|View single post by Leonard|
|Posted: Sun Oct 23rd, 2005 05:17 AM||
|Kind of interesting how things evolve. I really wanted a 264Win. Mag. at one time. All I considered was muzzle velocity, not bullet weights or barrel life, nothing but speed.
Then I suddenly became aware of the merits of the 7mmRem. Mag. Better bullets, better barrel life and better ballistics. That's what I wanted.
Eventually, I actually had a need for a more powerful big game cartridge, and started watching the ads. Then a buddy called and said there was a Model 700 for sale out by him, but it was in 300Win. Mag. Had a decent 3X9 Leupold on it, too.
Well, I had my heart set on that 7Mag but what the heck, the price was sure right, and I could have it rebarreled if it didn't shoot. Right?
I hit the books and found out right away that the numbers compared with everything I desired about both the 264 and the 7Mag. Hmmm? Guess you just have to look in the right place?
One thing I found out was that a 300 Weatherby beat the Winchester version by quite a bit, as far as muzzle velocity, especially 150 and 180 grain bullets. However, it seemed like a 165 grain bullet was closer in performance, maybe it was a natural weight for the powder capacity of the Winchester case?
So, after dolling it up with a fibreglass stock, I went to the range with four loads of two different powders and shooting the 165 grain Hornady flat base. The first two loads were about 74 grains of IMR4350, and one was okay but the slightly hotter load was opened up a little bit.
The other two loads was with a max load of 80 grains of H4831, and 79.5 grains, both of which printed about three quarters of an inch for five shots.
That's it, over twenty-five years ago, and (truthfully) it still puts that load under a quarter. Never developed or needed any other load in that gun.
I notice several comments above about 165 grain bullets. I thought it was my little secret? Elk and deer load, and several coyotes and a bobcat or two, seems to do it all?
I have put a few 168 grain Noslers through it, just for the heck of it, same load, always with the standard w8½ primer. It is actually a tiny bit better. All my loads used to be right out of the book, but the books (these days) have become a lot more cautious. Probably with advice from the lawyers. All I know is it's safe in my gun, gives me 3265fps. It's not uncomfortable to shoot from the bench, I think the word "Mag" scares some people?
So, I found it by accident, but it has found a warm place in my heart, and I was not very receptive. I just couldn't help it, the performance won me over. In my book, it's higher than #5....and I don't need a RemUltiMag, thank you.
Good hunting. LB