I've a query! Assuming that I can buy and obtain the loaded ammunition equally easily and for the same price. Which is the "better" cartridge in a bolt action rifle? .280 Remington or 7x64?

Buying both is not an option! This is Europe with gun controls!

I am hoping that some of my continental European cousins here who will have experience of both will be able to give an opinion. In terms of performance - I will be mostly handloading - and which works best through the rifle.

In actual fact because I can source American cases the .280 Remington cases will be half the cost of the 7x64 cases.

Am I also right, I hope my American friends can advise, that in a "like for like" bolt action rifle any loading data for .270 Winchester will in fact be safe in a .280 Remington? In other words in say a Remington 700 can I safely use .270 loading data for powder charges and bullet weight as a direct equal in my .280..if that makes sense what I'm trying to say! The .280 has the slightly greater case capacity?

quote:

Am I also right, I hope my American friends can advise, that in a "like for like" bolt action rifle any loading data for .270 Winchester will in fact be safe in a .280 Remington? In other words in say a Remington 700 can I safely use .270 loading data for powder charges and bullet weight as a direct equal in my .280..if that makes sense what I'm trying to say! The .280 has the slightly greater case capacity?

I answered some of your other questions on the European forum.

The idea of using cartridge A (e.g. .270 Win) load data for cartridge B (.280 Rem) is simply bonkers. Why on earth would you want or need to do that?? There is a wealth of .280 Rem load data available, why in the world wonder or worry about whether data developed for a different cartridge would be safe in your gun??

I don't know who suggested this to you, nor do I know whether there is a hint of truth in this. IMHO, it is not even worth considering. Use .280 Rem data for a .280 Rem cartridge - that should be simple enough.

I'm not sure where you come from with this, but what you safely can do, is load the .280 Rem to the (somewhat higher) .270 Win pressures (assuming both are loaded for a strong bolt action rifle, say). You do this by carefully working towards max .280 Rem book loads, and if all looks OK pressure wise, you carefully try to increase your max load 1-2 grs. If you are not an experienced handloader, though, I strongly urge you to stay away from this idea! Any performance advantage you might gain will be negligible in the field. Start your handloading career using safe and accepted data, you can always worry about blowing up yourself and your gun when you have gained more experience

- mike

If you need load data for the .280 Rem, there are numberous places to download it off of the internet. Hodgdon's website is one example.

The .280 rem & the 7x64 are ballistic twins. I have seen a reloading manual that said for the 7x64 use 280 data. With sensible load developement that is entirely safe as they are that close. Whatever one will do, the other will. The only thing I can think that may prevent that would be the rifling twist of the barrel they were chambered in. Every manual published in the last 30 years pretty much has .280 Rem load data, also all online reloading data websites, theres your source for the 7x64. They both do better with heavier bullets then the .270 as long as the twist is quick enough. Some 270s won't stabilise heavier bullets, 160 gns is about the max available anyway, the 7x64 is factory loaded in Europe for 175 gr bullets.
Steve

Thanks to all, so far. I've handloaded for thirty years so am confident in that. It is just that sometimes the manuals don't always seem as helpful.

I'm currently using 55.00 grains H4831 in my 270 Winchester with a 150 grain Hornady SP to get velocities with a spread of 2801fps to 2831fps and hoping that I can basically just use that same loading with appropriate bullet in any .280 Remington rifle I purchase.

The heavy bullet availability is what appeals. I hoping to be in the happy position that I can "duplicate" what I usually use in the .270 Winchester (either 140 or 150 grain - never 130 grain at 2900 and 2800 respectively) but have that top end availability of the 175 grain AND access to cheaper non s5 FMJ 7mm bullets for practice or sporting target work on ranges where soft points are prohibited for whatever reason.

Look here for free .280 Rem data:

http://www.hodgdon.com/

The Hodgdon data suggests a max of 53.7 grs H4831 with a 150 grs bullet.

If you need more data, look in any US published reloading manual, or for more free data:

http://www.reloadersnest.com/rifle.asp

http://stevespages.com/page8c.htm

http://www.alliantpowder.com/

I don't know the "s5 FMJ 7mm" bullets you are referring to. Be aware of the following issue, though: If you have a SAAMI spec "7mm" barrel (i.e. 284 cal) and want to fire CIP spec "7mm" bullets, you have to go easy on your loads. The SAAMI and CIP specs don't agree on what constitutes a 7mm bullet, and CIP spec bullets have a slightly larger diameter. Probably not enough to blow up your gun, but it may well be enough for pressures to rise, so go easy on your loads in this case.

