Want a new barrel for my 280 remington.
- Thread starter Ryry
- Start date
4
4000fps
Guest
why do you want to pull the factory? is it stainless, and do you want to sell it?
New barrel = pacnor, three groove, 9 twist.
New barrel = pacnor, three groove, 9 twist.
Chesterwyo
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,551
No sense in puting a custom berrel on a rifle you have never shot. Take it out and put a few rounds through it first. You never know it could be a shooter with the factory berrel. Excellent choice of caliber.
completesportsman
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 3,508
Krieger
4
440sixpack
Guest
Lilja or Shilen
Yes its stainless but i might take your guys input and go shoot it some. I got my turrets today for my Leupold cdx and my 5 boxes of Berger 140 Vld in the mail. I just need to get the scope on and shoot it. Thanks for the input and keep it coming for i am new to building guns. I put a HS Precision stock on it and had the trigger tuned up by a local gunsmith. I just want a good flat shooter out to 600 or 700.
muzz
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 3,284
dont waist your money on a new barrel yet. Work up some loads. I have a factory 280 remington that will shoot 5 shots in one hole at a hundred yards. Just play a little with the loads. I would put money on it that you will get it to shoot very good.
O--one
B--big
A--ass
M--mistake
A--america
O--one
B--big
A--ass
M--mistake
A--america
Chesterwyo
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,551
A good flat shooter out to 600-700? Sorry as great as the 280 Remington is it's not a long distance thumper.
4
440sixpack
Guest
Agreed, better make that a 36" barrel.
4
440sixpack
Guest
Dispite what seems to be the new internet " chip shot " 700 yards is a long ways when it comes to reality. if you're trying to hit a target at 700 yards the 280 isn't a great choice, if you're trying to kill a game animal at 700 yards the 280 is a poor choice.
E
elk_horn
Guest
Im not sure what you mean by flat shooting???? a 280 shooting a 140 grain bullet at 3000 fps sighted in 1 1/2" high @ 100 yards will drop over 70 inches at 600 yards! and will be traveling about 1700 fps.....not a good choice! Even if you had it sighted in dead 0 at 400 yards you would still drop over 40" at 600 yards. I would hope nobody would take a shot at 600 yards with a 280.
LAST EDITED ON Jan-07-11 AT 01:08PM (MST)[p] Sorry Muzz I must have been writing when you were posting!
I think some of you boys are clearly over looking the fact that a scope that takes the ballistics of the cartridge into consideration will off set just about any drop you can figure into the equation. If you know where any given bullet will impact at that yardage and adjust for it your argument just lost quite a bit of it's steam. We made plenty of long range shots in WWII Vietnam and Iraq with .30/06 & .308's to lay that theory to rest. If the scope has the adjustability then the round has the energy at 700 yards. The magical recommended "1200ft/lbs" of energy figure on deer sized game can is there at 600 and with heavier bullets is there at 700.
The round simply has the capability but whether the shooter does is another issue. A 7mm Rem mag only shoots around 100-200 ft per second faster than the .280 and it's a well known 1000 yard round. The short cases 6.5 mm rounds shoot slower yet they are using them for long range matches to 1000 yards. So based on that I'd have to say that the thinking the bullet won't do it is fallacy. Granted it wouldn't be my first choice for shots beyond 600 yards but it can and will do the job in the right circumstance. There's too much acclaim being written about the Whizbang magnums when in reality the refocus on the 6.5 has demonstrated that you don't need a magnum to shoot that far and much farther accurately on paper.
Do I think they're pushing the limit over 600..... YES..... and there certainly are better cartridges for the job. The middy's are great cartridges but at those yardages the recommended energy levels drop off so that is a consideration in the equation and those that are saying no are using good sense from years in the field. Utilization of a cartrige within it's capabilites will always be more humane and put more meat on the table than one that's done doing it's best work and it's velocity & energy are dropping off at a rapid pace. At that point you start losing ground and have less chance of the bullet doing it's best work or penetrating bone increasing your chances of losing the animal.
I think some of you boys are clearly over looking the fact that a scope that takes the ballistics of the cartridge into consideration will off set just about any drop you can figure into the equation. If you know where any given bullet will impact at that yardage and adjust for it your argument just lost quite a bit of it's steam. We made plenty of long range shots in WWII Vietnam and Iraq with .30/06 & .308's to lay that theory to rest. If the scope has the adjustability then the round has the energy at 700 yards. The magical recommended "1200ft/lbs" of energy figure on deer sized game can is there at 600 and with heavier bullets is there at 700.
The round simply has the capability but whether the shooter does is another issue. A 7mm Rem mag only shoots around 100-200 ft per second faster than the .280 and it's a well known 1000 yard round. The short cases 6.5 mm rounds shoot slower yet they are using them for long range matches to 1000 yards. So based on that I'd have to say that the thinking the bullet won't do it is fallacy. Granted it wouldn't be my first choice for shots beyond 600 yards but it can and will do the job in the right circumstance. There's too much acclaim being written about the Whizbang magnums when in reality the refocus on the 6.5 has demonstrated that you don't need a magnum to shoot that far and much farther accurately on paper.
Do I think they're pushing the limit over 600..... YES..... and there certainly are better cartridges for the job. The middy's are great cartridges but at those yardages the recommended energy levels drop off so that is a consideration in the equation and those that are saying no are using good sense from years in the field. Utilization of a cartrige within it's capabilites will always be more humane and put more meat on the table than one that's done doing it's best work and it's velocity & energy are dropping off at a rapid pace. At that point you start losing ground and have less chance of the bullet doing it's best work or penetrating bone increasing your chances of losing the animal.
completesportsman
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 3,508
Boskee and others,
Good posts, I agree 100% but I wouldn't waste my time trying to educate some of the all knowing posters on here.
Good posts, I agree 100% but I wouldn't waste my time trying to educate some of the all knowing posters on here.
4
440sixpack
Guest
Would you put your money on a 300 mag or the 280 making a clean kill on an elk at 700 yards?
So, what is the logic in choosing a 280 as your ultra long range gun? how many 1000 yard competetors choose the 280? I question the wisdom of the average shooter poking at game at 700 yards anyway but if they're going to do it why not do it right at least.
So, what is the logic in choosing a 280 as your ultra long range gun? how many 1000 yard competetors choose the 280? I question the wisdom of the average shooter poking at game at 700 yards anyway but if they're going to do it why not do it right at least.
Cahunter805
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 3,360
Ryry If you are going to rebarrel the rifle and want to stay with the 280 I would for sure go with the 280AI! I think the 280AI is probably the best improvement from its standard parent case. You wont be disappointed.
tayhot
Active Member
- Messages
- 349
You know if you want to stimulate the economy by buying a new barrel. Go for it. I would however, do other things first before I put on a new barrel. Blueprint the action, recut the chamber, throw on a QUALITY scope. All the barrels in the world wont make up for quality optics.
Its always amusing when those that dont/havent or wont want to tell the guys that do what they should be using..The 280 rem pushing 162's or heavier is an excellent LR round...Those that say nay, have obviously never shot the 280 to its potential, and also proved they know next to nothing about LR shooting.
I'm sure boskee went over the it in detail, but he's too long winded for me.
I'm sure boskee went over the it in detail, but he's too long winded for me.
Thanks for all the input guys. I was just trying to pick your brains for a good barrel to get an idea on a price for one if i go that route. I have a new Leupold Vx3 4.5x14x40 CDS for this gun with turrets made for it. I am a rookie when it comes to this stuff and just want a nice shooter that might not be shot at game for a year or two. Thanks for everything and sorry for the confusion. Ryan
completesportsman
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 3,508
LAST EDITED ON Jan-08-11 AT 07:45AM (MST)[p]>Would you put your money on
>a 300 mag or the
>280 making a clean kill
>on an elk at 700
>yards?
either one will do fine, I promise the elk won't know the difference
> So, what is the logic
>in choosing a 280 as
>your ultra long range gun?
we were only talking 600-700 yds but the reasons would be bullets with a high BC and high SD, which equals good performance and penetration on game and at manageable recoil...
>how many 1000 yard competetors
>choose the 280?
More than you might think
>I question
>the wisdom of the average
>shooter poking at game at
>700 yards anyway but if
>they're going to do it
>why not do it right
>at least.
Well guess what, I agree w/you. 700yds is too far for the average joe. Lots of guys can do it, lots think they can and are mistaken. I know which category I fit into, my personal limit is 550yds when conditions are good, and the longest shot I have ever taken at a game animal is 450yds and was a one shot kill.
Head shots are kept to under 100yds
>a 300 mag or the
>280 making a clean kill
>on an elk at 700
>yards?
either one will do fine, I promise the elk won't know the difference
> So, what is the logic
>in choosing a 280 as
>your ultra long range gun?
we were only talking 600-700 yds but the reasons would be bullets with a high BC and high SD, which equals good performance and penetration on game and at manageable recoil...
>how many 1000 yard competetors
>choose the 280?
More than you might think
>I question
>the wisdom of the average
>shooter poking at game at
>700 yards anyway but if
>they're going to do it
>why not do it right
>at least.
Well guess what, I agree w/you. 700yds is too far for the average joe. Lots of guys can do it, lots think they can and are mistaken. I know which category I fit into, my personal limit is 550yds when conditions are good, and the longest shot I have ever taken at a game animal is 450yds and was a one shot kill.
Head shots are kept to under 100yds
muzz
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 3,284
Well if you know your ballistics you would know the 7mm bullet has better trajectory then the 30 cal bullet. But i m not going to get in a pissin match with the know it all magnum fellers. Its just not worth it. Ill shoot my 280 right with any. And wont bat an eye.
O--one
B--big
A--ass
M--mistake
A--america
O--one
B--big
A--ass
M--mistake
A--america
completesportsman
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 3,508
Ha Ha good one mtmuley!
