Powder, bullets for 280 AI

C

canoetrpr

CGN frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
13   0   0
Location
Just North of Toronto
I've gone down a bit of an off route and picked a .280 AI to be built in a Cooper. Nosler seems to be the only book that I have that lists loads for this calibre.

I was hoping to either fire form .280 brass or pick up new Nosler brass. Anyone that is reloading for this caliber, what powder and bullet combinations are you using?

I was planning to use some Nosler Accubonds or Partitions if I can find them. Figured I might as well stock up on some components given shortages.
 
I have a M52 in 280AI. I couldn't find a load it liked with 140 Accubonds, I'm not sure why, but I'm not the most experienced handloader out there. But it did seem to settle down with 140 TTSXs, IMR4831SC, Fed 210s with an OAL that just fit it inside the magazine. I don't have my book handy, but I'm pretty sure it's 3.340" or a little less. They get going just over 3000fps and grouped quite well. I don't know just how far off the lands they are, since if I seat to try to touch the lands (well, it wouldn't fit in the magazine) an unfired/dummy rounds would get caught between the bolt face and the front of the receiver when being ejected. Forcing it out would break off the polymer tip.
 
First thing: Hodgon has 280 AI reloading data available on the Web http://data.hodgdon.com/main_menu.asp.

Second thing: you can use 7mm Remington Short Action Ultra Magnum as a basis for 280 AI loads but do be careful since it operates at a higher maximum pressure and has a slightly higher capacity!

Finally, here are 2 high velocity 7mm "death ray" loads you should try are:
  • H4350 or H4831 with a Nosler 140gr Accubond at 3200fps (deer and elk)
  • H4831 with a Nosler 160gr Accubond at 3000fps (elk and moose)

A 7mm 140gr Accubond at 3200fps is the pretty much the ultimate long range/low recoil long range load, superior to the classic and proven 270 Win 130gr at 3000-3100fps load.

Alex
 
Last edited:
If a 150 gr TTSX is available, I'm guessing this is going to be plenty good for game like Elk or Caribou right? Perhaps 140 gr would suffice?

Given that the alternative I was thinking of to this calibre was a .270 where 130 and 140 gr bullets are common, I'm guessing this is the case. Thought I'd put it on here for folks to critique.
 
Alex, thanks for those pointers. I'm hoping to develop some loads with lighter projectiles but which are still ethically capable of a Elk or Caribou. Some day if the hunting bug does take on I may want to hunt those critters out west or in Quebec.

Correct me if I am wrong here. I thought the 7mm was 0.284".
 
canoetrpr said:
If a 150 gr TTSX is available, I'm guessing this is going to be plenty good for game like Elk or Caribou right? Perhaps 140 gr would suffice?

Given that the alternative I was thinking of to this calibre was a .270 where 130 and 140 gr bullets are common, I'm guessing this is the case. Thought I'd put it on here for folks to critique.
Click to expand...

When comparing bullets of different calibres, you should compare bullets with similar sectional densities, not similar weight. The 140 gr 7mm has basically the same sectional density as the 130 gr .270, so if all else is equal, ( bullet construction, velocity) they should behave in similar manner.

I don't have a .280, but I do have a 7x57. I already have a good stock of 140's, but if I was starting over I'd use 150's instead. You only give up about 100 fps with the heavier bullet, and the difference in downrange ballistics is so slight there's really no reason not to use the heavier bullet.

There are a few online ballistic calculators around ( I use Hornady's because I found it first) and it's worth punching in some numbers to see what the differences are at longer ranges.
 
Check out Nosler's new ACCUBOND LONG RANGE, its a separate listing from Accubond on their website. The 7mm 150gr has a BC of .611! And they're supposed to open up as slow as 1300fps. That's the perfect bullet for a 280AI IMHO.

280AI is on my wish list!
 
Sorry about the confusion I might have caused!! You're right about that, I meant to say that a 27 caliber or 7mm 140gr Accubond is highly effective at long range!
I'm editing my message right now!!!

Again sorry about the confusion.

Alex
 
canoetrpr said:
Alex, thanks for those pointers. I'm hoping to develop some loads with lighter projectiles but which are still ethically capable of a Elk or Caribou. Some day if the hunting bug does take on I may want to hunt those critters out west or in Quebec.

Correct me if I am wrong here. I thought the 7mm was 0.284".
Click to expand...

The 140gr Accubond at 3200fps is a now a well established long range elk load.
There are trends in elk hunting (338 Win Mag with a "light" 200+ gr bullet is now fashionable) but remember that with a modern well designed bullet, you can use a 10-20% lighter bullet and that a 7mm 140gr bullet is the equivalent in terms of sectional density of a 30 caliber 165gr bullet.

Also, you're right 7mm is 0.284", I meant to say that 270 WSM, 7 WSM, 7 Rem Mag, 280 AI are all equivalent in terms of power.
The huge advantages of 280 AI are great 7mm bullet choice, long accurate barrel life, lower muzzle blast and lower recoil.

Alex
 
you might also want to try 150 gr sciroccos they are really accurate
in my 7wsm with imr 7828 at 3140 fps.
they are an even better bullet than the accubond in my opinion. they
retain more weight, open up to larger frontal area. and give about the same penetration.
BUT they are a bit more expensive...

i tested the 200 gr accubond out of my 300 ultra @ 3050 fps
the recovered bullets weighted between 105 and 113 gr. and expanded diameter was between .55 and .65
the 150 scirocco out of the 7wsm @ 3140 that i recovered were between 110 and 117 gr.
and expanded to .63 to .98" so this lead me to beleive that my 7wsm would kill as well with the scirocco than my RUM with the
accubond.
but a lot of factors come into play, so not sure about this.
if you want other example of such test results, go to nosler forum in the bullet test section
and look for threads with scirocco in the title.
weight retention/expansion/penetration seems repeatable with all siroccos tested.

he only reasons i can see for them not being more popular is lack of advertising and price???
 
coldmaker said:
you might also want to try 150 gr sciroccos they are really accurate
in my 7wsm with imr 7828 at 3140 fps.
they are an even better bullet than the accubond in my opinion. they
retain more weight, open up to larger frontal area. and give about the same penetration.
BUT they are a bit more expensive...

i tested the 200 gr accubond out of my 300 ultra @ 3050 fps
the recovered bullets weighted between 105 and 113 gr. and expanded diameter was between .55 and .65
the 150 scirocco out of the 7wsm @ 3140 that i recovered were between 110 and 117 gr.
and expanded to .63 to .98" so this lead me to beleive that my 7wsm would kill as well with the scirocco than my RUM with the
accubond.
but a lot of factors come into play, so not sure about this.
if you want other example of such test results, go to nosler forum in the bullet test section
and look for threads with scirocco in the title.
weight retention/expansion/penetration seems repeatable with all siroccos tested.

he only reasons i can see for them not being more popular is lack of advertising and price???
Click to expand...

You are bang on with the Scirocco, I have used them in a few rifles and they are a great hunting bullet and fly pretty well too. They are worth every penny you pay. My only issue with the Scirocco is that they are hard to find. I don't know any where in Calgary that stocks them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom