I hear what you're saying, and perhaps because on-game effect is (by many accounts) nearly indistinguishable for medium bores - and for the sake of argument, let's say everything from .260 Rem to .300 WM - it becomes silly to claim that any one is significantly superior.

I once heard it said - and wish I could remember who coined the phrase: "The whole problem with the world is that fools are so sure of themselves, while the wise are always so full of doubt."

Maybe just a moment's worth of doubt is enough, then, to form an educated opinion that's worth something!

Blessings & good shooting!

friar

While it is true that cyberspace is full of folks with examples of one and spurious guesstimates and axes to grind and plain old bullshit, but when one reads a definitive article by say Finn Aagard that explores the good, bad, and ugly about a cartridge or rifle and reads yet another piece by a reputable writer with a proven track record and adds emprical information from trusted friends and contributors, one may not have any hands on experience with a particular cartridge/rifle but he can have a damned good idea as to its worth.
I agree with a great deal of what you have to say but we don't all have to invent the wheel to know it rolls.

quote:

Originally posted by wasbeeman:
we don't all have to invent the wheel to know it rolls.

+1

quote:

I once heard it said - and wish I could remember who coined the phrase: "The whole problem with the world is that fools are so sure of themselves, while the wise are always so full of doubt."

Maybe just a moment's worth of doubt is enough, then, to form an educated opinion that's worth something!


friar

Friar: Eliminate the doubt;do it yourself!Only then do you "know"..

What I'd really like to do is poke a nice bull elk or moose with a 175 gr. Partition out of my father's 7 RM.

His rifle is a Savage circa 1965, with a high grade stock (think of the Weatherby style), and the recoil on the gun is terrible, which I contribute mostly to the stock design.

It's hells bells on whitetails, but to tell you the truth, I suspect it's got a rather slow barrel, at least for the handloads that I've done for it. I haven't chronied factory ammo for it, but would like to know someday what factory ammo would run out of it.

I've often admired a nice straight stocked 7RM. My reluctance today is on account of Kimber's new 84L, which is just a little over 6 lb., as compared to 7 or even 8 in most 7RM chambered rifles. And when you think of how fast the new powders are pushing 180 gr. 30-06's, and the lighter Kimber, I've started to lean towards a new 30-06 in 84L.

Still, my absolute dream is a Model 70 (or clone) in 7RM, trimmed down to sub 7 lbs (before extras).

God bless!

friar

I've owned several 7 Rem Mags and a 24" 7 WBY Mag.

The fastest 7 Rem Mag was in a 26" Ruger No.1. It would quite easily do 3000 fps from the 175gr Nosler.

With 2" less the 7 WBY would do the same: 3000+ fps from the big Nosler. A bl. bear got terminated with that load at 65 yds. It was a "bang flop".

According to early literature on the 7 Rem Mag, many reamers were not standard, and the result was a too tight neck which didn't allow proper release of the bullet, creating high pressure. I came to believe that because, at the time of the article, I owned a very nice (choice wood) BAR in that chambering, for which I handloaded. It was true... The neck was so tight after firing, it was like the cases had already been resized! I couldn't even force a bullet into the neck of a fired case without using the press! And that was a factory Browning barrel!

I read the article, and warning, when the SAAMI specs were still 54,000 CUP. Shortly after that article they lowered it to 52,000.

With a reamer that allows proper neck expansion, there's no reason not to allow psi to 64,000, as in any modern bolt-action with a properly cut chamber!

I owned a Rem M673 in .350 Rem Mag... it had a severely under-sized chamber that showed high pressures from factory ammo. I took it to my gun smith who said it was "roughed-out only". He did a proper chambering and it transformed the rifle !

MAP is for safety reasons, and mostly on the conservative side. Back in the '80s, the NRA did a publication on rifle cartridges and CUP. I'll not look up the quote here, but I've used it in my publications. In effect it states what the "normal average pressure" is for each, but then adds what "the maximum working pressure for factory ammo" is. Let me just say: It (factory ammo) was significantly higher.

Bob

www.bigbores.ca

quote:

Originally posted by Eastcoaster:

quote:

Originally posted by friarmeier:
Wait a minute, are you saying that a person can't have an educated opinion on a subject unless one has 1st hand experience with it?



friar

friar: With all due respect that is exactly what I am saying....

People are free to form educated opinions,but it generally leads to lousy and inaccurate information when distinguishing cartridge performance.

Besides, if you have not shot the rifle,loaded for it,etc...how then is the opinion "educated"?

Because you read about it? Sorry does not wash IMHO.The internet is full of such nonsense,based on a lot of guessing that passes for "educated opinion".

After all these years, its only now I'm told that I should not believe anything I read about say the .375H&H.
Now I have to own and shoot one for half a lifetime to verify it credentials....I fear its too late....

KurtC, BEAUTIFUL rifle!!! My 7x57 is the #1 International, and i love it!!! As far as the various 7MMs out there, ive got 7 Mauser, 7 Mag, and a 7-08 and i love em all, but if pressed, id have to say 7RemMag cause of the extra power when/if needed if i could only have one.

quote:

Originally posted by Trax:

After all these years, its only now I'm told that I should not believe anything I read about say the .375H&H.
Now I have to own and shoot one for half a lifetime to verify it credentials....I fear its too late....

There are two ways to learn about things....by reading or gleening information from others...or by doing them yourself.Or,a combination of both.

You can "read" about what a 375's potential is,but until you have used it,or seen it used,you can't really "know" how it compares to other cartridges of the same class,unless you use it.

In one instance, you have "theoretical knowledge",and in the other, you have "actual knowledge".

I am new to this forum,but read it frequently...I notice that Michael has quite a following here,because his knowledge is buttressed by actual experience,not theory,or what someone else says.

Try reading all you can about being a petroleum engineer;then go to a job interview at Exxon,and tell them you "know"how to be a petroleum engineer because you have "read" about it,and see how far that gets you....I bet you won't get hired

Why? Because you have no "personal experience" being a petroleum engineer.

I think you know exactly what I am saying....if you don't,I fear that you are correct,and it is, in fact,"too late" for you...

this is like choosing between chocolate or vanilla ice cream. Both are great rounds as verified by this thread. I like the 280 Rem. I shoot a 160 grain accubond in front of 54 grains of R-19. My rifle (Magnum Research Mtn. Eagle) going with me to NZ to take on Tahr & Chamois. I find being a rifle nut makes choosing which rifle(s) to take an enjoyable conundrum. For the record I was debating taking the following 270 Weatherby Mag; 7 MM Weatherby Mag; 7 MM STW, and 7 MM Rem Mag. I intentionally limited my choices to 270 and 280 calibers. If I through in my 30 Caliber options I would be forced to shut down and re-boot...

quote:

Originally posted by Tim Vining:
this is like choosing between chocolate or vanilla ice cream... I intentionally limited my choices to 270 and 280 calibers. If I through in my 30 Caliber options I would be forced to shut down and re-boot...

That's a good summation!

And, in light of the reconciliation, peace, & forgiveness of the risen Christ, let's not be too hard on one another regarding "book learning" vs. "field learning."

Perhaps the great NY Yankees catcher, Yogi Berra, said it best:

"In theory, theory and practice are the same; in practice, practice and theory are different."

Happy Easter!

friar

But the choice is not really between chocolate or vanilla, it about one scoop or two.
The position taken by the .280 camp always compares handloaded ammo to store bought when they are talking that talk. But the fact remains if all things are equal, ie, carefully prepared loads, working within saami tolerances, home rolled by a knowledgeable reloader, the big 7 will outdo the .280. That's a simple fact.
You can red line the .280 and at rhe risk of life and limb crow about acchieving 7mm preformance. But the fact remains that if you work to the same stupid levels with a 7mag, it will leave the .280 in the dust.
And this is from a guy that shoots them both, has them both, and likes them both.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Eastcoaster:

There are two ways to learn about things....by reading or gleening information from others...or by doing them yourself.Or,a combination of both.

in my view, accounts of other peoples actual experiences can be rather valuable to others.
One does not have to do everything themselves to validate the effectiveness of a cartridge.

You can "read" about what a 375's potential is,but until you have used it,or seen it used,you can't really "know" how it compares to other cartridges of the same class,unless you use it.

In one instance, you have "theoretical knowledge",and in the other, you have "actual knowledge".

