Rem 783 300 win mag, 7mm mag question

icehunter121

icehunter121

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
147   0   0
Location
Alberta
Anybody have one that could get me a inside mag length measurement? Looking at one but don't want to get stuck with loading 180 gr. nosler partition slugs in deep and losing capacity. An also wondering as I like to seat my slugs 30 thou off the lands. EDIT to add..just looked at cabelas and the 7 mag and 300 win mag use the same magazine.

Thanks..Ice
 
Last edited:
Is the 300 mag a specific magazine or is it a regular long action magazine for those rifles? If so, I have a long action mag I can measure for you.
 
rascal1 said:
Is the 300 mag a specific magazine or is it a regular long action magazine for those rifles? If so, I have a long action mag I can measure for you.
Click to expand...

I had no idea till you posted. Did some checking on cabelas and they list a short action,long action and long action magnum. The 7mm and 300 win use the same mag.
 
icehunter121 said:
Thank you Sir...Muchly appreciated. My last 300 win on a rem 700 bdl I was seating the 180 partition at 3.540. Not sure about the extra bullet jump due to the short mag length dimension.
Click to expand...

There may not be any "extra bullet jump". The length of the magazine is not the length of the throat to the lands. It is a limit on how long the bullets can be and still function through the magazine, but cartridge over all length and the jump to the lands depends on other measurements.
 
rral22 said:
There may not be any "extra bullet jump". The length of the magazine is not the length of the throat to the lands. It is a limit on how long the bullets can be and still function through the magazine, but cartridge over all length and the jump to the lands depends on other measurements.
Click to expand...

I know how it works,been at this for 35 years. But with it being a shorter mag you will still have to seat them deeper.
 
icehunter121 said:
I know how it works,been at this for 35 years. But with it being a shorter mag you will still have to seat them deeper.
Click to expand...

Maybe, but if that's the case, why are you trying to measure the magazine? You're doing it backwards. You need the chamber dimensions first to figure out possible COL for any given bullet, and consequently, whether or not the magazine length will matter. But carry on as you wish. My .300 prefers H1000 for 200 grain bullets if that is of any importance, and the magazine length limits my COL to shorter than the maximum the chamber would allow, but I found they shoot just fine with the "jump" that is required.
 
rral22 said:
Maybe, but if that's the case, why are you trying to measure the magazine? You're doing it backwards. You need the chamber dimensions first to figure out possible COL for any given bullet, and consequently, whether or not the magazine length will matter. But carry on as you wish. My .300 prefers H1000 for 200 grain bullets if that is of any importance, and the magazine length limits my COL to shorter than the maximum the chamber would allow, but I found they shoot just fine with the "jump" that is required.
Click to expand...

Let me try and explain to you. I have had 5 -300 win mags and am not a big fan of a magazine except on a .22. Now if I buy a rifle and the interior measurement of a mag is short and I have to seat the slugs so deep that I am either starting to compress loads or loosing a lot of case capacity to me the rifle is useless. I do not like being limited to mag length that overall tells me what seating depth is on a longer case. I like to be 30 thou off the lands or right in that area. So why on this planet would I buy a rifle that may not be what I want without checking things first. I much prefer a Rem 700 as it has a long mag length and lets me play with seating depths without having a massive slug jump. So no I am not doing it backwards,I am checking things out before dropping $$$ and buying a rifle sight unseen. Alternately if it has a long throat I go with 1 bullet dia. for seating and work from there. But since I found a Rem 783 cheap I was going to try one out for ####s and giggles. But if I know ahead of time that I will be hindered by it then its a no deal for me. After having 5 300 mags all at the same time and working on a couple of my buddies and have been reloading for 35 years I think I have a pretty good idea as to what I am doing. But Thank you for your concern,but its not needed.
 
icehunter121 said:
Let me try and explain to you.
Click to expand...

So let me try to explain that your "obsession" with .030 off the lands is amazingly arbitrary. There is no magic about that number. Some rifles may well like that jumpThere is no way you can know that you won't have .030 jump to the lands from the magazine in any specific rifle without measuring the chamber. To write off a rifle because it has a magazine of a specific length that you THINK might mean you will have to use more jump than .030 because some other rifle without measuring the chamber dimensions of the rifle with the magazine that you hate because it is a certain length (which does, in fact, allow for the SAAMI maximum overall length for the cartridge to which all commercial ammo conforms) is a bit silly.

It's just a very strange reason to eliminate a rifle from consideration without knowing the real chamber dimensions involved. Some guns/bullets may like that .030 gap; some may not. For example, the following is from the Barnes website "When loading a Barnes TSX, Tipped TSX or LRX bullet, your rifle may prefer a bullet jump of anywhere between (a minimum of) .050” up to .250” or more. This distance off the lands (rifling), aka "jump" may be limited to the rifles throat length, magazine length and bullet length. "

There is no reason to think .030 jump to the lands is some sort of criteria for choosing a rifle.
 
rral22 said:
So let me try to explain that your "obsession" with .030 off the lands is amazingly arbitrary. There is no magic about that number. Some rifles may well like that jumpThere is no way you can know that you won't have .030 jump to the lands from the magazine in any specific rifle without measuring the chamber. To write off a rifle because it has a magazine of a specific length that you THINK might mean you will have to use more jump than .030 because some other rifle without measuring the chamber dimensions of the rifle with the magazine that you hate because it is a certain length (which does, in fact, allow for the SAAMI maximum overall length for the cartridge to which all commercial ammo conforms) is a bit silly.

It's just a very strange reason to eliminate a rifle from consideration without knowing the real chamber dimensions involved. Some guns/bullets may like that .030 gap; some may not. For example, the following is from the Barnes website "When loading a Barnes TSX, Tipped TSX or LRX bullet, your rifle may prefer a bullet jump of anywhere between (a minimum of) .050” up to .250” or more. This distance off the lands (rifling), aka "jump" may be limited to the rifles throat length, magazine length and bullet length. "

There is no reason to think .030 jump to the lands is some sort of criteria for choosing a rifle.
Click to expand...

You are really starting to annoy me. I came in here looking for a measurement and not preaching about hand loading. I have hand loaded and owned over 1000 rifles in 35 years. You say about SAAMI specs. The spec from them means nothing to me as I don't use their spec for COL. I have a 280 sitting here that is custom throated for one 168 gr. slug seated to a certain depth and is way over SAAMI spec for COL. My criteria for choosing a rifle is that if the mag wont allow me to seat a slug out farther and give me some playing room I don't want it. By you suggesting I should buy a rifle just to check and see if it will work is absurd. I like the older Ruger rifles but with the short mag length I wont buy them either. Same for a Winchester using a 300 magnum cartridge. Take a rem 700 and chamber it to 300WBY and you have lots of room in the mag. Do the same with a Winchester rifle and all of a sudden you are limited to mag length for OAL.

You are suggesting would be akin to running out and buying a volkswagon beetle and trying to fit a 7 foot tall guy in it comfortably. In closing,its my $$$ and will buy what ever I want, and don't need, nor want someone trying to tell me any different. Thank you for your time.
 
I gave my buddy some loads for his. I believe they were loaded to 3.35 iirc. 180gr woodlieghs. His 783 fed them fine from the mag. He ended up selling rhe rifle after 10 shots. Recoil was to much for him to handle. I bought a 783 in 308. I havent had one in a magnum yet but im impressed by the accuracy of my 783 in 223
 
You are suggesting would be akin to running out and buying a volkswagon beetle and trying to fit a 7 foot tall guy in it comfortably.
Click to expand...

No I'm suggesting that not buying a Volkswagen because you're afraid that one day you may grow to be 7 feet tall is a bit silly.

Of course you may spend your money any way you want, but your insistence on .030 is just strange, and I prefer to work the opposite direction. I experiment to find out what the ideal COL is for every load I devise for any given rifle, rather than thinking there is one magic "jump" distance that I will apply to everything. I'm surprised that your vast experience hasn't shown that to be a good idea. I will not "annoy" you any more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom