Talk:7mm Remington Magnum

Ballistics

I wouldn't say "The 7 mm Remington Magnum offers ballistics superior to the .30-06 Springfield with all equivalent bullet weights." It's true merely by technicality. The 7mm rem mag maximum size factory round is a 175 gr. The 30-09 ballistics are best at the 180 to 200 gr. Also, this in not a fair way to compare cartridges of different diameters. It's more meaningful to compare "best rounds".

It is true that the 7MM Shoots flatter with equivalent zero's and bullet weights. However, to say the 7MM is ballistically superior to the 30-06 is splitting hairs! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.227.51.162 (talk) 21:44, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Headspacing

The article states "The original purpose of the belted magnum concept taken from the .300 H&H and .375 H&H, was to provide precise control of the head-space, since the sloping shoulders, while easing cartridge extraction, provided poor head-spacing." If the sloping shoulders ease case extraction, then what would be the purpose of the belt? That doesn't make any sense and I'm guessing this is a typo?

I think the last part of the sentence is backward. The sloping shoulders of a case impede can extraction but create a more precise headspace. The belted case aids extraction, as correctly stated in the follow-up sentence, (not quoted) but at the presumed sacrifice of precise headspacing and accuracy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dgarvin1 (talk • contribs) 21:58, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Dead link

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://www.accuratepowder.com/data/PerCaliber2Guide/Rifle/Standarddata(Rifle)/264Cal(6.5mm)/264%20Winchester%20Magnum%20pages%20233%20and%20234.pdf
  • In .264 Winchester Magnum on 2011-05-20 21:36:09, 404 Not Found
  • In .264 Winchester Magnum on 2011-05-31 04:50:55, 404 Not Found
  • In 7 mm Remington Magnum on 2011-06-19 21:12:23, 404 Not Found

--JeffGBot (talk) 21:12, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Incorrectly named article

The page name should be 7mm Remington Magnum not 7 mm Remington Magnum as this is the naming convention adopted by Remington and most other companies for their cartridges. Please move or rename page to reflect this. Page has been categorized to reflect this DeusImperator (talk) 17:01, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Added to Requested Move Category

Almost everyone refers to the cartridge as the 7mm Remington Magnum. The manufacturer and the "namer" of the cartridge refers to this cartridge as the 7mm Remington Magnum. This page should be moved with all its content and history from 7 mm Remington Magnum to 7mm Remington Magnum. DeusImperator (talk) 03:07, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

There is a discussion regarding the issue in Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Firearms. Has to do with cleaning up articles and bring them up to snuff. DeusImperator (talk) 04:48, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Parent Cartridge

It would be more correct to note the parent cartridge of the 7mm Rem Magnum is the .275 H&H Magnum. (SM527RR (talk) 21:40, 7 February 2012 (UTC))

It would be an excellent addition so long as you reliably source it. And by reliably source, a well published book or government source would be an ideal start. Shadowjams (talk) 12:59, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

comparison with 7x64mm

How does this round (7mm Remington Magnum) stack up against the 7x64mm Brenneke round? They have (almost) the same bullet diameter, same case length, the 7mm Rem Mag has a slightly larger cartridge. How much mroe does the 7mm Remington Magnum deteriorate barrels, how much more energy do you get out of it, how much more does it kick? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.194.79.94 (talk) 00:08, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Missing info

The "dangerous range" is not mentioned. I think it is about 2.4 miles (~3800 metres), but somebody should find out this missing information. (I don't have an authoritative source.)77Mike77 (talk) 18:21, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on 7mm Remington Magnum. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110707080200/http://www.accuratepowder.com/data/PerCaliber2Guide/Rifle/Standarddata(Rifle)/284Cal(7.21mm)/7mm%20Remington%20Magnum%20pages%20247%20and%20248.pdf to http://www.accuratepowder.com/data/PerCaliber2Guide/Rifle/Standarddata(Rifle)/284Cal(7.21mm)/7mm%20Remington%20Magnum%20pages%20247%20and%20248.pdf

N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070928011833/http://www.accuratepowder.com/data/PerCaliber2Guide/Rifle/Standarddata(Rifle)/264Cal(6.5mm)/264%20Winchester%20Magnum%20pages%20233%20and%20234.pdf to http://www.accuratepowder.com/data/PerCaliber2Guide/Rifle/Standarddata(Rifle)/264Cal(6.5mm)/264%20Winchester%20Magnum%20pages%20233%20and%20234.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:03, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on 7mm Remington Magnum. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6I7VGrifY?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.saami.org%2Fspecifications_and_information%2Fspecifications%2FVelocity_Pressure_CfR.pdf to http://www.saami.org/specifications_and_information/specifications/Velocity_Pressure_CfR.pdf
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct/default.aspx?productNumber=638692
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct/default.aspx?productNumber=712757
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070712183443/http://www.reloadbench.com:80/cartridges/7rm.html to http://www.reloadbench.com/cartridges/7rm.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:18, 31 December 2016 (UTC)