Hi, I was wondering if anyone has any 175 grn loads for a short barrelled(18.5")Model 7.Thanks. Bruce

The 175 gr. bullet is so long that it creeps into the powder space of the 7-08 and you can't get the velocity....Much better choice is the 150 or 160 gr. premiums or GS HV....

The 7x57 is large enough to get substantial velocity with proper powders with the 175 gr. bullets, as is the 280 and 7 mag.., not the 284 for the same reason...

Does not mean you can't do it, just that it has proven less than satisfactory whereas the 150 gr. bullet in a GS HV or North Fork will do even better than the 175 under the circumstances.

Dont know if this will be of any help to you but I use 168 grain sierra matchkings with 40 grains of varget with good results & still plenty of room left in the case of my 7mm-08 & i'm about to increase it to 41 grains(varget performs superbly in the 7mm-08)

For your short barrel i'de be using the fastest burning powder that is suitable.

Any reason why your using a 175 grain bullet,your short barrel would suit a lighter bullet & a faster burning powder & you would get more velocity & maybee better down range energy retention.

I like the 140 & 150 grain bullets in my 7mm-08 & think they perform superbly although the 168 grain matchkings are great too,I also use 140 grain balistic tips,150 grain coreloks 150grain matchkings & 150 grain gamekings.

Good luck

Alan

This is exactly the reason I abandoned the 7mm-08! It is a great cartridge but the gun-makers do not allow the magazine and throating to accept the heavier 7mm bullets for this caliber for proper seating to get the advertised ballistic advantage! Too bad - this would be a good caliber for the heavier 7mm bullets - in my opinion.

[ 06-20-2003, 00:40: Message edited by: sizzlebird ]

Sizzlebird,
That is whole point of the 7-08 a short action compact gun, but you cannot make a silk purse out of a sows ear...It and the 284 are grand cartridges with lighter bullets that don't take up powder space, but if you open the actions up or use a std. length action, you just defeated the purpose of the two short calibers...

Thats why I shoot a 7x57 in a Brno 22F Mauser, where I can seat any 175 gr. bullet half way to the cannalure or to a depth of .270 to .284...That also gives me the same powder capacity as a 7x57 Imp.

Ray, I have thought on this issue many times over the past few years and it was hard for me to let go of the 7mm-8 that I had. I understand what you are saying about the whole point of having a short action - and I do like short actions and their cartridges. It's just that some shooters(and I am one of them), tend to lean towards the heavier bullets in any given cartridge/caliber. The 7mm-08 can push a 175gr. Grand Slam bullet at a respectable velocity out of a 22 or 24 inch barrel and my hope when I bought the gun(a Remington 700 BDL), was that I could shoot these heavier slugs and thereby avoid having to go to a larger case and therefore keeping the muzzle blast and recoil at a level that I prefer. Even being able to single load one and put just one additional such cartridge at the top of the magazine(crimping at the factory cann.), would have satisfied me! I have no desire to alter a factory short-action rifle. I like them too much to go to that sort of trouble. What I have decided to do is to go with the .308 because it is inherently designed in factory guns to house a heavier bullet without this kind of trouble.

[ 06-20-2003, 23:55: Message edited by: sizzlebird ]

It's interesting, but when you look at the data from the different loadin manuals, you get a range from 2300 FPS to almost 2650 FPS with a 175 gr. bullet in the 7mm08. Makes one think a bit.
However, I would estimate that one might reasonably expect somewhere around 2400 to 2450 FPS would be feasable. Considering that the old 7x57 literally made it's reputation with 175 gr. round nosed bullets at 2250 to 2300 FPS, maybe that same weight bullet just might be the ticket where reasobaly close shots requiring deep penetration are the order of the day.
"Karamojo" Bell once said that he thought the "perfect" elephant rifle just might be the .308 Winchester with a 220 gr. bullet, something that the "eggspurts" in the gun rags say won't work. Those of you with experimental natures get a copy of the One book, One load that has data from literally everybody and try it. I reached 2300 FPS with no problems on a very hot Arizona summer day. Accuracy? From a 1 in 12" Winchester model 70, groups were in the .375 to .50" range, and that's something else the "eggspurts" say won't work. Sometimes, it's interesting to fly in the face of convention and prove, if to noone else but yourself, that something isn't what the so called experts say.
my, my, my.
Don't flame me, try it for yourselves.
Paul B.

Paul B: "One Book, One Load".......where do i get a copy of this? i looked on Amazon and Booksamillion and they don't have it.

To PaulB: Now that is the kind of thinking and the kind of shooting that I prefer -as long as it makes sense and is safe. Read the books, think for yourself and try what you like! I have always thought that the perfect all-around rifle cartidge was either a 7x57 or a .308 with a normal-weight 24-inch barrel! It is interesting that our D.O.D. ballisticians and engineers basically started with the 7x57 in designing the 30-06 cartridge - and people and gun-nuts are still touting the advantages of the 57mm size case as opposed to the larger stuff which most everyone seems to be hung up on these days. Why not stoke the .308 with a 200 or 220 grainer - sounds good to me and you'll find in researching this stuff that the twist in the .308s and .30-06s is plenty fast enought to stabalize these wonderful heavier slugs. I've always wanted to try the 338-08 myself. Supposedly, Chuck O'Connor came up with the idea of necking up the 7mm Mauser case to accept .338 sized bullets.

[ 06-27-2003, 23:38: Message edited by: sizzlebird ]

I have never worried about not being able to use 175gr 7mm bullets since I don't use them.A quality 160gr bullet (or even lighter weight premiums such as failsafes,barnes x's or even partitions)is all that you need in the 7mm bore for game up to including moose and elk.

