Short Barreled 7 Rem Mag

Thats what I figured but I thought I would respond too your statement by giving you the benefit of the doubt first now that I am sure what you meant I'll clear it up for you...

RL17 is the powder that Hornady used that produced from 50fps to 150fps faster velocities in their standard factory loads.

I use it in my 21" barreled 375RUM end result is I am able to get with RL17 the same velocities from this short barrel as I did before I shortened it from 26" I am getting a gain of appr 120fps - 150fps with my 260gr Accubond loads yep thats right 3020fps with a 260gr Accubond from a 21" barrel...

If you do not understand or have never heard of the performance that can be gained with this powder you should maybe check into it before you spew...

:p
 
Camp Cook said:
Thats what I figured but I thought I would respond too your statement by giving you the benefit of the doubt first now that I am sure what you meant I'll clear it up for you...

RL17 is the powder that Hornady used that produced from 50fps to 150fps faster velocities in their standard factory loads.

I use it in my 21" barreled 375RUM end result is I am able to get with RL17 the same velocities from this short barrel as I did before I shortened it from 26" I am getting a gain of appr 120fps - 150fps with my 260gr Accubond loads yep thats right 3020fps with a 260gr Accubond from a 21" barrel...

If you do not understand or have never heard of the performance that can be gained with this powder you should maybe check into it before you spew...

:p
Click to expand...

Here is a "spew" for you. A 26" barreled 7MM Rem Mag will get more velocity shooting cases containing RL 17 than the same barrel with the same load will at 22". Your example is not only inapplicable, it can be used with several different powders.
 
Chuck, relax. Don't you know that all you need now is Rl17? I use it in my 223 right up to my 35 Norma. At LEAST 150 fps in every cartridge on the market. Once word gets out that's all you will see on store shelves. Hodgdon is dead!






:D
 
The OP asked what velocity will be lost in a 2" shorter barrel my response was none if he used RL17 powder so I have to ask who's talking 26" barrel?

I'lll sayyy itttt slowlyyy forrrr youuuu innnn theeee shorterrrr barrelllll RL17 willlll jumppppp velocitiesssss backkkk uppppp soooo thereeeee willl notttt beee aaa velocityyyy losssss andddd possiblyyy resultttt innn aaaa velocityyyy gainnnn innnn aaaa 2" shorterrrr barrelllll... :p


:nest:
 
Rman said:
All things being the same, the magnum will always out perform. I am always interested in "arguments" that say otherwise.

R.
Click to expand...

Interesting. Lets assume we choose a rifle with a 22" barrel chambered for the .280 Remington cartridge and fired some 150 gr maximum loads across a chronograph to establish a base line. For the sake of argument, we'll define a maximum load as one that produces the highest velocity without leaving extractor marks on the case head. Lets say we then re-chambered that same barrel to 7 mag, just to keep everything equal, and repeat the test with the same bullet and again work up a maximum load of the same powder. I would be very surprised if the 7 mag showed a ballistic advantage that could be exploited in the field. I expect both cartridges would produce 3000 fps + or - 50 fps from that 22" barrel. Had you had said, " . . . that when chambered in optimum barrel lengths, a 7 mag will always out perform a .280," I might agree.
 
Haven't used it in a 7mm mag but loaded my 24" barreled Rem 700 LSS in 280 Rem with 140gr Accubonds it had an average of 90fps gain velocity over any other powders I have used in it.

Accuracy wasn't as good as my IMR4350 loads so I stopped using it in the 280 then I sold the rifle...

:)
 
I don't have the data anymore sent it along with the rifle when I sold it just remember that it averaged 90fps faster than my IMR4350/RL19 loads...
 
I don't have the data anymore sent it along with the rifle when I sold it just remember that it averaged 90fps faster than my IMR4350/RL19 loads...
Click to expand...

R-22 produces noticeably more velocity than R-19,or 4350 in my 280AI rifles.
 
If you want a 7mm in a 22 inch barrel, it's simple. GET A .280 REMINGTON. Practically the same ballistics as a 7mm magnum in a 22 inch barrel, less recoil and waaay less muzzle blast. Over bore capacity rounds ALWAYS require a longer barrel to get optimum performance.
 
I tried RL22 as well I remember it didn't give me any better velocity than IMR4350 in my 280 RL19 was the fastest...

RL22 gives great velocities in longer barrels in every cartridge I have ever tried it in but shorten the barrel and it's performance drops off actually until I found RL17 I was switching over from RL22 to IMR4350.
 
Longwalker said:
Hence comments like "the muzzle blast isn't too bad" and other ignorant observations.
Click to expand...

HA! I assume you're referring to me. Ignorance is making assumptions without all the facts. I wonder if you know the facts. Facts like- I ALWAYS wear hearing protection
- The word "magnum" doesn't make a cartridge any better or worse on your ears than "standard" cartridges- powder consumption and barrel length does.
- Muzzle blast can be felt as well as heard. The blast from my 21.5" 7RM is more gentle than the blast from other rifles that I've fired like a MarkV .300 Weatherby, a .44 Magnum revolver, etc.
- They make hearing protection for a reason. Judging by your comments, you would gain greater longevity to your hearing if you used muffs, rather than thinking that using smaller non-magnum cartridges, instead of magnums, will save your ears.
 
Traps said:
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.
Click to expand...

It totally depends on the powder, bullet, and on the individual barrel in question. Some barrels will lose 20fps/in, while others with the same specs and components will lose 60fps/in. Obviously the inside diameter of the groves/lands makes a difference. Every barrel is an individual. There's only one way to know what kind of loss you're getting on any given rifle- shoot over a chrony, chop the tube, and re-chrony.
 
Boomer said:
Interesting. Lets assume we choose a rifle with a 22" barrel chambered for the .280 Remington cartridge and fired some 150 gr maximum loads across a chronograph to establish a base line. For the sake of argument, we'll define a maximum load as one that produces the highest velocity without leaving extractor marks on the case head. Lets say we then re-chambered that same barrel to 7 mag, just to keep everything equal, and repeat the test with the same bullet and again work up a maximum load of the same powder. I would be very surprised if the 7 mag showed a ballistic advantage that could be exploited in the field. I expect both cartridges would produce 3000 fps + or - 50 fps from that 22" barrel. Had you had said, " . . . that when chambered in optimum barrel lengths, a 7 mag will always out perform a .280," I might agree.
Click to expand...

Boomer, aren't you the guy with a shorty 375 RUM that outperforms a 375 H&H? IIRC, the idea was to get a big combustion chamber behind a short barrel, in order to drive bullets fast.

How does that renconcile wth your above claim that 7 mag and a 280 will have essentially identical ballistics?

They will not. Optimal barrel lengths or not, the bigger case will always outperform the smaller one.
 
Boomer said:
I would be very surprised if the 7 mag showed a ballistic advantage that could be exploited in the field.
Click to expand...

You just introduced subjectivity into an objective discussion. What is an "an advantage that coule be expoited in the field"?

See above, I'm getting 3250fps ave from my 21.5" barreled 7RM with a 140gr Sierra PH and GK. I'm getting 3050fps from the same bullet in my 22" .280. They are 2 different barrels- some individual barrels are faster than others, so you can't objectively compare the two. On average, however, I would suggest that the 7RM will get 150fps more velocity than the .280, both from 22" barrels.
 
Last edited:
Mike Webb said:
Practically the same ballistics as a 7mm magnum in a 22 inch barrel, less recoil and waaay less muzzle blast. Over bore capacity rounds ALWAYS require a longer barrel to get optimum performance.
Click to expand...

LOL, not in my experience. And I own both (21.5" 7RM and 22" .280). The .280 is 200fps behind the 7RM with the same bullet, and the muzzle blast is VERY similar.

What does "over bore capacity" mean? What is the definition? With today's slower burning powders, this term is less and less applicable to yesterday's cartridges. John Barsness has reported that from his experimentation the shorter barrels tend to lose less velocity from slower-burning powders and heavy-for-caliber bullets.
 
Mike Webb said:
If you want a 7mm in a 22 inch barrel, it's simple. GET A .280 REMINGTON. Practically the same ballistics as a 7mm magnum in a 22 inch barrel, less recoil and waaay less muzzle blast. Over bore capacity rounds ALWAYS require a longer barrel to get optimum performance.
Click to expand...

curious,

do you own a chronograph?

what is your idea of "Practically the same ballistics"?
 
Jordan Smith said:
LOL, not in my experience. And I own both (21.5" 7RM and 22" .280). The .280 is 200fps behind the 7RM with the same bullet, and the muzzle blast is VERY similar.

What does "over bore capacity" mean? What is the definition? With today's slower burning powders, this term is less and less applicable to yesterday's cartridges. John Barsness has reported that from his experimentation the shorter barrels tend to lose less velocity from slower-burning powders and heavy-for-caliber bullets.
Click to expand...

I think the traditional definition of over bore is a cartridge which can be loaded with more powder than can be efficiently burned in a standard length barrel, e.g., 22 inches is considered standard today. Everything I have seen suggests that over bore cartridges are affected more(velocity and noise) by shortening the barrel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom