7 mm SHERMAN SHORTMAG vs 7 SAUM

[elkaholic]

I finally found a spot in the desert to stretch the legs on the 7SS a little more. I was able to get out to 1100 yards where I was at and the 7 held .3 moa in good conditions. This thing is going to be a long range hammer with the 180's.....Rich

 

[MudRunner2005]

Post & Quote transferred from another thread...

Let me know. If I can get my pics to post, I will put up a pic of a doe I shot at 854 yards with the 7ss. Center punched her shoulder with a 180vld and dropped her like a rock....rich

Very nice! I probably have 500 unopened 180 VLD's sitting around, since I found such an awesome load in my STW with the 180 Hybrids... Wouldn't mind having an excuse to use them.

I have heard of some folks claiming to get better velocity with the Hybrid bullets over the VLD's, even in the same weight class... Have you noticed any higher velocities with the 180 Hybrids? Also, what velocities have you seen with 180 Hybrids and 168 VLD's? What all powders have you tried? 7828 SSC? 7977? H1000? I've got like 4 lbs of H1000 collecting dust...

7977 should be right on-par with RL26, and 7828 SSC is right next to RL25 on the burn chart. So, I might be able to interchange some load data...

 

[elkaholic]

Post & Quote transferred from another thread...



Very nice! I probably have 500 unopened 180 VLD's sitting around, since I found such an awesome load in my STW with the 180 Hybrids... Wouldn't mind having an excuse to use them.

I have heard of some folks claiming to get better velocity with the Hybrid bullets over the VLD's, even in the same weight class... Have you noticed any higher velocities with the 180 Hybrids? Also, what velocities have you seen with 180 Hybrids and 168 VLD's? What all powders have you tried? 7828 SSC? 7977? H1000? I've got like 4 lbs of H1000 collecting dust...

7977 should be right on-par with RL26, and 7828 SSC is right next to RL25 on the burn chart. So, I might be able to interchange some load data...

As a comparison, the 215 hybrid will reach the same velocity as the 210 vld in a Berger. I have not really tested that in the 7, but I am sure the short bearing surface would win out. I have pretty much stuck with RL26 so far because I have had such great success in the 6.5 for velocity and very low es. RL26, H1000, and 7977 are all very close in burning rate but RL26 has considerably more energy per grain it seems. The 7977 did seem to give good accuracy when I tried it and I think H1000 would be about the same. Since Hodgdon owns both, I am not too sure the 7977 is not just H1000 with copper reducer?? The RL26 maxes out at about 3050' with the 180. I do run a .040" drill bit thru the hollow point of the vld's...Rich

 

[MudRunner2005]

As a comparison, the 215 hybrid will reach the same velocity as the 210 vld in a Berger. I have not really tested that in the 7, but I am sure the short bearing surface would win out. I have pretty much stuck with RL26 so far because I have had such great success in the 6.5 for velocity and very low es. RL26, H1000, and 7977 are all very close in burning rate but RL26 has considerably more energy per grain it seems. The 7977 did seem to give good accuracy when I tried it and I think H1000 would be about the same. Since Hodgdon owns both, I am not too sure the 7977 is not just H1000 with copper reducer?? The RL26 maxes out at about 3050' with the 180. I do run a .040" drill bit thru the hollow point of the vld's...Rich

I did't know Hodgdon owned IMR, but it does make sense, since they come in the same jugs, just with different labels and different color caps. LOL

I hadn't really paid that much attention to that before.

My local store doesn't stock 26, I think they do have a couple jugs of 25, but I already have tons of 7828 SSC (which is the same burn as 25), so I would probably go that route.

 

[RH300UM]

Makes me think about a rebarrel job for the 6.5 SS Rich. Or a
Lone Peak Ti action and a manners EH2 stock and a 4 or 5 contour fluted barrel 24 inches would make a "killer" mountain rig!!!
Decisions decisions

 

[bigngreen]

Makes me think about a rebarrel job for the 6.5 SS Rich. Or a
Lone Peak Ti action and a manners EH2 stock and a 4 or 5 contour fluted barrel 24 inches would make a "killer" mountain rig!!!
Decisions decisions

^^^^ Awesome sauce right there!

I had a good conversation with Brian about his Ti action, I'm going to order one and see how it is but it sounds like it may be thee Ti action to build on!!

 

[elkaholic]

Makes me think about a rebarrel job for the 6.5 SS Rich. Or a
Lone Peak Ti action and a manners EH2 stock and a 4 or 5 contour fluted barrel 24 inches would make a "killer" mountain rig!!!
Decisions decisions

I have been thinking along the same lines for my next build! I might add a proof research barrel to the mix as well. A guy on the forum from Az. just built one and it shot one hole while fire forming the brass I sent him. I have TOO many heavy rifles. A 6 lb. rifle that was capable of 800+ yards would be pretty nice! I'm getting old......Rich

 

[RH300UM]

^^^^ Awesome sauce right there!

I had a good conversation with Brian about his Ti action, I'm going to order one and see how it is but it sounds like it may be thee Ti action to build on!!

I think they are.

 

[RH300UM]

I have been thinking along the same lines for my next build! I might add a proof research barrel to the mix as well. A guy on the forum from Az. just built one and it shot one hole while fire forming the brass I sent him. I have TOO many heavy rifles. A 6 lb. rifle that was capable of 800+ yards would be pretty nice! I'm getting old......Rich

The problem with the proof barrel is the contour is to big for the EH2. Then you have to go to a MCS-T and loose the weight savings. I haven't seen a really good stock that will fit the proof barrel and give the features of the EH2.
+1 on the heavy rifles. Looking at changing all my actions to the Razor Ti model from Lone Peak.
Time to get lightened up for the mountain hunts that I hunt mostly.

 

[elkaholic]

You would lose on the stock weight but not nearly as much as the savings on the barrel. Also, you could put on a much stiffer barrel than the same weight in a stainless or chrome moly version. i.e. a light sendero P R barrel would be more like a featherweight....Rich

 

[RH300UM]

You would lose on the stock weight but not nearly as much as the savings on the barrel. Also, you could put on a much stiffer barrel than the same weight in a stainless or chrome moly version. i.e. a light sendero P R barrel would be more like a featherweight....Rich

True and a good point

 

[MudRunner2005]

I have been thinking along the same lines for my next build! I might add a proof research barrel to the mix as well. A guy on the forum from Az. just built one and it shot one hole while fire forming the brass I sent him. I have TOO many heavy rifles. A 6 lb. rifle that was capable of 800+ yards would be pretty nice! I'm getting old......Rich

I agree. A 26" P.R. barrel in a 7SS would be awesome, and lightweight.

 

[Pdvdh]

Re: Lightweight rifles

Almost all of my Alaskan hunting is backpack hunting in the mountains. I recommend handling a 6 lb rifle before spending an extra $7-900 building one, just to make sure you're going to like that light of a rifle. There's a point of diminishing returns cost-wise, but then there's a weight of rifle that gets to being lighter than I prefer for long range targets - no matter the cost of the components.

The lightest rifle I've long range backpack hunted with is a Tikka T3 Lite, factory spec weight of 6 3/8 lbs. The first thing that became obvious was a 30oz scope on a rifle of this weight was a poorly balanced combination - for me. I shoot OK with the Tikka T3 rifle weight, but it requires a consistently good shooting technique. A 22oz scope on that same rifle, using an aluminum scope rail and aluminum rings was a big improvement, and handles reasonably well. The last scope I purchased for a long range hunting rifle weighs 16oz.

If I want to be engaging game at 700yds and further, I've settled in the 8 lb range for the bare naked rifle, as an acceptable compromise between carry weight, and stability at the moment of the shot. I use the "edge" weight stocks and put that weight savings into the barrel. I also purchase a lighter weight scope and all-aluminum bases/rings. I don't flute my barrels, let alone purchase the carbon-wrapped barrels. I could save some more carry weight with those additional expenses, but I'm not convinced I'd appreciate the weight savings at the moment I'm getting ready to touch the trigger.

I'll say this about my backpack hunting and rifle & scope packaged-weight experiences, looking back over the past 40 years in Alaska. There's definitely a weight limit that I find intolerable to the point that I resent any rifle & scope combination that exceeds that limit of toleration. The rifle is packed/carried 99.999% of the time. Fired at game 0.001% of the time. I recommend identifying your cussing weight, and then staying just under it, in order to assist ability to hit the target at longer ranges.

 

[elkaholic]

Re: Lightweight rifles

Almost all of my Alaskan hunting is backpack hunting in the mountains. I recommend handling a 6 lb rifle before spending an extra $7-900 building one, just to make sure you're going to like that light of a rifle. There's a point of diminishing returns cost-wise, but then there's a weight of rifle that gets to being lighter than I prefer for long range targets - no matter the cost of the components.

The lightest rifle I've long range backpack hunted with is a Tikka T3 Lite, factory spec weight of 6 3/8 lbs. The first thing that became obvious was a 30oz scope on a rifle of this weight was a poorly balanced combination - for me. I shoot OK with the Tikka T3 rifle weight, but it requires a consistently good shooting technique. A 22oz scope on that same rifle, using an aluminum scope rail and aluminum rings was a big improvement, and handles reasonably well. The last scope I purchased for a long range hunting rifle weighs 16oz.

If I want to be engaging game at 700yds and further, I've settled in the 8 lb range for the bare naked rifle, as an acceptable compromise between carry weight, and stability at the moment of the shot. I use the "edge" weight stocks and put that weight savings into the barrel. I also purchase a lighter weight scope and all-aluminum bases/rings. I don't flute my barrels, let alone purchase the carbon-wrapped barrels. I could save some more carry weight with those additional expenses, but I'm not convinced I'd appreciate the weight savings at the moment I'm getting ready to touch the trigger.

I'll say this about my backpack hunting and rifle & scope packaged-weight experiences, looking back over the past 40 years in Alaska. There's definitely a weight limit that I find intolerable to the point that I resent any rifle & scope combination that exceeds that limit of toleration. The rifle is packed/carried 99.999% of the time. Fired at game 0.001% of the time. I recommend identifying your cussing weight, and then staying just under it, in order to assist ability to hit the target at longer ranges.

Good points Paul. My main goal would be a carry rifle that would be used primarily where I think it is going to be close up and personal but would have the ABILITY to shoot longer range if the situation arose. That is why I think a short action 6.5 SS with a 22" barrel at over 3000' with the 150's would be a good choice. There are lightweight scopes available now that have 5-6x magnification so maybe a 3x18 or even 4x24 would work to allow good field of view close up but enough power for longer ranges. I might not use a turret scope either, but a good BDC style.......Rich