Super Magnum, Short Magnums, and Standard Rounds

[Shadow]

What is the word on some of the new rounds being developed. I am guilty of liking new gadgets, and some of the increased velocity is appealing to me. Though I would never probably actually need it. I have heard some negative things about the super magnums and their long powder columns and barrel life. On the flip side, I have heard very little on the short mags. I heard from a dealer that Browning is going to unveil a .270 short mag soon. That ought to be an interesting round. Does anyone have any experince with these new rounds. A local sporting good store here can sell you a 7mm Ultra Mag, but they can't get ammo for it yet. A lot of good that would do. A article I read on the 7 Ultra stated that it started a 140 grain partition at 3425 fps. It also said handloaders should be able to get an additional 300 to 400 fps out of the round. Now that is whistling dixie!

[ October 30, 2001: Message edited by: Alan Shadow ]

[Mike375]

Alan,

The stuff put out on accuracy with the short fat case (like 6mm PPC) will have no bearing unless it is a bench rifle and even then you would need several rifles for a difference to become apparent. In other words if you had a 7mm Short, a 300 WSM, a 7mm Rem and a 300 Win the most accurate would be determined by the individual rifle.

I prefer the longer cases mainly because of the long action since I am always thinking of rebarreling or rechambering and the short actions puts some limits on what you can do.

With reloads the short magnums will probably be close to 100 f/s slower than the 7mm Rem and 300 Win with reloads.

Barrel life will be short with the 7mm and 300 Rem Ultra but that is simply because of the large case capacity for the bore size, rather than case shape.

Of the new calibers I think the 300 Rem Ultra has the best combination of practicality, pizzaz and performance.

Mike