7 Mag Bullet Choice

[WesternRookie]

Assuming accuracy is equal, which would you personally prefer for a bull elk hunt?

175 gr Nosler Partition @ 3000 fps

140 gr Barnes TTSX @ 3190 fps

 

[MTLabrador]

Whichever one you want to use. A 140 copper is plenty for elk.

 

[N2TRKYS]

160 grain Partition did very well on my bull last year.

 

[nrpate05]

160 Barnes TSX @ 2950

 

[stw]

Barnes TSX 140 grain out of a STW 3300fps

 

[WildWill]

I Vote for the 175 gr partitions.

 

[1100RemingtonMan]

Neither I would use Nosler 160gr AB
For what it worth my Brothers friend was shooting Federal 30-06 with Barnes Copper bullet and we found one under the hide of a Caribou with zero expansion.

 

[Doublegunner]

140 ttsx is what I set my 7mm Remington mag up for.

 

[DropTyne]

With the current lineup of .284 bullets currently available, our discussion would be much shorter if we discussed which bullets would be bad choices.

You will never be able to tell the difference in terminal performance with either of the 2 bullets you mention on elk. However, the difference in recoil and trajectory will be obvious.

Personally, I would lean towards something like a 150-160 Partition/Accubond or a 140-150 TTSX.

Good luck

 

[JLS]

I’d use the Barnes.

 

[Gunner46]

^ What Drop said. I like the 150 PT idea.... A Lot !

 

[LongCut]

Instead of recommending something other than the two choices you gave, I would ask:

How far are you capable of and willing to shoot at game, with either of those bullets?

I'm fairly certain that both will do just fine, but what about at 300 yards? 400 yards? 500+yards??

I personally would lean towards the heavier of those two you named, assuming everything else is equal.

 

[6mm Remington]

My father only used one bullet in his 7mm for everything from antelope, deer, and elk. IT was a 160 gr. Partition. It never failed him either.

If it was me I would go with one of these if either shot very well in your rifle. I would go with the one that was most accurate.

160 gr. Accubond
160 gr. Partition

 

[sneakypete]

175 corelokts been working just fine for me!

 

[Walkathon]

I shot a mule deer buck last year with the 140 TTSX out of my 7MM Rem mag. Worked great. I'd use it on elk for sure if I had a tag.

 

[Seamaster]

If you can get 3,000 fps (using a chronograph) with the 175 then that would be clearly my choice between the two. I have killed quite a few elk with the NP. As mentioned above the 160 grain Accubond would be an excellent choice.

 

[H&H]

I started with 140g Barnes TTSX and switched last year to 150g Barnes. Trajectory is almost exactly the same and get a little more energy out of it, about 150 ft-lbs. I was hunting an area where 3-400 yd shot would be necessary. Took a cow with one shot.

 

[vikingload]

Assuming accuracy is equal, which would you personally prefer for a bull elk hunt?

175 gr Nosler Partition @ 3000 fps

140 gr Barnes TTSX @ 3190 fps

Really depends what your rifle likes shooting. My rifle likes heavier bullets so i shoot 168 Berger. If like you said accuracy is the same 140 would be plenty for elk, but I do love nosler bullets.

 

[WesternRookie]

Really depends what your rifle likes shooting. My rifle likes heavier bullets so i shoot 168 Berger. If like you said accuracy is the same 140 would be plenty for elk, but I do love nosler bullets.

I have worked up many loads with many bullets, and these are the two most accurate, and these are the velocities I get, which is why I posted the original post the way I did. I know folks can't help themselves though, this is the internet after all, lol

 

[noharleyyet]

Assuming accuracy is equal, which would you personally prefer for a bull elk hunt?

175 gr Nosler Partition @ 3000 fps

140 gr Barnes TTSX @ 3190 fps

The heavy...