7mm mag. 160 gr. bullet

R

rnhunter

Guest
I was wondering what the opinion is on a solid long-range bullet for 7 mag, 160gr. Nosler doesn't make a BT for 160's. What is the best option for long range accuracy? I have always shot Sierra BT but I just had my 7 mag re-barreled with a 26" and want to reach out and touch something, if you know what I mean. I value your input so let me have it. Thanks
 
Your best bet will be to check the ballistic charts in the back of your reloading books and do a comparsion for velocity, bullet drop, wind drift and decide which is best for your requirements. As for the BT design, it does not enter the picture very much until you are over 500-600 yards over the flat base bullet design.
As for "reaching out and touching someone" that can be any distance from 300 yards to 1000 yards depending on your shooting skills.

RELH
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-01-06 AT 11:07PM (MST)[p]RELH, I guess I should be a little more clear. I am looking for a hunting bullet.I would not consider shooting at irresponsible distances at game but I do like to see what I can do at the range out at 5- 600yds.I know the nosler partitions are great hunting bullets but how do they hold up at longer ranges 3-400yds.
 
Try the 140 or 160 Accubond. Shooting a healthy load behind a 140 currently out of my rifle. Very flat shooting at the distance you mentioned, took a bull with it at 400 yards last fall with excellent results. Wouldn't be afraid to shoot one with it as far as I can comfortably shoot given the right conditions.
 
i have a 7mag and my intent of the rifle was the same you are having: reach out there a ways! i compared 140 and 160 accubonds and, all though the 160 has a higher BC, the 140 is leaps and bounds above the 160 in total drop. if you are looking at just punching paper, look at the Berger VLD, you may have to single shot it as it needs to be touching the lands but i have heard of remarkable accuracy with these bullets.


also, check out longrangehunting.com lots of experienced long range shooters there!
Casey
 
Rnhunter;

I do not use a 7mm, but have used the Nosler Partition in 25-06 and 300 win. Mag. they work great out at the extended ranges. good expansion and exit hole.
give them a try, and if your gun likes them for accuracy, you found your long range load. If your gun does not give you the accuracy you need, there are other very good controlled expansion bullets on the market you can try in order to get the best load for your 7mm rifle.
Good luck;
RELH
 
Osok & Coues, Hey if you guys don't mind will you share your loads with me on the 140gr. accubond. I would love to try them. i know the Nosler handbook has a very hot load for the 140's using IMR4350. I hear RL22 & 4831 are good powders.
 
Casey, thanks, I will start in that ballpark. I love to hear about that kind of accuracy & velocity combined. you must be a fellow AZ boy trying to cover all the open country such as myself. Daryl
 
hey i made a mistake... the load i just posted is the one that i use 140 accubonds out of my 270wsm.... had a brain fart!


the best accuracy i have gotten from my 7mag is 65 grains of r22 at .723... but that is a untuned load before i did the trigger and floated the barrel on my remington model 700... should tighten up now.

yes i am a az boy, hunt mostly coues and elk. but this past week killed my first javelina and mountaion lion! the lion took a 140 accubond from my 270 ( not my 270 wsm) in the back at about 20 feet! gotta have all the fast, flat shooting rifle for those long shots ( 270, 270 wsm, 7mag, 7RUM, 25-06, 243)
Casey
 
Congrats, on the lion Casey, that is very sweet. thanks again for sharing the info. with me.
OSOK was wondering if you have had any pressure issues shooting the 70grs RL22.
 
At 70.5 the groups opened up slightly and primers were starting to flatten, at 70 grains there is no signs.
 
The 160 grain Nosler Accubond is an AWESOME bullet. I get tremendous accuracy in my 7mm Rem Mag and a buddy gets terrific accuracy with 180s in his 300 Win Mag.

Mine held 3" or less at 320 yards in several long range testing sessions. I shoot a stout load of H1000 powder, Rem brass and CCI250 primers.

