I plan on a long range target bolt action, and to start reloading again-I reloaded .223 for a few years, a few years ago.

I can't seem to find much on the 7mm Rem Mag. Except ballistically a very flat and fast round. The case is belted, how does that affect cost and resizing the brass?

The rifle I'm thinking of is 700 Sendero or similar. Purpose is a target, sniper/ counter sniper gun.

Anything a 7 mag will do a 300 mag will do better, don’t know if that helps I own both and like both

.300 mag. Is still in the mix. That would open up a lot more choices in rifles. Just something about the .284 and the belted case...

TBH I'm kind of tired of hearing about the 6.5 C, though I get why, just looking for something a little different.

7mm magnum is a fantastic choice for a long range rifle I  love mine.

I used to work with a guy who hunted coyote with Sendero 700 in 7mm Mag.  This was in western Mn, shots were longer.

define long range? for anything under 1000 I would go 6.5X47 lapua in a heartbeat. anything under 600 I would ( and did ) go 6mmBR also with lapua brass. for beyond 1k? 338 lapua baby. belted magnums are outdated and not an idea base for a true precision build.  Its not as precise as locating off the neck. 

for an off the shelf option I feel the 300WM is way more versitle especially if speaking about a long range cartridge.

however a 7mm mag in a fast twist barrel throated for the heavies is a whole nother animal. but if I were to go this far I would consider a 28 nosler or even a 7mm-300WM rather than a straight 7mm mag.

1000M+

I hear you but t wanting to stay with a factory rifle and reasonable ~$1/ Rd. factory ammo until I am set up for reloading.

Thanks.

I know quit a few serious long range shooters, but I don't know anybody who shoots a 7mm magnum or anybody who shoots a modern, off-the-shelf Remington rifle.  The cartridge is too overbored, too large of capacity, too loud, too much recoil, and too expensive.  The rifle is made by lawyers, not engineers or gunsmiths.  There is no way to properly seat a bullet for long range accuracy in the extended throat that characterizes all new Remington 700s.  And, then there's the trigger....

Get out your loading manual and go to the tables in the back.  Find the table that presents ballistic coefficients of bullets of various caliber.  Find the caliber that has the best BC.  It won't be hard, it will stick out to you like a sore thumb if you look for it.

Then, get a Savage rifle in that caliber.

I don't understand this thread. OP you come across as someone who isn't actually serious about your stated goals. There's a reason no long range shooters are using Rem 700s in 7mag. It's OK to want to be different, but when that means swimming against the current of tried and true, it usually means you end up just making your own life more difficult. There are better cartridges and better rifles than what your're suggesting.

OK "better" is subjective. Just looking for a heavy hitting cartridge capable at 700-1000 yards, in factory rifles and a wide selection of factory ammo choices to start. I won't be entering competitions, nor spending thousands of dollars on the endeavor. From what I've read, the ATF/ FBI adopted it for counter/ sniper cartridge, so I was asking about it. I plan on reloading for it, down the road so that is another consideration. That said, there is a lot written about 7mm Rem Mag comparisons that are well fleshed out, I probably should have started there.

Never mind.

You haven't looked at the ballistic coefficient tables yet, have you.

I have no idea what a "heavy hitting" cartridge is.  I do, however, know what penetration is.  Bullets that move through the air efficiently -- because of their high ballistic coefficient -- also penetrate better than bullets with a lesser BC.

Agree. The OP is a newbie swimming up stream and not doing it very well.

You want long range in a standard action: it's called the 300 Win Mag, which the military uses for several reasons.

They don't use a 7mm magnum.  Focus, dudenal, it ain't rocket science.

300 Win Mag would be my choice if you must have a magnum load.  If not and you want to get into the 6.5-7mm non-mag loads range then that opens up to some really good long range cartridges.  You being tired of hearing something should be a red flag or flashing lights that it is probably a good option to think about.  6.5 Creedmore or 260 Rem are really good long range cartridges.  If you are going to shoot more than 10 rounds in a setting they are also far less punishing as a magnum load.  Lastly the available loads coming out for the 6.5 and 260 are expanding fast.  If you must have a 7mm the 7mm08 is a great almost forgotten cartridge that can be found pretty easy and all these loads are much cheaper than you are going to find 7mmRemMag.  Sometimes going against the grain just to go against it gains you nothing when some of the more knowledgeable people are boring you with 6.5 or 260.  Just because they are boring does not mean they are not better options.  One thing I found that is bad with magnum loads is being able to see your bullet impact this is very important when long range shooting and 300WM and 7RM are hard to do this with.  I cannot emphasize how important spotting your shot at range is vs "hard hitting".

