280ai on a budget

If you can buy what you want, its cheaper to just buy it than to build it. If what you really want is an excuse to build something, then that's probably the only thing that will make you happy.

As gun nuts we will agonize over little differences that don't make much difference. In the end you are trying to make a bullet go a certain speed at a certain rifle weight. There's always an easy way and a hard way.
 
Kevan said:
That is faster than I want to push a 150 in my old Mod. 70 in 270, actually faster than I need to push them.
I'll check my 270 load data because I think my 150 gr. loads are around 2700 +...
Click to expand...

I have a handful of newer "lawyerized" manuals that list 150's at 2900 in the .270; another 100 fps over that isn't way out of line.

My deceased father-in-law's load wasn't something he worked up - he pulled it from an older manual. CCI# 200's, 60.0 grains of IMR 4831, and 150 grain flat base Hornady, seated to cannelure.

FYI, the same CCI#200's and 60.0 grains of IMR 4831 works in the 30-06 when topped with a 180 grain bullet of your choice; again, an older, less lawyerized load of yesteryear.

Our knowledgeable member, H4831, posted this on another thread discussing the .270 and 150's specifically:

"Yes, some of these "Maximum" loads in modern loading books are quite amusing.
There is a Hodgdon reloading chart in the 1964/65 Ellwood Epps catalogue. In that chart Hodgdon's show for a 270 Winchester and 150 grain bullets, 59 grains of 4831, for a velocity of 3105.
I used quite a bit of that loading, but dropped it back one grain, to 58 grains of 4831, in my L61 Sako. Five cartridge loaded in mixed cases and charged with a powder measure set at 58 grains, chonographed with an Oehler, averaged 2919, with a spread of only 22 fps."

So, honestly, 3000 fps with a 150 from a commonly available .270 win is entirely doable, unless you have a slow barrel.
 
I have been following this thread and have a question to which I do not know the answer. If the only problem with a rechambered readily available 280 Rem is barrel length, would the simple addition of a muzzle brake to the shorter barrel solve the problem? Would you gain or lose velocity with the brake? I have considered adding a brake to my Ruger 257 Roberts Ultra light not for recoil reduction but because the barrel looks too "stubby" to my eye. Thanks for knowledgeable advice.
 
Last edited:
Northman999 said:
I have a handful of newer "lawyerized" manuals that list 150's at 2900 in the .270; another 100 fps over that isn't way out of line.

My deceased father-in-law's load wasn't something he worked up - he pulled it from an older manual. CCI# 200's, 60.0 grains of IMR 4831, and 150 grain flat base Hornady, seated to cannelure.

FYI, the same CCI#200's and 60.0 grains of IMR 4831 works in the 30-06 when topped with a 180 grain bullet of your choice; again, an older, less lawyerized load of yesteryear.

Our knowledgeable member, H4831, posted this on another thread discussing the .270 and 150's specifically:

"Yes, some of these "Maximum" loads in modern loading books are quite amusing.
There is a Hodgdon reloading chart in the 1964/65 Ellwood Epps catalogue. In that chart Hodgdon's show for a 270 Winchester and 150 grain bullets, 59 grains of 4831, for a velocity of 3105.
I used quite a bit of that loading, but dropped it back one grain, to 58 grains of 4831, in my L61 Sako. Five cartridge loaded in mixed cases and charged with a powder measure set at 58 grains, chonographed with an Oehler, averaged 2919, with a spread of only 22 fps."

So, honestly, 3000 fps with a 150 from a commonly available .270 win is entirely doable, unless you have a slow barrel.
Click to expand...

4831 from 1964 is not the same as it is today. Jack O'Connor had some really hot loads - I looked them up last night - and he was getting about 2900 fps with 150's. With respect to what the manuals state - I don't believe they are very accurate. For example, Nosler #4 has the 7mm RM launching 140's at up to 3400 fps and 150's at up to almost 3300fps. I have used chronographs in the past, but just last summer I got a really nice, accurate one - and Oehler 35P. I regularly see velocities +100fps slower than claimed, through a variety of rifles, even with longer barrels than in the book.
 
1899 - My experience with manuals is also that they can be very optimistic; totally agree with you there.

However, I've personally chronied the load I mentioned, and, IMO, there's enough evidence from "old" manuals and "old" reloaders to suggest that 150's @ 3000 fps from the .270 win is not some urban legend or anything.
 
Northman999 said:
I have a handful of newer "lawyerized" manuals that list 150's at 2900 in the .270; another 100 fps over that isn't way out of line.

My deceased father-in-law's load wasn't something he worked up - he pulled it from an older manual. CCI# 200's, 60.0 grains of IMR 4831, and 150 grain flat base Hornady, seated to cannelure.

FYI, the same CCI#200's and 60.0 grains of IMR 4831 works in the 30-06 when topped with a 180 grain bullet of your choice; again, an older, less lawyerized load of yesteryear.

Our knowledgeable member, H4831, posted this on another thread discussing the .270 and 150's specifically:

"Yes, some of these "Maximum" loads in modern loading books are quite amusing.
There is a Hodgdon reloading chart in the 1964/65 Ellwood Epps catalogue. In that chart Hodgdon's show for a 270 Winchester and 150 grain bullets, 59 grains of 4831, for a velocity of 3105.
I used quite a bit of that loading, but dropped it back one grain, to 58 grains of 4831, in my L61 Sako. Five cartridge loaded in mixed cases and charged with a powder measure set at 58 grains, chonographed with an Oehler, averaged 2919, with a spread of only 22 fps."

So, honestly, 3000 fps with a 150 from a commonly available .270 win is entirely doable, unless you have a slow barrel.
Click to expand...

I'm not trying to hi-jack a fine thread, but honestly I have tried to work up to the 130 gr. load that you list for the 270 Win and cannot as I run into a serious pressure issue before reaching the 60.0 gr. mark, hence my posted velocities.
My rifle is a '58 vintage Mod.70 in really good condition.
 
Now is a good time to point out that the .277"= 7mm all others are just pretenders.
2900 fps with a150gr bullet is doable and safe with current data ,Re22 and IMR 7828.
 
hiredgun said:
I have been following this thread and have a question to which I do not know the answer. If the only problem with a rechambered readily available 280 Rem is barrel length, would the simple addition of a muzzle brake to the shorter barrel solve the problem? Would you gain or lose velocity with the brake? I have considered adding a brake to my Ruger 257 Roberts Ultra light not for recoil reduction but because the barrel looks too "stubby" to my eye. Thanks for knowledgeable advice.
Click to expand...

Muzzle brake will do nothing to velocity, for or against. Will reduce recoil and make your rifle louder. - dan
 
one thats actually 5 grains lighter haha. just saying I chose those over say a 270 for the option of shooting heavier bullets.
 
The reason I bought my Rem SS model 7, was just for sheep hunting. Great little rifle, light, tough, and more than accurate enough for the task. It's only a 7mm-08, but has now taken deer, moose, sheep, a few wolves, coyotes, and a few sickly pests I ran across while hunting. If I was to get a 280AI I would want a longer barrel.

It's a little small compared to anything else I use, but that's half it's charm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom