well, I sighted in (for the most part) my Stainless/Lam Ruger MKII and it is a fine shooter and I've very satisfied with my groups.

However; I used reduced recoil loads to sight it in...

For those of you who have the Ruger MK II in 7mag, what kind of difference in recoil should I expect when going to a regular round? Is it/will it be significant? I'd love to shoot the regular round, but not to sacrifice accuracy. After all, I bought a 7mm mag for a reason. I hunt in wyoming for Muley and Speedy-goat and someday elk, etc...

Also, if I keep shooting the reduced recoil load am I really losing anything significant? Obviously I'm accurate with it, but I'm conflicted because if I wanted a lessor load, I would have bought a smaller rifle.

In any case, I'm trying to figure out what to do and wanted to hear from some folks who have experience. I'll pick up a box of regular remington rounds and give it a shot.

Opinons/thoughts anyone?

Only downside from changing loads is they might shoot to a different point of aim. Recoil will be more, but recoil is such a subjective thing only the shooting will tell you if it's more than you like.

I prefer to shoot Full power 175gr loads, sighted in at 200 yards. It gives an effective kill range to 250 yards without changing zero. + 140 and 175's are not effected as much at these ranges. The 140 will run a couple inches higher but nothing real significant. Jim

Try the 140 grain factory loads and get use to that recoil before you jump to the 175. With what you are hunting the 140 grain bullets will work fine.

Frank

Gents,

I am wondering what the nature of the load reduction was, either light handloads or those new factory reduced recoil jobs? I am guessing that they are the factory reduced recoil loads, as my 7 RM is very sensitive to case densities, and accuracy starts going to pot when the load density goes below 80%.

I am working allot more on my 7 mag these days, my light bullet- field load, although extremely accuratte, is not besting velocities I am getting from my 270, and that irritates me more than it should. This thing of ours, what a fine and pleasant misery.

As far as point of impact in concerned, barrel harmonics play a big role in this, so individual results may vary. I have a few rifles that are so insanely sensitive to this, I only use one load. Others are way more forgiving. The one and only Ruger 77 that I own is one of those that is forgiving, although the performace range for this cartridge is narrower than all of the variety and flexibility offered of the 7RM.

Recoil will be another huge consideration, and probably the most drastic. Mark 2 Rugers are fairly light, and the 7's recoil starts to get into the noticable range. Not only the shove, but the blast that is generated post muzzle. Since recoil tolerance is a highly subjective thing, its something that will have to be expirienced to be understood. I have found that loads that are upwards of moderately uncomfortable from the bench are not even noticable in the field, and I would think for yor application full power loads, and the reach that they represent, might be a course worth pursuing.

Best to you fellows.

Steve

Can understand the factory reduced recoil ammo when a young or slightly built person is using dad's hunting rifle and is being introduced to the shooting game. Even when health issues dictate the shooter step the power level down for shooting pleasure.

I can't understand someone purchasing a chambering such as a 7 RM and then deciding to shoot the reduced loads because of anticipated recoil. Why not buy a smaller capacity cartridge of the same caliber to begin with? You can't realize the full potential of the larger cartridge by loading down.

I don't load my 7 RM or 7 Dakota to absolute full maximum capacity because of accuracy considerations, but they are just under the max recommendations. The 7 RM will print anything from 140 grainers to 162 grainers with great accuracy. The 7 Dakota dotes on 175 gr Remington Corelocks.

When these begin to pound the shoulder excessively, a step-down to a 7-08 will be considered.

What kdub said.

Probably not much point in getting it sighted in with reduced recoil loads anyway, if you aren't going to hunt with them. Sight it in with the loads you will hunt with, from a field shooting position. It's too easy to sight it in from a bench, then find out later the POI is different from a field position (sitting, standing, whatever it is you do when hunting).

If you don't like the recoil of the 7mm Mag, sell it and buy a rifle chambered for a smaller cartridge. The 7mm-08 is a great round with less recoil, and burns less powder too.

i shoot standard factory loads out of my m77 7mm rem mag and have no problem at all with the recoil. that being said i am not a large guy by any means, 5'-6" 160 lb. i did shoot some of the remington managed recoil ammo out of it for two reasons, first i was curious as well as how they would shoot, second, if i ever needed to have one of my boys shoot that rifle they are a few years away from handling a full 7mm rem mag load. the managed recoil ammo shot decent groups for me, windage wise it was dead on, but grouped about 2" lower that the full bore stuff. overall i was pleasantly surprised and pleased the way they performed out of my rifle. but what they do out of yours is any bodys guess.

WH, it has been my finding that with a lighter bullet in my 7 mag it tends to like a faster powder. Like H4350 for 150's and lighter and H1000 for 160's and above. I've pretty well stuck with 150's for several years now. Elk seem to die when I point it in their general direction. :D

RJ

Recoil of 7mmrem mag is about on par with 30 06.with pratice and proper shooting technique you should be able to handle the 7mm with no problem barring any physical limitations

well, I sighted in (for the most part) my Stainless/Lam Ruger MKII and it is a fine shooter and I've very satisfied with my groups.

However; I used reduced recoil loads to sight it in...

For those of you who have the Ruger MK II in 7mag, what kind of difference in recoil should I expect when going to a regular round? Is it/will it be significant? I'd love to shoot the regular round, but not to sacrifice accuracy. After all, I bought a 7mm mag for a reason. I hunt in wyoming for Muley and Speedy-goat and someday elk, etc...

Also, if I keep shooting the reduced recoil load am I really losing anything significant? Obviously I'm accurate with it, but I'm conflicted because if I wanted a lessor load, I would have bought a smaller rifle.

In any case, I'm trying to figure out what to do and wanted to hear from some folks who have experience. I'll pick up a box of regular remington rounds and give it a shot.

Opinons/thoughts anyone?
If you plan to shoot a lot of targets at modest ranges stick with the reduced recoil loads....for hunting you can shoot about any full power load well....just shoot a couple of rounds of high octane stuff, adjust your scope, and shoot a couple more. You shouldn't be bothered too much by 4 or 5 rounds. My 870 slug gun hammers the heck out of me at the bench but when I shoot a deer with it I don't feel a thing. Like another feller said, "Recoil is subjective". Try to remember that hefty recoil pretty much means hefty downrange smack. Ya gotta love it.
-Ed

Thanks RJ, looking at the data really hard pretty much confirms your advice. I did burn some Re 19, kind of in the 4350 range burn rate area- and while very accuratte, it was not only too slow, but the extreme spread was, well....extreme. I had some luck with IMR 4831 and the 150 Nosler, besting the 140s and the Alliant powders, so the answer is exaclty were we suspect.

I did find a wealth of Winchester WMR powder, and with the 139 Hornady its velocity was unreal. It was really hot the day that I fired it, so I am going to let the weather cool off a little, and see how much I will lose off this lot. Accuracy was good, but not outstanding.

I'm starting to get the notion that this cartridge is at its best with a middle weight bullet, and have aquired some 168 Match Kings to investigate this end. Recently picked up some H1000, and the data looks sound- although the Sierra manual does not promise much in the way of speed. This is kind of a new territory for me, as I have never been one to think on speed as all that necessary, but dog gone it- if the big 7 won't shoot flatter than my 270, then why bother?

Best to you fellows.

Steve