Want to be a cool kid? 300 Norma Magnum.

Otherwise 6.5CM.

Although 6.5PRC is sexy.

The United States Secret Service used the 7mm Rem Mag for over 20 years, then transitioned to the 300 Winchester Magnum in the mid-90s.

They called their hand-built rifles the JAR.  Just Another Rifle.

For this being my first non-.223 bolt gun, magnums are out due to cost of factory ammo, since hand-loading won't be in the cards until the spring. And excessive recoil.

I did look at a Savage 10T-SR in 6 CM and 6.5 CM today. Lots of gun for the $, and lots of weight , non-scoped at 10 lbs.

Good choice... do not rule out the 260 Rem and 7mm08 both good cartridges also even 308 is not bad.  Caliber is really only a small part of long range shooting... good accurate rifle with a good trigger(Savage is good choice), quality optic with appropriate magnification, bi-pod and stock bag, I like a shooting mat for comfort(comfort plays into shooter ability to hit targets), and training in precision shooting really helps.  Being able to understand ballistics will be more valuable than any caliber you choose.  Learn how to keep a dope book on your rifle and to develop a dope sheet for your load.  I am no expert but have done some long range shooting in my life and caliber/cartridge choice is not biggest thing to worry about.  I learned long ago that the ability to spot your shot was probably the most important aspect of long range shooting because it allows you to make instant corrections for a follow up shot using a hold over.

The 7mm Remington Magnum is a magnum cartridge that works well without generating much more recoil than a .30-06.  

The 7mm Rem Mag to .30-06 comparison is pretty reasonable.    When you're looking at long range shots with a 7mm you're looking at a bullet weight of at least 162 grains.  A 7mm Rem Mag will launch one of those at 3000 fps while a .30-06 will launch a comparable 168 gr bullet at 2900 fps.   At 175 grains the 7mm Rem Mag gains another 100 fps over a 180 grain bullet from a .30-06 - but the 7mm Rem Mag is burning another 10 grains of powder to get it, and it's harder on the throat.

On the plus side, the BCs are higher for the 7mm in comparable weight ranges, so that extra 100 fps along with a better BC will give you a flatter shooting round, with a bit less windage.  

The 7mm Rem Mag is a very capable 1000 yard cartridge.  The Secret Service used the 7mm Rem Mag for years with a 168 gr SMK at 2,950 fps.  That load stays supersonic out to 1250 yards, and drops only 20.5 MOA at 1000 yards from a 500 yard basic zero.  

That's not bad performance.  It's significantly better than the .30-06 which manages 2,650 fps with a 175 gr SMK, staying supersonic to 1100 yards and dropping 34.5 MOA at 1000 yards from a 500 yard zero. The 190 gr SMK does a bit better at a MV of 2,600 fps, staying supersonic to 1150 yards and dropping 33.5 MOA at 1000 yards with the same 500 yard zero.  Out past the 600 yard line, the 7mm Rem mag is a LOT flatter shooting than a .30-06 - and it does it without much more recoil.  There's something to be said for that.

The 7mm Rem Magnum compares pretty well with the .300 Win Magnum when the bullet weights are comparable.  The .300 WM drives a 168 gr bullet at 3200 fps - a 300 fps edge over the 7mm Rem Mag.  At 180 grains it's still getting 3100 fps, a 200 fps edge over the 7mm Rem Mag.  It burns a bit more powder, but it's a larger bore and it isn't any harder on the throat.  However, the 7mm Rem Mag still makes up that lost velocity with a better BC.  

But, to be fair, the sweet spot for the .300 Win Mag is in the 190 to 220 grain range - well beyond what the 7mm Rem Mag can manage.  With a 190 gr bullet the .300 WM will still deliver 2,950 fps and a 190 gr SMK will stay supersonic out to 1,350 yards, with 19.5 MOA of drop at 1000 yards from a 500 yard basic zero.  

