What really makes it a magnum?

kennygss

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2012
Messages
200
I had an interesting discussion last evening with a friend. He has developed an RL22 load for his 06' using the 168 TSX yielding about 2850 FPS. I shoot the VLD out of my 7mm remmy at about the same, the 160 partition at 3000. The question of the day is, who has the Magnum? :D His Crown induced contention was: " a 168 going 2800 is a 168 going 2800"
 
I had an interesting discussion last evening with a friend. He has developed an RL22 load for his 06' using the 168 TSX yielding about 2850 FPS. I shoot the VLD out of my 7mm remmy at about the same, the 160 partition at 3000. The question of the day is, who has the Magnum? :D His Crown induced contention was: " a 168 going 2800 is a 168 going 2800"
You are faster for your caliber. The 7mm bullets have a higher sd at the same weight, so they will penetrate better(if they are the same construction) and should have a better bc.
If you were both using the same bullet, instead of him using a average bc hunting bullet, and you using a rather high bc hybrid type bullet, it would be closer.
That being siad, it realy doesn't have anything to do with the price of tea in China until the range is extended past a few hundred yards.
 
IMO, You have the magnum, by virtue of the cartridge named '7mm Remington Magnum'.
And while a 30-06, 7-06, or a 284Win, are more or less capable, their case heads don't exceed .473" and/or they don't hold a headspacing belt in their designs.
Of course there are surely contradictions, as internal ballistic standards truly are not.
 
Oh this subject has come up around my campfire a time or two as well. Belts don't count obviously. My 300 Ultra is surely a magnum. The 7 Remington mag is a magnum in name only in my opinion. The lowly old ought six with the heavier bullets will at the very least match,if not surpass the 7 Remmy for velocity in equal barrel lengths. The otter has been proven as a long range target round longer than most can remember. I don't consider it a magnum either. One could say the rounds giving the highest velocity in a given caliber are magnums. That narrows the field considerably. Marketeing execs would hate to loose their ploy of calling a new round a magnum though.
 
And while a 30-06, 7-06, or a 284Win, are more or less capable, their case heads don't exceed .473" and/or they don't hold a headspacing belt in their designs.
For rifles, there's at least one "magnum" designated round whose head diameter's .473" so it'll work in a standard .30-06 size bolt face and it's a belted case. Tried to find others Googling around the i-net but didn't. 'Tis Roy Weatherby's .240 Wby. Magnum;

http://www.stevespages.com/jpg/cd240weatherbymagnum.jpg

And in the rifle magnum ammo chart's "pipsqueak" column, there's the .22 Winchester Magnum.

There's other rimmed cartridges used in rifles that have "Magnum" in their name, but they originated in the handgun world.
 
When you guys get this one figured out, you might want to determine what makes a product "long lasting".
 
All excellent responses as expected. In my youth, I thought magnum territory was 3000 FPS. Then I got my first 338 win mag. I figured it was a magnum because, well, it recoiled like a magnum would! I dont think winchester would have sold one 300 Win Mag if it had been named " 30 winchester standard" My afore mentioned buddy doesnt own magnums, He has 06's, 280's etc. Of course, all at magnum velocities. If I had any sense, I would be building a 280AI with Chad now, rather than a 7 rem mag, maybe I'll have him engrave "Magnum" in big, cursive script on the barrel. . . . . . . . . .. . . . .:cool:
 
(the .30-06) A good friggin design! Springfield armory got it right so long ago. . .)
I agree. Too bad it's performance in competition wasn't fully utilized after the .308 Win. chambered barrels started kicking it off the firing lines in 1963. Had the .30-06 commercial chambers had a 1.5 degree leade angle in a 1:12 twist bore, it would have shot just as accurate as the .308's did with the same leade angle and twists. So it was not the cartridge that made in unpopular, it was the chamber and bore specs used that dealt the .30-06 its death knell in competition.

While the .30-03's 220-gr. round nose needed a 1:10 twist, that's too fast for best performance with a 150-gr. spitzer at .30-06 muzzle velocities. And the 172-gr. FMJBT machine gun bullet that came out in the 1920's for the .30-06 also was best with a 1:12 twist.

Harry Pope (barrel maker extraordinaire) knew the .30-06's 150-gr. bullet would shoot much more accurate if the barrels were rifled with a 1:12 twist. Mr. Pope's said to have contacted the government and strongly suggested they use a 1:12 twist for the new '06 cartridge, but Uncle Sam chose to keep using the 1:10 twist. When Harry was contracted to make barrels for the M1903's for use in the Palma long range matches, he had to profile them the same as the arsenal barrels were. He said (in so many words): "OK, I'll make 'em on the outside like you want, but I'll make 'em on the inside like I want." He used 1"12 twists with his bore and groove specs and the USA team won the next big world championship long range matches with them.
 
My afore mentioned buddy doesnt own magnums, He has 06's, 280's etc. Of course, all at magnum velocities.
Lots of folks load smaller case cartridge for a given caliber's magnums and get magnum velocities with equal length barrels. But they typically do so at peak pressures much higher that what's safe as well as more than SAAMI/CIP specs.
 
If I had any sense, I would be building a 280AI with Chad now, rather than a 7 rem mag, maybe I'll have him engrave "Magnum" in big, cursive script on the barrel. . . . . . . . . .. . . . .:cool:


Incredible caliber that 280AI is, I built one for a close friend while he was in Iraq, I sooooo wish I built 2:)
 
Warning! This thread is more than 12 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.
Top