7WSM @ 770 YARDS

Post Reply
RomeoWhiskey
Posts: 22
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 1:22 am

7WSM @ 770 YARDS

Post by RomeoWhiskey »

This is a group we shot a couple weeks ago at 768 yards. There is a knife taped to the head. Russ missed the cold bore head shot on the knife by only about 1/2". Then followed it up with a 3 shot group on the torso.

Note: Wind was held for the head shot, but not the torso. The two bolts were used for an aiming reference to try to shoot a smaller group. That is why the group wasn't centered on the torso and why it was lower than you would expect.


Orkan
Posts: 137
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2012 7:52 pm

Re: 7WSM @ 770 YARDS

Post by Orkan »

Love it! :)

You guys going to be offering factory 7WSM soon then I take it? Bullet?

RomeoWhiskey
Posts: 22
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 1:22 am

Re: 7WSM @ 770 YARDS

Post by RomeoWhiskey »

Hopefully very soon. I love the round.

That round in the video was with a 168 Berger at 3070 fps. The 180 shoots equally as well.

User avatar
Seddo
Posts: 235
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2012 6:13 am
Location: Victoria AUSTRALIA
Contact:

Re: 7WSM @ 770 YARDS

Post by Seddo »

Russ,
I have been thinking about getting a 7WSM barrel to replace my savage 284win. What sort of barrel life do you expect to get with it?

Orkan
Posts: 137
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2012 7:52 pm

Re: 7WSM @ 770 YARDS

Post by Orkan »

DTM-RussW1911 wrote:I love the round.
As do I. The 162 amax has been very good to me. I like the 160gr weighted stuff better than the 180's.

180's pick up a hundred yards or so on the far end of the rounds performance spectrum, but give up quite a bit of trajectory up close. If the 162's can't do it for me, then I need to move to the 338LM to get it done anyway... so I don't see it as a real issue. I'll take the 1200yd performance of the 162's over the 1400yd performance of the 180's. ;)

RomeoWhiskey
Posts: 22
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 1:22 am

Re: 7WSM @ 770 YARDS

Post by RomeoWhiskey »

Seddo, I'm still on my original barrel. In my research we have found that 2500 rounds is a very real and achievable number.

Orkan. One reason I like the 162 and 168 is that you can use them with the same charge and Ogive seating depth and get the same ballistics out to 1600. If memory serves, we were only .1 or .2 mils difference.

Coldbore really likes the 162 in his SAUM.

Post Reply