On one hand, that's 100 yards farther than the 7mm Rem Mag, and 1 MOA better at 1000 yards, but on the other hand it's only 100 yards and 1 MOA better, at the expense of substantially more recoil.

But, again to be fair to the .300 WM, with a 220 gr SMK at 2,850 fps the 300 Win Mag's numbers improve a bit more, staying supersonic to just over 1500 yards, and dropping only 18.5 MOA at 1000 yards from a 500 yard basic zero.   That's now 250 yards farther and 2 MOA better than the 7mm Rem Mag.

----

In the big picture the .300 Win Mag has remained more popular than the 7mm Rem Mag as a very long range cartridge because it can handle heavier bullets with decent BCs that perform better past 1200 yards.  In fact, with those heavy bullets, the .300 Win Mag also holds up pretty well compared to the .338 magnums.

But, unless you are really going to shoot past 1200 yards on a regular basis, the 7mm Rem Mag will work just fine.  In some respects it's a better choice as a plains hunting round as while it does not have the heavy weight bullet capability of the .300 Win Mag it accommodates lighter bullets that have much better BCs than comparable 30 caliber bullets, which gives it more flexibility for smaller game, long range varmints, coyotes, etc.    

----

With all that said, I still prefer the lowly .308 Win to either the 7mm Rem Mag or .300 Win Mag cartridge for ranges less than about 800 yards.  It's got light recoil in a medium heavy barreled rifle, barrel life is superb in a bolt action .308.  It's also an inherently accurate cartridge that is easy and comparatively inexpensive to hand load.   It burns substantially less powder and you can maintain a much higher rate of fire if you're shooting long range varmints without over heating the barrel.

There's a lot to be said for that.

Belted magnums have a belt to make head spacing easier with the long case.  That's the theory anyway. In practice, head spacing on the belt is notoriously poor, and you end up with a fair bit of case stretch on the first firing of the case.  Belts made sense back when the shoulder angles were shallow (think .300 H&H Magnum, and .375 H&H - the parent case for the .300 Win Mag), but it makes a lot less sense now with the sharper shoulder angles on modern magnum cartridges (.300 Dakota, .300 RUM, etc).  The .300 Win mag has a sharp shoulder angle and certainly doesn't need a belt, but the belt came along for the ride as the parent case had one, and because belts were also a marketing tool at the time.    

If you are loading for just one rifle, then you can easily get by with neck sizing in many rifles, or failing that, just partially sizing the case, taking care not to move the shoulder back any farther than is needed to get the round to chamber easily.  That will maximize your brass life by minimizing case stretch.

The 7mm Rem Mag has an advantage in terms of once fired brass costs.  Despite being a lot more common, and available as military surplus, cleaned .300 WM brass costs between $65-75 per hundred depending on where you buy it. In comparison cleaned 7mm Rem Mag brass costs you about $40-$45 per hundred.

You'll appreciate a compound press when loading a magnum rifle cartridge as they do take a lot more effort, even with just partial re-sizing.

----

Rifle wise, I like the Sendero.   People complaint that quality seems to have fallen off on the newer Remington 700s. However, it's largely the same phenomenon that's befallen the Ruger 10/22.  Way back in the day they were actually moderately high end, well made rifles.  What they've become is a base rifle for aftermarket parts.  The base model 700s fall in the same category.

For example you can buy a 700 SPS tactical for around $600.  The stock is a throw away item as it's not stiff enough for serious shooting with a bipod or sling, the X-mark Pro trigger is crap, and the barrels are a bit of a crap shoot - some perform well and some don't perform quite as well.    I bought one, with the full understanding I'd need a new stock (about $350 for what I wanted), and a new trigger ($150 will get you a nice Timney trigger), and I understood I might need to re-barrel it.  

I got lucky as my barrel is 1 MOA accurate and extremely stable and consistent, so while the accuracy is acceptable but not phenomenal it'll do it all day long with a reasonable rate of fire without changing the point of impact.  Thus I have a bit over $1100 invested in what started as  a $600.  I could have bought something very similar from Remington for around $1400-$1500, but it would still need a new trigger, so even if I got screwed on the  in my SPS, my cost would have been the same in the end - and I'd have what In wanted for stock, trigger and barrel rather than with what Remington wanted to put on it.