Used this bullet to kill a large cow elk at 378 yards last December. Bullet broke the near shoulder, jellied the lungs and then broke the leg bone as it exited the opposite side. I wouldn't hesitate to shoot this bullet again at a large bull.

You can try 140s if you like, but the purpose of a "magnum" cartridge is to shoot "heavy" bullets at high velocity. Most importantly though, shoot the bullet that shoots most accurately in YOUR rifle as long as it is "game worthy".

Have fun!

Firehawk
 
Firehawk, You surely bring up the real beauty of the 7mag. I have shot the 160 Sierra for quite some time,loading it up to 3000fps with good accuracy. I guess the question is how much velocity do you really need which in turn can take some of the error out of long-range shooting.I like the idea of getting 3200-3300fps with the 140's but surely like the punch of a 160gr.I am little hesitant to use 140's on elk but previous posts seem to prove otherwise. What's a guy to do?
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-06-06 AT 08:26AM (MST)[p]I think it comes down to asking yourself what you expect the primary duty of your rifle to be. For me I went with the 7 mag over other choices like the 7UM, 300WM, 300UM because I figured 90% or more of it's duty will be geared towards deer. Then I went and popped it cherry on an elk, go figure. ;)

I like the relatively light recoil out of the hot 140 grain load I'm shooting now and honestly as confident as I am in the way it shoots I don't feel I need to step up in weight for anything I hunt unless I was to happen upon the notion of wanting to kill a moose which I currently don't have at this point and time.

If the rifle was primarily an elk rifle I would probably go with the 160's, they are supposed to retain more energy and beyond 400 yards I believe trajectories are very comparable.
 
go with the 175 gr. bullet it can down an elk at 500 yards and then you have to start elevating your gun but it is a good bullet to use.
 
I shoot 62gr IMR 4831 and 160 accubonds, and 63gr RL22 with 160 accubonds... CCI250 primers, Winchester cases.

Both produce roughly half inch groups or less in my bone stock SS Rem 700, the only thing I've done to it is tweak the trigger... 160 Sierra GK with the above loads also produce half inch groups or better... Not sure of the exact velocity, but should be in the 3000fps range. These are not real hot loads by anymeans but shoot well in most conditions. All I know is a 160gr bullet will put a serious hurt'n on an elk about as far away as a guy should be shoot'n at one. ;)
 
in my opinion, if you need a 160 gr bullet, you oughta move up to a .300 mag. 160 is just too much bullet for that small o' bore. too long, too much drag in the lands, drop like a rock. just because someone makes a big bullet for a caliber doesn't mean it's a good option. someone used to make a 165 for .277 bore. totally useless. like chunkin' rocks. a 7 mag will toss that much lead better than a .270, but it's still too much bullet.
 
RLH, I have to disagree with that. The 160 grain has a better ballistic coefficient, and may drop a couple inches more at 400 yards, but it definitely does not "drop like a rock." With the higher ballistic coefficient, it also will drift much less in the wind, and that is a more significant advantage than the very slight flatter trajectory of the lighter bullets. I would say if you don't use at least a 160 in a 7 Mag, then you ought to move down to a 280 or a 7/08. No sense in shooting a magnum without taking advantage of the larger case capacity by using the heavier bullets.
 
what's a 160 gonna shoot? maybe 2800 fps? that's what i shoot my '06 with 165's. my .300 mag is 3200+. if you wanna shoot heavy bullets, don't use a long skinny one. use a fat one. take alla that ballistic coefficient, sectional density, etc. and chunk it. speed is what gets results. look at the ballistic arc of a 7 mag with 160's. after 200 yds. it's horrible. before 200 yds it's pathetic slow. a 7 mag was made to shoot 120s', 130's, 140's and maybe 154's, real fast, real flat and hit hard when it got there. it wasn't made to shoot a long heavy bullet. you hafta stay inside what the case/bore diameter/barrel twist/bullet weight combo will work well with. if they made a 220 gr 7mm bullet would ya use it? if you need more than 150 gr in anything less than .30 cal., you need to move up to a bigger bore. the 7 mag is a great round. if you stay inside it's realistic limitations. a 160 wouldn't even be a good choice in an stw or any of the other real hotrod 7mm's. you're trying to make the cartridge something it ain't. stick with what will work well in that cartridge. if you need big bullets to get the job done, get a bigger gun.
 
160's at 3000+ isn't much to ask from what I've seen. With my current rifle I wouldn't be suprised if it'd push them around 3100.
 
Heck I'm shooting 150's out of my 270 Win. and I just recently got a box of 160 grain Partitions to try in it. Haven't loaded any up yet but I'm sure they'll do just fine. I didn't have any problem shooting an antelope at 300 yards with a 150 grain Ballistic Tip, with no need to hold over.
 
160's will shoot fine in a .270. unless you have some real weird barrel twist anyway. they'll just be reeeeeaaalllll sssllloooowwwwww. 160's out of a 7 mag will shoot fine. i just see why you'd wanna handcuff the cartridge with a long skinny bullet. let it breath and go fast.
 
RLH,

I believe when you start a 160 grain .284 bullet out of a barrel at 3000fps give or take a few, you will have terrific trajectory withing "normal" hunting ranges. Beyond say 400 yards, the 160 grain bullet compared to a 140 grain bullet of similar construction, will actually hold its trajectory better and also resist the wind drag better. So, for long range hunting, the heavier bullets are actually better.

The longer 160 grain bullet will hit harder, penetrate better, and "buck" the wind better than it's lighter bullet counterpart flying at faster speeds.

Put the "real" data into a ballistics program and see what it really does. Don't use the "ballistics charts" on the back of an ammo box or in a magazine. Download DallanC's pointblank software for free, figure out the starting velocities and what the Ballistic Coefficient is of the specific bullet, and enter the data. You will be surprised to see how awesome a 160 grain bullet is in a 7mm Rem Mag.

140 grain bullets in 7mm are perfect for my 7mm-08 though.

Firehawk
 
Good post Firehawk. Nice to see that there is somebody who understands what I'm talking about. In my opinion, the only advantage with a 140 out of the 7 Mag, instead of a 160, is less recoil. So if you want light recoil, use the 140, but don't try to convince people that the lighter bullet is better for long range shooting.
 
you can data me to death, it won't change my mind. 7mm is a pretty small diameter bullet. so is a .270, 6.5mm, 6mm, etc. they're made for shooting fairly light bullets. you create a buncha drag, therefore pressure, when you try to load heavy bullets in a skinny barrel. if you need a 160 gr bullet, get a gun that is made to shoot that heavy of a bullet. a 160 will shoot fine from a 7mm. just not as a fine as out of a rifle with a bigger hole in the barrel. 160's and 175's are right on the edge of what is reasonable for a 7 mag. there are 4 cartridges based on the .458. the .264 mag, the 7 mag, the .338 and the .458. the 7 mag and the.264 have a near identical case design, only thing different is the bore. with a .264 a 140 gr is a little too long for my liking. they shoot ok, but you don't realize the speed that the thing was designed for. shoot 129's and smaller and it is a hotrod. same with a 7 mag. after the 154, you're handcuffing the round. if you need a 160 gr bullet to feel safe or ethical or whatever the reason, i'd go to a bigger bore. forget all the theoretical stuff about penetration and wind bucking (whatever that is) and use a bullet that will let your gun run. a 140 will do anything a 160 will, if you can shoot straight. i've seen guys try to shoot 225's out of an '06. they make em and it's a hell of a slug. but it is pathetic. ain't much good out of a .300 for that matter. but they make em, so what the heck. it's too much bullet for the cartridge. that's my 2 cents.
 
I've shot enough elk and seen enough shot with the 06 as well as the 7mm at fair ranges from 250-400ish to say that the 06 is not even in the same leauge as the 7mm, by a long shot. Especially with the like weight bullets... At close range, its kind of a wash, but long range... not even close.

IMO the 300 mags are a little step up over the 7mm with like weight bullets, but not enough to make me run out and buy one. I'd rather sling a bigger piece of lead than lower my standards and use a 30 caliber...

