quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:
Alberta's data is a bit cherrypicked since the top velocity with 150's at equal pressures is a tad higher with the 7mm Rem than with the .30-06 (and somewhat higher with the 7mm Rem if you regard it as necessary to stick to SAAMI pressure limits for the two cartridges.)

Not really. With the same weight bullets fired at the same pressures, the 7m/m has a base surface area substantially smaller than the '06 base area, AND a longer frictional surface bearing on the bore intrerior. Less area for the powder gases to push on doesn't usually add up to a faster travelling bullet when operating at the same pressures, though under some circumstances it can.

Far from cherry Picking, I just went to the same weight of bullet in the tables of that Hornady book and found the listed recommended max handloading velocities for each round. then I noted the SD of those 7 m/m and .30 bullets and went to the ballistic tables of the same Hornady book to get the drops out to 100 yards at those listed max starting velocities.

That's hardly cherry-picking, folks.

At any rate as I said several times so far, those statistics I posted go a long way to explaining why lots of shooters found the old '06 such a good round....because they could mail a bullet of the same weight to an animal with essentially the same velocity and drop as the "magnum".

And you know, over more than 40 years of owning and/or working in gun stores, I can't ever, even once, recall a customer coming through the door and saying " I want a box of '06 (or 7m/m Mag) cartridges loaded with bullets of X.XX sectional density or ballistic coefficient. Nor did they come in and ask for bullets with x.xx SD or BC for loading their own cartridges. The ordinary handloader asked for bullets by diameter and "weight".

Nope, they all generally had a weight of bullet in mind which they wanted to shoot. And the bigger the game, usually the heavier weight bullets they asked for. The ones who didn't have a specific weight in mind would ask for "something for deer" (or whatever) at up to xxx yards.

Back when the 7m/m Mag was introduced, the rage wasn't for 150 grain 7 m/m bullets...it was for 160 grain ones. I doubt seriously the "designers" had modern low mass, high SD, streamlined VLD (or even just LD) monometal or other premium bullets in mind since pretty much from the beginning they were offering loads with up to 175 gr. bullets.

Anyway, as I said to start with, the velocity/drop approach is just ONE way to look at the comparison...a way I saw a lot of ordinary hunters who didn't fancy themselves ballistic geniuses chose to use.

If you feel a need to defend, laud, or otherwise bless the 7 m/m Mag, there are lots of ways to calculate and tabulate figures which will do that.

My attempt was to show why the '06 remained so popular in so many minds. Sorry if that makes any of you feel uneasy.

It doesn't seem to intimidate any of MY 7 m/m Mag rifles. Hopefully it won't terminally bother yours either.

If you know that other manuals produce different results and you do not factor that in, then it's cherrypicking.

I could care less for one over the other of the 7mmRM/30-06 comparison. Just the facts.

For hunting, Quintus said it well:

quote:

Chuck a sturdy bullet with a SD in the .230-.240 range from any case that will produce 2800 to 3400 fps and anything in the deer family is dead to 400 yards with reasonable shot placement.

That explains the success of all of the calibres.

Yet, there are also little differences, and averaged data is the best for seeing and appreciating the differences.

quote:

Originally posted by 416Tanzan:
If you know that other manuals produce different results and you do not factor that in, then it's cherrypicking.

.

Bull! If I was trying to prove something about either one, then, yes YOU might consider it cherry-picking.

But I wasn't trying to bless or curse either one. I was trying to point out why so many shooters continued to love the '06! No more, no less. It was not and is not my obligation to evaluate whether they were/are right or wrong, nor to evaluate and average all the data ever published about the two rounds.


If you want to do that, feel free. But it has nothing to do with the purpose of my original post.

quote:

Originally posted by ted thorn:
I have owned two 7RM rifles both were Weatherby MK V with plenty of tube length.

I loaded for years trying to find velocity that justified the heavier load and rifle.

Never did drink the coolaid and never was satisfied with the performance with my big sevens

Those who know me and hunt with me here know I pack an old -06 or a .270 for just about everything under the sun......sod poodles, ground hogs to elk

I'm with you Ted, never been a 7mm Mag fan, just thought the comparison should be as fair as possible (not that there was any attempt at bias). With the exception of brown bears and truly big grizzlies the 270 does all I need. A 150g Partition at 3000 fps (not a mild load) has worked for me for 40 years ... For deer a 243, 257 Roberts is plenty and have killed many elk as well.

quote:

A 150g Partition at 3000 fps (not a mild load) has worked for me for 40 years

And as Chuck pointed out, it would work at 2900fps, too.

quote:

Originally posted by chuck375:
The original spec for the 7mm Rem when it came out was a 175g bullet at 3000 fps from a 24" barrel. That's 300 Win Mag performance, not 30-06. If you love your 30-06 that's great, and with heavier bullets 200 and 220g it can do things the 7mm can't. With 180g and lighter bullets, the 7mm outperforms it, plain and simple.

Chuck "gets it",and so does 416 Tanzan.I can tell who has spent time behind both and who hasn't.

First off, it seems to me if you are going to compare the two cartridges,you do it with bullets of similar BC's....in the same weights the 7mm will trump the 30 calibers,ie a 150 gr in 7mm will trump a 150 in 30 caliber..and a 7 Rem Mag will easily start that bullet in excess of 3100 fps with goood handloads.Seen it many times.

The best comparison of a 150 gr 30 caliber would likely be a 120-130 gr 7mm,both of which are easily loaded in excess of 3300-3400 fps fps in a 7 Rem Mag....and if we boost bullet weight to 140 in the 7mm,and compare it to a 165 gr 30 caliber (similar BC's, look it up)we "know" that about 2900 fps is a top load in the 30/06,whereas the 140 can be easily driven to 3200-3300 fps in the 7 Rem Mag (see it in the Nosler manual if you read about it instead of actually owning the rifle and loading for it).

Anyone who has actually taken both to 300-600 yards, and actually shot them(instead of reading about it)will know which one shoots "flatter"...it is really no contest.

Load a 160-162 gr bullet in the 7 Rem Mag to around 3100(in some makes the BC's will exceed .600,) and the differences become very apparent. These bullets leave 165 and 180 gr 30's in the dust at distance,kill just as well on about anything,and you have to load the 165's to greater velocities than the 30/06 is capable of to keep up....ie, you can't do it and it takes a 30 caliber magnum to reach equivilent velocity and flight characteristics.

These loads are not excessive at all,are in line with what the cartridge is capable of, and very much in line with what I have gotten from several 7 Rem Mags,and spread out over several thousand rounds.I can toss in as many 30/06 rounds as well,and tell you I have seen exactly one 30/06 capable of hitting an honest 3100 fps with a 150...and 2900 is all the mustard with 165's from a 30/06.

Zeroed 3" high at 100 yards, a 140 gr from a 7 Rem Mag started at 3250,will be POA at 300 yards and only about 8" low at 400....a 160 started at 3100 fps from a 7 Rem Mag,and zeroed the same way, will be down only 10" at 400 yards,and will show exactly the same drop at 500-600 yards as a 180 gr 30 caliber bullet from a 300 Win Mag or Weatherby (about 48" in both cases). There is nothing that can be loaded in the 30/06 that keeps up.I know this from actually having shot all of them....not only on the range but at animals as well.

The 7 Rem Mag "kills" about like a 30/06 because that is exactly what it was designed to do....Les Bowman wildcatted the cartridge based off the 338 Win Mag to deal with the open country general BG hunting at his ranch near Cody. He noticed his open country elk hunters did not shoot very well with the 300 Magnums of the day due to excessive recoil, wanted a cartridge that shot in a flatter trajectory than the 30/06 (and 270 for that matter),but recoiled less than the 300 Weatherby's common for that day.He succeeded at both levels.

When someone tells me that a 7 Rem Mag holds no advantage over a 30/06 in terms of bullet flight and trajectory,I know he is likely reading books as opposed to actually having loaded for both cartridges and shot them both a good deal....to 300 yards they might look the same, but the ballistics of a properly loaded 7 Rem Mag will exceed those of a 30/06.

I like both cartridges....For the very heaviest of game, the 30/06 has the advantage of 200-220 gr bullets;but if I need that kind of power I would rather use a 375 myself.

The 270 is a great cartridge...it has a similar trajectory to a 7 Rem Mag but with lighter bullets.

quote:

I like both cartridges....For the very heaviest of game, the 30/06 has the advantage of 200-220 gr bullets;but if I need that kind of power I would rather use a 375 myself.

The 270 is a great cartridge...it has a similar trajectory to a 7 Rem Mag but with lighter bullets.

Properly argued, though it might gush a bit on the 7mm. 7mm's have quite a bit of fluctuation from rifle to rifle.

I would wordsmith a bit for my own situations:

"I like both cartridges....For the very heaviest of game, the 30/06 has the advantage of 200-220 gr bullets;but if I need that kind of power I would rather use a [416 Rigby with .289 SD, 2800fps] myself.

The 270 is a great cartridge...it has a similar trajectory to a 7 Rem Mag but with lighter bullets."
--
Which is why my wife uses a 270 on deer instead of a magnum of various flavors.

But as Chuck said, if you have a sturdy bullet at .240 SD, flying anywhere faster than 2800fps, then you are set for deer hunting out to 400 yards. Everyone has has gotten to know their rifle and chosen wind-resisting bullets will testify to the dramatic killing power of all of these cartridges.

A WHOLE - LOT - TO - DO - ABOUT - NOTHING. roger

Chuck "gets it",and so does 416 Tanzan.I can tell who has spent time behind both and who hasn't.

[/QUOTE]


For the last time for those of you who can't or won't read and understand English, I was not presenting those figures to praise the '06 in comparison to the 7 m/m Rem Mag.

I was showing what a Hornady loading book from back in the early days of the 7 m/m Mag showed, and which lots of handloader-shooters those days owned and were influenced by. That's part of understanding why the '06 is still highly popular, though certainly not the only reason.

As for having spent time with a 7 m/m Mag, I had (and still have and shoot) one of the very first Rem 7m/m mags ever to come off the Remington production line...certainly from the first month of production, and possibly the first week of production. (An employee grabbed it off the line and sent it to me before they were even available for distribution to gun shops.)

Before that I had both a .275 H&H (BY H&H) and a 7x61 S&H, as well as a couple of '06s. I have had plenty of time and shot plenty of game while hunting with both the big 7's and '06s.

So please don't lecture me or anyone else on how the two rounds "should" be compared. Been there, done that, probably well before most of you.


No matter how today's on-line ballistic "experts" feel the two rounds SHOULD be compared, that is not how they actually WERE often compared for about the first 20 years of the 7 m/m RM's life, at least not when under scrutiny by the great unwashed.

They looked at the 7 m/m RM in much simpler terms...what will it do that other cartridges with the same bullet weight won't do, out to 300, 400, or even 500 yards? The answer they read was essentially "Not Much".

Maybe they SHOULD have been more sophisticated like all the modern bean-field shooters who like to call themselves hunters but are really sitters. (I know, another big argument over opinion, but I for one will save that controversy for later.)

But the large majority of that day's shooters weren't that sophisticated and maybe still aren't. As soon as they found that a substantial part of the hyped velocity of the 7 RM with 150 and 160 grain bullets was hot gas, (as it is with almost all factory published ballistics from about 1930 until around 1990 when everyone suddenly appeared to have a chrongraph) the stampede for the new round ended.

The big 7s still sold well, but the "have to have" part of the rush was over.

I thought you guys would find the historical information interesting and useful in understanding why the old '06 wasn't abandoned for the new "wonder" round. But apparently I was wrong in that assumption.

Instead, at least some vocal fragment of you want to believe that through my supposed lack of experience and and abject stupidity I can't understand the "correct" way to compare the cartridges and, through that ignorance, I am unfairly trashing the 7 m/m RM.

Fine. Believe whatever you want if it makes you feel superior, or less troubled, or secure in YOUR choices. Neither of us will change the history of either the 7RM or the '06, both fine hunting rounds.

Alberta sorry if you were offended by my post.It was not directed at you, per se.Mostly I was arguing with what the numbers seem to tell us, because they can be misleading....we can prove almost anything we want if the right data is refernced.

I consider both calibers to be (obviously) excellent,and will admit the differences may be "small", but exist nevertheless.I've hunted with both.

Facts are what they are and they are not always demonstrated fully by what's contained in the tables.That was really my point.

Eastcoaster -

I certainly agree wholeheartedly with that point. And like everything else where the truth isn't adhered to fairly well all the time, it both helps manufacturers sometimes, and hurts them other times.

Luckily in this instance it has not destroyed or severely diminished the popularity of either the "Big 7" or the '06, and we have both cartridges and rifles firing them available for use when their individual strengths are what we either need or simply prefer.