Short Barreled 7 Rem Mag

A step backwards IMHO. That cartridge calls for a long barrel to get the most out of the large charge of powder. 26" would be my preference. But short barrels are very fashionable at the moment, I'm sure that many will advise that 22" is no problem!
Muzzle blast will be unpleasant, and velocity only marginally better than a .280.
That said, .280's kill things very dead!
 
Gerald said:
What does a 22 inch barrel in 7mm Remington give up in speed to a 24 inch? Worth worrying about?
Click to expand...
If the gun is used at shorter ranges, loss of MV would be moot. OTOH ... if the rifle is a designated long range rig, you might appreciate the extra speed.


.
 
I shoot a 21.5" barreled 7RM in a Husky 1640, and I typically see about 3250fps from 140gr bullets, so maybe 100fps loss from max velocity in 24" barrels. The rifle is handy-dandy, and the blast is nothing uncomfortable at all. I bet most guys wouldn't be able to tell the difference if they shot the rifle blindfolded.

It does okay at long range, too. I can routinely smack 4L milk jugs at 750 yards with it, so the 21.5" barrel doesn't seem to be too much of a disadvantage. I'm getting about 150-200fps more than the average "warm" .280 load, so I'd say it's still a step up in the LR department, as well as being a great short-range gun.
 
"...see about 3250fps from 140gr bullets..." Using loads that are way over max?
"...Worth worrying about?..." Nope. Velocity loss with any cartridge runs between 50 and 100 FPS per inch of barrel.
"...Muzzle blast will be unpleasant..." The muzzle blast is unpleasant shooting next to any magnum. There's no game in North America that needs a magnum of any kind.
 
Gerald said:
What does a 22 inch barrel in 7mm Remington give up in speed to a 24 inch? Worth worrying about?
Click to expand...

Cut barrel length to balance and all other variables will fall into alignment. I have yet to see a 26" factory tube that was not nose heavy. Nothing you point that rifle at will be able to tell the difference between a 26 inch barrel and a 22 inch barrel. If I missed anything, feel free to guess as to your "correction"

R.
 
sunray said:
There's no game in North America that needs a magnum of any kind.
Click to expand...

I agree with the "needs" emphasized. I do like my .300 Win for everything bigger than deer, however.

To the OP, I think you would be better off with a .280 if you cut the barrel on the Magnum. You loose nothing at all on game, and you get a lot of practical advantages.
 
rral22 said:
I agree with the "needs" emphasized. I do like my .300 Win for everything bigger than deer, however.

To the OP, I think you would be better off with a .280 if you cut the barrel on the Magnum. You loose nothing at all on game, and you get a lot of practical advantages.
Click to expand...

Like what?

R.
 
Trade off 5-10 years of leeway in your hearing in your elderly years without developing tinnitis and balance problems? I'd say that's worth forgoing the "advantages" of a loud, short barrelled magnum! Most people don't realize that they are permanently damaging their hearing and inner ear function with each shot until it is too late. Hence comments like "the muzzle blast isn't too bad" and other ignorant observations.
I respect the killing power of "mild" rounds - and I think the trade off of more muzzle blast with short barrelled magnums is a very bad bargain.
 
I routinely get 120 fps over book on the 7mm-08 with a 28" barrel over the 24". The 270 will get 35 fps/in. This will vary along the length of the barrel, with shorter being more of a drop off, longer gradually increasing. The 7mm rem mag will get 40 fps/in, I would say your losing in the neighborhood of 160 fps between the two.
 
If you mean where can you buy it contact Mark @ Omenica Sports in Vanderhoof BC they are a new dealer here on CGNTZ...

The last 3lbs I bought came from The Powder Keg in Merrit, BC.

CC
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom