7MM WSM Unpopular
#21
![Default](https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
With the 160 grain Sierra bullets the 7WSM is 100 fps behind the 7MM Rem Mag and 250 fps behind the 7 MM STW. With heavier bullets the WSM bullets have to be seated to a depth that won't allow enough powder to compete with the bigger 7"s. Several of my reloading manuals list this as a problem for the WSM with heavy bullets. With lighter bullets it can equal the other 7's
#23
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location:
Posts: 2,052
![Default](https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
JB is correct, other than the 7Rem, metric cartridges have just never panned out in the U.S. In Europe the 7WSM was asked for so much of late that Beretta added it too Sako/Tikka last fall. I don't know who is getting their information and where it came from but the 7WSM is NOT 2-300fps hotter than the 7Rem. The WSM ballistic tables are notoriously "hot" and many gun writers (who weren't on the dole) have ran many through cronies and proven the figures on ink to be optimistic, some by as much as 150-200fps+. Likewise the 7Rem has ALWAYS been loaded down, even in most reloadin manuals you will see strangely low figures compared to what can be accomplished with good rifles with 24"-26" barrels and slow powders.
Aint tryin to rain on anyones parade, it sounds like someone is in need of extra re-assurance as too their decision and purchase. The caliber itself is a GREAT one. But it is essentially a FLOP here stateside and you can bet the factory ammo selections are only going to get slimmer instead of growing steadily like the other two WSMs. Most makers today that are beginning to pickup the WSMs are not doing so with the 7s. And it is a universal, industry wide question and confusion. I spent a weekend lastyear in WY with several gun, optics and ammo makers and one of Kimbers national reps asked me personally why we didn't order any 7WSMs (my brother was a Kimber Master Dealer). I told him basically what I just put down here and he alluded that basically that was the same reason given by ALL their dealers nationwide. I think many in the industry actually thought the 7WSM would practically wipe the 270WSM off the shelves but it's been the other way around.
Another thing that is basically a parallel and really the WSM incident is just a repeat of it, around my section of the country and with guys that shoot Weatherby's, there are a considerable amount of 270Wbys and 300Wbys. But very very few 7Wbys. Our sales of both guns and ammo likewise bore that point as well. America is simply a .277 and .308 calibers market, has been that way for a LONG time and it appears likely to remain so. The only conclusion I can draw from the success of the 7Rem is that it was the first "affordable, bluecollar, bareable recoil" magnum brought to the market by a major maker. Remember that Roy Weatherby's first magnum was the 270 and I'm sure that was based on the fact that when he did it in the 40s the 270/Oconnor affair was in full swing. (Remember likewise that Mr. Jack went on record several times as quoting the 7mmMauser to be his favorite!) I guess that is why Remington didn't "reinvent" the wheel and do a 270 mag vs the 7 they came out with. BUT it is my opinion that if either Remington, Winchester or Ruger simply took a 7Rem dimensioned case (blownout and straightened and shortened 300H&H) and stuck a 277 in it and called it the XYZ 270Mag and keep ammo prices reasonable, it would sell like HOTCAKES shortmags be damned. There's just that much sentimental and determinedness in the American shooting publics mind concerning the .277 bore! I PROMISE you it would go over. Imagine the ".270 O'connor Magnum"??? You'd have to sell lottery tickets for the first few runs of rifles!!!
We're a finicky lot we hunters,
RA
Aint tryin to rain on anyones parade, it sounds like someone is in need of extra re-assurance as too their decision and purchase. The caliber itself is a GREAT one. But it is essentially a FLOP here stateside and you can bet the factory ammo selections are only going to get slimmer instead of growing steadily like the other two WSMs. Most makers today that are beginning to pickup the WSMs are not doing so with the 7s. And it is a universal, industry wide question and confusion. I spent a weekend lastyear in WY with several gun, optics and ammo makers and one of Kimbers national reps asked me personally why we didn't order any 7WSMs (my brother was a Kimber Master Dealer). I told him basically what I just put down here and he alluded that basically that was the same reason given by ALL their dealers nationwide. I think many in the industry actually thought the 7WSM would practically wipe the 270WSM off the shelves but it's been the other way around.
