Juts curious if anyone has anything to add good or bad about this combo. I dont have a 243 and I always thought that the Model Seven would make a great 243. I always had my eye on the SS, 20" barrel with synthetic stock and I have a chance to get one, of course they dont make them anymore like everything else I want. I dont need it, just think a lightweight 243 would be a fun, versatile gun where I hunt in TX. Anyone own or try one of these?
Model Seven in 243 - Good combo?
- Thread starter TXHORNS
- Start date
- Status
Abel
Member
That black synthetic stainless Seven is awesome. I don't understand why Remington stopped making those. They make 101 different useless versions of the 700 & only two Model Sevens. I would jump on it if I were you.
Runningman
Member
That should work excellent for ya. Years ago, bought a synthetic stainless Model Seven with a 20" barrel in a 7mm-08. It is a easy to pack around hunting rifle if there ever was one.
Strongbad
Member
I've got a 788 and a Model 7 in 243, which is a good little round for Texas. The model 7 is a slicker looking rifle, but the barrel on mine is even lighter than the one on the 788. The 788 shoots better too. I have a good load for both using 95 gr. Hornady SST's. The model 7 hasn't seen much action in years, but the 788 has taken lots and lots of deer and the load I put together with the SST's back in 2004 absolutely hammers'em.
Interesting. So a few guys for it and then Strongbad who prefers his 788 which if I'm not mistaken weighs more and shoots better.
I am primarily attracted to the light weight and handling, if I want heavier and more power I can choose one of my other rifles. But one of the appeals to the 243 for me is the 55 grain screamer so if the accuracy isn't there with the lw barrel then that's negative for sure. What can I expect accuracy-wise out of these at least for 2-3 shots? I don't need rapid fire accurate but 1.5moa would be nice for 3 quick rounds.
I am primarily attracted to the light weight and handling, if I want heavier and more power I can choose one of my other rifles. But one of the appeals to the 243 for me is the 55 grain screamer so if the accuracy isn't there with the lw barrel then that's negative for sure. What can I expect accuracy-wise out of these at least for 2-3 shots? I don't need rapid fire accurate but 1.5moa would be nice for 3 quick rounds.
Abel
Member
Hey, the 788 is an exceptional shooting gun. It wouldn't be hard to add a great aftermarket trigger to the Seven, and have it shooting great too, because the trigger lock-time is where alot of the 788's accuracy comes from.
An old pal of mine bought a 788 in 243 for his deer rifle about 30 years ago. My thought at the time was that 243 was a varmint round, unsuitable for deer. Boy, did he prove me wrong on that. He harvested a big mulie buck each fall and then went to Wyoming one time and got an antelope at 300 yards with a single shot.
Made me a believer in the 243. And the 788 isn't a Model 7, but it's pretty close in a lot of ways. I think it's a potent combination.
Made me a believer in the 243. And the 788 isn't a Model 7, but it's pretty close in a lot of ways. I think it's a potent combination.
The 788's pop up all the time around here which always tempt me but I rarely see these black stock/ss Model 7's, I think I will just do it as I'm not worried about unloading it if I decide to later - doubt I will though. I think the 7 has a lot going for it plus it could make a great kids gun later on for me. My buddy has a Model 7 in 260 and raves about it, just wanted some other opinions too.
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
I don't have a 7, but my .243 package is similar. Sako Forester carbine, 19" barrel. Seven pounds, fully dressed to go hunting. 1:10 twist.
I've tagged twenty-some bucks with the Sierra 85-grain HPBT. The 55-grain bullet works just fine on prairie dogs.
I'd think that a 7 would do quite nicely. As with any rifle, you might have to do some tweaking with the forearm bedding, and maybe work up a couple of loads which are tuned to your barrel's harmonics, but all that's trivially easy.
I started loading that Sierra bullet some forty years back. Not too long back, the kids at Federal started producing a load with that bullet, and I found that it groups as tightly as my handloads. Good option, seems like...
I've tagged twenty-some bucks with the Sierra 85-grain HPBT. The 55-grain bullet works just fine on prairie dogs.
I'd think that a 7 would do quite nicely. As with any rifle, you might have to do some tweaking with the forearm bedding, and maybe work up a couple of loads which are tuned to your barrel's harmonics, but all that's trivially easy.
I started loading that Sierra bullet some forty years back. Not too long back, the kids at Federal started producing a load with that bullet, and I found that it groups as tightly as my handloads. Good option, seems like...
I used to have a Seven in .308. Great looking, great carrying, but it was so muzzle-light that I found it difficult (for me, at least) to shoot well. The 20" barrel might help, mine was shorter and very tapered so all the weight was back in the action and grip.
If you are not bothered by the balance of a Seven, go for it. It is certainly a handy rifle to carry around in the woods.
If you are not bothered by the balance of a Seven, go for it. It is certainly a handy rifle to carry around in the woods.
Dr T
Member
I have a 788 in 6 mm and a 7 in 7-08. My 7 has the 18.5" barrel with adjustable sights on a fiberglass-kevlar stock and a Burris 2-7 Fullfield.
Both are extremely accurate--my best 3 shot group with the 7 went 0.19" center-to-center (but it took some work. Among other things, I floated the barrel).
The 788 has been out of production for some time, but the 7 is a member of a current production line (it is a basically a short action 700). If you find a 788, you may want to pick it up just to have. It was an inexpensive gun with a weaker action than the 7, but they tend to be tack drivers--not something I can say for all 700s I have fired.
The 7 with a composite stock is a light, fast handling rifle and the 243 is a very nice deer cartridge if you don't have any brush (I have "killed" several mesquite trees with my 6 mm trying to sneak a bullet through). Just make sure you have well constructed bullets. We have had very good luck (accuracy and bullet performance) with the $14 Federal 100 gr. 243s that you can pick up at Walmart. My experience with the Remington 6 mm factory stuff was not so positive: The corelokts would tend to separate their cores from the jackets and end up under the skin on the far side of a whitetail.
Both are extremely accurate--my best 3 shot group with the 7 went 0.19" center-to-center (but it took some work. Among other things, I floated the barrel).
The 788 has been out of production for some time, but the 7 is a member of a current production line (it is a basically a short action 700). If you find a 788, you may want to pick it up just to have. It was an inexpensive gun with a weaker action than the 7, but they tend to be tack drivers--not something I can say for all 700s I have fired.
The 7 with a composite stock is a light, fast handling rifle and the 243 is a very nice deer cartridge if you don't have any brush (I have "killed" several mesquite trees with my 6 mm trying to sneak a bullet through). Just make sure you have well constructed bullets. We have had very good luck (accuracy and bullet performance) with the $14 Federal 100 gr. 243s that you can pick up at Walmart. My experience with the Remington 6 mm factory stuff was not so positive: The corelokts would tend to separate their cores from the jackets and end up under the skin on the far side of a whitetail.
Uncle Mike
Member
If you have a chance to buy one of the stainless, black synthetic stocked Model 7's, and it is in excellent shape, and it is in the caliber you like....by all means, get it.
The Model 7's from the era in which those particular rifles were manufactured were excellent rifles, both in durability and accuracy.
I own several of the Model 7's from those manufacturing days gone bye, and can attest to their accuracy, even with their 'pencil' barrels. All except one of the units I own will consistently shoot into a 'nickle' sized group at 100y with FACTORY(Hornady Light Magnum) ammunition!
Never a problem with any of them. I would give the "left one" IF Remington would build a rifle as fine today, as they did back then!
One of the attributes you'll quickly notice about the Model 7 is its superb ballance, not to mention its light weight!
Simply put, they are a pleasure to carry through the wood! And don't be misled by the short, thin barrel, I have anchored deer to 402y with one chambered in 7mm-08, using the above mentioned Hornady Light Magnum 139gr.... one shot, dead!
The magnum(SAUM) Model 7's don't seem to shoot as tight as the non SAUM versions, obviously do to the violent goings on when a cartridge of that capacity is touched off, but they will keep inside of 1.5" at 100y, again with Horandy Light Magnum ammo.
The Model 7's from the era in which those particular rifles were manufactured were excellent rifles, both in durability and accuracy.
I own several of the Model 7's from those manufacturing days gone bye, and can attest to their accuracy, even with their 'pencil' barrels. All except one of the units I own will consistently shoot into a 'nickle' sized group at 100y with FACTORY(Hornady Light Magnum) ammunition!
Never a problem with any of them. I would give the "left one" IF Remington would build a rifle as fine today, as they did back then!
One of the attributes you'll quickly notice about the Model 7 is its superb ballance, not to mention its light weight!
Simply put, they are a pleasure to carry through the wood! And don't be misled by the short, thin barrel, I have anchored deer to 402y with one chambered in 7mm-08, using the above mentioned Hornady Light Magnum 139gr.... one shot, dead!
The magnum(SAUM) Model 7's don't seem to shoot as tight as the non SAUM versions, obviously do to the violent goings on when a cartridge of that capacity is touched off, but they will keep inside of 1.5" at 100y, again with Horandy Light Magnum ammo.
I tend to prefer the 308 in the shorter barrels and the 243 in at least 22 or 24"
Everyone else seems to go the other way. I've had sucess usiv the 243 out of longer barrels but with A velocity dependent round (light bullet won't do much going slow) I would rather have the 308 in 20" or less
Everyone else seems to go the other way. I've had sucess usiv the 243 out of longer barrels but with A velocity dependent round (light bullet won't do much going slow) I would rather have the 308 in 20" or less
Dr T
Member
One could argue that the 243 is an overbore cartridge and can better benefit from a longer barrel (my T/C Icon in 243 has a 24 inch barrel).
But as a hunting rifle, handling, point-ability, and accuracy are more important than velocity. The 7 has plenty of all three. A 6 mm bullet of 85 grains or more and adequate construction will kill any Texas whitetail I have ever seen at any range I am willing to shoot.
One note: Based on my experience, I would check to make sure that the pad that reinforces the front sling swivel does not bear on the barrel. If it does, it can really mess things up until you free float the barrel (It took me about 3 trips to the range and 45 rounds to figure this out with my 7).
But as a hunting rifle, handling, point-ability, and accuracy are more important than velocity. The 7 has plenty of all three. A 6 mm bullet of 85 grains or more and adequate construction will kill any Texas whitetail I have ever seen at any range I am willing to shoot.
One note: Based on my experience, I would check to make sure that the pad that reinforces the front sling swivel does not bear on the barrel. If it does, it can really mess things up until you free float the barrel (It took me about 3 trips to the range and 45 rounds to figure this out with my 7).
Dr t you missed my point. A 308 and 243 model seven will have the same handling, poitability and accuracey
the whe point of the 243 is to go faster with a smaller bullet. There is a good argument for it out of a decent length barrel but out of. <20" it would seem the 308 wins hands down. However alot of people seem to think a short/light barrelled gun is more suited to the 243 I just don't get it. If anything j would go338 fed or 358 rather than the ther way
the whe point of the 243 is to go faster with a smaller bullet. There is a good argument for it out of a decent length barrel but out of. <20" it would seem the 308 wins hands down. However alot of people seem to think a short/light barrelled gun is more suited to the 243 I just don't get it. If anything j would go338 fed or 358 rather than the ther way
Had a Model 7, .243 and liked it a lot. Handy, accurate. Took a nice caribou with it. Would have preferred more gun, but the .243 did its job.
I also think the .243 kills beyond what one would expect from its size. Dunno why, perhaps lighter recoil makes for better shooting. Just know that it works well. My $.02.
I also think the .243 kills beyond what one would expect from its size. Dunno why, perhaps lighter recoil makes for better shooting. Just know that it works well. My $.02.
Dr T
Member
All other things being equal (barrel length, action, type of powder, weight of powder, weight of bullet) a larger bore bullet will tend to have a higher muzzle velocity and a lower sectional density than a smaller bore bullet.
My point was that velocity lost by using a 20" barrel rather than the 24" is not really important in real hunting situations. After all, all 100 fps buys you is about 10 yards in point blank range. Most of the deer I have killed in West Texas have been at 125 yards or less.
The difference in recoil between a 243 and a 308 may well be one of the most important factors, especially if the shooter has a tendency to flinch. Reason: the 243 has a soft recoil, and with practice is is an aide to recovering from the tendency--I had to do this when I was in my early 20's due to a horrible tendency to flinch I got from shooting a poorly stocked 30-06. I used a 6 mm Rem which is very close in performance to a 243 win.
The more you practice with a gun, the more familiar you are with it and the more likely that it will become a natural extension of your self. Handling, etc., all contribute. The more that it becomes a part of you, the more fun it is to shoot and the more effective you will be with it.
My point was that velocity lost by using a 20" barrel rather than the 24" is not really important in real hunting situations. After all, all 100 fps buys you is about 10 yards in point blank range. Most of the deer I have killed in West Texas have been at 125 yards or less.
The difference in recoil between a 243 and a 308 may well be one of the most important factors, especially if the shooter has a tendency to flinch. Reason: the 243 has a soft recoil, and with practice is is an aide to recovering from the tendency--I had to do this when I was in my early 20's due to a horrible tendency to flinch I got from shooting a poorly stocked 30-06. I used a 6 mm Rem which is very close in performance to a 243 win.
The more you practice with a gun, the more familiar you are with it and the more likely that it will become a natural extension of your self. Handling, etc., all contribute. The more that it becomes a part of you, the more fun it is to shoot and the more effective you will be with it.
- Status
