7mm SAUM

What I was referring to was the fact that it had less cap. then some of the barrel burners that are not considered for target work due to throat erosion, yet it has enough jam for long range work. While not my cup of tea, it has all the elements of a great long range round, without the negatives that most rounds carry.
 
Saum

Jordan Smith said:
Correct. The 7SAUM is a great cartridge, but the Kool-aid is getting a little strong in this thread.
Click to expand...
The 7SAUM won't catch either the 7mmRemMag or the 7WSM.It can't,powder capacity=velocity and the SAUM case doesn't hold as much powder.Claims to the contrary don't make it so!:)If I had wanted velocity I could have bought a 7STW or 7RUM.The 7SAUM does what I need it to do,no more,no less! Mur
 
bearkilr said:
:confused:
Given the same bbl. length, the WSM can achieve slightly higher velocity.
How is less capacity a positive? If you're referring to powder usage, then a 7x57 or 7mm-08 is superior to all 7mm mags.
Click to expand...

Hornady Manual, best loads with 24" barrel length:
7WSM, 160 grain, W780-69 gr= 2968=44.01fps/grain
7SAUM 160 grain, W780-64 gr= 3003=46.92fps/grain

7WSM 154 grain, W780-69gr=3063=44.39fps/grain
7SAUM 153grain, H100V-60.0=3067=51.12fps/grain

7WSM 140 grain, W780-71.1=3160=44.4fps/grain
7SAUM 140 grain, H100V-62=3217=51.88fps/grain

From this it becomes obvious that the 7SAUM gets similar to better velocities with 5-9 grains of powder less with at least 3 different bullet weights. When you look at the feet per second/ grain of powder it is apparent that the 7SAUM is superior, to the 7WSM, in efficiency. The result is less recoil, more loads per pound of powder and longer barrel life. When a 22" barrel is used, in both calibers, the 7SAUM gains even more of advantage.

The 7mm-08 gets more velocity per grain of powder than the 7X57 and is therefore superior in efficiency in the same ways that the 7SAUM is superior to the 7WSM. Hopefully this clears up the confusion.
 
hodgdon load data

This is from the hodgdon database, which includes data from IMR, Win, and Hodgdon powders. using the 140 Nosler Partition bullet for all 3 cartidges here are the fastest max loads.


7WSM 3161fps 63.2grs of IMR 4350@63,200psi
7SAUM 3217fps 62.0Cgrs of hybrid 100V@62,400psi
7mmRem 3138fps 63.0grs of hybrid 100V @59,800psi

here's another load for comparison;
7SAUM 3174fps 61.2grs of IMR 4350@62000 psi

The short mags are both loaded to higher pressures than the old 7Rem, not sure why. The 7SAUM comes out on top in this comparison.
 
lclund1946 said:
Hornady Manual, best loads with 24" barrel length:
7WSM, 160 grain, W780-69 gr= 2968=44.01fps/grain
7SAUM 160 grain, W780-64 gr= 3003=46.92fps/grain

7WSM 154 grain, W780-69gr=3063=44.39fps/grain
7SAUM 153grain, H100V-60.0=3067=51.12fps/grain

7WSM 140 grain, W780-71.1=3160=44.4fps/grain
7SAUM 140 grain, H100V-62=3217=51.88fps/grain

From this it becomes obvious that the 7SAUM gets similar to better velocities with 5-9 grains of powder less with at least 3 different bullet weights. When you look at the feet per second/ grain of powder it is apparent that the 7SAUM is superior, to the 7WSM, in efficiency. The result is less recoil, more loads per pound of powder and longer barrel life. When a 22" barrel is used, in both calibers, the 7SAUM gains even more of advantage.

The 7mm-08 gets more velocity per grain of powder than the 7X57 and is therefore superior in efficiency in the same ways that the 7SAUM is superior to the 7WSM. Hopefully this clears up the confusion.
Click to expand...

Well said.
 
There's lots of ways to bolster the numbers, from loading pressures, to powders, to biased companies. At the end of the day, more powder equals more velocity.

From the Nosler manual the 7SAUM with 140gr bullet gets a max of 3147fps and the 7RM gets 3340fps.

According to the newest Hornday manual, the WSM outruns the SAUM by 100fps.

All numbers were obtained using 24" barrels.

It's all subjective to the manipulation of the one crunching the numbers. Load all 3 cartridges to the same pressure, using optimal powders for each, with equal barrel lengths, and we'll see that there is no replacement for displacement. The 7RM comes out on top, followed by the 7WSM, and then the 7SAUM. The SAUM is certainly the most effcient, least hard on barrels, and the most economical. BUT, it won't outrun the other 2, no matter how you slice it, provided an objective comparison.
 
lclund1946 said:
Hornady Manual, best loads with 24" barrel length:
7WSM, 160 grain, W780-69 gr= 2968=44.01fps/grain
7SAUM 160 grain, W780-64 gr= 3003=46.92fps/grain

7WSM 154 grain, W780-69gr=3063=44.39fps/grain
7SAUM 153grain, H100V-60.0=3067=51.12fps/grain

7WSM 140 grain, W780-71.1=3160=44.4fps/grain
7SAUM 140 grain, H100V-62=3217=51.88fps/grain

From this it becomes obvious that the 7SAUM gets similar to better velocities with 5-9 grains of powder less with at least 3 different bullet weights. When you look at the feet per second/ grain of powder it is apparent that the 7SAUM is superior, to the 7WSM, in efficiency. The result is less recoil, more loads per pound of powder and longer barrel life. When a 22" barrel is used, in both calibers, the 7SAUM gains even more of advantage.

