7 STW limitations
- Thread starter Firedawg
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Rick Richard
Well-Known Member
Anything really, but might consider using 180 grainers for the big stuff. Oh,not sure I would use on large bears, but it can be done with correct shot placement.
MudRunner2005
Well-Known Member
With the 168, you are severely limiting yourself and handicapping the STW's abilities with both ballistics and effective range. It seems to function better using the 180 and heavier bullets. That being said, the new Berger 175 Elite Hunters look like they would be a good option, given the higher BC's and faster velocities. But they still won't keep up with a 195 Elite Hunter in kinetic energy downrange.
I wouldn't go actively seeking grizz, kodiak, or polar bears with one, but that's just me...Since you'll be at closer ranges, you'll want something that has a high-capacity, a 150 yard effective range, but dumps metric tons of KE on target like a .45-120 or a .50 Alaskan, some of the Nitro cartridges would be a good option for that. I'm not scared of dying, I just don't want it to take a long and painful time to happen, especially because I tried to do something stupid like bring a "knife" to a gunfight.
With the 7mm STW, there is really no size limit for North American herbivores with the right bullet, and good shot placement. With the right bullet, the STW can harvest just about any herbivorous game animal up to a mile (not an exaggeration). With a Berger 195 being pushed at an average of 3,000 FPS MV, it will still be holding 1256 FPS and 683 lb.ft. of energy 1,700 yards. That's enough to properly expand and make a complete pass-through with a rib shot on most game. Most folks say 1,300 FPS minimum on bullets for proper expansion, but there is some slight leeway in there, it's not an exact number.
The only limitation you will experience with the 7mm STW is with just about any and every rifle that has a magazine box shorter than 4.000". You can remedy this by using a Remington 700 magnum long action, and having a smith install a 4.000" Wyatt's Outdoors extended magazine box and follower in it.
Last edited:
WildRose
Well-Known Member
There is no limit if you use the right bullet and put it where it'll do the most good. Range would be your limiting factor with the 168's and if you're shooting Berger's you really need to put it through the lungs rather than attempting to punch bone.
Are you building or do you already have one? If building, I'd recommend going with at least a 1:8.5 or 1:8 tw over the traditional 1:9tw so you can shoot the heavier for caliber bullets.
Mine shoot best with the Accubond, Accubond LR, and Peregrine mono's. I won't shoot frangible bullets at game and certainly not at dangerous game.
Last edited:
175 and up, for everything!
Any chambering/rifle set-up limitation is the "NUT" (to include personal sets of values, standards, ethics, etc., and their invaluable "real-world" experience in hunting those games) behind the trigger.
lobo6942
Member
With the 168, you are severely limiting yourself and handicapping the STW's abilities with both ballistics and effective range. It seems to function better using the 180 and heavier bullets. That being said, the new Berger 175 Elite Hunters look like they would be a good option, given the higher BC's and faster velocities. But they still won't keep up with a 195 Elite Hunter in kinetic energy downrange
I wouldn't go actively seeking grizz, kodiak, or polar bears with one, but that's just me...Since you'll be at closer ranges, you'll want something that has a high-capacity, a 150 yard effective range, but dumps metric tons of KE on target like a .45-120 or a .50 Alaskan, some of the Nitro cartridges would be a good option for that. I'm not scared of dying, I just don't want it to take a long and painful time to happen, especially because I tried to do something stupid like bring a "knife" to a gunfight.
With the 7mm STW, there is really no size limit for North American herbivores with the right bullet, and good shot placement. With the right bullet, the STW can harvest just about any herbivorous game animal up to a mile (not an exaggeration). With a Berger 195 being pushed at an average of 3,000 FPS MV, it will still be holding 1256 FPS and 683 lb.ft. of energy 1,700 yards. That's enough to properly expand and make a complete pass-through with a rib shot on most game. Most folks say 1,300 FPS minimum on bullets for proper expansion, but there is some slight leeway in there, it's not an exact number.
View attachment 115151
The only limitation you will experience with the 7mm STW is with just about any and every rifle that has a magazine box shorter than 4.000". You can remedy this by using a Remington 700 magnum long action, and having a smith install a 4.000" Wyatt's Outdoors extended magazine box and follower in it.
With the 168, you are severely limiting yourself and handicapping the STW's abilities with both ballistics and effective range. It seems to function better using the 180 and heavier bullets. That being said, the new Berger 175 Elite Hunters look like they would be a good option, given the higher BC's and faster velocities. But they still won't keep up with a 195 Elite Hunter in kinetic energy downrange.
