Thread: The next flop?

Originally Posted by Stocky

In fairness to play devils advocate, if people dont shoot a bunch to the point where ammo costs dont matter do they have any business wanting calibers that realistically only benefit them beyond the range they practiced and are competent too? ie what improvement does this give most guys that they could utilize vs say a 7mm08.

A big boomer does not make one a marksman if fact the opposite may be true.

i get that to a point but add up what you spend on everything related to actually pulling the trigger its still fuckall in the whole equation. And realistically im on under 30k a year in income and spend at least 5k so that's about 20+% of all money earned so if your on 120k a year do you spend 20 - 30K plus on hunting? Ive got a long range setup for high country work and it would only use 20 rounds a year as i've got private land access to shoot deer on so only use my 300 win mag to shoot what's not on the farm chammie, tahr and big stags hopefully. if you look at this as say recently the 7mm PRC craze 2-6000 dollars rifles getting purchased then scopes suppressors etc not much change from 6000-10,000 rifle setups so it will be the same cost at getting a new 7mmBackCountry so who cares if ammo is 200$ for 20 rounds when you've spent so much on your setup? are you going to shoot say 200 rounds a year at 2000$ and then complain about ammo cost when if it was say a 308 at 100$ for 20 thats a 1/2 the price - sort of like buying a high end car and moaning about the cost of 100 octane

and as far as should you be buying to shoot further its what 80+% of all us hunting have done in the past as you need'ish a magnum to shoot further to get the wapati across the valley or the Tahr across the ridge, learn to shoot longer range then your 308 or latte drinking 7mm08 can do with enough power to put em down. If i didn't have a 300 win mag i wouldn't shoot the backcountry with my 18" 308 past 400m because thats what the boomers are for and you only get experience by doing it and using it and to get to a point where i could use the 308 to say 700m reliably would take to much time and trips away and costs so i just use the magnum to my ability and slowly stretch it out further and further as i shoot it more often and know from using it in the scenarios what it can and cant do. And we all know of youtube channels in nz that use magnums ands non magnums to shoot long range and promote themselves but i know from people who know them how many animals they wound and loose from not using a suitable enough caliber for the range they shoot and trademe is filled with for sale long range setups that would do the job if the shooter was capable of using at distance

I remember reading somewhere that 80 percent of shooters use 20 percent of a cartridges potential. Which reminds me of the old saying beware of the man with one gun, he knows how to use it.

Originally Posted by Stocky

In fairness to play devils advocate, if people dont shoot a bunch to the point where ammo costs dont matter do they have any business wanting calibers that realistically only benefit them beyond the range they practiced and are competent too? ie what improvement does this give most guys that they could utilize vs say a 7mm08.

A big boomer does not make one a marksman if fact the opposite may be true.

Having been called an old Fudd on occasions, I see a realistic benefit from this development for what I look for in a cartridge. At the distances I can realistically shoot too and stick within, which is around 400 meters. I can pass up the opportunity of using the high BC heavies in a new cartridge like this, and go for the 155gr load. Or if it's reloadable, a 140gr load even better. No need for any special scope turrets or reticle, just a bog standard cross, and no need to hold over or ballistics chart out to 400m

To summarise, the improvement for me, would be simplicity.

Originally Posted by Stocky

In fairness to play devils advocate, if people dont shoot a bunch to the point where ammo costs dont matter do they have any business wanting calibers that realistically only benefit them beyond the range they practiced and are competent too? ie what improvement does this give most guys that they could utilize vs say a 7mm08.

A big boomer does not make one a marksman if fact the opposite may be true.

Men* buy guns for many more reasons than shooting

Conspicuous consumption
Mood affiliation
Keeping up with the Jones
Curiosity
Wanting to prove something/somebody wrong

I ain't saying it's right but it's a thing


*Women aren't generally as stupid as men

No free lunch in physics.

All steel-alloy case vs. bi-metal like the SIG FURY.

That will be fun to reload (not!)

Also, you can already get 'extra' performance from a standard case, but at what risk/cost?!

