.280 Load Question

[TN deer hunter]

I shot a couple of loads out of my Steyr .280 yesterday with 57gr of Rl-19 which is max load in the Nosler book. I was using 139gr Hornady SST's .020 off the lands, this particular load shot .710" which is great considering this is the time I have ever worked up a load for this rifle. I then shot the load through the chrono and to my disappointment it chronographed at 2,868fps nearly 300fps slower than the published speed which is 3,152fps. The other load was 57.0gr (+1 gr above max)of IMR 4831 and 139 SST's and .020 off the lands also. This load shot .597" but it was also very slow at 2854fps. I love the accuracy but I am very disappointed in the velocity. My question is has anyone else seen this in the .280? I was expecting at least 3,100fps with the RL-19 and 3,000fps with the 4831. BTW my Steyr has a 24" barrel.

 

[JD338]

Test data is just that, test data. Lab conditions and a universal receiver with custom barrels.
Don't worry too much about the velocity, you have two great loads.
Precision accuracy is a much better way to go than trying to get xxxx fps.
Your hunted target will never know the difference between 2868, 2854, or 3152 fps if you put the bullet where it needs to go. :wink:

Go shoot small groups with your 280 Rem and don't look back.

JD338

 

[TN deer hunter]

I am very happy don't take me wrong. I have always said accuracy first, speed is just a plus. However, I was just a little disappointed. I am very happy with the groups but I thought speeds would be higher after looking at both the Nosler and Hornady manuals as well as other reloading sites.

 

[WHELENATOR]

Hey TN, I had a Browning A-bolt 1, 280 a few years back, and my load of choice was also 57.0 Grs of RL-19. My rifle had a 22 inch barrel, and like you, I was disappointed in the speed. BUT, the group size was worth the trade-off for me. The bad news for you is that for these 280 loads in the books, I suspect that they use a Wiseman 26 or 28 inch test barrel to get those velocities. Paco Kelly of Sixgunner.com has some interesting writings on their archives concerning 280 info. he was using a ruger 77 early model with a 24 or 26 inch barrel I can't remember which. but he was getting good velocities with his. It's interesting reading. If I can find the article, I will post the link here for you. My 57 grainer load was with a 140 Ballistic Tip. The group size was in the 1/4 inch range, all the time, every time. Everyone that saw it was amazed. I have a pic of it on my MSN website.
I think you can access it here.
http://groups.msn.com/MARKSADVENTURES/s ... snw?Page=2

go to the targets picture album.

The problem also with the 280 is that the books also load it down. i think I read somewhere that they do this because of the Remington semiautos floating around, or some such BS. Been a long time since I have done any reading on it because I sold that rifle to a guy in Texas. It was my first of 3 7mm rifles, I have a 7 Mag in a Colt Light Rifle, and a Remington 700 classic in 7 Wby. A 280 becomes a little anemic in comparison, so I dumped it. i sometimes regret that sale, the rifle was crazy accurate...

 

[remingtonman_25_06]

I think it has something to do with 7mm bore myself. I've seen to many 7 RM's, 7 STW's having a heck of a time achieving book velocities. Trying to get 3350fps w/140g and RL-22in a 7 RM in teh nosler book is about impossible. My dads 7 RM shoots a good 200fps slower with 150g NBT's and IMR-4350. My 7 RM shoots a good 100fps slower then book with 175's. However, 7mm's tend to be very accurate cartridges. Like the above poster said, the extra velocity wont kill them any deader. Its better to have accuracy and ensure a killing shot. I am using a 175g SBT at 2810fps out of my 7 RM. Now that is slow, but my groups are .5-.75" for 5 shots at 100 yards, and stays 3/4 MOA to 800 yards, so I cant complain to much. Its a little dissappointing at times, but speed isn't everything.

 

[Northwoods Hunter]

I have studied the .280 on many reloading threads and articles...It is my favorite caliber.
I looked for 2 yrs for a Remmy 700 CDL just to get a 24" bbl w/o spending for a custom rifle.

What I have surmised is that in order to get the published velocities in a 22-24" bbl you need to load to .270 Win pressures...Even John Barsness reccomends recipes well over the .280 "book" maximums...

If your chrono hits the published speeds and there are no excessive pressure signs you are OK...

Please do this at your own risk...

 

[JD338]

I am very happy don't take me wrong. I have always said accuracy first, speed is just a plus. However, I was just a little disappointed. I am very happy with the groups but I thought speeds would be higher after looking at both the Nosler and Hornady manuals as well as other reloading sights.

One option to consider is going with a 280 AI. I am shooting the 160 gr AB at just over 3000 fps and my accuracy is in the .2's. The 140 gr AB is just over 3200 fps and accuracy is in the .3's. This is 7mm RM performance. :wink:

JD338

 

[Northwoods Hunter]

Someday when I can afford it...there will be a .280 AI in my small arsenal...

For me and my hunting desires from Yotes up to Elk and even Moose it sure fits the bill...with less recoil than a 7mm RM.

 

[Desert Fox]

Increase your load in half a grain increments to get to your desired velocity and watch for signs of high pressure. All the load data on the book were published with semi-auto rifle in mind, therefore lower pressure. My pet load for my 280 is the 150 grain Nosler Ballistic Tip and 55.5 grain of IMR 4831 at around 2900 fps+. That's about two grain above maximum in any book. Brass showed no sign of pressure whatsoever. Some had been reloaded about a dozen times. Excellent accuracy.

 

[fredj338]

You are actually quite close to what the Alliant site & my chronograph say I get using RL19. My .280 performs best w/ slower powders like H4831sc & IMR7828. Don't expect much more than 3000fps from you 24"bbl, 3150fps is a bit optimistic IMO. :roll:

 

[CJAdam10]

Why do you need the excess vel.? Or is it a want? I have a Ruger M77II that is sub MOA with 120 Ballistic Tips dropping 53grs of IMR 4350 with Rem 9.5 primers 0.020 off the rifling. I have collected ever deer this round has been used on. :wink:

 

[TN deer hunter]

I guess I had higher expectations out of the .280. Most of the gun writers have talked about the .280 nearly duplicating the 7mm Mag. as far as ballistics and that most companies have loaded it down. I felt like that since I was reloading I could get more velocity than factory. I was looking for the 139gr. SST to be close to 3,150 or 3,075fps which would be fine but I was a little disappointed for it to be under 2,900.

 

[Guest]

You know, nobody has mentioned this yet, but perhaps your rifle just needs a different powder? I know that sometimes a change in powder can make a difference in what I am getting in velocity from a particular cartridge/bullet combination. I usually try at least three different powders in a new rifle, unless I get inconsistent results, in which case I might try more. As far as going above published max loads, I would caution you that unless you have a blade micrometer, and can check casehead expansion, you should not rely on traditional signs.

If you want a different powder suggestion, try contacting Western Powders and asking about data for your rifle for MagPro powder.

 

[fredj338]

dubya, I think I did say that in a round the hill kind of way. :grin: IMR7828 is shear magic in my .280 w/ accuracy too. :shock:

 

[SOTN]

I am very happy don't take me wrong. I have always said accuracy first, speed is just a plus. However, I was just a little disappointed. I am very happy with the groups but I thought speeds would be higher after looking at both the Nosler and Hornady manuals as well as other reloading sights.

One option to consider is going with a 280 AI. I am shooting the 160 gr AB at just over 3000 fps and my accuracy is in the .2's. The 140 gr AB is just over 3200 fps and accuracy is in the .3's. This is 7mm RM performance. :wink:

JD338

JD338:
I just looked up case capacities (grains water) in “Load from a Disk”, for the 280, the 280AI, and the 7mm RM. They are 68.2, 70.1, & 81.4 respectively, if I read things right.

Considering that the 280 AI has less than 2 grains (1.9) more capacity than the straight 280, why would it be a very useful option?

The 280AI has 11.3 grains less capacity than the 7mm RM. I would think that if you are getting 7mm RM performance, you wouldn’t be getting it at 7mm RM pressures.

I understand that rifles, powder, and case combinations vary and effect results, but obtaining 7mm RM performance from the 280AI, is a scary thought to me. What say you?

I love 7mm as a caliber. I have 7x57, 280, 7mm RM, and 7mm Webby. My 280 was handicapped, velocity wise, with it’s 20 inch barrel, and I had it replaced with a 26” barrel.

I hope to get more velocity that way, but beforehand I went to the 7mm RM and 7mm RM for higher than 280 velocities.

Aren’t there better ways to obtain greater performance than overloading a cartridge? This assumes that 7mm RM performance form a 280 AI would increase pressure to a dangerous level.

I’m not wanting to be confrontational, but just to ask a serious question.
Thanks,
Smitty of the North

 

[remingtonman_25_06]

Its all about efficiency. JD is getting velocities that equal my 7 RM, but hes using on average about 3-5g less powder then I am. Just the way it is. I'm using 68.5g RL-22 w/140g bullets to achieve 3250fps. I also have to use 64g Rl-22 w/160g bullets to achieve 3000fps. This is in 24" bbl. The 280 AI is just a pretty dang efficient cartridge is all I can say.

 

[SOTN]

Its all about efficiency. JD is getting velocities that equal my 7 RM, but hes using on average about 3-5g less powder then I am. Just the way it is. I'm using 68.5g RL-22 w/140g bullets to achieve 3250fps. I also have to use 64g Rl-22 w/160g bullets to achieve 3000fps. This is in 24" bbl. The 280 AI is just a pretty dang efficient cartridge is all I can say.

remingtonman_25_06:
Having owned my 280 Rem. for longer than any of my other rifles, I've been aware of the 280 AI, also.

My Nosler #4 shows 2975 fps with their 160 gr. Partition, and 58 gr. of RL22. They also state that there is no established maximum pressure limit for the .280 AI.

My ancient P. O. Ackley book says this.... "It will be quickly noticed that there is very little difference between the top velocities for the .280 Improved and the Magnums, plainly demonstrating that there is little advantage in using a Belted Magnum case, for anything under .30 caliber."

Still, it seems like a very large serving of efficiency to me.

I don’t think it is illogical to assume that 7mm RM performance form a 280 AI would increase pressure tremendously, perhaps even to a dangerous level, which is the reason I no longer consider it an option for me, anyway.

Smitty of the North

 

[DrMike]

Among the rifles I shoot and load for is a Winchester Featherweight chambered in .280. It has a slow barrel, never quite acqhieving maximum velocities even after adjusting for barrel length. However, it shoots quarter inch groups with 140 grain bullets. Every deer I have pointed the rifle at has dropped dead with one shot. Can't ask any more of a rifle. The deer have been shot at ranges of between 70 and 250 yards, and all have required one shot. I threatened to rebarrel, but all I would gain is a faster rifle and it would not kill any better. Perhaps I could shoot heavier bullets, but I have other rifles that are able to do that (7 mm WSM and 7 mm RM), so there is no reason to mess with what works. 140 grain BT or AB at 2800 fps work quite well.

 

[Desert Fox]

I did considered the Ackley version of the 280 when I build mine and I didn't see any real advantages ballistic wise when comparing the two; Actually there's more minuses than pluses. I can push the 150 grain Nosler Ballistic Tip at close to 2900 fps or even a little over that. I found that the ideal velocity, for the 150's , at least on my rifle, were around 2850 to 2875's. The 140's at 2950. Both shoot tight in my rifle. Deadly on deer and none complained about the round lacking in velocity. On the contrary, they just fold over. Ranges varies between 150 yards up to the longest shot I ever made on games at 675 yards. I still have to recover any bullet. Even at 675 yards, the bullet exited after mangling the the neck bones forward of the shoulder right at the base of the neck. Now mule deer in California are midget when compared to other state but that kind of external ballistic performance will drop any size deer.

 

[markdille]

Hey everyone,
This is my first post on here, and I also own an A-Bolt .280 with a 22" barrel like someone else mentioned. I've been out of reloading for about 20 years since all my equipment burned up in a fire, but I'm soon to get back into it. I haven't used anything but factory ammo in my .280. Here's my $.02 worth after reading all the posts.

The problem all us .280 folks have is absolutely no reliable "REAL" maximum numbers from any of the published sources. The maximum pressures are all listed at 50,000 cup per SAAMI. In no way shape or form are the folks who write the manuals going to increase that unless someone who has the ability to globally change the SAAMI maximum pressure for the .280 to something more reasonable like 52,000 cup (like the .270). Even the .284 Winchester and the .300 H&H have a maximum of 54,000 cup (how old is the .300 H&H?). In all honesty, none of it makes any sense. The .270 has been chambered in every single rifle that the .280 has been. Underloading it was a huge mistake that they've never bothered to correct over at Remington, and yes, that seemingly small amount makes a big difference for the small velocity difference we're all disputing.

Look at it this way. There is no magic to it. It's simple science/mathematics. The .280 shell has slightly more case capacity than the .270 due to the shoulder being moved forward. A small difference, but a difference nonetheless. Furthermore, the bullet is slightly larger which will again slightly improve efficiency. So, if an equal weighted bullet, say 140 grains, is fired in both calibers with similar rifle and cartridge set ups, the .280 should shoot the 140 grainer faster with the same amount of pressure. Notice I said with the same amount of pressure. The same amount of powder will no doubt be slower in the .280 (assuming the same type of powder of course), because the .280 is more efficient. The pressure will drop off quicker as the bullet travels down the muzzle. Therefore, to maintain higher pressures, it must have a slightly larger powder charge. I realize I'm splitting hairs between the two, but to think that the .270 can outdistance the .280 in velocity just because the books or the chrono says so is like agreeing that the world is flat. The problem with chrono data is that it only tells you the average pressure behind the bullet. In other words, if you have a barrel of 22" and accelerate the bullet to 3000 fps within that distance, based on cartridge length, you could calculate the average psi on the base of the bullet if you had nothing better to do with your free time. However, that only tells you the AVERAGE not the PEAK pressure. Here's the slightly tricky part, and the part unfortunately none of us can answer, and that is what is safe pressure to achieve the velocity that the .280 SHOULD DO under REALISTIC SAFE MAXIMUMS. This is the reason, many go to the .280 AI. First of all the case is, after all, slightly larger, but the key is, the manuals list pressures at a higher level than the .280 is listed. The .280 has no chance, and it makes the AI look like a miracle come true, when in reality, it's just barely better.

Speaking of the .280 AI and how it compares to the 7mm RM, here's an explanation on this. The 7mm RM has been butchered by rifle manufacturers for years on chamber tolerances, so this is what you get from the publishing manuals (other cartridges have this problem too, but the 7mm RM supposedly is the worst of them all):
A. Load a cartridge to all minimum specs allowed to gun manufacturers.
B. Test minimized cartridge in pressure barrel also built to minimized specs for pressure data.
C. Once pressure data has been recorded, either i or ii happens depending on publishing group.
i. Provide chrono numbers from pressure barrel. These numbers will be high for the powder charge used because the chamber dimensions are tight. However, the tight chamber also limits the overall potential and isn't necessarily a good representation of what a field rifle will get, nor what the cartridge can do when freed up a little. A rifle loaded to these limits will almost never meet the published velocities, nor will those loads be at the same pressures that the pressure barrel saw. They will be less. The rifle can take a heavier dose of powder to achieve the desired higher pressures, but unfortunately, there's no way to tell what is safe or not. A chrono is your best bet at that point, but by no means perfect.
ii. Take minimized cartridges with charges established in the pressure barrel, then record velocities from one of the manufacturer's standard rifle offerings. These velocities look anemic in the books, but chances are, you'll meet or slightly exceed them in your gun. Again, pressures in the books probably won't be what your actual rifle is seeing. However, there is no way to measure what your rifle is seeing.

I hope I haven't bored too many, but these are the real reasons the numbers are low on the .280 and the 7mm RM. Oehler has a great product from what I understand (never used it). However, I don't think it actually provides a reference point for it's pressure measurements, and they basically say to fire a factory cartridge to benchmark a safe load. That may be fine and dandy in other cartridges, but we all know that in the .280 or 7mm RM that doesn't help much since factory ammo is downloaded slightly.

As a side note for all you out there, one factory offering that had some zip and may be worth comparing to as a benchmark (if anyone actually does have an Oehler system) is the Winchester 140gr Power Point for the .280. I don't even know if they still make it, but I chrono'd mine at or near 3100 fps every time in my 22" barrel. I normally get Remington's 150gr Cor-Lokt to go out at 2800 fps by comparison. Even though the Remington round was 10 grains heavier, the Winchester round kicked noticeably harder. In my opinion, it is loaded probably where it should be. I hope I didn't say it loud enough for them to hear. :lol: