I am looking for actual experience(s) with the 7 X 61, both good and bad. I don't mean to be "smart", but I can read the loading tables and I understand what they tell me. I have always thought the 7 X 61 was a pretty neat round, but I already have the 7RM. However, I have located a custom 7 X 61 and it intrigues me, thus the question...

Are these cartridges ballistic twins? Is there any benefit to either one over the other besides factory vs. handloading? (I handload for everything anyway...)

Thanks, guys.

The 7x61 will basically do anything the 7mag will do with a touch less powder. The 7 mag case 4-5grs more capacity it's listed max pressure is about 4000psi higher. Handloads no reason to load them to different pressure. QL calls the difference at equal pressure to be abour 35fps advantage to the 7mag wil 160s.

When I was working up my first 7mm wildcat looking at all the available cases and there performance the 7x61 had what I calculated as the optimum point. Above that capacity gain for capacity increase got to be less and less.

Big advantage of the 7mag is factory ammo, cheaper headstamp brass and dies etc. Resale of the 7mag would probably be higher.

Both are excellent choices go with what makes you happy.

Over the years I have owned and hunted with about half a dozen or more of each.

There is no practical difference between them at all except the 7m/m Remington Mag is still available in lots of different factory rifles to more easily suit one's fancy, ammo is available all over the world, and ammo can be found in just about any shop or store that sells ammo at all here in North America.

I've no experience with 7x61 but have with the 280 Ross.

If it is in good order, and you handload, and have cases and can locate the dies. And accept that if you leave you ammunition at home you can't buy any....the buy it!

At least, unlike the Ross, it uses .284" bullets.

I built a 7x61 in '82 and it was my go to rifle for abot 20 years. Only reason I up-graded ( ) to my 7x57 was the areas I now shoot and the weight of the 7.61. Possibly the better of the 7mm magnms in many ways.

I am just one guy,
But I have loaded for more rifles and cartridges than I can remember.
The 7mm rem mag is the round I would say that has been most accurate cartridge i have used.
I had a 7mmstw for a while and it was great.
somthing about those big 7s.
It,s also a great hunting round of course, and a guy can sort of pic 1 load and use it for any thing from lopes to elk.
I like a 160 grain acubond...tj3006

quote:

Posts: 24 | Registered: 28 March 2012

Well, logic says Rem Mag, but being one that likes to be different (I have a .276 Dubiel Mag that I like), I'd go 7x61 just to have something different.
After all, my .338/334 OKH is being finished next week. It won't do a darn thing a .338 Winnie won't do, but it's different. Elmer would be happy, I think.

If you want SOMETHING DIFFERENEnt, knock yourself out. Hell, I built a 6.5 x 300 Wby. Shoots great and kills. NOT any better than my 06's, 3 Winnie, 338 or even 257, but "I" have one. As a rifle "afficianado" sense does not fit into the picture---it's just fun. I sent a 35
whelen that I bought on these forums off to the engraver today. Did I need it ? Hell no, but it is going to be one fine rifle when done.

I had to be different, that is why I run the 7x61!

The 7 Rem Mag in my Blaser Attaches' has been my primary caliber for quite some time, and I own a lot of rifles :-)

It shoots .375" with factory 160gr Accubonds, and has taken probably 30 heads of game up to about 750 lbs. Ammunition is available everywhere, and there is a myriad of bullet weights and types loaded by every manufacturer.

Basic answer---They are twins. It is your money so get what you want. Better yet have both.

[I have no personal experience with the S&H, but I always thought it was a neat and efficient looking cartridge.

What I do know is that Bill Morkel, the African professional, used one for years as his plains game rifle.

To my mind the cost considerations is unfortunately what would limit me from taking the plunge...

Used the 7x61 S&H cartridge for years. Could achieve a genuine 3000fps with Sierra 160gr bullets and Norma factory ammunition gave a tad under 3100fps with the same weight bullet from the two 26" barreled Schultz and Larsen rifles I have owned.

A very efficient and accurate cartridge and easy to load to top velocity with. Never had a 7mm Rem Mag but some seem to find it a little difficult to reach top velocities with the 7mmRM. Maybe it is just that the Danish made S&L rifles are so well made and have consistently good barrels that the 7x61 has always proven to be an outstanding cartridge in these rifles. I understand from early correspondence I had with Hornady that Joyce Hornady shot a record book moose with the 7x61 cartridge. The cartridge does come with good credentials.

quote:

Originally posted by Divernhunter:
Basic answer---They are twins. It is your money so get what you want. Better yet have both.

Absolutely true. I mentioned before that I have had numerous of each over the years. What I did not mention is that I still have three 7m/m RemMags, and one 7x61 S&H (And a 7m/m Wbee).

Interesting is that the 7x61 S&H cartridge was first introduced in North America in the Danish S&L rifle. But, by the last years of S&L sales here, that rifle was offered in 7 m/m Rem. Mag.

I have one of those 7mmRem Mag Shultz & Larsen rifles even now. I like the rifle, and I like the ammo which matches and/or very, very slightly exceeds 7x61 ballistics with max handloads in either one. One thing I really like is having the nice S&L rifle, while being able to buy and use the Remington ammo which is likely the most comonly used 7 m/m Mag sporting ammo in the world.

In the field, other than ammo availability there is simply nothing to make one choose either round over the other. All the ballistic differences are between the user's ears, not in their physical performances on game.

----------------------------------------

quote:

Originally posted by Doubless:
I am looking for actual experience(s) with the 7 X 61, both good and bad. I don't mean to be "smart", but I can read the loading tables and I understand what they tell me. I have always thought the 7 X 61 was a pretty neat round, but I already have the 7RM. However, I have located a custom 7 X 61 and it intrigues me, thus the question...

Are these cartridges ballistic twins? Is there any benefit to either one over the other besides factory vs. handloading? (I handload for everything anyway...)

Thanks, guys.

Many of the answers you are going to get or have gotten are based on personal favorites rather than dispassionate consideration of ALL the facts.

And even the original question's choices are a choice between "the common thing" and "something different"

The problem with something diffferent is that it IS different.

"Popular things" are often popular because they are effective and because they are popular they are cheaper and easier to repair/replace.

Different for just the sake of being different is really just an elaborate way of being stupid

7mmMag is common as dirt and some people regard that as a flaw.

Exotic just for the sake of being exotic? No Thanks.