- mike

I don't know the "s5 FMJ 7mm" bullets you are referring to..

In Britain I can have any amount of "military" full jacketed bullets (for reloading) in my house. But I can only have a limited amount of soft pointed expanding "hunting" bullets for reloading.

Son "non s5 FMJ" means those unrestricted military type bullets. The "s5" being "section 5" of the legal code that deals with bullet possesion.

I love my 280, best light rifle round around IMO. It is pretty much the same round as the 7x64. If brass is the issue, I would go w/ what is more readily available to you. Either will get you 3000fps w/ a 140gr bullet or 2800fps w/a 160gr bullet, both would cover all but DG hunting in NA, Europe or Africa. If you felt the need, you could go to 175gr bullets @ 2700fps, but I have found 160gr adequate to elk.
AS to handloading, I think what was meant by using 270 data for the 280 is that most 280 data is under powered when compared to the pressures of the 270. If loaded to tthe same pressures, most printed data will be over pressure. Speer loads to 270 pressure limits. An exp. reloader can extrapolate data from the 270 & use it in the 280, for powders not shown for the 280. As alway, work up your loads.

Real simple for me. The .30/'06 is, metric, 7.62 x 63mm. The 280 is the .28/'06 basically. So I am guessing that it is so close to 7mm x 63mm as to not be worth arguing. So what do you get with the 7mmx64? More expensive cases if I understand your remarks. Some want the glamour of something that no one else has... Some. I'm cheap. I would go .280 and never look back unless I had to form cases and could not get '06... then I might reform a 7x64... luck.

I am on my third custom .280Rem. and have a Brno 21/22 action plus Krieger bbl. set aside for another; I have owned, loaded for and shot at least a dozen .270Wins and have a pair of P-64 Mod. 70 Fwt.-270s now, one in a Brown Kevlar and one in a Micky Edge right now. I have shot a Steyr-Mannlicher in 7x64 to get it tuned for a guy at my old rifle club.

There is NO practical difference between any of these three rounds, NONE and I tend to prefer 150-160 gr. bullets, usually NPs in them as I may find a legal Elk, Moose or Grizzly here in BC on a deer hunt.

In YOUR situation, I would go with the .280 Rem., no question and load 160 NPs for Scottish stags and 160 Hornadys, Nosler ABs or Speers for all other Cervids. You CAN use the NPs for everything, I always have, but, am trying other bullets just for fun.

I would load with Winchester brass, mag. primers, 160s. up to 56 grs. of NEW production H-4831 and I PREFER the longer granules here. I also use RE-22 a lot, IMR-7828 a lot, 57 for the first and 58 for the latter with EXCELLENT results.

You CAN use Norma MRP with RE-22 data, work up tho' and I find my Norma brass will take a bit more powder, as well. I prefer Norma brass in my .280s, then Winny, then Remmy and have not yet tried Nosler or Hornady.

This is, properly handloaded, about the finest medium game cartridge ever designed, IMO. You can hunt and reliably kill ANY North American game, including Grizzlies and with reasonable recoil and rifle weight. Have at 'er!

Enfieldspares may well find 7x64 brass easier to come by in the UK than .280 Rem, I'm sure that will be one of the factors that guides his decision, it was certainly the case when I went looking for similar. I could have had another .270 Win but they were just so "everybodies got one". Having said that, the .270 will do all I want of either, I don't load heavier than 160grns in the 7x64.
Steve

The .280 Remington and the 7x64 are commonly considered to be ballistic clones. Use safe reloading practices to overcome the built-in conservatism in many reloading manuals and you will find that desired "Hot" 7mm loading, provided you are shooting a strong action bolt gun. I shoot a pair of 7x64s and have just acquired a .280 Remington M-S, so I have little current experience with them as a pair. With the 7x64mm, I noticed that African game was killed just as dead with the 7x64 as with a .30-06 or 7mm Magnum. The only problem I see with these cartridges in England is brass availability. You might be able to purchase RWS 7x64mm brass more easily than .280 Rem made in USA.

LLS

Surprisingl, or maybe not, I can get it from Midway UK which is just a forty minute drive from where I live. Lucky me!

The European made 7x64 brass is however terribly expensive. Twice the price! Loaded ammunition? Virtually impossible for 280 Remington in UK but plenty in France. 7x64 maybe very, very limited in UK although some in some places in Scotland. But the price? Whew! In France it is available everywhere.

enfield,

Quote, "This is Europe with gun controls!"

