dozen elk with them). Berger bullets and Barnes work as advertised Barnes hold together and shoot straight, Berger.... a small gernade and very accurate, lots of your elk vaporized. Considering I like eating elk I believe you will have to look long and hard to beat the AccuBond.
AccuBond's shoot very good groups out of every rifle I own and have a good combination of weight retention and hydrostatic shock delivered.
I will say that if a Partition shot like a AccuBond I would never use anything else, partitions performance has always been DRT (dead right there). CW

Yes, the Partition is a real killer. Oh, there is not such thing as hydrostatic shock (static means no movement, shock can not be created by something that is static) so a more appropriate way to express the shock fact would be to say "dynamic shock"

or hydraulic shock, because it is caused by fluid displacement.
RR

 

[DrMike]

Technical moment:

"Hydrostatic" is derived from "hydrostatics," a branch of hydrodynamics dealing with fluid statics, usually confined to equilibrium and pressure of liquids. It is related to hydrodynamics, the study of fluids and gases in motion. Thus, the term is appropriate in referring to the damage generated by the passage of a bullet through flesh.

 

[FOTIS]

The 160 AccuBond rocks! I have used it on game on various occasions from the 7mm Rum, worked great

 

[Ridge_Runner]

Technical moment:

"Hydrostatic" is derived from "hydrostatics," a branch of hydrodynamics dealing with fluid statics, usually confined to equilibrium and pressure of liquids. It is related to hydrodynamics, the study of fluids and gases in motion. Thus, the term is appropriate in referring to the damage generated by the passage of a bullet through flesh.

over this rednecks head but I'll give ya that one!!!
RR

 

[SJB358]

Technical moment:

"Hydrostatic" is derived from "hydrostatics," a branch of hydrodynamics dealing with fluid statics, usually confined to equilibrium and pressure of liquids. It is related to hydrodynamics, the study of fluids and gases in motion. Thus, the term is appropriate in referring to the damage generated by the passage of a bullet through flesh.

over this rednecks head but I'll give ya that one!!!
RR

Redneck? Did someone call me? Ha!

 

[bullet]

Technical moment:

"Hydrostatic" is derived from "hydrostatics," a branch of hydrodynamics dealing with fluid statics, usually confined to equilibrium and pressure of liquids. It is related to hydrodynamics, the study of fluids and gases in motion. Thus, the term is appropriate in referring to the damage generated by the passage of a bullet through flesh.

over this rednecks head but I'll give ya that one!!!
RR

Redneck? Did someone call me? Ha!

:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

 

[BeeTee]

Would be interesting to see the drop tables out to 1000 yards in this thread for the 7RM 140/160/175, each pushed to the highest published velocities in the Nosler manual.... :wink:

 

[SJB358]

140gr AB

Ballistics Table in Yards
7 Rem Mag 140 gr., .485 B.C. http://www.hornady.com
Range (yards) Muzzle 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Velocity (fps) 3250 3043 2845 2656 2475 2301 2134 1974 1821 1677 1543
Energy (ft.-lb.) 3283 2878 2516 2193 1904 1646 1415 1211 1031 874 740
Trajectory -1.5 2.9 3.6 0.0 -8.5 -22.7 -43.4 -71.8 -109-157.1 -217.4
Come Up in MOA -1.5 -2.8 -1.7 0.0 2.0 4.3 6.9 9.8 13.0 16.7 20.8


160gr AB


7 Rem Mag 160 gr., .531 B.C. http://www.hornady.com
Range (yards) Muzzle 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Velocity (fps) 3100 2917 2741 2572 2409 2252 2101 1956 1817 1686 1562
Energy (ft.-lb.) 3414 3022 2669 2350 2062 1802 1569 1359 1173 1009 867
Trajectory -1.5 3.2 3.9 0.0 -9.2 -24.3 -46.3 -76.3 -115 -164.8-226.7
Come Up in MOA -1.5 -3.1 -1.9 0.0 2.2 4.6 7.4 10.4 13.8 17.5 21.6


175gr Make believe AB with a BC of .600


Ballistics Table in Yards
7 Rem Mag 175 gr., .600 B.C. http://www.hornady.com
Range (yards) Muzzle 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Velocity (fps) 2900 2745 2595 2450 2309 2173 2042 1915 1794 1678 1569
Energy (ft.-lb.) 3268 2927 2616 2332 2072 1835 1620 1425 1250 1094 956
Trajectory -1.5 3.8 4.5 0.0 -10.2 -27.0 -51.1 -83.6 -125 -178 -243
Come Up in MOA -1.5 -3.6 -2.1 0.0 2.4 5.2 8.1 11.4 15.0 18.9 23.3

I ran them all with a 300 yard zero, and gave a best guess for speeds. Sorry for the crappy charts, but it is tougher to format them. Pretty interesting. Scotty

 

[Ridge_Runner]

as you can see by scotty's chart, the 175 basicly gives no advantage over the 160, even with the 140 the 7 RM carries over 1000 ft/lbs to 800 yards and is flatter than the 160 or the 180, a 175 would be a good choice in the cases from the 7 RUM on up in capacity, but won't show much advantage in the 7 RM
RR

 

[BeeTee]

I ran them all with a 300 yard zero, and gave a best guess for speeds. Sorry for the crappy charts, but it is tougher to format them. Pretty interesting. Scotty

Thanks Scotty. Why would a hunter choose anything other than the 140 in the 7RM? If I were to hunt griz or big bull moose, I'd probably opt for something other than the 7RM.

Jim

 

[SJB358]

Yeah, I guess there is two sides, you get slightly flatter trajectory with the 140's, but I think the 160's and 175's trump them a bit with penetration. I like the 140's in the smaller 7mm's, but with the bigger ones able to push the 160's around 3100, that seems a little better suited to bones and meat. Again, that is just my jaded thought on it. The 160 AB in the 7WSM is pretty awesome. Penetrates well in tests and also shoots pretty flat. I am going to run 140's in my boys 7mm Mauser though. Scotty

 

[nvbroncrider]

Reading old posts. Looks like we got it 175 LRAB!

 

[preacher]

And what a beauty it is! I still haven't heard anyone say how it does in the 9 1/4" factory twist in a 7 Rem Mag. I'd sure like to try some, seems to me it would be a wicked killer on deer,etc. Not sure how it would hold up under 100yds on a hard angling shot on elk. My plans are to work up a heavy load with the 175PT for elk/big hogs and such and play around with 150-168 for deer. My shots have never been over 300 or so except three (correction: Six; I remembered some more) times in my life. I like any magnum to use a bullet matched to the game but one in which I can take a shot at almost any angle. Sure, we all like broadside shots, but I would have missed out on some outstanding animals if I hadn't had the ability "break him down" or thread it from the flank to the off shoulder. Its just a different style of taking game, I'm certainly not being dogmatic about it.