I wouldn't go actively seeking grizz, kodiak, or polar bears with one, but that's just me...Since you'll be at closer ranges, you'll want something that has a high-capacity, a 150 yard effective range, but dumps metric tons of KE on target like a .45-120 or a .50 Alaskan, some of the Nitro cartridges would be a good option for that. I'm not scared of dying, I just don't want it to take a long and painful time to happen, especially because I tried to do something stupid like bring a "knife" to a gunfight.
With the 7mm STW, there is really no size limit for North American herbivores with the right bullet, and good shot placement. With the right bullet, the STW can harvest just about any herbivorous game animal up to a mile (not an exaggeration). With a Berger 195 being pushed at an average of 3,000 FPS MV, it will still be holding 1256 FPS and 683 lb.ft. of energy 1,700 yards. That's enough to properly expand and make a complete pass-through with a rib shot on most game. Most folks say 1,300 FPS minimum on bullets for proper expansion, but there is some slight leeway in there, it's not an exact number.
View attachment 115151
The only limitation you will experience with the 7mm STW is with just about any and every rifle that has a magazine box shorter than 4.000". You can remedy this by using a Remington 700 magnum long action, and having a smith install a 4.000" Wyatt's Outdoors extended magazine box and follower in it.
Mudrunner how the heck are you getting 3000 fps with a 195 out of an STW?!With the 168, you are severely limiting yourself and handicapping the STW's abilities with both ballistics and effective range. It seems to function better using the 180 and heavier bullets. That being said, the new Berger 175 Elite Hunters look like they would be a good option, given the higher BC's and faster velocities. But they still won't keep up with a 195 Elite Hunter in kinetic energy downrange.
I wouldn't go actively seeking grizz, kodiak, or polar bears with one, but that's just me...Since you'll be at closer ranges, you'll want something that has a high-capacity, a 150 yard effective range, but dumps metric tons of KE on target like a .45-120 or a .50 Alaskan, some of the Nitro cartridges would be a good option for that. I'm not scared of dying, I just don't want it to take a long and painful time to happen, especially because I tried to do something stupid like bring a "knife" to a gunfight.
With the 7mm STW, there is really no size limit for North American herbivores with the right bullet, and good shot placement. With the right bullet, the STW can harvest just about any herbivorous game animal up to a mile (not an exaggeration). With a Berger 195 being pushed at an average of 3,000 FPS MV, it will still be holding 1256 FPS and 683 lb.ft. of energy 1,700 yards. That's enough to properly expand and make a complete pass-through with a rib shot on most game. Most folks say 1,300 FPS minimum on bullets for proper expansion, but there is some slight leeway in there, it's not an exact number.
View attachment 115151
The only limitation you will experience with the 7mm STW is with just about any and every rifle that has a magazine box shorter than 4.000". You can remedy this by using a Remington 700 magnum long action, and having a smith install a 4.000" Wyatt's Outdoors extended magazine box and follower in it.
lobo6942
Member
Mudrunner how the heck are you getting 3000 fps from a 195 in an STW?!
MudRunner2005
Well-Known Member
IMR 7977 or H1000.
lobo6942
Member
Thank you sir
MudRunner2005
Well-Known Member
Every rifle is different, every chamber is different, and every barrel is different. Your rifle might hit pressure before mine does, therefore I might get more velocity than someone else. Don't try to push your rifle just to try to equal what someone else's rifle will do. That's how folks end up getting hurt, and how guns get destroyed.
I'm getting 3125 FPS with 81 gn or retumbo and 195's in my STW
Mud you wrote this: "With a Berger 195 being pushed at an average of 3,000 FPS MV, it will still be holding 1256 FPS and 683 lb.ft. of energy 1,700 yards. That's enough to properly expand and make a complete pass-through with a rib shot on most game. Most folks say 1,300 FPS minimum on bullets for proper expansion, but there is some slight leeway in there, it's not an exact number."
Except for Nosler's advertisement of the LR Accubond, I haven't heard of a cup-n-core big game bullet reliably expanding down to 1200-1300 fps (thought 1800 was kind of the golden rule). Have you seen/heard/read of the 195 Bergers doing so?
Except for Nosler's advertisement of the LR Accubond, I haven't heard of a cup-n-core big game bullet reliably expanding down to 1200-1300 fps (thought 1800 was kind of the golden rule). Have you seen/heard/read of the 195 Bergers doing so?
MudRunner2005
Well-Known Member
No, I've read/seen 1,300 FPS was minimum for most hunting bullets by folks doing ballistics gel tests... But, I could be mistaken, as I haven't tested this first-hand, so I can't guarantee the accuracy of it.
Last edited:
