Morning all,

Have been asked by friend to "build" him something to shoot driven wild-boar, stags and roebuck with.

He wants a 7mm Rem Mag, in a 700 SPS (cause he likes mine). But, mine is out of the box. He wants a shorter barrel, due to shooting in very narrow shooting lanes, between 5m - 75m, so no need for the additional barrel length.

Out of the box, its got a "26 barrel.

Question: what length can I bring it down to, without sacrificing accuracy out to say 150m? 22"?

Orvar

you will not sacrifice accuracy at any length legal for a long gun....16" for a rifle.

personally if I wanted a short barreled 7-Mag it would be 20 inches......22" max!

My wife uses a Browning BAR 7mm RM, with a 20" barrel. The gun looses about 200 FPS compared to a 24" barrel with the same load. It didn't seam to matter to a couple truck loads of whitetails and a halve dozen bears.

Seems counter productive to me to chop off to shorter than 24 inches. Especially in an overbore case like a 7mm rem. If I wanted a short barreled rifle it would be at least 30 cal or even 338. The easy way to go would be 30/06.

quote:

Originally posted by DIs:
Seems counter productive to me to chop off to shorter than 24 inches. Especially in an overbore case like a 7mm rem. If I wanted a short barreled rifle it would be at least 30 cal or even 338. The easy way to go would be 30/06.

OR a 9.3x62 since the quarry is boar. At a maxuim range of +or- 75M a high velocity 7mm Magnum would not even be in considered.

Both my 7mm Rem Mags have 26" barrels and that is how they get the higher velocities. If he wants a short barrel 7mm rifle I think he would be better off with a 280 or 7mm-08. The 7mm Mag is going to have an excessive amount of muzzle blast from slow powders not getting a full burn. The 7mm-08 would be a compact and quick handling rifle that would better suit his hunting scenario. The quality of the barrel will affect accuracy not the shorter length.

Thanks all for your comments

Issue I have to contend with

1. Its for use in France... which has a bunch of funny (read: stupid) laws around calibers, and while available, the more "american" calibers are hard to find.

2. The 7RM was his choice, I would have done it in 270 Win, or even a 6mm variant... but thats me.

Thanks again!

I usually use 23 or 25 inches. I've only gone shorter with a short action .350Rem Mag for pigs. 23 inches on a 7mm Rem Mag was always hand enough for me but the only thick stuff I hunt is patches of mesquite and juniper. The rest is pretty open.

How about some data instead of "I wouldn't do that" or "twenty inches is too short!"?

G&A Nov 1981
7mm Rem Mag. 150 Nosler
Barrel..Velocity
26".......3185
24".......3131
22".......3035
20".......2951


G&A July 1989
.280 Remington. 150 factory
Barrel..Velocity
22".......2786
21".......2735
20".......2708

Pretty clearly, the 7mm Magnum is still markedly superior to the .280 in a 20" barrel - at least with the .280 factory load.



.

quote:

Originally posted by DIs:
Seems counter productive to me to chop off to shorter than 24 inches. Especially in an overbore case like a 7mm rem. If I wanted a short barreled rifle it would be at least 30 cal or even 338. The easy way to go would be 30/06.

Almost word for word what I was going to post. What a waste to go shorter than 24" on a 7mag. Defeats the purpose and what the caliber can do. Go 30.06 and slap a 21" tube on it. Push 180 partitions or 200 ABs over as much Re22 that will fit in the case, use a mag primer and go hunting.

24 or 26-inch barrels are fine, but if you are going to go shorter, why not just go with a 7/08 or something? You can get a shorter, lighter rifle that is more efficient on powder. A magnum needs a long barrel to compete with shorter cartridges. A short belted magnum is counter-productive.

Based on those velocities and just handling a variety of rifles I too would think that IF it was going to be done 22 inch would be quick pointing enough and still retain some mag punch too. As has been stated going to much shorter tends to negate the Mag. And if it loaded up it might have some blast at the shooters face too LOL!

quote:

Originally posted by TX Nimrod:
How about some data instead of "I wouldn't do that" or "twenty inches is too short!"?

G&A Nov 1981
7mm Rem Mag. 150 Nosler
Barrel..Velocity
26".......3185
24".......3131
22".......3035
20".......2951


G&A July 1989
.280 Remington. 150 factory
Barrel..Velocity
22".......2786
21".......2735
20".......2708

Pretty clearly, the 7mm Magnum is still markedly superior to the .280 in a 20" barrel - at least with the .280 factory load.



.

Excellent post.

What the customer wants 7 RM with a short barrel. Let him pick how short and how much muzzle blast to contend with. Nate

A 20-inch 7 mag would be impressive to shoot at night.

For the shooting you outline a Tikka T3 in 7x64 should prove ideal. In my view the Tikka is a better rifle than the Remington and the 7x64 should not be a problem with the French authorities. 7x64 ammunition is likely to be available in France.
I don't have to hand Normas catalogue but I doubt the x64 is very much behind the Rem mag and in barrel lengths of 22 inches the blast from the x64 will be less.
This may not be what you want to read but it's what I recommend and would purchase.
Whatever is settled on
Waidmannsheil

Nice BigNate......did they do any accuracy testing as they reduced the barrel?

The question needs to be asked, if you're gonna end up shooting what is performance wise, a 7-08 or a .280, why endure the extra recoil, weight, and muzzle blast? I've never shot a driven boar in my life but my son routinely kills hogs down in TX with a 7-08. I can't imagine the 200fps loss from the shorter barrel is gonna have any effect on the final results so why be bothered by the negative aspects of toting a magnum.
Inquiring minds would like to know.

26"

Drop to a short action cartridge like a 308 or 7-08 for a shorter barrel

quote:

Originally posted by DIs:
Seems counter productive to me to chop off to shorter than 24 inches. Especially in an overbore case like a 7mm rem. If I wanted a short barreled rifle it would be at least 30 cal or even 338. The easy way to go would be 30/06.

quote:

did they do any accuracy testing as they reduced the barrel?

Short barrels are inherently more accurate then long barrels. Just ask any bench rest shooter. A short fat barrel will be the stiffest, hence the most stable.

In a hunting rifle, you will never see a difference in accuracy between 26" and 22", but you will definatly see a difference in velocity.