I've already committed to taking a couple of .280's(one for me, one for the wife) on a combo deer/elk hunt. The 140 gr AccuBond is grouping .5" @ 100 yds. I wanted to use 140 Partitions but they won't group consistently good enough in my rifles to trust on an expensive hunt.
Anyone bagged a big elk with a .280 and 140 gr Accubond?
- Thread starter zupspoon
- Start date
- Nov 4, 2004
- 25,188
- 8,468
The 140 gr AB should get the job done in your 280 but you might also want to look at the 160 gr AB. 54.0 grs IMR4831 should get you there.
Please work up!
JD338
Please work up!
JD338
I'm sort of in the same boat using a 280 only I'm hunting nilgai - probably a slightly hardier animal than an elk. Anyway, I'm willing to sacrafice some accuracy just to get the penetration and bone-smashing effect. I'm not saying an 140 AccuBond won't do it, but I would select 160s over 140s just to be on the safe side. You say you want the extra accuracy because this is an expensive hunt, what if you hit one an then find 140 wasn't enough - then you have a merry chase on your hands and the hunt was just as expensive. Possibly both?
Richracer1
Handloader
- May 12, 2005
- 2,138
- 117
This may or may not help, but I bagged a cow elk laster year with my 270WSM using 160 partitions.
Powerstroke
Handloader
- Feb 24, 2006
- 1,799
- 58
zupspoon,
I have yet to use the 140's out of my .280 ( currently have switched to the A.B's but have not shot them )
I've taken several large cow elk with the 150gr B-tips with awesome luck!
Range on both has been aprox 200 to 250yrds.
Good luck!
I have yet to use the 140's out of my .280 ( currently have switched to the A.B's but have not shot them )
I've taken several large cow elk with the 150gr B-tips with awesome luck!
Range on both has been aprox 200 to 250yrds.
Good luck!
- Oct 30, 2004
- 24,282
- 3,002
Personally I would go with the 160 AB
- Oct 30, 2004
- 24,282
- 3,002
Personally I would go with the 160 AB!
G
Guest
Guest
I wouldn't be one bit afraid of using the AccuBond on elk, but as stated before, I would use the 160 grain version if it were my elk hunt.
I Guess my question would be, How inaccurate were the Partitions? If they are shooting 1.5" or less, you will not lose any game due to a misplaced shot unless you mess up yourself. The AccuBond is a good bullet, but the Partition is a better one for solid game like elk, and I would be opting for the 160 in either case [Partition or AccuBond], since this is a better choice for elk sized game. 40 years of hunting the big cervids has taught me some interesting facts. Penetration will be better, particularly if the angle is not quite perfect. As someone already commented, I would be willing to sacrifice a bit of accuracy for the right bullet. Regards, Eagleye.
- Thread starter
- #10
To clarify "doesn't group good enough"....I can live with a rifle shooting
1 1/2 inch groups for hunting at reasonable ranges...BUT...the Partitions shoot like crap in both of my Rem .280 700 RS rifles. They are spread all over the place, 3 to 4 inches @100 yds, and I've tried 3 different powders that should work well..IMR4831, RL-19, and RL-22. The two rifles are identical and relatively rare examples, both having the 7mm Express/280 Rem dual stamped barrels. They both also produce low velocity/high pressure, and they both shoot 140 gr Sierra(flat base only) and Nosler AB pretty good(about 1" and 1/2" 3-shot groups respectively), but shoot all other 139-140 gr. bullets I've tried like absolute crap, which includes Hornady SST, Nosler BT, Sierra Boat Tail, and Barnes XLC. Coincidence??? I think not. I suspect the barrels are the culprit, as there's a good chance that they were made on the same machinery around the same time as there were only 500 of these barrels produced. BTW, after free-floating and bedding both rifles, they shot the same. It's also interesting to note that 1/2 gr. difference in powder charge either way and the two good shooting bullets don't shoot so good anymore.
1 1/2 inch groups for hunting at reasonable ranges...BUT...the Partitions shoot like crap in both of my Rem .280 700 RS rifles. They are spread all over the place, 3 to 4 inches @100 yds, and I've tried 3 different powders that should work well..IMR4831, RL-19, and RL-22. The two rifles are identical and relatively rare examples, both having the 7mm Express/280 Rem dual stamped barrels. They both also produce low velocity/high pressure, and they both shoot 140 gr Sierra(flat base only) and Nosler AB pretty good(about 1" and 1/2" 3-shot groups respectively), but shoot all other 139-140 gr. bullets I've tried like absolute crap, which includes Hornady SST, Nosler BT, Sierra Boat Tail, and Barnes XLC. Coincidence??? I think not. I suspect the barrels are the culprit, as there's a good chance that they were made on the same machinery around the same time as there were only 500 of these barrels produced. BTW, after free-floating and bedding both rifles, they shot the same. It's also interesting to note that 1/2 gr. difference in powder charge either way and the two good shooting bullets don't shoot so good anymore.
- Nov 4, 2004
- 25,188
- 8,468
zupspoon,
I use 57.0 grs RL19 w/ 140 gr BT or PT in th e280. Both shoot sub MOA and to the same point of impact at 100 yds.
Give the 160 gr AB or PT a try. Both are great elk bullets and your rifle may shoot them a lot better.
JD338
I use 57.0 grs RL19 w/ 140 gr BT or PT in th e280. Both shoot sub MOA and to the same point of impact at 100 yds.
Give the 160 gr AB or PT a try. Both are great elk bullets and your rifle may shoot them a lot better.
JD338
- Thread starter
- #12
JD338...I've resisted going to the 160 grain bullets only because I get low velocity at pretty high pressure with the 140's...just a fact of life with these rifles. Normally I'm not velocity crazy but I'm really concerned about it in this case because the hunt is in an area where a long shot is the rule rather than the exception. And I'm limited(for my wife) to a .280 class gun because that's the upper limit that she can handle with accuracy. Being able to push a 160 grainer to around 2800 fps would work but I have my doubts in these particular rifles. I'm hard pressed to get 2900 fps with the 140 grainers without over-pressure signs. I will try the 160 AB anyway. If I can get close to 2800 fps with at least 1 1/2 inch accuracy...great. If not I'll stick with the 140 AB. I have a tack-driving .308 that the wife shoots well, but my guide isn't thrilled about it due to the potential for a longer shot. Can't say that he's wrong. She needs to have something with a better point-blank range and a bullet appropriate for both deer and elk. If only she could handle a .300 mag...oh well...how many guys have a wife that wants to hunt? Is that good or bad? Both? Wouldn't that be an interesting poll to take!