Another thing that is basically a parallel and really the WSM incident is just a repeat of it, around my section of the country and with guys that shoot Weatherby's, there are a considerable amount of 270Wbys and 300Wbys. But very very few 7Wbys. Our sales of both guns and ammo likewise bore that point as well. America is simply a .277 and .308 calibers market, has been that way for a LONG time and it appears likely to remain so. The only conclusion I can draw from the success of the 7Rem is that it was the first "affordable, bluecollar, bareable recoil" magnum brought to the market by a major maker. Remember that Roy Weatherby's first magnum was the 270 and I'm sure that was based on the fact that when he did it in the 40s the 270/Oconnor affair was in full swing. (Remember likewise that Mr. Jack went on record several times as quoting the 7mmMauser to be his favorite!) I guess that is why Remington didn't "reinvent" the wheel and do a 270 mag vs the 7 they came out with. BUT it is my opinion that if either Remington, Winchester or Ruger simply took a 7Rem dimensioned case (blownout and straightened and shortened 300H&H) and stuck a 277 in it and called it the XYZ 270Mag and keep ammo prices reasonable, it would sell like HOTCAKES shortmags be damned. There's just that much sentimental and determinedness in the American shooting publics mind concerning the .277 bore! I PROMISE you it would go over. Imagine the ".270 O'connor Magnum"??? You'd have to sell lottery tickets for the first few runs of rifles!!!
We're a finicky lot we hunters,
RA
#25
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 171
![Default](https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
"Aint tryin to rain on anyones parade, it sounds like someone is in need of extra re-assurance as too their decision and purchase (RedAlison)."
Wrong...Actually I am not trying to justify a purchase because I do not own one. From looking at balistics I could not understand why the 7mm wsm was not selling more.
Wrong...Actually I am not trying to justify a purchase because I do not own one. From looking at balistics I could not understand why the 7mm wsm was not selling more.
#26
Typical Buck
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 604
![Default](https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
James B I will assume your numbers came from a reloading manual not a factory load. I rechecked the factory offerings and found the 7MM Remington behind by over 100 + FPS at 140, 150, and 160 grains. Before you go back to saying the WSM numbers are being misrepresented, just remember they both have case capacities of 83 grains (so I am not sure what you meant by "bigger 7s") and the WSM has a higher pressure limit. So it makes sense that the WSM will be ahead. This is giving you the benifit of the doubt, that the shorter cases are not more efficient than the longer cases as the manufacturers claim.
#27
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: WV
Posts: 4,484
![Default](https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Red, (or anyone)
If you could post a link or website that contains objective opinions by gun writers you citedd earlier that state theWSMs have innacurate ballistic charts with some of these major manufacturers, I 'd appreciate it.
Thanks
If you could post a link or website that contains objective opinions by gun writers you citedd earlier that state theWSMs have innacurate ballistic charts with some of these major manufacturers, I 'd appreciate it.
Thanks
#28
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location:
Posts: 372
![Default](https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
the 7mmWSM would probably even or ahead of the 270WSM if they were released at the same time.....
they were announce together.but they had to redo the chamboer or something on the 7mmWSM so it ened up coming out a little later..........this was stated in one of the links i posted earlier
they were announce together.but they had to redo the chamboer or something on the 7mmWSM so it ened up coming out a little later..........this was stated in one of the links i posted earlier
#29
Typical Buck
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 604
![Default](https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
James B in Post # 12 you said you needed to compare bullets of equal sectional density to give them all a fair shake. Comparing cartridges this way is not a fair shake comparison. See the results below for a 3000 FPS impact:
Caliber WT SD KE lbs/Momentum
270133 .248 2658 57
7MM 140 .248 2798 60
.308 165 .248 3297 70.7
When you compare bullets of different calibers with equal sectional density and equal velocity you will see the larger bullets have far greater terminal performance. As demostrated above the .308 caliber bullet has 639 LBS, 24% more kinectic energy and 24% more momentum than the 270. Hardly a "fair shake" comparison.
Caliber WT SD KE lbs/Momentum
270133 .248 2658 57
7MM 140 .248 2798 60
.308 165 .248 3297 70.7
When you compare bullets of different calibers with equal sectional density and equal velocity you will see the larger bullets have far greater terminal performance. As demostrated above the .308 caliber bullet has 639 LBS, 24% more kinectic energy and 24% more momentum than the 270. Hardly a "fair shake" comparison.