Accuracy and Velocity Loading 160 gr Accubonds for .280 Rem

[Oldtrader3]

For the past 25 years or so during which I have owned and handloaded for the .280 Remington, first in a Mountain Rifle and now in an A-Bolt Browning since 1995. I have stuck pretty much with using 140 gr Ballistic Tips and other brands of 140 gr bullets with the opinion that I was using the best balanced weight versus velocity for this caliber at about 2940 fps with the 140 gr bullets. Then on this past Sunday, I was reading my old Nosler Number 3 manual and it listed a load that exceeded 2900 fps for the 160 grain bullet in the .280 with IMR 7828.

I had never really paid much attention to the 160 gr weight of bullet in the .280 Rem because I also own a 7mm Rem Mag which I have been loading to approximately 3060 fps with the 160 Partition since the early 1960's. I had just always figured that I would just use the .280 with 140 gr bullets and the 7mm Mag with 160 gr bullets.

Then a couple of weeks ago, I finally was able to find and buy a sufficient quantity (3 boxes) of 160 grain Accubonds to try in the 7mm Mag and figured that it was time to also see what I could do with load development of the 160 AB's in the .280 Rem as well and testing for velocity and accuracy.

I ended up making some test loads ramping up to 58.0 grains or IMR 7828 with a Federal 215 Mag Match primer. I never expected the results that I got with this load and bullet combination in the .280 Rem. Not only did I get over 3000 feet per second muzzle velocity but I also got (3) 100 yard, 3-shot groups of 1/2 to 3/4's inch accuracy with this load.

This is within 50 fps of what I normally get for velocity with the 160 Partition in the 7mm Mag with the 160 AB in the .280 Rem, talk about surprised! Others must have experienced this same power range with the .280?

 

[BeeTee]

The 280 is no slouch!

I wonder though what you could do with the 7RM, 160AB, tough brass and 7828. That combo is actually on my list of things to do with the 7. :wink: I have used 7828 in a 300Wby to achieve nearly 3300-fps with the 165BT.

Jim

 

[JD338]

That is impressive speed! I am doing that with my 280 AI.
How do the cases look? Are the primer pockets tight?

JD338

 

[Oldtrader3]

Primers seem to be fine with slight cratering but they are always cratered. Bolt lift is normal, no ejector hole marks on the cases. I will reload them and see if the get through another firing with tight primers. The load is 1/2 grain less then Nosler Number 3 maximum load. Recoil is a little heavier than 140 grain bullets and the load is a little louder.

Seems fine so far.

 

[Mountain Goat]

Something is up with the IMR7828 data for the 280, and Nosler isn't saying anything. The starting charge in #5 is the max charge in #6, for 160 grain bullets. The 150gr bullet info is the same, like they didn't even re-test the data. I'm glad I spent money on a half-assed manual, :x

My 280 doesn't shoot the 160's that fast, but it will hold a case full of 7828ssc without showing any signs of pressure.

I've asked Nosler this question, but their response was quite vague, without a definitive explanation.

 

[Oldtrader3]

I suspect that this issue has to do with all of the Model 742 and 760 Rifles that Remington made for the .280 cartridge when it first came out in 1958. Because of this, and in spite of the fact that the case shoulder is 0.050 longer than the .30-06 which means that the case should hold more powder for a similar sectional density bullet than the .30-06 with lower pressure. The factories consistantly keep this case loaded down in the 50 KSI or lower range of pressure when the .270 is routinely loaded to 60 KSI.

I tried some 140 grain loads for the .280 Rem that were listed in Nosler #6, 52.5 grains of IMR 4350 with a Fed 210 primer and only got 2700 fps muzzle velocity when I have been getting 2930 fps with the Winchester Black Box (CT Silvertip) factory Supreme ammo. The .270 Win uses 55.0 grains of IMR 4350 with the same SD 130 grain bullet and a smaller capacity case! So, I loaded up to 56.0 grains of IMR 4350 and got 2960 fps with no pressure signs.

I suspect that IMR 7828 SSC is a better powder than anybody in the ammo industry is saying it is. I think that these ammo companies use this powder for their factory ammo and do not want handloaders to be able to meet the factory's velocities with highly accurate handloads?

I just tested a primer for removal force and insertion into a case that I have loaded with 58.0 grains of IMR 7828 and a 160 AccuBond and the pocket is tight with no leakage or signs of pressure. I am sticking with this load as being fast, accurate and apparently safe in my rifle.

I use the IMR 7828 SSC in my .340 Weatherby because it is the only powder that will meet factory load velocities with manageable pressures and high accuracy with the 225 Nosler Partition bullet. If I can nearly equal the 7mm Rem Mag 160 grain load (within 70 fps) and reasonable pressure in a .280, why not use it?

 

[glock3540]

found the same results using IMR 7828 and 160 accubonds. I actually went up to 59.5gr with no pressure sign until I shot them on a 90+ degree day (light extractor marks on brass). I've since dropped to 59gr and it retained the accuracy. I have not chrono'd them but I'm sure they are moving. Here's the first three shots I tried with the 59.5 gr.

 

[Oldtrader3]

I am glad to have someone come forward with similar experiences to mine. I got 3009 fps with 58.0 IMR 7828, Federal 215 Mag Match primer and W-W cases. Plus all three groups were very consistantly under 7/8 inch. I probably will not fool any more with this load because it meets all of my criteria for accuracy and velocity.

 

[jmad_81]

I had very great luck with 7828 in my 280 AI with the 160 AB. I was just able to break the 3000 mark, but I think I was a bit to close to the lands and got high psi. Three fireings was about all I could get out of the brass. I never went back to it because I really never intended to shoot the 160s out of it much. I might have to revisit it now.

That is one smoking 280 if you are getting 3000+ with a 160!

Nice work.

 

[Oldtrader3]

Thanks, I will just have to reload the cases and see what life is with the brass. I am going to go with it for now.

 

[C.Smith]

Correct me if I'm wrong but was not the orignal powder for the 7mm mag and 175 grain bullets using IMR 7828? Those are great and interesting results you have there. Makes me wonder why I can not get more velocity of my 7mm mag with same bullet or if the 7 just wastes powder and the 280 is just that effeciant.

Corey

 

[DrMike]

Charlie,

Fascinating results. I'm working up loads in my new .280. My old Winchester shoots 139/140 grain bullets to 1/4 inches. I'm toting either 140 grain BSTs or 140 grain PTs at about 2800 fps in that rifle. However, the newer Remington handles heavier bullets quite nicely. I was focusing on 150 grain PTs, but I may just try 160s in the next couple of weeks. While there is nothing wrong with 150 grain PTs launched at good velocity, little more punch can be handy at times.

 

[Oldtrader3]

DrMike, that is certainly true with the 150 gr bullets in the .280 being a really good load. I was just curious about the puplished information that I could equal my 7mm Rem Mag with less powder in a standard (.30-06 based) case. I just had to see if it could be done.

 

[DrMike]

I just had to see if it could be done.

Adding to the knowledge base is always a good thing. I have a voracious appetite for information. If it appears credible, I'm willing (and blessed to be able) to test to see if I can duplicate the results. It does not mean that I'll appropriate the information for my own use, but it will be filed together with all the other information on that load and used at some point in the future.

 

[SJB358]

Wow- Charlie, that is one great shooting load! Man, that is very impressive. My 7WSM does just a shade over 3100 with the 160gr AB and I was stoked. Being you are using a 280, you really have a great combo there.

I will add this- it isn't completely scientific or anything, but I have found RL22 and IMR7828 to be darned near the same powder. I am sure there is a variance among some cases, but my 270WSM will shoot a bunch of different bullets, with the same charge of either at the same speed and accuracy. I know without a doubt they are different, but to me, they are very good powders for alot of bullets in alot of cases. Oh, the 243 worked the same way as well. Again, just some coincidences I have found over a little time, but the data seems to back it up a little.

Again, great shooting Charlie. That is very impressive for the 280 Rem. Scotty

 

[Ridge_Runner]

I pretty much gave the books up, they are so conservative that there is no way you can reach a rifles full potential unless you just work up your own safe max loads for your rifles. I brought this up in a thread last week about the 264 winny, how the loads have been watered down.
Remember the ruckus when layne simpson unveiled the stw then as soon as remington brought out the 7 RUM, they're specs went from a MV of 3430 with a 140 to 3200, my stw still runs 140's at 3550 and 160's at 3340.
RR

 

[Oldtrader3]

Thanks Scotty, despite being an old man, I can still do one thing well.

I think that RL22 and IMR 7828 SSC are pretty close, as are RL 19 and IMR 4350. I do not know who copied who but I think RL 22 was out before 7828, at least for handloaders, which doesn't mean much as far as when they started making it. I started using IMR 7828 for the .25-06 and 7mm Mag in the mid 1990's sometime. The SSC version is only about 3 years old.

 

[338 Ultra]

Same here I use 7828 in the 280 with 160 Ab's. My load is in the mid 2800's but very accurate and consistant. I was able to load higher and get more speed but accuracy went south so the choice was easy. The good old 280 is a great cartridge that still seems to be holding on for the time being. Remmy made a huge mistake bringing it out in a pump and a semi. Had they put it in a bolt action only and had the pressure up with the 270 today we might have a different story. Great cartridge that has paid it's dues but is almost all but forgotten.

 

[Oldtrader3]

That sure is true. If you can get 3000 fps with a 160 gr AB without the muss and fuss of a magnum case and with 8 grains less powder etc., why not do it. I think that recent innovations in powder dynamics are going to change the way people think about these .30-06 based cartridges vesrsus the magnums.

 

[SJB358]

That sure is true. If you can get 3000 fps with a 160 gr AB without the muss and fuss of a magnum case and with 8 grains less powder etc., why not do it. I think that recent innovations in powder dynamics are going to change the way people think about these .30-06 based cartridges vesrsus the magnums.

The 30-06 based cartridges are pretty danged awesome. I love the Whelen a bunch and would have no issue having a Whelen and probably a 25-06 to cover just about all the hunting I would need to do. With the great powders available today, the 06 really shines as well.

Your 280 load with the 160 is a great one Charlie. Makes it really hard to justify the big 7 with those kinds of speeds. Scotty