Federal own Alliant so probably cut Re26 off to Hornady (7PRC) knowing this was coming out, mines faster than yours! No way I’d pull the trigger on a savage at 80kpsi! I’d want a high quality action

Originally Posted by outdoorlad

Federal own Alliant so probably cut Re26 off to Hornady (7PRC) knowing this was coming out, mines faster than yours! No way I’d pull the trigger on a savage at 80kpsi! I’d want a high quality action

The Savage 110 is actually a strong action, only issue is they are made in the cheap.

Have seen people running a Savage at stupid pressure to the point they wore out the primary extraction cam...

Originally Posted by outdoorlad

Federal own Alliant so probably cut Re26 off to Hornady (7PRC) knowing this was coming out, mines faster than yours! No way I’d pull the trigger on a savage at 80kpsi! I’d want a high quality action

My layperson understanding from what is being said in the blurbs is that the 80k pressure is somehow absorbed/taken up by the steel casing and standard action strength is ok.

Originally Posted by Tahr

My layperson understanding from what is being said in the blurbs is that the 80k pressure is somehow absorbed/taken up by the steel casing and standard action strength is ok.

Yeah again lay person understanding, so willing to be corrected. As I understand it, the weak link in the action is the bolt lugs and face. The still case 'holds' onto the chamber better and so less force is put on those weak areas.?

Originally Posted by whanahuia

Yeah again lay person understanding, so willing to be corrected. As I understand it, the weak link in the action is the bolt lugs and face. The still case 'holds' onto the chamber better and so less force is put on those weak areas.?

I would guess "holds on to the chamber better " and due to less stretch than brass there would be less or no more bolt thrust.

Modern steel ( and some old steel ) can easily contain chamber pressure in the barrel shank and receiver ring.
It's usually backwards pressure that is harder to contain

What I find interesting about this is that the self contained cartridge really hasn't changed a lot in well over 100 years.
A lot of the incremental improvements have come from a gradual increase in chamber pressure as the firearms industry has been able to improve designs and materials to contain that pressure.

This new 7mm case is just another step along that continuum.

If you increase pressure , you need a smaller case head to withstand the excess pressure than what is generated by a magnum case.
So since case capacity is the limiting factor ( standard 7mm backcountry case close to 280 rem volume) the only thing that can rise pressure ( I presume) is loading with faster burning powder …?

Originally Posted by Friwi

If you increase pressure , you need a smaller case head to withstand the excess pressure than what is generated by a magnum case.
So since case capacity is the limiting factor ( standard 7mm backcountry case close to 280 rem volume) the only thing that can rise pressure ( I presume) is loading with faster burning powder …?

If you run out of capacity before a powder gives you the pressure you want then yes, switch to a faster powder. But if you take a few samples of different factory loadings for different cartridges, a lot of them are nowhere near to 100% fill and you can hear the powder shaking around. If you were to take one of those loadings with spare case capacity, you could quite easily keep filling them with the same powder to get up to the required pressure. That same powder is going to burn more thoroughly and completely like you'd expect a faster powder to, because the chamber pressure is so much higher.

See screenshots on the other thread (https://www.nzhuntingandshooting.co....96/index5.html). GRT suggests it's entirely possible (and I'd put money on it being the case) that they're just using a stiff dose of Re26... Which is not something you'd normally consider to be a "fast burning" powder. Yet 80,000psi gives it a 100% burn (for whatever that's worth) in a 12" barrel.

Originally Posted by Friwi

If you increase pressure , you need a smaller case head to withstand the excess pressure than what is generated by a magnum case.
So since case capacity is the limiting factor ( standard 7mm backcountry case close to 280 rem volume) the only thing that can rise pressure ( I presume) is loading with faster burning powder …?

Can simply be more of a slower powder. If you are being limited by pressure and not capacity usually adding powder is a better method once the pressure ceiling is removed.

Ok so now i need to buy some new brass / alloy cases and possibly some slighly faster powder for my 243 and 358win and they will get an extra 200fps.

will be interesting to see what happens as the new tech cases start to trickle down into existing calibers. all the reloading books will need to be redone.
Fasinating to see that they are clamining the limiting factor is brass not the existing actions.
Z