I don't want to hadicap myself any more than I already have. :p
 
I love these forums. People can "argue" or try really hard to convince someone their opinion is best. When it comes down to it though, I am flat out glad that I can even carry a gun and hunt. God Bless America!

That said, RLH in good fun, when you state "You can data me to death and it won't change my mind" does this mean that we should change our minds based on your opinion? Data is what helps me make up my mind. This is real or subjective. Right or wrong, I will use data to make a decision.

One important piece of data that MUST be discussed is something called Sectional Density or SD. Each bullet has one. It doesn't matter if the bullet is a round nose or a flat base or a polytipped etc., they all have one. The number is based on a ratio of weight to caliber. All 7mm bullets that weigh 140 grains have the same Sectional Density (same with every bullet of every shape when compared to bullets of equal weight in the same caliber). This means the drag will be the EXACT SAME with bullets that have the same profile and SD (or length). The Ballistic Coefficient (BC)can change between these bullets. For instance, a 160 grain Nosler Accubond bullet is a boattail and Poly tipped bullet. It's designated BC is higher than a Nosler Partition bullet that is also a 160 grains. This means that given the same velocities the Higher BC bullet will travel "flatter" than the lower BC bullets. But, the Sectional Density is still the same. This is in relation to the weight of the bullet vs. its diameter.

RLH mentions that the "160 grain bullets are better served in a larger caliber rifle". Let me ask this, Is a 237 grain .530 round ball better than a 225 grain .338 bullet as far as trajectory or power etc? Heck NO! We all know that the .530 round ball is a heck of alot of lead, but everyone is switching to Saboted slugs in Muzzleloading so they can get flatter trajectory.

If you want to compare bullets to each other as far as trajectory and penetration etc. you must compare bullets with the same or similar Sectional Density and BC to each other. Why? Because these are real numbers that effect the bullets ability to stay on course and buck the wind and penetrate through the muscles and bones of a game animal. If you want to compare a .308 caliber bullet to a 160 grain .284 (7mm) bullet than you need a bullet of similar design and length. The Hornady SP 154 grain .284 is nearly identical to a 190 grain Hornady SP in .308 caliber. When you compare a 140 grain nosler Partition to a .308 caliber, you should compare it to a 165 grain Partition. This will allow you to really analyze the differences in caliber.

I own two .284 caliber rifles. One is a 7mm Rem Mag that loves to shoot 160 grain bullets and shoots them much better than any 140 grain bullet I have tried. The other is a 7mm-08 Remington. This little rifle will flat out shoot. I can get clover leaf 5 shot groups with the right 140 grain loads all day long if I do my part.

I have often wondered whether a larger caliber rifle would better serve me. I have decided that for me to notice any difference in the cartridges ability to kill game, I need to step up to a .338 or maybe a .325. I can do anything a 300 Win can do with my 7mm Rem Mag. I can do anything a .308 or .30-06 can do with either my 7mm-08 or my 7mm Rem Mag. The only .308 caliber cartridge that would offer significant difference over my 7s is the 300 Weatherby or Ultra Mag (fit .30-378 Weatherby in here too). But I am only gaining trajectory. This of course comes at a cost, Alot more powder, Alot more recoil and Alot more expensive Brass to reload or even a greater expense in the cost of factory ammo.

There is importance to the data. It doesn't lie. This is my $1.00 worth

Firehawk
 
well, i got out alla my reloading books last night. never found a one of em that said you could get 3000fps out of a 160 in a 7 mag. a couple said 2900 and some change, but with real high pressures. most of the reasonable loads were in the 2800 to 2900 fps range. somebody must have some sorta powder i ain't familiar with to get 3100 out of one. and who said they had a 7mm/08? i thought we banned them sorta guys offa this site? this site is for real guns. from the .270 on down anyway. and everything is under a .270. go ahead and shoot rainbows outta your 7's with them big bullets. they'll do ok. but i still am of the opinion that if you need a big bullet, you need to get a big gun. heck, get somebody to make some 250's and you can take it kodiak huntin'. they oughta have a helluva sectional density. in fact, if what you say is true, they ought be faster than anything else. the tip might poke out the end of the barrel when ya chamber it tho.
 
This is a off topic, but look at this info from that alliant powder site for the 30-06 with 165 grain Nosler Partitions:


Fed. 3.22 24 Fed. 215 Reloader 25 90 3,245 58,500


Over 3200 fps with a 165 out of a 30-06??? And 90 grains of powder? How do you get that much powder in the case? I imagine that would be quite a compressed load!
 
I think you'd be pretty hard pressed to get 60gr in a 06 case. I load 59gr or RL22 in a 280 and she's real tight even with a drop tube.
 
:eek:

My guess, mr. data entry got himself confused with 06 and 300 mag of some sort maybe. :shrugging:
 
You're calling me "mr. data entry?" I didn't enter anything, just copied and pasted it directly from the 30-06 info. Weird thing is that now when I go back there, it's gone! Sure you all think I'm crazy, but it WAS listed under the data for the 30-06 with 165 Nosler Partition. There was also another bogus load listed, and it is gone as well.
 
that's why a .270 is so good. an '06 has the same case. 90 grains o' powder and you can shoot like 5000 fps. and osok, anybody coulda whupped up a phony website like that in a couple hours. i never even heard o' that kinda powder.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-22-06 AT 10:44AM (MST)[p]No, the website designer. ;)

I just checked it again and the 90 grain listings seem to have dissapeared. :shrugging:

RLH,

We could round up a few dead animals that could give you their testimony as to it's effect, Cept I don't think they can schpeak any longer.
 
Well I see a load for 68 grains of RE22 for a 3028fps, 72 grains of H1000 will produce more than 3000fps, 63 grains of IMR 4831 reaches just over 3000fps. These loads are right out of my reloading manuals and these velocities are achieved with a 24" barrel.

Personally, I don't care if I get 2900 or 3000 fps. I know that it will hit where I aim with my loads. I feel very confindent to 400 yards and if conditions were perfect (no wind, animal standing broadside, solid & steady rest etc.) I would go to 500 yards. Much beyond that and I can't call my shot well enough. But a better marksman than I am today, could make those shots all day long. Difference is that they do it regularly. I don't get the opportunity to shoot much beyond 400 yards during practice often enough to feel really comfortable.

RLH, let's not get into the 7mm-08 thing again. We both know that the desire to have a larger diameter bullet is really compensating for our inadequacy in other areas ;>)

My 7mm-08 is perfect for carrying a rifle in the woods for deer. For true long range hunting, my 7mm Rem Mag is my "go to" rifle. If I were to build or buy a "go to" long range rifle for elk it would have to be a .338 Win Mag or a .325 WSM. Possibly a .340 Weatherby, but I don't think I have guts to put up with that kind of recoil on a regular basis.

By the way RLH, I said nothing about the Higher SD bullets being able to fly faster. But they will fly just as fast as another bullet with the same SD in a different caliber that starts out at the same velocity. If you don't believe me, check it out! It is proven by physics and mathematical formulas on a regular basis.

Have fun!

Firehawk
 
You've really never heard of Alliant Powder??? Let me guess you are still using old surpluss WW2 powder in your trusty ol 270. ;)

Thats not a 'made' up site... they must have been entering data in and hose it up. Anyone with any realoading sence would have recognized that 30gr over case capacity was hosed up.

Has anyone actually chonoed any of those hotrod loads in thier trusty ol 06? I can't imagine hunting with compresed loads in the 115%+ range. IMO its just asking for trouble. I'd be willing to bet that you'd be pretty hard pressed to get that kind of speed.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-22-06 AT 01:58PM (MST)[p]hey firehawk, i shoot a .270. it's even smaller than a 7mm. so maybe you're the one with the envy deal. and also, i think a 7mm/08 is great. if you're a woman. bwahahahahahaha. c'mon bambi, can't ya tell when somebody is pullin' yer leg?
 
Ouch! Nice shot RLH!

The .270 Win is a nice cartridge though. About 12 years ago when I was shopping for my first very own rifle (had used Dad's sporterized Springfield for my first 7+ years of hunting)I was weighing out between a .270 Win and a 7mm Rem Mag. I had heard from a brother-in-law and a friend that the DWR was considering making .284 a minumum diameter for elk. As I had dreams and hopes of shooting an elk someday, I went the 7mm Rem Mag route.

I didn't get into the ballistics and gunsmithing (on my own stuff, not professionally) and handloading etc. until several years later. I personally don't know that there is a better all around deer cartridge than a .270 Win. That said, I certainly wouldn't feel bad using my 7mm Rem Mag for deer and I like the "heavier" bullets for elk especially.

My 7mm-08 started out as a .243 Win that I hated. What a puny little bullet. I bought it with the hopes of someday having my wife and kids accompany me on a hunt. When I realized that my wife really had no desire to hunt, I rebarreled my rifle to 7mm-08 Remington. Now the kids have a great little rife that doesn't kick too hard and shoots really nice groups with "game worthy" bullets. Oh, and it has the same trajectory with 140 grain bullets as a .30-06 with 180s and sometimes 165s. By the way, my wife still doesn't want to hunt, but she sure likes to shoot that rifle.

Firehawk
 
firehawk, put the 140 vs. 160 accubond in point blank, the 140 wins all catergories besided foot puounds and wind drift. look at the total drop, it is quite a bit lower than the 160. i did all this research when i got my 7mag, wanted to know if i should load 140 or 160 accubonds. 140s won
Casey
 
"quite a bit lower"

How much is that? Three to four inches less drop at 400 yards? Not very significant. If you know the range and you know your bullets trajectory, that can be adjusted for very easily. But how do you compensate for the wind? I'd rather have the bullet that is not pushed by the wind as much.
 
I've only used the 140 accubonds on one animal... About a 90 yard shot out of my 280 Rem... MV is right around 3000fps... The bulled was found under the skin. No bones hit other than one rib... I would think that 140 should have penitrated clear through from that range. But regruardless I was happy with the outcome. I really dont' care one way or another if the bullet goes all the way through or not, I kind of like the splat factor anyway. Thats the exit hole by the way, the bullet was found in the crater next to the skin.

exit_hole1.sized.jpg


I've since taken 6 animals with the 160 accubonds between both my 280 and 7mm and have only recovered one. My wife shot a wildebeste from about 125 yards with the 280 with a MV of 2850fps on. Penitration was close to 3' and the bullet was found lodged under the hide on the oposite shoulder in a nice little mushroom. I've killed two elk with them, one was 330ish yards with my 280 and the other was about 40 out of the mag... neither was recovered.

I really don't have a whole lot of experience with the 140's yet. I may make them my go to bullet in my 280, but I doubt it. One less thing to buy when I can just load the same bullet in both rifles.
 

Similar threads

gr8fuldoug
Athlon Winners Chosen - Enter to Win a Pulsar Thermal
Replies
0
Views
196
gr8fuldoug
gr8fuldoug
gr8fuldoug
For Sale GPO Optics Sale
Replies
0
Views
148
gr8fuldoug
gr8fuldoug

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

F8C820A0-C1C5-496C-9227-7D95303B59F0.jpeg
EB57E486-C116-4BFE-8A0D-459B2DA99D4C.jpeg
107097.jpeg
55B49DAE-46C6-4265-A216-13BDA292BBC7.jpeg
3FDF42EB-380D-4041-AAF0-DEC36C1BBA49.jpeg
IMG_1905.jpg
IMG_2362.jpeg
Huge Buck
F8E72D63-DA88-44E3-A29F-7CCF45078B0F.jpeg
IMG_20170525_212214.jpg
FCD1C3C9-BD86-4510-968B-F95B8EB67201.jpeg
IMG_20220311_213535_833.jpg
Back
Top Bottom