So yes, quality has suffered on the low end Rem 700s, but that's because it's your basic lego starter set and you can build it the way you want it.  But people still bitch because they see a $600 low end rifle and think it should shoot well above it's price range.   If you want a rifle that does that, you should look at Savage.

-----

A rifle is only as good as the sight that is on it, and if you're talking about long range shooting, you need optics that are good enough to allow you to see the target at long range.  That means adequate magnification.  10X is about the minimum if you're shooting out past 600 yards, but don't go crazy. 14-16X is plenty until you get well past 1000 yards and 20-22x is the upper limit for practical purposes.  You can get scopes in the 30-32x range, but that's actually pretty stupid for a rifle used in the field.

The reason for that is that you need a sufficiently large exit pupil to be able to use that magnification in anything other than bright light.  A  4-14x56 scope will have an exit pupil about 4mm in diameter at 14X, and that is well matched to the size of your pupil even on heavy overcast days. Which means you can actually use all the magnification without compromising apparent brightness or image quality.   And as the sun goes down you can back the magnification down to about 8-9xx.  This will give you an exit pupil in the 6-7mm range, which is as large as alight adapted pupil gets.    

In comparison, with a 5.5-22x50 scope, the exit pupil at 22x is only 2.2mm.  That limits you to only bright sunny days at 22x. On an overcast day the image will be dark and you'll only be illuminating a portion of your retina.  With the 50mm objective, you'll need to go down to 7x to get a 7mm exit pupil.  

In short, you want a large objective - and 56mm is about as large as is practical on a rifle you're going to use in the field, and you want a reasonable magnification range.  I find 4-14x works fine - it lets me see long range targets in sufficient detail, it lets me take advantage of the wider fields of view of 4x-6x at shorter ranges, and the lower magnifications at 8x and under provide a 7mm exit pupil for good low light performance.


What really sets a long range optic apart however are accurate, predictable and repeatable adjustments with no back lash, and a reticle that is actually aligned with the elevation and windage adjustments.   In general, you get what you pay for, and if you're spending $1000 on a rifle, you should plan to spend $1000 on the scope as well.  Again, you don't have to go crazy on either optical quality or whiz bang features, but you do need acceptably good optics and superb adjustments.

Flat shooting is nice, but once you get beyond a rifle's point blank range, you're going to be relying on good range estimation, good wind estimation and the adjustments on your scope - fed by either a range card, a whiz wheel or a ballistic app.   The adjustments have to be precise and repeatable with no lag or back lash if you want to get the first round on target.   A flat shooting rifle still offers some advantage however in terms of reducing the effects of an error in range or wind estimation, and that becomes progressively more important as the range increases.  

Here's my Remington 700 as built and scoped for about $2100. I like it fine, it does what I need it to do out to the 800 yards ranges I'll shoot it, and it does it very, very consistently, and it's "only" a .308.

Choose a bullet first...

didn't think of it that way, but that is in essence what I do. I build around the bullet I want to shoot. or at least weight class of bullets.

I have no doubt now the 7mag will be my magnum rifle when I can get shoot enough land to stretch it out and begin have my medium and varmint rifles sorted.Here in SW Ohio, a predator rifle under 400 yards is more realistic vs. an anti-personnel shot a click away.   I also have the wrinke of going with a left handed bolt gun.

I ended up going with the 6.5x55 Sweedish Mauser via a left hand Tikka T3x hunter. Next will be decent glass, and components.

Some seriously informative posts, sir.

interesting but nice choice! the sweed should yield some respectable performance and with all of the high bc 6.5 bullets out there it should be a great tool.

Dude, SW Ohio might as well be northern Kentucky in terms of terrain: rolling steep hills, gullies, ravines, hollows, and hardly anything flat.

It's more realistic to think of 200yds as the practical maximum, with maybe an occasional 300yd shot if you're shooting across a small hollow where they cut down trees and cleared out brush to run the power-lines.

Yep, for the short hunting ranges in SW Ohio, you don't need a magnum-anything. That 6.5 Swede will serve you just fine.