Curious about Hammers. 7mm Rem Mag 1:9

[Shortbowshot]

I've been reading a lot about Hammers. I'm just finishing a build on a 7mm. Shilen 1:9 barrel 24" Just curious your experience loading them. Good or bad. Seems like there's an assortment of different choices on the Website. I'm pretty bad to pick an elk bullet and hunt everything with it once I get a load I like. Will their heavier stuff perform well across game species?

 

[Deleted member 20812]

I would load the 140 Absolute Hammer. There is load data available on several forums.

I absolutely love them. Performance is great, accuracy is great, and I can always get them. I would use a 7mm and the 140 on anything in North America, without hesitation.

 

[mevertsen]

I would find a bullet to match your twist which is listed on the website.
It's pretty simple load development.

I loaded the 152 Hammer Hunter in my 3006 and am sold after my sheep hunt. This bullet will be all I need for antelope to elk.

 

[MThuntr]

140AH or 143HH...kind of depends on what you have for powder available. The 140AH needs moderately fast powder while you can get away with slower powder for the 143. Both work very well on elk well within most people's abilities.

 

[Deleted member 20812]

I just checked out of curiosity. You don’t have enough twist for the 155 grain bullets. The 143 Hunter will give you slightly better BC of you are worried about it.

From the load work I did with my 280, I’d expect you could push 3500 with the 140AH. If you’re not an experienced loader, go with the 143HH and Nosler load data.

 

[MThuntr]

I just checked out of curiosity. You don’t have enough twist for the 155 grain bullets. The 143 Hunter will give you slightly better BC of you are worried about it.

I think Steve has mentioned within 4-500 yards the 140AH has a slight advantage with the increased muzzle velocity.

I'll continue to use the 143s in my 280ai because I have ample amounts of slow powder.

 

[rtraverdavis]

I’d bet anything around the Hybrid 100V burn rate should work great with the 140 AH. I was able to get over 3500 in my 7mm Mag with minimal testing with the 130 AH using 100V. Never reached pressure at the top of the ladder I ran. I’d shoot the 140s if I had a fast enough twist. They’re great bullets.

 

[CB1]

Steve recommended to me recently either 131 hh or 120 hh for the 7mag 1:9.5 twist. If shooting under 500 he said 120hh at around 3650fps would work for elk and below. They do have the 146hh that work in 1:10 if you want a bit heavier. Have not shot them yet so can’t comment on that.

 

[Shortbowshot]

Thanks for the input. I'm a pretty basic reloader. I've been doing it for 5 yrs or so. I have some Barnes 145 LRX on the way to try. I'm anxious to give this thing a test drive. I like the concept of the Hammers design. It looks like in the HH would be either 143 or 146 for my twist.
Not sure the velocity advantage with the Absolute Hammers is needed for my ranges.

 

[Addicting]

Thanks for the input. I'm a pretty basic reloader. I've been doing it for 5 yrs or so. I have some Barnes 145 LRX on the way to try. I'm anxious to give this thing a test drive. I like the concept of the Hammers design. It looks like in the HH would be either 143 or 146 for my twist.
Not sure the velocity advantage with the Absolute Hammers is needed for my ranges.

I drank the hammer kool-Aid, a lot of it. They shot excellent and was super happy with the accuracy. I’ve shot Barnes TTSX been super happy with them as well. I chose Barnes LRX at the end of the day after killing several animals with both.

The reason is that Barnes doesn’t require a crimp to get the best performance. Hammers can be finicky in certain neck configuration and then require a crimp to keep seating depth consistent. Both of my wildcats had this issue. Second, is that I found Barnes opens faster on impact and gave me a better entrance wound. Some of hammers I shot opened on impact and some didn’t until 6-8” later. Both provided a excellent exit wound if it exited. I decided that I want a larger more consistent entrance wound in case of no exit. The Barnes TTSX was always consistent but didn’t offer lower velocity option.

There is no perfect bullet but I think the LRX is the closest Mono to it and why I switched.

 

[std7mag]

I drank the hammer kool-Aid, a lot of it. They shot excellent and was super happy with the accuracy. I’ve shot Barnes TTSX been super happy with them as well. I chose Barnes LRX at the end of the day after killing several animals with both.

The reason is that Barnes doesn’t require a crimp to get the best performance. Hammers can be finicky in certain neck configuration and then require a crimp to keep seating depth consistent. Both of my wildcats had this issue. Second, is that I found Barnes opens faster on impact and gave me a better entrance wound. Some of hammers I shot opened on impact and some didn’t until 6-8” later. Both provided a excellent exit wound if it exited. I decided that I want a larger more consistent entrance wound in case of no exit. The Barnes TTSX was always consistent but didn’t offer lower velocity option.

There is no perfect bullet but I think the LRX is the closest Mono to it and why I switched.

I've helped at least 2 friends with accuracy issues using Barnes bullets.
In both cases, changing only that they put a crimp on, helped accuracy immensely.

And using them on game, both have switched away from Barnes.
1 went to Hammers, the other to Cutting Edge.

 

[marksjeep]

Both Barnes and Hammers will do their job. I've been using the 145lrx for a long time, it's killed pronghorn to moose for me. Frankly, it seems to punch above it's weight class. I am also using hammers in a couple of other rifles, they have worked just as well. I'd run whatever you can get appropriate powders for, and whatever works well in the rifle. Hammers have the benefit of actually being available right now, so if I were starting from scratch with a new rifle, I'd be inclined to try them first. Since you have a box of lrx on the way, that's moot. So start with those and if they fly well, they will kill well.