all pupose 7 Mag
- Thread starter lschrader
- Start date
The 140's are fine for Whitetail & Antelope but I would go with the 160 for Elk. I load the 160's for Pigs, Axis & Elk. The 160's possess greater penetration and shock trauma. I worked up some AccuBond loads and they are awesome bullets. They have a long bearing surface though. Velocity is important to me so I stick with the Partitions. I know I cannot go wrong with them and they have a much shorter bearing surface which equals less friction.. I shoot a 7mm Weatherby.
- Nov 4, 2004
- 25,170
- 8,443
I agree with Reloader 28, 160 gr AB since you are including Elk
which are 7X the size of a goat. The 160 AB will give you expansion
on the smaller game. Another possibility could be the 150 gr PT in your 7mm RM.
RL22 would be a good starting point to develop a load.
Regards,
JD338
which are 7X the size of a goat. The 160 AB will give you expansion
on the smaller game. Another possibility could be the 150 gr PT in your 7mm RM.
RL22 would be a good starting point to develop a load.
Regards,
JD338
roysclockgun
Handloader
- Dec 17, 2005
- 736
- 1
I agree with others who responded, regarding moving up to 160gr AB for elk. I loaded 140gr AB for my 7mmRemMag and I really like that bullet for deer and pronghorns. Don't know if I will be able to chase elk again, but if I do, I will work up a load for the 160gr AB. In fact, had I already started with 160gr AB I would not even load the 140gr bullets. Working up a load that works for elk, deer and pronghorn is a better way to go.
longwinters
Handloader
- Oct 10, 2004
- 1,476
- 1
The guys that already responded are right on the bean.
Long
Long
remingtonman_25_06
Handloader
- Nov 17, 2005
- 2,807
- 402
I would also go with the 160g AB. Couple reasons, first is the added weight and S.D. to drive through the elk. Another is that they will "probly" be more accurate then a Partition, and lastly, they have a much higher B.C. which will help you in everything you want downrange, including flatter trajectory, energy, retained velocity, and less wind drift.
Reloader28,
The 160 grain bullet, to my estimation would be better for elk, but as I once read, how much difference would I think 10 grains could make in 150 grain class 7MM bullets? I guess from a practical perspective, probably none! But I don't know for sure because I have never actually conducted testing to quantify an actual difference.
To the point of my not hesitating using 150 grain bullets for elk, they are very close in sectional density to the vaunted 180 grain .308 projectiles. So, the 150 grain .284 projectile compares very closely to the 180 grain .308 projectile. Therefore, were I on a combo hunt, mule deer & elk, & were I to come acroos the biggest elk North America has ever produced, I'd shoot it w/o the slightest worry of bullet failure provided I were to be using a 150 grain Partition or similar premium bullet.
I once bought a couple boxes of factory 150 grain Core-Lokts that were on sale in Utah. A local hunter who was in line saw the cartridge boxes asked if I was in Utah to hunt elk. He told me the 150 grain Core-Lokts in 7MM Rem Mag were damn good elk bullets! I never asked if he had actual knowledge of their efficacy, but he spoke as if he did.
The 160 grain bullet, to my estimation would be better for elk, but as I once read, how much difference would I think 10 grains could make in 150 grain class 7MM bullets? I guess from a practical perspective, probably none! But I don't know for sure because I have never actually conducted testing to quantify an actual difference.
To the point of my not hesitating using 150 grain bullets for elk, they are very close in sectional density to the vaunted 180 grain .308 projectiles. So, the 150 grain .284 projectile compares very closely to the 180 grain .308 projectile. Therefore, were I on a combo hunt, mule deer & elk, & were I to come acroos the biggest elk North America has ever produced, I'd shoot it w/o the slightest worry of bullet failure provided I were to be using a 150 grain Partition or similar premium bullet.
I once bought a couple boxes of factory 150 grain Core-Lokts that were on sale in Utah. A local hunter who was in line saw the cartridge boxes asked if I was in Utah to hunt elk. He told me the 150 grain Core-Lokts in 7MM Rem Mag were damn good elk bullets! I never asked if he had actual knowledge of their efficacy, but he spoke as if he did.
roysclockgun
Handloader
- Dec 17, 2005
- 736
- 1
Tom wrote: "...BTW, I think that the 7MM Rem Mag separates its self from non-magnums when using heavy 175 grain bullets ..."
I do not know if bullets heavier than 175gr are generally available in 7mm, but if going against dangerous game, the heavier the better. I agree with Tom, the heavier bullet weights are the only area where I can claim that my 7mmRemMag can outdo the non-7mm cartridges. Likewise, the .30cal shooters can go into even heavier bullets then can 7mm shooters, so "best cartridge" opiinions should always be predicated upon what game is being pursued. No? It is when considering one rifle cartridge that can cover most all situations, that I'd opt for the .280Rem over the 7mmMag.
Some have put forth the idea that certain heavier bullets will produce flatter trajectories, given the same basic designs. It is hard for me to imagine that being the case. For instance, I believe that a 7mm 140gr AB can be worked up to have a higher MV than can a 160gr AB. Given that the 140 bullet starts out faster and given that any bullet begins to slow as soon as it leaves the muzzle. How can the slower heavier bullet have a higher velocity down range?
I do not know if bullets heavier than 175gr are generally available in 7mm, but if going against dangerous game, the heavier the better. I agree with Tom, the heavier bullet weights are the only area where I can claim that my 7mmRemMag can outdo the non-7mm cartridges. Likewise, the .30cal shooters can go into even heavier bullets then can 7mm shooters, so "best cartridge" opiinions should always be predicated upon what game is being pursued. No? It is when considering one rifle cartridge that can cover most all situations, that I'd opt for the .280Rem over the 7mmMag.
Some have put forth the idea that certain heavier bullets will produce flatter trajectories, given the same basic designs. It is hard for me to imagine that being the case. For instance, I believe that a 7mm 140gr AB can be worked up to have a higher MV than can a 160gr AB. Given that the 140 bullet starts out faster and given that any bullet begins to slow as soon as it leaves the muzzle. How can the slower heavier bullet have a higher velocity down range?
roy,
It is because longer, heavier bullets retain velocity more so than smaller, lighter ones. That is why sectional density is such an excellent predictor of downrange bullet performance.
I believe there is an appendex in tha back of the Nosler manual that lists trajectory for various weight bullets at various muzzle velocities.
Reference heavy .284 bullets, the 175 grain is about the heaviest, althought I do recall a manufacturer did at one time make a 195 grain bullet; sort of like a 160 grain 6.5MM bullet.
A 175 grain .284 Partition at 3000 FPS will work on anything in North America. Jack O'Connor did not like the 175 grain 7MM Rem Mag bullets on North American ungulates because he wrote that they sailed through-and-through w/o much expansion.
It is because longer, heavier bullets retain velocity more so than smaller, lighter ones. That is why sectional density is such an excellent predictor of downrange bullet performance.
I believe there is an appendex in tha back of the Nosler manual that lists trajectory for various weight bullets at various muzzle velocities.
Reference heavy .284 bullets, the 175 grain is about the heaviest, althought I do recall a manufacturer did at one time make a 195 grain bullet; sort of like a 160 grain 6.5MM bullet.
A 175 grain .284 Partition at 3000 FPS will work on anything in North America. Jack O'Connor did not like the 175 grain 7MM Rem Mag bullets on North American ungulates because he wrote that they sailed through-and-through w/o much expansion.
roysclockgun
Handloader
- Dec 17, 2005
- 736
- 1
Tom wrote: "It is because longer, heavier bullets retain velocity more so than smaller, lighter ones. ..."
Tom, so again, in your studies, you have found the 150gr AB to be the best, all around bullet in your 7mmRemMag? This for anything from 90lb whitetails up to the largest bull elk?
Tom, so again, in your studies, you have found the 150gr AB to be the best, all around bullet in your 7mmRemMag? This for anything from 90lb whitetails up to the largest bull elk?
Hi Roy,
No, I have never actually tested the bullets in question; however, I do know that mule deer will drop like rocks when hit with 160 grain Partitions. And I do know that I can easily get 3100 FPS from my 7MM Rem Mag using 160 grain Partitions from a 24" barrel and absolutely no sign of pressure! In short, I could easily increase this load but see no reason to do so!
My take on this comes from a slightly differnt angle. We know that most hunters pursue deer with an occasional ungulate of larger stature. My thesis is to look for a bullet that works both on deer & elk, and not vice versa, which is why I shot deer with 160 grain Partitions.
From a practial perspective, I can see no logical reason why a 150 Partition would be inferior to a 160 grain Partition when used on elk.
Maybe someone from the Nosler company can give us a much more learned opinion???
Take care,
Tom
No, I have never actually tested the bullets in question; however, I do know that mule deer will drop like rocks when hit with 160 grain Partitions. And I do know that I can easily get 3100 FPS from my 7MM Rem Mag using 160 grain Partitions from a 24" barrel and absolutely no sign of pressure! In short, I could easily increase this load but see no reason to do so!
My take on this comes from a slightly differnt angle. We know that most hunters pursue deer with an occasional ungulate of larger stature. My thesis is to look for a bullet that works both on deer & elk, and not vice versa, which is why I shot deer with 160 grain Partitions.
From a practial perspective, I can see no logical reason why a 150 Partition would be inferior to a 160 grain Partition when used on elk.
Maybe someone from the Nosler company can give us a much more learned opinion???
Take care,
Tom
roysclockgun
Handloader
- Dec 17, 2005
- 736
- 1
Tom, Do you prefer the Partition over the AccuBond? Or, have you just not had time to test the AB and choose between the two?
In two previous tests, I had problems getting the Partition to group well when loaded for .270Win 130gr. However, in both my .270Wins and my 7mmRemMag, the Accubonds have given excellent groups.
In two previous tests, I had problems getting the Partition to group well when loaded for .270Win 130gr. However, in both my .270Wins and my 7mmRemMag, the Accubonds have given excellent groups.
roy,
I haven't tried AccuBond bullets yet, but I intend to pick up a box and give 'em a try.
I do agree that Partitions are not as accurate at Ballistic Tips, but they are designed for a different purpose. I would rather have the comfort of a bullet designed to penetrate (Partition) than one that will shoot sub-MOA groups (Ballistic Tips) when hunting anything larger than mule deer.
I haven't tried AccuBond bullets yet, but I intend to pick up a box and give 'em a try.
I do agree that Partitions are not as accurate at Ballistic Tips, but they are designed for a different purpose. I would rather have the comfort of a bullet designed to penetrate (Partition) than one that will shoot sub-MOA groups (Ballistic Tips) when hunting anything larger than mule deer.
roysclockgun
Handloader
- Dec 17, 2005
- 736
- 1
Tom, you will most likely appreciate what Accubonds can do. Accuracy in three tested rifles of mine has been very good.
Dear roy,
The next Noslers I buy will likely be AB. However, I am giving serious consideration to going with 150 Partitions and using them for everything on the North American continent, even Shiras moose if I am to be drawn. Fact of the matter is I'd probably use my .308 Win on moose because nearly every one I've seen in Wyoming indicated a stalk was a definite possibility! And there ain't no doubt that a 200 grain Partition out of a .308 Win will anchor a moose! But for mule deer and elk, game that is taken at extreme range, a 150 grain Partition @ 3200+ FPS in 7MM Rem Mag will work just fine.
Take care,
Tom
The next Noslers I buy will likely be AB. However, I am giving serious consideration to going with 150 Partitions and using them for everything on the North American continent, even Shiras moose if I am to be drawn. Fact of the matter is I'd probably use my .308 Win on moose because nearly every one I've seen in Wyoming indicated a stalk was a definite possibility! And there ain't no doubt that a 200 grain Partition out of a .308 Win will anchor a moose! But for mule deer and elk, game that is taken at extreme range, a 150 grain Partition @ 3200+ FPS in 7MM Rem Mag will work just fine.
Take care,
Tom
- Nov 4, 2004
- 25,170
- 8,443
Tom and Roy,
Don't underestimate the accuracy pf the PT's. I am getting under .5" in my 338 RUM with the 210gr, 225 gr, and 250 gr PT's. The 225 gr AB's are just over .5". The rifle is a stock M700 LSS with the exception of a Pachmyer Decelerator recoil pad.
In my M700 Classic 280 Rem, the 140 gr PT and 160 gr PT also shot well under sub MOA. I have a target shot with a 160 gr PT "factory Seconds" that measures .400".
I do agree though that the BT and AB bullets are more accurate than the PT's. My 280 AI shoots 140 gr AB's into .5"-.6" range but the 160 gr AB's
shoot into the .2's. I plan on "playing" with the PT this summer.
Good dialog guys.
Regards,
JD338
Don't underestimate the accuracy pf the PT's. I am getting under .5" in my 338 RUM with the 210gr, 225 gr, and 250 gr PT's. The 225 gr AB's are just over .5". The rifle is a stock M700 LSS with the exception of a Pachmyer Decelerator recoil pad.
In my M700 Classic 280 Rem, the 140 gr PT and 160 gr PT also shot well under sub MOA. I have a target shot with a 160 gr PT "factory Seconds" that measures .400".
I do agree though that the BT and AB bullets are more accurate than the PT's. My 280 AI shoots 140 gr AB's into .5"-.6" range but the 160 gr AB's
shoot into the .2's. I plan on "playing" with the PT this summer.
Good dialog guys.
Regards,
JD338