The 160 gr and 175 gr Speer Magtips may be the best suited heavies to use in a 7MM 08. They have an larger window of reliable expansion. I believe it goes all the way down to 1600 fps. They are unusually compact and have a moderate BC. In addition they have a reinforced jacket at the base. They were originally designed for short necked magnums. Think it over.

I like the heavier bullets as they provide deep reliable penetration without extreme expense. I load both the 175 grain Hornady spire point and the Speer Mag tip in my 7x57 now for my night hog hunting and like the results I am getting. I was using AA4350 but went to IMR 4064 to reduce flash and am pushing the bullets to 2350 fps out of my 19 inch barrel. I consider this to make the mid capacity 7mm's into solid 200 yard all game guns.

Thanks everyone for you replies.I just like to use the heaviest bullet weight for calibre.Paul B. can you tell me details of book "One Book,One Load".I sent you private message about it. Bruce

7mm Man-The heaviest bullet weight does not always give the best penetration or retained weight.Bullet construction is far more important in this respect.A 140gr failsafe or barnes x will penetrate just as well as a 175gr partition with less recoil and bullet drop.

Rickt300, I sent you a e-mail to your profile e-mail address but it was returned undelivered.What I was asking you was what was your 19" barreled 7x57 like in terms of increased muzzle flash/report and increased recoil, etc.I have always been interested in having a short-barreled 7x57(the shortest I've owned has been 22").I have a military Mauser(Mexican 1910 7x57) sitting in the cupboard that has a stuffed barrel which when I can afford to, will probably put a short barrel on it.Thanks in advance. Bruce

Hi Bruce
You can order the "one book/one caliber"
from http://www.loadbooks.com/
And Yes they have the 175gr Speer bullet and the 175gr Sierra loaded in it.

I have only shot two mooses with the 160gr Barnes X in the 7mm-08Rem so far. This year I have loaded some 170gr Oryx for the coming season to see if there are any difference
Good shooting/
PerN

[ 06-30-2003, 21:23: Message edited by: PerN ]

The barrel began as a 24incher and I finally got around to shortening it to make it a bit handier getting out of trucks and in treestands. The recoil did not noticably change but certain powders such as Winchester 760 exhibited major flash and I believe this powder would have done the same in the 24 inch barrel. I don't feel that the noise is as loud as my 30-06. I found 4064 to be a quieter powder with less flash than all others with 3031 making second place.

7MM man -

Don't give up on a 175 gr in a shot bbl 7-08. All you need is a short 175 gr bullet. Hawk Bullets derive thier BCs from ogive rather than spires and you can order them with thin jackets which makes them even shorter. These thin jackets are ideal for the velocity range in question, expansion is fantastic and weight retention is over 90%. A Hawk 175 should be shorter than any one else's 160 and close to a speer 145.

Ideally, someone should manufacture 7MM 175's with tungsten cores...then we would have flat based 140's that weigh 185 grs!!

Hi, The other thing I forgot to mention is that 2200-2400 fps is perfectably acceptable for me. Bruce

Paul B and Sizzlebird,
If those limits are acceptable to you and they should be, then the 7-08 will do the job...I would reason that 2200 to 2300 FPS to be about tops with a deep seated bullet and that will certainly kill anything on this side of the pond.

500 grs.,
I call it the way I see it, strictly from a bullet performance standpoint, the GS custom is about the best game bullet I have ever shot..I have mine picked up and delivered to me by my PH's and hunters I send to Port Elizabeth.. I have ordered them several times without any problems...I never gave it a thought as to their delivery problems, which apparantly are quite serious with some of the posters on this board.

Funny thing,

Isn't a 170 gr. bullet at 2200 fps often referred to as a 30/30 Winchester? Many consider this round barely adequete for deer,what were you going to hunt with this anyway?.....Big K

Big K-I agree fully.2200fps with a 175gr bullet seems like a real waste of the 7mm-08 cartridge,

Hasn't the 30-30 taken every big game animal in North America? So has the 175 in the 7x57 as far as I know and done it without massive meat damage while giving deep penetration. The truth is that one rarely needs more cartridge and the ballistics these two give are good enough for 90 % of all hunting as long as you can shoot. Go ahead and burn more powder, make more meat worthless and deafen yourself, it's your life.

You can drop down another step to the 6.5 with 160 grain, in the 6.5x54 Mannlicher or 6.5x55 Mauser, get the same penetration as the 175/7mm with even less noise and recoil. This antique load has the same paper ballistics as the .30-30 but is an infinitely superior killer, an object lesson in the value of sectional density, even Elmer Keith allowed that it was not totally useless !!!

Rickt300,

Sure, you could kill a grizzly with a 30/30.( I have a whole gun cabinet full of Model 94's. )You can also kill one with a .22 if you do your part.However, lowering a 7mm-08 to this level of performance is neither neccessary nor beneficial. Why try to drive a 175 gr. 7mm slug from stem to stern through an animal when a lighter, faster(which equals flatter shooting) slug like a 150 gr. Barnes x-bullet will do exactly the same thing???
Ever hear of shocking power? That's why we need to keep that speed up! And accurate shot placement will still save the steaks.....Big K

Flatter shooting isn't that big a deal where most shots are taken inside of 200 yards and at any rate I will not be shooting "stern to stem" on any large animal with some fancy solid copper hollow point. Would I choose a 175 grain bullet at 2500 fps over a 150 grain bullet at 2700 fps for elk up to 250 yards, you bet every time. Would I use either load past 300 yards,no.

Paul

the Norse and Swedes have used the 6.5x55 with 160 grain on their "elg" same as our moose for over a century. Their Arctic explorers used it on polar bear. Just get under 200 yards and it will do fine on elk.