I am new to this forum,but read it frequently...I notice that Michael has quite a following here,because his knowledge is buttressed by actual experience,not theory,or what someone else says.

and if one only reads/gleens what Michael says, and does not do what Michael has done, then all one has gained is "theoretical knowledge" [according to you]..so what would be the great value in only reading about Michaels findings?


The knowledge you or I gain from reading about other peoples actual experiences with 7MMRmag,375hh or some bullet design..is based on just that.
It may be written down in order to share with others, but remains account of actual experience, nothing theoretical about that.
Those people aren't writing about what they think that bullet or .375H&h might do, but actually what it has done, time and time again!

....Are you saying that another person would get no actual worthwhile credible gain of knowledge from reading of other peoples[extensive] actual experience?

Should I not believe what Michael says about his bullets? Does one have to do the same testing Michael has done to be convinced/give his work credibility?...
If I myself don't actually do the testing he has done, then any knowledge i gain by only reading about his results /findings, would according to you, have only theoretical value to me.

Gerard from GSC, uses the knowledge gained from his own testing as well as the broad spectrum of people using his custom bullets,
In other words, Gerard takes into account other peoples experiences to more strongly verify performance.
the many more thousand bullets tested by GSC customers,seem to count for something more than theoretical, according to Gerard.
Why would anyone with any sense downgrade the value of such experiences-findings of other people?

Does Gerard have to shoot all those GSC bullets himself to give the findings value-add to his knowledge base?, Is it not possible for him to gain valuable knowledge from studying-reading other peoples actual results?


Try reading all you can about being a petroleum engineer;then go to a job interview at Exxon,and tell them you "know"how to be a petroleum engineer because you have "read" about it,and see how far that gets you....I bet you won't get hired

Why? Because you have no "personal experience" being a petroleum engineer.



First of all, most of us are recreational hunters, and not someone applying to become a professional hunter.

secondly, there are experienced Petroleum engineers,electrical engineers,lawyers,doctors etc, to consult/ provide advice in fields-matters they have much experience in.
If I don't have the proven practical experience they have, does that mean I cannot trust the advice they give, Do I have to have the proven experience they have, in order to trust that what they say is true/realistically helpful beneficial advice?

Lets say one posts a thread on AR and e-mails several Hunting/guiding outfitters saying:

"Have never been to Africa & never hunted the big bears of NA, but plan to do this, considering to buy a.375HH for such task, but have never owned one,..what do you think about my cartridge choice-is it suitable?"

Would you believe[should one have confidence] in the advice given by the rec. hunters and PHs who respond with their vast experience regarding this cartridge? [along with everything else one has ever read about the .375hh that was written by those with extensive .375hh experience]

quote:

But the choice is not really between chocolate or vanilla, it about one scoop or two.

Actually, that sums it up well, in that is IS about that "one extra scoop"!

Because for what I do here in Britain and Europe I prefer that extra one round that the 280 gives me over the 7mm RM.

I use a Belgian artisan gunsmith 98K converted to 280 so that gives me FIVE in magazine and one in barrel if I wish. So SIX rounds.

Remember some shooting here in Yurrup is different to in the US.

Many this side of the ocean would sooner sacrifice extra range for an extra round for battue type shooting or also culling a herd.

As fine as it is if I were considering a 7mm RM I'd seriously think about actually going "all the way" to 300 Win Mag.

And many in Europe do that. Going from 7x64 (their 280 Rem equivalent) to 300 Win Mag with out considering the 7mm RM at all.

I was able to safely achieve 3100 fps using 140gr Nosler AB's in the 22 inch barrel of my Remington Mountain rifle, using Winchester 760.

One thing I discovered about Winchester 760 is just how consistent and accurate a powder it really is, so I highly recommend it (actually I've found it works really well in 270, 280 and 30-06)

Seems like a few are starting to get their panties in a wad. Oh well. seriously, I am surprised this thread has stayed as polite as it has.
I see no arguement on whether the 7MM Rem. Mag. is more powerful than the .280 Rem. which is of course more powerful than the 7x57. Hell, that's a given.
Whether one should restrict their reloads in the .280 to SAAMI specs is a horse of a different color. I do believe that with careful handloading one can"improve" on the .280's velocity in reasonable safety. I'm not saying one should go balls to the wall by any means but by judicious powder selection, careful monitoring on case head and pressure ring measurements along with graphing the powder charge velocity gain, one should be able to easily better factory specs without going overboard and potentially destroying a good firearm and body parts. The individual rifle must also be taken into consideration. I have three rifles in 7x57, a Ruger #1A, Winchester M70 Featherweight and a custom Mauser with a very tight chamber. The load I shoot most of the time is the 140 gr. Nosler Ballistic tip which does 2750 FPS in the Ruger, 2800 FPS in the M70 but is way too hot for that tight chambered Mauser. One load work up with the 175 gr. Hornady round nose does the 2300 FPS I was looking for as I was experimenting with how the original loads would have worked back in 1893. That same load will do a full 100 FPS fater in the Mauser but no different than the M70 in the Ruger.
I have done evry little work up in my custom .280 Rem. or the Ruger #1B 7MM Rem mag. so far. Just been way too busy to take the time.
I have been thinking of using either the 7x57 or .280 on my cow elk hunt this coming December and probably use a 160 gr. bullet. I did this same hunt in 2010 and used a .35 Whelen. According to the outfitter, these elk are very spooky and will run at the sight of a truck or man on foot and frankly, he was not kidding. The 7MM mag. has to stay home as the outfitter strictly forbids single shot rifles. The elk I shot was jumped at about 100 yards and was 150 yards when I put a 225 gr. Barnes TSX into her bringing her down like right now. It's just I haven't hunted the .280 at all yet and only one deer hunt with the M70 and they need to get blooded. I'll probably use W760 in the 7x57 and WMR in the .280. WMR has proven to be a real winner in my .270 and .300 Win. mag. It's also done very nicely in my 25-06 but for some reason, it sucks big time in the 30-06 until you use 200 gr. and heavier bullets. Last time I took the .300 Mag. in case shot were gonna be way out yonder so it will be the back up gun once more.
So I guess my question is should I go with one of the above mentioned 7MM rifles or just stick to the tried and true .35 Whelen? At least I don't have to work up a load for that one.
Paul B.

Paul,

It will be interesting to see how WMR performs with 160's in your 280. As I mentioned in my post W760 worked extremely well for me with the 140gr Accubonds, and then later the 120gr GS Customs of whom I am good mates with the NZ Distributor. Certainly for what I hunt down here, the 140gr would be the heaviest I'd ever need.

Michael.

quote:

Originally posted by wildcat junkie:


If the 280 had been designed correctly in the 1st place & chambered in bolt actions only @ the outset(like the 270 WIN)& loaded to 65K psi (again like the 270) we might never have had a 7mm Remington Mag.

Reading through some of my older Gun Digests from the 50's and 60's, America was very much on the Magnum Craze so IMHO, even if the .280 was as you say loaded to the same pressures as the .270, I still think Remington would have introduced the 7mm Remington Magnum. With prominent Gun Writers of the day such as Bob Hagel and Warren Page championing the performance of the 7mm Mashburn Magnum, I think that the bigger arms manufacturers would have been acutely aware that a Magnum 7mm of some sort would be a big seller. It would have been interesting to see if Winchester had a 7mm Magnum waiting in the pipeline in case Remington didn't go ahead with their creation (thanks to Les Bowman)

I am on my second 280AI. But I also enjoy reloading as a hobby. If I bought off the shelf, I would choose the 7 RM. To me, that is really the biggest difference between the two. Whatever you kill with either one will never debate your choice.

I have often been puzzled by the SAAMI MAP specs for some cartridges. Being a Weatherby fan, I noticed that the MAP for the 300Wby were set at 65k while the 340Wby was set at 62.5k. The same can be seen when comparing the 7mmWby to the 257&270Wby. The 7mm was set at 65k and the latter pair's MAP is set at 62.5k. This is according Speer reloading manual #14. Can anyone offer insight into why you see MAP's are set in this manner? I was just curious. When comparing different cartridges, this seems to come up alot.

I've taken elk with my 7mm RM both a 6x6 bull and a cow. The cow was a bang flop with 175gr partition at 2950. The bull took three in the chest with 160gr accubonds at 3000 but just stood there after the first shot his first step caused him to do a nose dive. I watched a friend hit a bull 3X in the chest with a 280 and 154gr SP he ran up the ridge turned and looked back as if not hit. I put him down with my 338-06.140gr accubonds at 3350 out of my 25" bbl with 75gr of Retumbo for long range Deer and Antelope. Just my experience with both.