Federal’s recent announcement of their new chambering, the 7mm Backcountry, has certainly caused a stir within the outdoor community. It doesn’t take long to find a podcast, forum thread, or advertiser’s email expounding on the supposedly revolutionary cartridge.

Now, I am not an influencer. Nobody has paid me to talk about this cartridge. I have not received a platform to test it with. Hell, nobody will likely read this. So this is one man’s humble opinion based on what I have seen and noticed. While I think there are some very interesting things going on here, I also believe that we need to take a realistic step back and think about a few things.

What Is the 7mm Backcountry?

According to Federal’s website, the 7mm Backcountry is capable of launching a 170 grain projectile at 3,000fps out of a 20 inch barrel. This follows a years long trend of moving toward heavy-for-caliber bullets with high ballistic coefficients (BC). This type of performance outclasses any other 7mm cartridge on the market. To get anywhere close to those ballistics, most rifles need at least a 24 inch barrel if not longer.

Using a shorter barrel makes for a lighter rifle that is less unwieldly with a suppressor attached (another trend that has gained an exponential amount of steam in the last few years). The Backcountry also achieves this with a standard bolt face and reported overall length of 3.34 inches. This coincides with the maximum overall length of a .30-’06 or .300 WinMag. So it should fit in a standard length action.

The Nerd Stuff

The biggest leap that enabled this cartridge is a new steel alloy case that is stronger than standard brass. This allowed Federal to test the cartridge all the way up to a chamber pressure of 80,000psi. This follows on the heels of SIG’s .277 Fury, which uses a hybrid steel head/brass body case to produce results similar to a .270 Winchester with a 24 inch barrel but out of a short action with a 16 barrel.

Published data indicates that with a 100 yard zero, the 7mm Backcountry with a 170 grain Terminal Ascent bullet drops 2.8 inches at 200 yards, 23.1 inches at 400 yards, and 41.7 inches at 500 yards.

For comparison, that same bullet but in a 175 grain .30-’06 loading starts at 2730fps at the muzzle and drops 3.8 inches at 200 yards, 30.6 inches at 400 yards, and 55.6 inches at 500 yards. The Backcountry also has more energy throughout it’s trajectory than the .30-’06 in that loading.

Now that’s just comparing one loading. Your mileage may vary with different bullet combinations. But all those articles waxing on about the new girl in school will tell you that and more.

What’s Not To Like?

Of course, the numbers don’t lie. This cartridge will outperform anything in its class and then some and do it in a smaller, lighter package. Paired with a lightweight suppressor and you’ve got a serious package for the long-range, backcountry hunter in the 7mm Backcountry. So what are the possible cons?

Well for one, barrel life. This has been a problem that has plagued hot cartridges for a century. That amount of pressure in a small space pushing those speeds is sure to wear out throats and barrels at an unprecedented rate.

Second is availability. Many of these newer hot rods are difficult to find in factory loadings and are often very expensive. For this reason, many serious shooters choose to reload. Which brings me to point 2A: reloadability.

The problem with traditional steel cases is that they become brittle after one or two firings and cannot be annealed. This makes them impractical and dangerous to reload. Maybe this new alloy is different. Already there are murmurings of companies developing reloading dies. But how available and expensive will the components be? How tedious will reloading this case be compared to a .30-’06?

How expensive and available will rifles be in this chambering? Will any of this be available to the everyday hunter? Or is there a class of hunter (the unrecognized, non-celebrity majority) that this will not even be an option?

Of course, all of this is downplayed by the marketing team at Federal in the FAQs. They make a lot of claims about things like barrel life and availability. They wouldn’t get many clicks if they said otherwise and since nobody has sent me rifle and 1,000 rounds for testing, I remain skeptical.

Where Are We Heading?

Let’s get back to those drop comparisons. That’s a significantly flatter trajectory and would make it easier to accomplish those shots. But, I prefer to get in close. I also sight my rifles for Western hunting 2 or 3 inches high at 100 yards. This means that I don’t have to deal with adjusting my scope out to about 350, which is further than I’ve ever actually killed anything. Even my bighorn sheep, an animal that people build specific long range rifles for, was felled by a single .30-’06 round from 180 yards.

And I know I’m in the majority here. Most shots on game, even in the wide open spaces of the West, are generally under 300 yards. A competent marksman with practice can easily push their max to 500 with any one of the options that have been on the market for decades.

So inside of 500 yards, the flatter trajectory is of no use to most people. What’s concerning to me is when this product collides with another, more unsettling trend. Long range hunting.

Back to that announcement. On the webpage is a drop chart comparing different cartridges against the Backcountry. It show an image of an elk and corresponding drops at… 1000 yards… A grand… One click.

That’s where I think this is heading. The whole hunting industry, has shifted gears to pushing the envelope of what is considered ethical. There is no reason to shoot at a game animal at 1000 yards so why even bother advertising it? Because you know people do and you want to ensnare the people who want to do it. Forget about the difficulty of drawing a tag. Ignore the number of wounded animals from asshole Carlos Hathcock wannabes.

Their unstated (or stated) goal is to deliver a product that makes it easier to fill tags under the guise of it somehow being more ethical. Give me a freaking break. The drop at that distance is still 250 inches, not accounting for wind. If you take shots at game where you have to aim 10 feet above it, you’re an asshole and should stick to steel targets. We aren’t military snipers trying to eliminate an enemy. We are hunters. Learn some other skills or get off the damn mountain.

Back To Center On the 7mm Backcountry

Man. Might have gone a little high and right but I can’t help it. Truth be told, I do think this is a fascinating concept. Federal identified an unfilled niche in the market and developed accordingly. I applaud that even though I don’t think it was a glaring gap. Realistically, it’s more related to the military’s want for a 5.56 replacement. But I digress.

Even with the velocity loss going from a 24 to 20 inch barrel, most cartridges are still more than capable of bringing down anything they would otherwise. Time will tell if this trend is here to stay. But history is littered with the graves of other wonder calibers that weren’t successful for a myriad of reasons.

There’s the old saying about fishing lures being designed to catch fishermen more than fish. I think that rings true here. The 7mm Backcountry might be a better mousetrap but it doesn’t hold a true field advantage for the vast majority. But hey, this is America and who am I to tell you that you shouldn’t buy another gun. Maybe it’s the 7mm Backcountry but I’ll stick to my 70+ year old options.