Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > Guns & Ammo Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-26-2012, 10:16 AM
Kurt505 Kurt505 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
Default 280 loads, what's hot and what's not?

I'm trying to do some load development for my 280 and right now I'm running 58gr of IMR4831 topped with 140gr ballistic silver tip. It's an accurate load and I'm getting just under 2900fps with it. I've heard the load data for the 280 is on the conservative side, and there are a couple of theories I've heard for this. One reason is that it was first developed to run in the remmington auto loader. The second reason I've heard is that it was developed to run similar ballistics as the 270 but with less pressure. Whatever the case, I'm looking to get this type of speed with a 160gr bullet or over 3000 with a 140gr bullet.

Does anyone have a load they would like to share that is meeting my desired speeds?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-26-2012, 10:22 AM
bulletman bulletman is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,103
Default .280

You would have to get a 7mm Rem. Mag. to get 3000 fps from a 160 IMO.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-26-2012, 10:24 AM
Kurt505 Kurt505 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bulletman View Post
You would have to get a 7mm Rem. Mag. to get 3000 fps from a 160 IMO.
I guess I wasn't quite clear, what I meant was 3000+ with the 140gr and 2800+ with the 160gr.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-26-2012, 10:30 AM
bulletman bulletman is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,103
Default .280

OK, Now that sounds a little more realistic! 280's did come out in a semi originally if I remember correctly! I use IMR 4350 with a 150 grain in a .280. Thought I was in the 2850 area. I would have to dig out my old chronograph log to know for sure. What barrel length do you have?
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-26-2012, 10:30 AM
whitetailhntr whitetailhntr is offline
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,501
Default

58 gr of 4831 is pretty much at the top end of what ive used with 140 gr bullets in mine. I get right around the 3000 fps mark using 57.5 gr and 140 gr bullet. Even with my AI I only get slightly better than 3100 and it has a 24" barrel. My regular .280 has a 22" barrel. I have never used the 160's much so can't help you there. Did use the 162btsp from hornady a while back but don't remember the numbers from it. I just remember that it was accurate which, to me , is most important.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-26-2012, 10:37 AM
Kurt505 Kurt505 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bulletman View Post
OK, Now that sounds a little more realistic! 280's did come out in a semi originally if I remember correctly! I use IMR 4350 with a 150 grain in a .280. Thought I was in the 2850 area. I would have to dig out my old chronograph log to know for sure. What barrel length do you have?
These speeds were out of a 22" m70 featherweight barrel, I have a cooper with a 24" barrel that I'd like to work up some loads for, I have yet to shoot it.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-26-2012, 10:38 AM
catnthehat's Avatar
catnthehat catnthehat is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Ft. McMurray
Posts: 38,530
Default

When the 280 originally came out as the 7mmExpress it was loaded down a tad and IIRC was only offered in round nosed bullets.
Since it was renamed the 280 Remington however, it has come out with all sorts of different applications.
I do know that when it was first offered, it was loaded down under its potential, but I think the new factory stuff is loaded to the higher velocities, -I have tried any through the chronograph so cannot validate this however.

I've never had a problem hitting safe 3,000FPS velocities with my 280 and 140 grain bullets, however I prefer the 160's.
Cat
__________________
Anytime I figure I've got this long range thing figured out, I just strap into the sling and irons and remind myself that I don't!
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-26-2012, 10:51 AM
bulletman bulletman is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,103
Default Jim Carmichael load

Jim Carmichael hunted quite a bit with the .280. His load was 57-IMR 4350 and a 140 Nosler Partition. I thought that was pretty hot at the time, but he had pre-64 Winchester custom made jobs. My load was 54-IMR 4350 with the old Nosler 150 Solid Base. Friend of mine killed many moose with that load! Probably switch to Accubonds now!
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-26-2012, 11:00 AM
Maxwell78 Maxwell78 is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 567
Default

My load is 55gr of imr 4350 pushing a nosler bt 2930ft/sec. I have just made up a batch with h4350 up to 54 grains. haven't tried it out yet. I would like to crack the majic 3000fps mark.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-26-2012, 11:04 AM
Kurt505 Kurt505 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
Default

I've got some 140gr ballistic silver tips, and some 140&160gr accubonds to use up. I've got some H and IMR 4831, IMR 7828, H4350, and some RL22 on hand to use, but it looks like I should maybe pick up some RL19 too?
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 12-26-2012, 11:05 AM
Kurt505 Kurt505 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maxwell78 View Post
My load is 55gr of imr 4350 pushing a nosler bt 2930ft/sec. I have just made up a batch with h4350 up to 54 grains. haven't tried it out yet. I would like to crack the majic 3000fps mark.
140gr?
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 12-26-2012, 11:07 AM
catnthehat's Avatar
catnthehat catnthehat is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Ft. McMurray
Posts: 38,530
Default

4831 is my favourite powder for the .280, but I know several people wuo use RL19 and like it.
Cat
__________________
Anytime I figure I've got this long range thing figured out, I just strap into the sling and irons and remind myself that I don't!
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 12-26-2012, 11:11 AM
Maxwell78 Maxwell78 is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 567
Default

140gr. sorry, long night
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 12-26-2012, 01:16 PM
Kurt505 Kurt505 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
Default

Does anyone else have a load they'd care to share?
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 12-26-2012, 03:15 PM
Jordan Smith's Avatar
Jordan Smith Jordan Smith is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,363
Default

56.5gr IMR4350 and 140gr Sierra PH at 3050fps

60gr IMR7828ssc and 162gr AM for 2950fps

Work up to these loads! Brass lasted a long time in my rifle and showed no traditional pressure signs, but may not work with yours.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 12-26-2012, 04:53 PM
Kurt505 Kurt505 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jordan Smith View Post
56.5gr IMR4350 and 140gr Sierra PH at 3050fps

60gr IMR7828ssc and 162gr AM for 2950fps

Work up to these loads! Brass lasted a long time in my rifle and showed no traditional pressure signs, but may not work with yours.
Would regular 7828 work the same as the ssc?
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 12-26-2012, 05:10 PM
JJ-65 JJ-65 is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 137
Default

RL-17. 57.0 grs . 3300 fps with Barnes 120gr TTSX bullets or Nosler Bal-tips. 3 shot groups sub half inch in a Rem 700 MR.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 12-28-2012, 09:35 PM
Kurt505 Kurt505 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
Default

Well, I've got 9 different loads made up with 2 different grain tips and 4 different powders, wasn't able to find any RL19. I'm running some RL22, H4831, IMR4831, and some H4350. I'll be shooting about 40-60rds in the morning to hopefully find something quick and accurate, kinda wish I had found some RL19 tho.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 12-29-2012, 09:10 AM
Jordan Smith's Avatar
Jordan Smith Jordan Smith is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,363
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurt505 View Post
Would regular 7828 work the same as the ssc?
Yes, but work up to those charge weights.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 12-29-2012, 07:05 PM
Kurt505 Kurt505 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
Default

Looks like 58gr of imr 4831 topped off with a 140gr bst is the ticket for both my 280's. tomorrow I'll run it thru the chrono.


Last edited by Kurt505; 12-29-2012 at 07:28 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 12-29-2012, 07:21 PM
bulletman bulletman is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,103
Default Awesome group

Unfortunately, accuracy is not the only issue with a ''hunting load''
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 12-29-2012, 07:26 PM
Kurt505 Kurt505 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bulletman View Post
Unfortunately, accuracy is not the only issue with a ''hunting load''
I've been using factory bst's out of my 280 for over 10yrs and have taken moose, elk, muley, and whitetails with them. I haven't run my hand load thru the chrono with my 24" barrel yet but with my 22" barrel they were almost 100fps faster than factory loads.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 12-29-2012, 07:49 PM
sevenmil sevenmil is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 475
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurt505 View Post
Does anyone else have a load they'd care to share?
Are you working up a load strictly for accuracy or do you want an accurate load that will work for everything from antelope to Moose? I worked up a good load with IMR 4350 and 140 grain Barnes Triple Shocks and it is the most accurate load I have developed yet in this particular .280. I am getting 2940 fps with it. Had faster velocities with IMR 4831 (over 3000 fps, but not the accuracy). Have shot pronghorn, deer, bear, sheep, elk, and moose with this load with and the bullet performs very well. When I was working up this load the folks at Barnes had not come out with triple shock data, and they recommended I use data for the regular Copper x bullet. They told me I could work up to 2 grains more than what the data for the regular old fashioned x bullet stated. As such I am shooting 54 grains of IMR 4350 and 140 grain barnes triple shocks. Started out with CCI Primers but when I switched to Federal 210M primers the groups shrank even more. I have not had any signs of undue pressure. It could be a little on the warm side however, and I am sure you know that all guns are different and a person needs to work up to a load. What works in mine may not work in yours but I am sure you know that. Am thinking of trying the Barnes 145 LRX with IMR 4831 and seeing how that load works.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 12-29-2012, 07:56 PM
sevenmil sevenmil is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 475
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by catnthehat View Post
4831 is my favourite powder for the .280, but I know several people wuo use RL19 and like it.
Cat
Hodgdon or IMR?
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 12-29-2012, 08:07 PM
rottie's Avatar
rottie rottie is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Lacombe
Posts: 2,462
Default

I use 58.6 IMR 4350 with a 139 Hornady interlock at a chronographed 2923 fps. This load works well on everything from Moose on down.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 12-29-2012, 08:15 PM
whitetailhntr whitetailhntr is offline
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,501
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sevenmil View Post
Hodgdon or IMR?
Either or has worked equally as well with mine. I tend to get better velocity with IMR but they are both equally accurate with both my .280 and my .280 AI.

Last edited by whitetailhntr; 12-29-2012 at 08:28 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 12-29-2012, 08:24 PM
Kurt505 Kurt505 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sevenmil View Post
Are you working up a load strictly for accuracy or do you want an accurate load that will work for everything from antelope to Moose? I worked up a good load with IMR 4350 and 140 grain Barnes Triple Shocks and it is the most accurate load I have developed yet in this particular .280. I am getting 2940 fps with it. Had faster velocities with IMR 4831 (over 3000 fps, but not the accuracy). Have shot pronghorn, deer, bear, sheep, elk, and moose with this load with and the bullet performs very well. When I was working up this load the folks at Barnes had not come out with triple shock data, and they recommended I use data for the regular Copper x bullet. They told me I could work up to 2 grains more than what the data for the regular old fashioned x bullet stated. As such I am shooting 54 grains of IMR 4350 and 140 grain barnes triple shocks. Started out with CCI Primers but when I switched to Federal 210M primers the groups shrank even more. I have not had any signs of undue pressure. It could be a little on the warm side however, and I am sure you know that all guns are different and a person needs to work up to a load. What works in mine may not work in yours but I am sure you know that. Am thinking of trying the Barnes 145 LRX with IMR 4831 and seeing how that load works.

I'm going to try some 140gr accubonds, I've had better luck accuracy wise than with Barnes. They fly a lot like the bst's in my experience.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 12-29-2012, 08:42 PM
bulletman bulletman is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,103
Default Ballistic Tips, SST, etc.

Quite a few people still seem to be using ''BALLISTIC TIPS'' for everything under the sun. They are not designed for that though. They are a ''light game'' bullet. I call them ''fairweather'' bullets. If everything goes absolutely perfectly there is no problem. Hunting is not like that though. Yes, I have shot some pretty nice groups with ballistic tips as well. Your rifle only has to shoot as good as you can in ''field position'' Yes, it is nice to see awesome groups like these, but I will give up the 1/2 inch group for a bullet that has not only accuracy but structure as well. One fellow here suggested the Barnes. I don't use too many of them either, but I would be more comfortable with a bullet that is designed for ''big game'' when hunting ''big game'' I switched to Accubonds as soon as they came out. Long Range Accubonds coming out spring next year. Partitions are still an awesome bullet, still hard to beat on game, maybe not quite as fancy a group on paper, but deadly on ''big game''
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 12-29-2012, 09:13 PM
Kurt505 Kurt505 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bulletman View Post
Quite a few people still seem to be using ''BALLISTIC TIPS'' for everything under the sun. They are not designed for that though. They are a ''light game'' bullet. I call them ''fairweather'' bullets. If everything goes absolutely perfectly there is no problem. Hunting is not like that though. Yes, I have shot some pretty nice groups with ballistic tips as well. Your rifle only has to shoot as good as you can in ''field position'' Yes, it is nice to see awesome groups like these, but I will give up the 1/2 inch group for a bullet that has not only accuracy but structure as well. One fellow here suggested the Barnes. I don't use too many of them either, but I would be more comfortable with a bullet that is designed for ''big game'' when hunting ''big game'' I switched to Accubonds as soon as they came out. Long Range Accubonds coming out spring next year. Partitions are still an awesome bullet, still hard to beat on game, maybe not quite as fancy a group on paper, but deadly on ''big game''

Everything I've shot with the ballistic tips has died? I once took a head on shot at a buck with a partition where the bullet went in the brisket and out behind the front leg, chased that damn deer all day long before I was able to get the kill shot in him. I still think if I had to be using a ballistic tip he would have died from the first shot. Penetration is great to have, especially for a good blood trail, but so far I've never had a problem with the ballistic tip. On a side note, I've had great accuracy results with the accubonds with my 257wby and with my other 280, I just got this rifle a week or two ago and I'll be working up an accubond load for it once I find some 140's, I have some 160's I'm trying out tomorrow.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 12-29-2012, 09:33 PM
bulletman bulletman is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,103
Default key words

The key words Sir are ''so far'' Actually we had a problem with a Partition one time too. I don't think any hunter would want to wound an animal. It's really very important to ''match your bullet to your game'' Accubonds are a safer ''do everthing'' bullet IMHO. With any bullet, if you read the comment section, there is always at least one unhappy customer. Most of these bullets have a 95 per cent or better ''satisfaction'' rating. You or I will never make 100 per cent of the people happy all the time, but there is no harm in trying!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:57 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.