I have a donor Remington 700 in 7mm Rem. Mag. that I bought for a project. I've been leaning toward a 8mm Rem Mag. I've been looking at some of the loads in the manuals and cant justify it by them. However, I've seen some loads in the "Favorite Loads" section here and see some of the 220 grain loads reaching 3000+fps. That is getting more like it. If they will do that, is anyone getting 3100-3200+ with the 200 grainers and 3300+ with the 180s? According to Nosler, they only get about 3000 with a 200gr. bullet. I can get that with a 300 Wby. I've got a couple of 338s and another in the works, couple of 375s, 4 8mm Mausers, 3 different 300 Mags, plus 416, 458, and 2 450s, not to mention deer rifles so it doesn't have to fill a void, I just don't have one.

358 STA (Shooting Times Alaskan)

The 8mm Rem Mag is underrated, and often underloaded. I think it is more reasonable to expect just a tad over 3,000 fps from a 200 grainer if you limit yourself to a 24 inch barrel. I load for a friend's 8mm stock 700 and I stop when I reach 3,000, simply because he doesn't desire any more velocity. You could probably push it a bit higher, but not to 3100+ without unsustainable pressures. A 26" barrel might exceed 3100 without too much strain, but I doubt reaching 3200 sustainably.

Some of the new powders on the market might do quite well in this cartridge. I'm thinking primarily of RL 23 and RL 26.

It has always sounded like a great round.....I know a gun shop that has a ton of factory ammo and when I see it, I wonder where I can find a gun for it....

I too thought it was a great cartridge. Shortly after it came out I considered getting one. Lack of really good bullets for it made me wait....and wait....and wait....until I lost interest. But today you can get proper bullets from several sources.

what the responders here have said, plus1!

I bought one in the early summer of 1978, and hunted it here in Idaho for several years.

I would suggest that it would be all the rifle a NA hunter would ever need.

Just think, a good gunsmith could make a switch-barrel with a second barrel in 458 Lott and you would be ready for the world.

I was surprised it never got the popularity it deserved.
A 250gr Partition would be hard to beat.

Rich

quote:

Originally posted by Magnum Hunter1:
According to Nosler, they only get about 3000 with a 200gr. bullet. I can get that with a 300 Wby.

and older Guns & Ammo[2011] have 8mmMag pushing 220gnAframe at 2963mv, sounds like a superb hunting load...

Theres also a very recent RELOADER magazine right-up on the 8mm mag I just glanced the other day.

>> But considering a .338win 210ttsx will outpenetrate even the excellent .30cal 220gn nosler,
i see no personal need for an 8mmMag or 3oomag.....but for anyone who's already got one, your on a very good thing.

The 8mm RMag is an excellent round.

It gives up a calibre of diameter to the 338WM but it adds a few grains of powder capacity.
For hunting it is pretty much a duplicate of what the 338WM does, unless you find a special bullet with a special load in a special rifle.

I, too, looked at the 8mmRM over 30 years ago when looking for a good plains-game cartridge. It would have done fine, but I went with the 338WM. The rifles were cheaper and mmore available, and the bullet selection was better, and the extra diameter doesn't hurt in Africa. Though I actually think of a 338 as a small-packaged 375.

Its a great round, but deader than a doornail, never passed the muster with the general public..

I would prefer a 338 Win. to the big Remington, but if someone gave me a 8 mag. I would be tickled plumb to death.

I've never liked the full sized magnum case all that much, too much, blast, smoke, and recoil for the extra 100 or so FPS.

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
Its a great round, but deader than a doornail, never passed the muster with the general public..

Maybe if Ruger came out with the non-belted 8mm Ruger Magnum..........

quote:

Maybe if Ruger came out with the non-belted 8mm Ruger Magnum..........

Short enough for the std action

Why would anyone worry if a cartridge is dead or not? Look at all the old metric crap that folks use in a pricey custom build! (by the way, I say that lovingly)
There are no flies on the 8mm Rem Mag especially with the much improved bullet selection of today.. Build one and kill everything your hunt with it!
I've never had one but have used the 325 WSM in NA and Africa and it kills like the hammer of Thor (or just like my 338's. haha)
Zeke

quote:

Why would anyone worry if a cartridge it dead or not?

Seems like people worry about being able to find factory ammo when all they shoot is reloads anyway.

I figure shoot what you want the heck with the gun writers and stores. Just don't leave home without the RIGHT ammo box.

That's so true Paul!
Zeke

I had one of the first 8 mags made. I played with it, shot a couple critters with it, set it aside. I would dig it out when-ever a new powder or bullet came along I thought might work well. 3000 fps with the 200 and a hair over 2900 for the 220's was all I could get with reasonable pressure. It went down the road a few years ago and I don't miss it.
I did shoot an 8x68 in Namibia, on all the usual stuff. Never saw so much blood sprayed over the landscape as when I shot something with that rifle. The kicker is, everything ran a hundred yards or so before tipping over even with the impressive exit wounds. That matches the results I've had on the same game with 45/70, 30-06, .405 win, 7x57 and so on.

Sounds like a fun project. Keep us posted as to what you learn.

quote:

The kicker is, everything ran a hundred yards or so before tipping over even with the impressive exit wounds.

Yep just as with most cartridges.

The only sure DRT is a brain or spine shot then a lot of spine shots require a finisher.

Shoots flat and hits hard. Mine is on a 17 Enfield action and 26 inch barrel. Gets well over 3000 fps with 200gr tsx and mild recoil. (it is not a featherweight) Six or seven elk and numerous deer were killed. It was my go to rifle for quite a while. All the plains game respected it also. Long or short range, it works.

If Remington had not come out with the RUM cases, I think the 8 would be pretty popular as a custom rifle build.

All the PR the 338 Edge is getting, imagine the same case in 8mm.

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
If Remington had not come out with the RUM cases, I think the 8 would be pretty popular as a custom rifle build.

All the PR the 338 Edge is getting, imagine the same case in 8mm.

Poor ballistic coefficient on the 8mm bullets selections when compared to .338 bullets.

I remember when it first saw light of day. There was a Remington Seminar and tis was written up in Guns and Ammo.

Apparently, so G & A would have us believe, after the people from "big green" had given their presentation they asked for questions.

Elmer Keith put up his hand.

"Yes", Elmer, "What's your question?"

His response was "And just what the hell use is it?"

I've never, from what I read in the US gun press, thought that Americans ever "got" or "understood" the 8mm calibre.

They seem to think that it is some sort of larger bullet diameter .30-06, or a smaller bullet diameter .338 Winchester Magnum and don't understand how to make use of the calibre.

There seems to be no understanding that 8mm works best with 196 grain and heavier bullets such as the 227 grain.

NORSEMAN above almost confirms this. Ad I don't mean that to be rude or disrespectful.

But he is correct that with the common selections of bullets in the USA it doesn't compete against the .300 Winchester Magnum or as he points out the .338 Winchester Magnum.

As GRENADIER says.

What is needed for the 8mm Remington Magnum is either a 227 grain or 250 grain bullet and then it would shine.

Problem is it is such a small "niche" that the 8mm Remington Magnum is now a "boutique" cartridge fro as THE BACK 40 says it doesn't do much on game that any other cartridge does with less mess in current factory loadings.

I think that it should have been an 1/8" or even a 1/4" shorter but used a minimum of a 227 grain or better a 250 grain bullet IDAHO SHARPSHOOTER makes the same conclusion seated out of the case to the same factory OAL.

Then it could have been an American (belted) version of the 8x68S....

I've had a Rem 700 in 8mm since the early 1980's. It is unfortunate Remington handicapped it with a 24 in barrel. A 26 in barrel delivers at least another 100 fps with most bullets. Played with a 26 in barrel on an old P-14 Enfield for a bit. Shot great but I didn't care for that rifle. Initially there were not a lot of bullets that worked well. I found the 200 gr Partition and the 200 gr TSX worked well at top velocities. I suspect the Swift A-frames would be good as well but they were not readily available. Loaded down a bit the 200 gr Speer bullet worked quite well also. Surprizingly the 175 gr Sierra held together at velocities over 3300 fps but destroyed a little too much meat.As a moose or elk rifle it is hard to beat.As already mentioned for big bears and Africa a good 250 gr bullet would be better. It was never very popular(and not likely to get that way) but anyone I've ever talked to that had owned one or used one had nothing but good things to say about how it worked on elk and moose.Mine isn't for sale.

quote:

Originally posted by theback40:

I did shoot an 8x68 in Namibia, on all the usual stuff. Never saw so much blood sprayed over the landscape as when I shot something with that rifle.
The kicker is, everything ran a hundred yards or so before tipping over even with the impressive exit wounds. That matches the results I've had on
the same game with 45/70, 30-06, .405 win, 7x57 and so on.

....

unfortunately there are still number of people disillusioned into believing bigger and bigger bores/frontal areas
....are automatically better and better killers.

The only reason I ever used a .338win, is because it offered more penetration not more frontal area.
230 Failsafes in .338 typically had same (or less) frontal area than numerous .257, .264 and 7mm premium cupcore bullets,
however the penetration in that 230 weight was just fantastic and much more imprtant,versatile and useful to me, than having
a wider wound channel.

Was I disadvantage by a narrower wound channel? no.
despite having an unpressive frontal area - IT still killed things stone-dead on the spot even at 400yd
which enforced to me that -shot placement<and>penetration- mean more than being foolishly obsessed
with larger and larger bore size.

A sobering fact is that:
Selby,Daly,Blunt,Manners,Bell,Robertse,Taylor,Capstick and several famed others, have killed a small mountain of game
using RN solids ranging from .256 bore to .470 cal,
all of which exhibited bullet frontal areas smaller than one would get from an expanded 257cal AFrame bullet.
which goes to show the reach of the solid bullet within an animal, was more important than the width of wound channel.

Why do people keep raising black and white "straw men"? This is getting old.

Why do some game departments in the US require expanding ammunition? Primarily for diameter and ethical kills, though remotely there is a minute factor of added safety.

Why have PH's largely shifted from "solids" to "premium expanding bullets" for first shot on a buffalo? Yes, faster kills.

Personally, I have seen enough game killed with small calibre, well-placed shots, and large calibre, well-placed shots, to know that the more powerful and wider cartridges tend to kill faster. Could I hunt the world with a 270, assuming the game departments would let me? Yes, absolutely. But the 270 still does not kill as well as a 338, 375, 416, etc.

A person needs shot placement, guaranteed penetration, bullet integrity (including CEB raptors as designed integrity of wound channel + penetration), and good frontal area for the most effective hunting. These factors are interelated and none are absolute. (A well-place .22 does not kill without penetrating deeply [President Reagan was thankful], but it can do wonders when shot up the ear-canal. i've used them for finishing shots in Africa to save ammunition and seen cattle slaughtered with them.)

So yes, I prefer a 8mmRM or 338WM over a 270 as a killing machine in most circumstances. Foolishly obsessed or just prudent? I reserve the right for myself to make that judgement call. Willing to use smaller? Yes. I am pondering a 243 or a 416 this Fall in California. The 416 only if I want the exercise of carrying 4 extra pounds up a mountain. Both rifles are good for 400 yards.

Often different folks get different results doing the same thing.
I differ from 416 tanzan, I have found little to no differences in the same well placed shot from large caliber or small, fast or slow.
I will add, I do not take ass shots, running through thick brush or other shots of the like.
Just the way I was brought up, not flaming others who do.
I enjoy trying various rifles and loads, and have been lucky enough to be able to do a lot of hunting. I do not always find the newest trends to work any better then anything else for my needs.

It's one of those calibers for which I still don't understand the unfavorable reputation. It's a ballistic dynamo with the right bullets, hits hard, and doesn't require a specialized platform (bolt face, rim dia, whatever) to chamber. I realize the bullet selection isn't fantastic, but those that are available are very effective.

Components and ammo aren't what I would call plentiful, but they're about the same as some of the other cartridges based on the same case (7STW, 358STA, 340WM). I've heard reports of terrible recoil which I find a bit unsubstantiated. If you can shoot a 300/340WBY or 300/338 Win Mag, this falls right in the same category.

I have seen a bit more press on this recently, purely coincidental to this thread, so I'm wondering if we're seeing a bit of a resurgence for this cartridge in our more progressive shooting environment these days. It might seem "what's old is new" or niche-y cartridges are becoming more popular by connoisseurs. If my wallet was a little thick one day and a Remington 700 so-chambered was in front of me, I'd probably take it home.

The 8mmRemMag sits halfway between the 300Weatherby and the 340Weatherby in bore diameter and is virtually equivalent in case capacity. If it had the 'rounded shoulder-neck' it could have been called a 320Weatherby.

For the same capacity, I would go with a Ruger case. It would fit all of the standard length actions, including Tikka (slick and light) and Ruger (ContrlFeed).

But if wanting to avoid a wildcat and if accepting the long magazine necessary for the 8mmRM, I would just get a 338RUM or 338Lapua for a cartridge a little heavier than the 30's. There are some awesome, high BC bullets now available for .338", over .800BC, so a fast twist barrel would be advised, either 9" or 8", depending on how radical one wants to go. Check out the CEB MTH line in 338".

Myself? These are just morning musings. I'm quite happy with a 338WinMag and it is available in virtually every rifle platform marketed to the general hunting public. It's a natural step up if and when someone wants a little more than a 270 or 30-06, both of which can do it all in NorthAmerica.

quote:

Originally posted by 416Tanzan:
Myself? These are just morning musings. I'm quite happy with a 338WinMag and it is available in virtually every rifle platform marketed to the general hunting public. It's a natural step up if and when someone wants a little more than a 270 or 30-06, both of which can do it all in NorthAmerica.

Sure. My 340 Wby won't ever leave my possession, but if the 8mm were available, I might have given it some thought. It kinda sucks it's the odd man out simply because it's located between the 300/340 or 300/338 Mags. I thought we might see more of a resurgence with the 325 WSM coming to market, but that hasn't been the case.

quote:

Originally posted by Magnum Hunter1:
I have a donor Remington 700 in 7mm Rem. Mag. that I bought for a project. I've been leaning toward a 8mm Rem Mag. I've been looking at some of the loads in the manuals and cant justify it by them. However, I've seen some loads in the "Favorite Loads" section here and see some of the 220 grain loads reaching 3000+fps. That is getting more like it. If they will do that, is anyone getting 3100-3200+ with the 200 grainers and 3300+ with the 180s? According to Nosler, they only get about 3000 with a 200gr. bullet. I can get that with a 300 Wby. I've got a couple of 338s and another in the works, couple of 375s, 4 8mm Mausers, 3 different 300 Mags, plus 416, 458, and 2 450s, not to mention deer rifles so it doesn't have to fill a void, I just don't have one.

I've never owned an 8mm Rem Mag because of this:

quote:

"And just what the hell use is it?"

.....and I couldn't find the answer as well!

That is quite evasive of your question.....

First of all, unless there is real pressure data to accompany the reloading data, it must be suspect....and yes that means that you must recreate the loads by loading up with the same caution used by the originator. Having said that, if I really wanted one that bad, I'd gamble on reaching 3,100 FPS with a 200 grain bullet and still be in the 65,000 PSI pressure range if that's your goal. Reaching 3200 might be overly optimistic.

I'd not plan on barrel length to put me over the top.....It';s a double edge sword and IMO it's a poor choice (at least for me it is)

Possible some of our resident quickload experts can provide a better reply....but you still must gamble on achieving the result....so it all depends on you and how bad you want one.

IMO there is no advantage in the 8mm mag over a prudently loaded .300 Win Mag or Weatherby mag....there is no such thing as "deader"

I got looking through some old articles for loading info using 250 grain bullets. In my opinion, this is where the 8mm Magnum would shine. I am posting it below for informational purposes:

Source: Modern Sporting Rifle Cartridges by Wayne Van Zwoll, 1998

250gr Barnes, 78.0 grains of H4831 (maximum load), 2790 fps (source given is Barnes)

250gr Barnes, 80.0 grains of H1000 (maximum load), 2740 fps (source given is Barnes)

Source: 8mm Remington Magnum by Bob Hagell, reprinted in BIG BORE Rifles and Cartridges, 1991

250gr Nosler, 84.0 grains of H-870 (starting load), 86.0 grain (maximum) 2764 fps

250gr Nosler, 72.0 grains of H-4831 (starting load), 76.0 grains maximum) 2776 fps

.