No, your query specifically concerns England, please don't confuse your Island Nation with the remainder of the connected Bits & Pieces referred to as "Continetal Europe". With your English 13+ controls, legislators, Firearms Control Officers, local Police, much worthless paperwork, and all the assorted To-Smart-to-Figure, Go-Guess Yourself extraneous Bullshiters, Associations, Media and Hunters, Sport Shooters, Clay Shooters and the collective "Poor Others" hype that you Brits (unfortunate) have to live with and consider perfectly normal. Please don't make Your Problem - Our Problem.....considerations are a fair query, qualifications, not.

The 280 Remington is somewhat better, more efficient and a tad more powerful than a .270 Winchester. It, the .280 Rem., as the .270 Win. has an enviable reputation as a good, solid, all-round performing Big Game Cartridge. 280 Remington ammunition and components (read=factory ammunition & brass cases) are found primarily in France (I wonder Why?), the UK and the United States. The rest of the World (Gasp! - Including other European Union Countries) live happily with the 7x64 Brenneke.

The best cartridge of the three mentioned is the 7x64 Brennneke based on statistics alone, higher chamber pressure & field performance - period. Not by a huge magin but do the Math with available factory ammunition and what you could possibly eak out of a reload. How you figure the best Bang-for-the-$$$$$ or English Pound is up to you.

I host countless Happy English Nimrods on The Continet annually who gleefully arrive (in Germany) awaiting a Sporting Opportunity of the Best Kind; with (God Forbid) Full Metal Jacket projectiles due to their licensing limitations in the UK. They are illegal for shooting Big Game animals in The Fatherland - sorry, we spend the next morning at the range sighting-in with a box of expensive RWS or Geco German factory ammunition "Soft Heads". (PS - a "Soft Head" is polititian who we elect to go to Washinton D.C. in the US. A "Bullet " is a Projectile.)

I happily ensorse your request to Saeed for a "UK Only" Chapter on this Forum to remove once & forever these strickly UK issues/whinning/bantering/problems/issues, regarding local Licensing, What game you can shoot, at what distance, at what hour of the Day, with which cartridge, how many "Bullets" (as oppsoed to "Heads") either "Soft Heads" or FMJ's a person can posess without incurring legal sanction, etc., etc., ad naseum, from the European Thread for which it is not, Well; representative of the remainder of Europe (except for Le Grand Nation which is a Law unto Itself). Please don't atempt to spread this (contageous disease) from one country to another.

Nothing is more fun than showing up at a ritzy hunting camp [late of course] and having some moneybags ask you what you are shooting. He is sporting a Weatherby/Colt Sauer etc--etc. So you pull a beautiful [in your eyes only] old Mauser in 7X64 Brenneke and say knowingly---- "a 7X64 Brenneke of course"! It has SO MUCH Snob Appeal not to mention performance. I love it. HeeHee

Aloha, Mark

quote:

Originally posted by Bohica:
Nothing is more fun than showing up at a ritzy hunting camp [late of course] and having some moneybags ask you what you are shooting. He is sporting a Weatherby/Colt Sauer etc--etc. So you pull a beautiful [in your eyes only] old Mauser in 7X64 Brenneke and say knowingly---- "a 7X64 Brenneke of course"! It has SO MUCH Snob Appeal not to mention performance. I love it. HeeHee

Aloha, Mark

Mark, does a Sako in 7x64 count?

quote:

Originally posted by Bohica:
Nothing is more fun than showing up at a ritzy hunting camp [late of course] and having some moneybags ask you what you are shooting. He is sporting a Weatherby/Colt Sauer etc--etc. So you pull a beautiful [in your eyes only] old Mauser in 7X64 Brenneke and say knowingly---- "a 7X64 Brenneke of course"! It has SO MUCH Snob Appeal not to mention performance. I love it. HeeHee

Aloha, Mark

enfieldspares
I have both and here's my two cents.

If you can get either one, it would be about the rifle instead of the cartridge for me. My Remington in .280 likes 140 grain bullets better and the 7x64 CZ 550 Lux likes 160 grainers. The Remington makes a better stand gun and the CZ is better for sticks.

Other than the weight preference, the two calibers' reloading data is identical.

Cheers

BNagel

quote:

Originally posted by enfieldspares:
Surprisingl, or maybe not, I can get it from Midway UK which is just a forty minute drive from where I live. Lucky me!

The European made 7x64 brass is however terribly expensive. Twice the price! Loaded ammunition? Virtually impossible for 280 Remington in UK but plenty in France. 7x64 maybe very, very limited in UK although some in some places in Scotland. But the price? Whew! In France it is available everywhere.

In my limited experience, I've found the European made (not eastern european) brass is a good deal better than US made brass. Either will work, but the Lapua, Norma, RWS seems to be more uniform and lasts longer.

They're so close together in performance, I'd get whatever has cheaper components, such as brass and dies.

Since the UK allows unlimited amount of FMJ's (is that a bit odd to anyone else? usually strict gun control focuses MORE on military type stuff then hunting materials!?) can you get away with using Barnes bullets? They're solid copper with no soft points...if so, then you could have as much of an excellent bullet as you'd like.

The two are ballistic equivalents, so get the one that has brass more easily available where you are, and factory loads in a pinch when you can't or won't handload or you've forgotten your handloaded ammo. In the US that would be the .280 Remington. On the European continent that would be the 7 x 64. I don't know about England.

The claim that European made brass is better than US-made brass may be true, but so what? The difference is small enough that, in my opinion, you can ignore it. I say, buy what you can get less expensively and use the savings for something else, such as better bullets or more time shooting at the range.

quote:

Am I also right, I hope my American friends can advise, that in a "like for like" bolt action rifle any loading data for .270 Winchester will in fact be safe in a .280 Remington? In other words in say a Remington 700 can I safely use .270 loading data for powder charges and bullet weight as a direct equal in my .280..if that makes sense what I'm trying to say! The .280 has the slightly greater case capacity?

Yes, that is correct as a theoretical application. A .270 loaded with a given bullet weight and charge of a given powder will generate slightly more velocity and pressure than the same amount of powder with the same bullet weight in a .280 Rem (to the extent that all factors can be held equal). However, it is not due to the marginal difference in case capacity, but due to the larger bore of the .280 (greater expansion ratio).

In practical application, differences in the chambers, bore finish, etc. will cause a variation between two random rifles, so the relationship is neither consistent nor linear.

There is nothing wrong with using .270 data as a starting place for .280 reloading. As with any rifle, loads that are close to the reaching the deformation capacity of the brass case head must be tailored individually to any given rifle.

Be advised that most reloading data for the .280 Remington comports with the (mysteriously) lower SAAMI chamber pressures for that cartridge (perhaps related to its use in the Remington Pump 760 and Auto 740 models.) In order to reach optimum velocities in a modern turnbolt, published "maximums" in most manuals have to be exceeded significantly.

As to you choice between chamberings, choose the gun and not the cartridge. One is the equal of the other. For that matter, if the cost of brass is a consideration, simply form either from any American .30-06-based case. An '06 case itself may be a tad short, but the difference is de minimus. Nor is the tiny difference in shoulder angle anything that cannot be taken care of with a simple trip through the FL die.

quote:

Originally posted by z1r:

quote:

Originally posted by enfieldspares:
Surprisingl, or maybe not, I can get it from Midway UK which is just a forty minute drive from where I live. Lucky me!

The European made 7x64 brass is however terribly expensive. Twice the price! Loaded ammunition? Virtually impossible for 280 Remington in UK but plenty in France. 7x64 maybe very, very limited in UK although some in some places in Scotland. But the price? Whew! In France it is available everywhere.

In my limited experience, I've found the European made (not eastern european) brass is a good deal better than US made brass. Either will work, but the Lapua, Norma, RWS seems to be more uniform and lasts longer.

Mmmmm, is that why I use RWS and Norma brass?

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:
[Be advised that most reloading data for the .280 Remington comports with the (mysteriously) lower SAAMI chamber pressures for that cartridge (perhaps related to its use in the Remington Pump 760 and Auto 740 models.) In order to reach optimum velocities in a modern turnbolt, published "maximums" in most manuals have to be exceeded significantly.

It's no mystery really, The .280 was designed for the Rem.740/742 semiauto rifles. Pressure were kept low to operate within the design of the 740/742. In a good bolt action, you can certainly match the pressure of the 270.

quote:

Originally posted by fredj338:

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:
[Be advised that most reloading data for the .280 Remington comports with the (mysteriously) lower SAAMI chamber pressures for that cartridge (perhaps related to its use in the Remington Pump 760 and Auto 740 models.) In order to reach optimum velocities in a modern turnbolt, published "maximums" in most manuals have to be exceeded significantly.

It's no mystery really, The .280 was designed for the Rem.740/742 semiauto rifles. Pressure were kept low to operate within the design of the 740/742. In a good bolt action, you can certainly match the pressure of the 270.

But the .308 with its higher SAAMI pressure specs was also chambered in the 760/740 series, along with .30-06, .243, and 6mm Rem, all of which have higher SAAMI pressures than the .280. I agree that the .280's pressure specs have to do with its original chambering in these rifles, but looking at the other chamberings it makes no sense, wouldn't you agree?