The 7mm-08 gets more velocity per grain of powder than the 7X57 and is therefore superior in efficiency in the same ways that the 7SAUM is superior to the 7WSM. Hopefully this clears up the confusion.
Click to expand...

If you can notice a difference in felt recoil btw the two, hats off. :rolleyes:

Longer bbl. life? Please.

The 7mm SAUM gets slightly lower velocities with slightly less powder, as it should be. You can post all kinds of numbers, I have all manuals. Why not post Alliant's numbers for a comparison ?:)

Frankly, I don't care. I currently own neither caliber as I prefer tall and slender for problem free loading. If you prefer short and fat, have at 'er. :D
 
todbartell said:
another 7saum in the stable these days :cheers:

148364_462547982991_512917991_5694319_7871820_n.jpg
Click to expand...

Nice rifle. If I wasn't such a left handed snob I'd own one. With a McMillan Hunters EDGE on it of course. :D
 
bearkilr said:
If you can notice a difference in felt recoil btw the two, hats off. :rolleyes:

Longer bbl. life? Please.

The 7mm SAUM gets slightly lower velocities with slightly less powder, as it should be. You can post all kinds of numbers, I have all manuals. Why not post Alliant's numbers for a comparison ?:)

Frankly, I don't care. I currently own neither caliber as I prefer tall and slender for problem free loading. If you prefer short and fat, have at 'er. :D
Click to expand...


140 speer sp
no pressures listed on their website
7mmRem rl25 71.5gr 3173fps
7WSM rl19 68gr 3134fps
7SAUM rl22 64gr 3117fps

Guess I'd be using IMR 4350 to get more velocity from either short mag.
 
chuck nelson said:
Nice rifle. If I wasn't such a left handed snob I'd own one. With a McMillan Hunters EDGE on it of course. :D
Click to expand...

already got that stock on my 260 Ti, if I had the same one on this 7mm they might fight in the gunsafe at night :HR:

I ordered a McMillan Mtn rifle stock, my favorite stock type. Koolaid swirl of course, to be cool! :cheers:


Ive found the 7saum will do 3350 fps w/ 120s, 3150 fps w/ 139s, 3050 fps w/ 154's, 2800 fps w/ 175s in my first 700 BDL. In my Sendero which has a 26" brl I can do 2980 fps w/ 160gr Accubonds & RL25 (66grs), 3040 fps with 162gr Amax & AA3100 (61.5 grs), and 180gr Berger Hybrids @ 2800 fps (58grs H4831sc).

The cartridge gives good speed, good accuracy, in a nice package. I quite like it and thats what matters to me :D
 
stovepipe699 said:
This is from the hodgdon database, which includes data from IMR, Win, and Hodgdon powders. using the 140 Nosler Partition bullet for all 3 cartidges here are the fastest max loads.


7WSM 3161fps 63.2grs of IMR 4350@63,200psi
7SAUM 3217fps 62.0Cgrs of hybrid 100V@62,400psi
7mmRem 3138fps 63.0grs of hybrid 100V @59,800psi

here's another load for comparison;
7SAUM 3174fps 61.2grs of IMR 4350@62000 psi

The short mags are both loaded to higher pressures than the old 7Rem, not sure why. The 7SAUM comes out on top in this comparison.[/QUOTE

Sammi rates the 7mm Mag case at 61000 psi while the Short mag cases are rated at 65000 psi. As well the 7mm RM is prone to pressure spikes. The 7mmRM cases generally start out with 8-10 thou short of a Sammi Chamber, as they headspace on the belt. This causes about an equivalent case stretch, on first firing, which results in thinning of the case ahead of the belt. I have had incipient head separation, on second firing, trying to get 3000fps from 160 grain bullets using loads listed in the Speer #11 Manual(1987). In the Speer #12 manual (1994) they cut back the max loads by one full grain of powder. I wonder why?

A couple of years ago I witnessed a young fellow wondering why his new 7mmWSM had blown a primer clean out of the case, and made his bolt quite tight. He insisted that he had loaded under the book max with MAGPRO. This is why I prefer to use the Hodgdon online manual and try to stick to their EXTREME powders. While Alliant RL22 and RL 25 are great powders, for these applications, one has to be more careful when working up loads in cool conditions.
Click to expand...
 
I had one in a Ti that was a shooter off a bench, I shot a deer the first year I had it and then missed repeatedly the same deer last year and sold the gun the next day.

BAD JU JU.....gun must go

It's in the NWT now.
 
martinbns said:
I had one in a Ti that was a shooter off a bench, I shot a deer the first year I had it and then missed repeatedly the same deer last year and sold the gun the next day.

BAD JU JU.....gun must go

It's in the NWT now.
Click to expand...

I built up a load for that rifle with 175 grain TSX's and Retumbo, it dumped a dall sheep at 454 yards this year. First shot double lung, following shots were running, second shot missed and the third was right through the boiler room.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom