Hi All,

I'm looking at trading my 270 winchester for a 7mm remington magnum. After a lot of research many people state that the velocities in loading manuals are way over the top and not acheivable. Even on the barnes load data site http://www.barnesbullets.com/information/load-data/ it has the 270 win with a 130 grain at 3133fps and another load at 3211 fps where the 7mm mag with a 140 grain load only travelling at 3107fps and another load at 3145fps. So why would I trade the 270 for the 7mm rem mag? In the manual I have it states the 7mm mag at 3340 fps with RE-22 for a 140 grain load out of a 24 inch barrel.

So I'm looking for actual, no BS chronied loads people have got with their 140 and 160 grain loads in the 7mm rem mag. Also if you could state the powder your using for that load and barrel length.

Thanks
Rick

Looking at 2900 fps w/ 59.5gr DP 85(close to the 4350s), 150gr psp, #34 primer & FC cases from a 24" barrel. This does not appear to be a hot load but I haven't pushed the envelope any farther.

There are no great outstanding differences between the .270 and 7mm. Rem. Mag untill you get into the heavier bullts. Both are do a lot cartridges. roger

Rick,

Here is what I get. Using 215 Fed. primers and R-P brass-
with a C.O.A.L. of 3.280

72.5gr RE22 = 2800fps with a 140gr Sierra BT

71gr RE22 = 2700fps with a 150gr Nosler Ballistic Silver Tip

BUT, that is with an Encore handgun with a 13" barrel.

Add the widely accepted 40fps per inch of barrel and it is a bit better than a 270winchester..which I also have and its not a 7mm mag.

I'd take those numbers from the barnes manual with a grain of salt. I don't have a 270 but have reloaded for a couple. I don't have my notes in front of me but from memory I know I never got close to 3200 fps with a 130 gr bullet, 3000-3050 was what I settled on out of a 22" barrel if I remember correctly. My 7mm mags I generally run at 3200-3250 with a 140 gr bullet, one with a 24" barrel and the other has a 26". Those numbers are more indicative of the capabilities of the cartridges in my opinion. There's not a huge amount of difference between the 7mm mag and the 270, but the 7mm is a significant step up. If I had a nice shooting 270 I doubt I'd trade it off for a 7mm mag, but there's no doubt that the 7mm mag is more cartridge.

Boltman,

Would you mind telling me what your load is to get those velocities? If you don't want to print your load could you tell me what powder your using for it.

Thanks

I load for two sons in law, one with a 7 mag and the other with a .270. The .270 is only about 125 fps slower than the mag, both with 150 gr. bullets.

Doesn't using a chronograph defeat the idea of owning a 7MM-Mag? I mean isn't it the thrill of "thinking" you're getting 3200 fps with a 140gr bullet the idea?

The difference between 2900 and 3200 in real world terms, especially if 2900 is more accurate and the brass lasts 10X longer is a matter of preception.

I always find it strange that until the widespread use of chronographs most shooters just went with whatever they "thought" the velocity was and were happy. Game animals died and shots were made at great distances, that little fantasy got killed off with lazer range finders, but reality never ruined your day.

Are you having trouble with 130gr 270 bullets at 2900 fps bouncing off deer at 300 yards? The difference between the two rounds is almost totally insignificant in the real world despite what 7 Mag fans say.

Real difference in these rounds is when you need to go above 150 gr. If you never need a bullet heavier than 140-150 gr. there is little difference. John

hell there ain't that much difference between a 7 mauser and a 270 either.
from 2750 to 3000 fps isn't that much
untill you get to 400 yds. or are shooting a bullet that weighs 20 grains more.
the whole point of a magnum is to throw a heavier bullet at the same or higher velocities.

if you are that worried about it get a 280 and have both your 270 and the 7 mag.

IMO there is more than just .007" between the 7m/m Remington magnum and the 270 Winchester, it fills a niche ignored since Holland & Holland introduced the 275 back in 1912. Also, when like weight bullets at similar pressures are compared, the larger case and bore will always be 250f/s faster than the 270 Winchester.

Secondly, there are more .284" bullet choices then .277", an undeniable advantage. This makes the 7m/m magnum the smallest heavy hitter IMHO, and if there is doubt about that the 175 grain .284" bullet should put an end to it. As with any magnum, the payoff comes with the ability to move heavy for calibre bullets at reasonable hunting velocities, and the 7m/m Remington has done this with annoying regularity since 1962. Few other calibres can claim this without substantial increases in recoil.

Lastly, it's popular because many choices of factory ammunition are available. Even tho Remington choose to ignore the classic 160 grain bullet when introducing its big 7, the new cartridge was a hit because it did as promised, whereas the .264 Winchester didn't.

That said, my favorite load always has a 160 grain bullet on top. I have no problem reaching 3100+ f/s with 66.6 grains of N-160, but throttle it back to 3050f/s as it's more accurate. Fired by either Remington's 9 1/2M or Federal's 215, this load will shoot to the same point of impact from my rifle with Nosler's partition or Sierra's Game King HPBT.

P.S. It is not my intent to bash the 270 Winchester, I merely wanted to point out what I think are its shortcomings with only three commonly available hunting weight bullets (130, 140, & 150's). Others can point to the increased sectional density of .277" bullets vs .284's, but most who favor the 270 do so for its 3100f/s velocity, and that means 130 grain bullets IMO.
Think of it this way -the 7m/m Rem mag will perform similar to the 270 while using bullets 20 grain heavier, or you could think that had Winchester introduced the 284 magnum instead of the 264, they would have made their own 270 obsolete

quote:

Originally posted by Rick 04:
Boltman,

Would you mind telling me what your load is to get those velocities? If you don't want to print your load could you tell me what powder your using for it.

Thanks

Rick,

My notes are at home and I work away so I can't get at them for a week or so, but I use RL25 for the 7mm mag and RL22 for the 270.

The more powder ("TNT"/energy) you put behind a bullet the more energy available to transfer to the bullet - i.e., more velocity and foot pounds of energy. But, there's a trade off. More powder means more kick and blast; moreover, shorter barrel life. Also, eventually the massive cartridges become less efficient and "overbore." To make these overbore cartridges more efficient you need slower burning powders, but we've reached a limit with powders like Retumbo and Re25. By the way these slower burning powders also make cartridges like the 3006 more efficient, and you should try them with the proper bullet. We need some high-energy slower burning powders, such as VVN570, which should become available in the USA soon. Has anyone seen it?

Finally, how dead can a deer get? Well there's only one degree of deadness so far as I know, and a well placed bullet from a 7x57 will kill a deer just a quickly as the same bullet from a 7mm RUM. Combine this fact with the availability of modern range finders, ballistic reticles, and premium hunting bullets and the added value of a 7mm RUM over a 7x57 becomes negligible. There's really no need to buy the BIG magnums anymore.

I shot thru my conagraph for these FPS, 120gr 3490, 130gr 3400, 140gr 3135, 150gr 3088, 160gr
3024. these bullets use H4831 powder. Hope this helps. My barrel is 26" long. Rifle is the Remington 7mm Mag.

quote:

Real difference in these rounds is when you need to go above 150 gr. If you never need a bullet heavier than 140-150 gr. there is little difference. John

John, I strongly agree. I load the boys what they want but have suggested 160-175 pills for the 7 mag., he doesn't want that, he wants the "higher velocity" loads. I've told him what he gets and never mention what the other boy gets from his .270!

Actually, all any large capacity cartridge offers is better performance with heavy bullets, IMHO. Standard cartridges using light, or normal for caliber, bullets lose little in effectiveness to mags or "improved" chambers.

My 24" bbld 7RM gives 3200-3300 fps with 140s depending on the powder. R22 will push them to 3300, but I get better accuracy with H4831 at 3200. It does 3125-3150 with 150s & R22 and 3080-3100 with 160s and R22.

The 270s I've loaded for would not come close to the ballistics of the 7RM. My fav 270 only gives around 2900 with 150s and 3100 with 130s. Several others had similar velocities.

Sort of opposite of what you've mentioned about the 7RM and manuals, I've found the 270 to be misrepresented in manuals.

Manuals are nothing more than a good reference for starting loads IMO, every rifle will differ in MV and Accuracy loads.

Both excellent carts.

Good Luck

Reloader

Rl-25 with the 160 accubond gimes me 3077 fps average of 20 rnds and some damn good acuuracy .75" at 200yrds on good days. And it definately has power, just shot a bull moose at 200yrds and exited, complete pass throgh.
Elmerdeer

Rick, all rifles are individuals. I get over 3050 FPS from my 26" barreled Ruger No. 1 in 7 Mag. using a 175-grain Nosler Partition bullet, and 3400 from it using the 140-grain Nosler Partition. The loads which perfom this way are 70 grains of IMR 7828, and 71.5 grains of old Hodgdon surplus H4831 respectively.

But I will not certify that such loads would perform as well for others! Or even be safe in another rifle!

quote:

Originally posted by Rick 04:

So I'm looking for actual, no BS chronied loads people have got with their 140 and 160 grain loads in the 7mm rem mag. Also if you could state the powder your using for that load and barrel length.

Rick

Rick:

In my 7mm Mag. I never shot anything lighter than 154 grains. I chronographed the 154 grain Hornadays at 3066 fps and the 160 grain Speers at 3004 fps both with 66 grains of RL22. Hope that helps.

Dave

Personally I can't see making a purchase or change, strictly on gain 100 or 150 fps in MV...

two clicks on the old scope elevation will normally take care of any difference in point blank range....

I wouldn't wing a 270 to buy a 7 mm Mag.. nor would I wing a 7 Mag to buy a 270... I own both calibers...but picked each up when I liked that particular rifle, and the cost was real attractive at the time.. both on sale, post hunting season...

I agree with seafire on this one. I also find it amusing the folks that say going from 2900 to 3200 gains nothing but bash rounds that may be 2700 saying they are crap and won't do the job. I am not speaking of anyone her on this thread, I do not think, but have read many similar threads where only 1 is any good and the rest are crap. I have found most deer do not give a crap how I kill them, as long as it is a quick clean kill, and is,nt that what we are all after?

I've only loaded for one 7 mag, a Winchester M-70. With 160 bullets I had a hard time reaching 3000 fps. With 175s I got 3000 fps with the Remington Core Lokt, but not with any others. I've loaded for a bunch of different 270s and can always get 3100(+) fps with 130s and H4831 and I have been able to approach, and sometimes exceed 3000 fps with 150s using H4831, Rl22, or MR3100. These are all chronographed velocities. Of course all rifles are individuals and your mileage may vary...

I also agree with Seafire. I have owned two .270's, both Mannlicher-Schoenauer 20" barrel carbines, and one 7mm Rem. Mag.

The .270's did an excellent job form me, including during three years in Fairbanks AK. I don't have a .270 at present, but have no complaints concerning how they handled all game when loaded with 150-grain Nosler Partition bullets. Actually, IMO, a .270 is all that one needs for anything in North America except the great bearas, and for these, nothing is too big!!

Today, I reserve my 7mm Rem Mag. for elk and moose hunting, and use a 7X57mm for smaller game like deer.

My favorite load for the 7mm Rem. Mag. is the 160 grain Nosler Partition in front of 80 grains of H-870 and a Fed. 215 primer for an honest 3100fps. It is the only load I shoot (or need) in the 7mm Mag. Who could ask for more?

Never owned a .270.

I first worked up handloads for my 7 Mag nearly 40 years ago without the aid of a chrono (IMR4831).

Fifteen years ago I worked up some loads for my son's .280 with a chrono.

Guess what? With 140 grain bullets the .280 was within 150 fps of the the old 7 Mag loads. With 160s the difference was only 250 fps (IMR4350).

That said the 7MM Remington Mag is still my all-time favorite all-round cartridge.

I chrony'd some loads of mine before, mostly 150 grain loads. Have done the same with .270 loads, I find with a 24" tube on a .270 I could get 130's up to 3100 no problem. My 7mm can surpass that by almost 200fps, but it's also a 140gr. bullet to the .270's 130 and it's coming out of a 26" barrel.

IMO if my 7mm didn't outshoot my .270 handily, I'd probably still use the .270 for my deer hunting even with it's crappy stock and no-name barrel.

I get the following velocities out of my 26" barrel Win. Mod 70 7mag.3260fps with 140gr bullets,3220fps with 145gr bullets,3200fps with 150gr. bullets and 3140fps with 160gr. bullets.I have one pet load for my rifle,it's 65.3grs of IMR4350.

quote:

Originally posted by Baldhunter:
I get the following velocities out of my 26" barrel Win. Mod 70 7mag.3260fps with 140gr bullets,3220fps with 145gr bullets,3200fps with 150gr. bullets and 3140fps with 160gr. bullets.I have one pet load for my rifle,it's 65.3grs of IMR4350.

Your post just reminded of something I learned years ago, and that is some 7m/m magnums don't always do their best with heavy charges of slow burning powder. I have a model 70 classic that does its best work with medium-slow burning powders, and of those V-V N-160 is my favorite.

N-160, a powder with burning characteristics similar to the 4350 family, gives me the best accuracy while giving up about 50f/s. I've exceeded 3100f/s with this powder, but 3 1/2" groups suck and aren't much use for long range work. At 66.0 grains, I could get away with neck sizing every other reload, but much prefer F/L sizing on hunting loads where 100% dependability is a must. This load is MOA or better with 160 grain bullets, and gives an honest 3050f/s from my 26" tubed model 70.

I remember when H 1000 was all the rage in 7m/m mag, but I've never been able to duplicate others successes with it, and much prefer IMR 7828 to the former. Off topic I know, but I wanted to reinforce the idea that sometimes slow burners don't always do best in a magnum case.

SOME 7mm mag really like a 26" tube, and some it doesn't seem to matter much.

Here's a post from some time ago that may be relevant to this thread:

"In any discussion of the belted 7mm cartridges it is worth observing that their reputations were made in the 1950s and 1960s using the 175gr Nosler Partition over max loads of original 4831. For retained energy over distance and superior sectional density the 175gr Noslers are still a good choice. Their terminal performance is a matter of record for over 50 years.

My chrono'd loads with the Nosler 175 and IMR 7828 average 2990 from a 23" bbl, 2924 from a 24" bbl. Both these barrels are from the same maker, cut with the same reamer. Go figure.

There are probably better powders today than 7828, but I've been using it for over 20 years and it works for me."

When my #1s was a 7rem mag, getting 3100fps w/ 160grNPs or 3250fps w/ 140grNPs was pretty easy w/ RL22 & IMR7828.

Thanks for the input. I think I'll keep the 270 after all of the discusion. They are pretty close and I only would need a 140 grain projie out of the 7mm rem mag. The diff between the that and the 130 grain 270 load seems pretty minimal.

Cheers
Rick

quote:

I think I'll keep the 270 after all of the discusion.

Good choice.

quote:

The diff between the that and the 130 grain 270 load seems pretty minimal.

It is.

I'd make the switch only if my .270 was wanting in the accuracy department and the 7mm Rem Mag was what I wanted and a sweet deal to boot.

LWD

My 140's will max out at 3270, the 160's at 3050 and the 175's at 2907. I have mostly used H4831, 7828 annd RL22. The RL22 and 7828 will give a bit more speed with the heavies, H870 will go faster yet, but I couldn't find a load that would shoot very special with it. I shoot almost exclusively the RL22-175 NP load and have for years. Mine takes quite a bit more powder than many manuals show as max, as you know data for the 7Mag varies a lot, so I won't even say how much RL22 I load in mine.

Its often said 7mmRM offers little over the 270win,... like in the same way some say .300win offers little over the 30-06?