Chesterwyo
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,551
It's funny how few people realize exacly how far a 700 yard shot is. Its a long GD ways away. It's even funnier how few people are capable of making a shot at that distance. The fact is that all the right equipment in the world does no good if YOU can't make the shot. And Reddog I agree with a lot of stuff you post but the 280 remington is not a long range caliber. I love it to death but it just isn't
cbeard
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,458
LAST EDITED ON Jan-09-11 AT 00:08AM (MST)[p]Ahh yes the trend of the 21st century. "Rookie at all this stuff" is building him a rifle to thump elk at 700. Why not? Don't you guys watch "Best of the West"? 700 is the new 200.
Heck why not get the Gunwerks rifle and Huskemaw scope and be done with it?
Heck why not get the Gunwerks rifle and Huskemaw scope and be done with it?
>LAST EDITED ON Jan-09-11
>AT 00:08?AM (MST)
>
>Ahh yes the trend of the
>21st century. "Rookie at all
>this stuff" is building him
>a rifle to thump elk
>at 700. Why not? Don't
>you guys watch "Best of
>the West"? 700 is the
>new 200.
>
>Heck why not get the Gunwerks
>rifle and Huskemaw scope and
>be done with it?
Thanks for the input. I just ordered a Gunwerks with a Huskemaw scope. I also got a 7mm mag. Never did i say i was building a gun for deer or elk so i don't see where this assumtion came from. Thanks for the positive input and the rest you just got to love the internet.
>AT 00:08?AM (MST)
>
>Ahh yes the trend of the
>21st century. "Rookie at all
>this stuff" is building him
>a rifle to thump elk
>at 700. Why not? Don't
>you guys watch "Best of
>the West"? 700 is the
>new 200.
>
>Heck why not get the Gunwerks
>rifle and Huskemaw scope and
>be done with it?
Thanks for the input. I just ordered a Gunwerks with a Huskemaw scope. I also got a 7mm mag. Never did i say i was building a gun for deer or elk so i don't see where this assumtion came from. Thanks for the positive input and the rest you just got to love the internet.
4
440sixpack
Guest
So you started out looking for a new 280 barrel for a 77 and ended up with a custom 7 mag? Gunwerks didn't suggest a 280?
If you're just a target shooter you should have said so, most of the time it's hunting rifles people are talking about here.
If you're just a target shooter you should have said so, most of the time it's hunting rifles people are talking about here.
440/cbeard, You might not think so but I agree with you. I cringed when Leupold came out with the CDS for the average joe..It will get ugly, cuz I can see joe blow sending in their info for corlocts and power points then dialing in on a critter at 700 with them, gonna be a disaster.(sorry bess)
B
B_BOP_A_LU_LU
Guest
Well Dawg!
You're right about one f'n thing!
If you're using Corelokts there's gonna be a disaster!
I know my range & the Power points have never failed me once!
God is Great!
Life is Good!
And People are Crazy!
I love not acting my age,
Damn I love my NASCAR race,
And Hell yes I love my Truck!
And a good BBQ!
I am Medicine And I am Poison!
What Voltage of Cordless Sawzall are you running & what's your quickest Drive-By at hackin the Horns off of RoadKills?
You're right about one f'n thing!
If you're using Corelokts there's gonna be a disaster!
I know my range & the Power points have never failed me once!
God is Great!
Life is Good!
And People are Crazy!
Damn I love my NASCAR race,
And Hell yes I love my Truck!
And a good BBQ!
I am Medicine And I am Poison!
What Voltage of Cordless Sawzall are you running & what's your quickest Drive-By at hackin the Horns off of RoadKills?
completesportsman
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 3,508
Another classic MM debate thread, I love it :7
cbeard
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,458
LAST EDITED ON Jan-10-11 AT 10:51AM (MST)[p]Ryry my post was smart-alecky and for that I apologize. But,like many, I am frustrated by the trend to sell long-range shooting at game as easy.It's just a matter of having the right equipment according to those who are-guess what?-sponsored by those selling that equipment.
The fact is having the right equipment is just the very first step of long-range shooting. To be even reasonably accurate at long range requires knowing how to use that equipment-and that takes ALOT of dedication and practice. And "reasonably accurate" is not good enough when shooting at game-we owe our quarry more than that.
IMO there are only a handful of people who have ANY business slinging lead at a game animal beyond 500 yards.Why? Field conditions are NOT range conditions.Even the best at Camp Perry get to take "sighting" shots. There are no "sighting" shots in the field.Plus winds are tricky and play a huge role at long range,game moves while the bullet is on its way,there is no bench to rest on,etc.,etc.,etc.
"Best of the West" doesn't show you the misses and the cripples. And believe me,there is alot of missing and crippling going on out there by guys increasingly willing to take a poke at an animal 1/4 of a mile and more away. It's a sad trend and one that will eventually hurt hunting IMO. I hate to see any more join in the trend so I am not shy about sharing my thoughts-even though I realize they don't count for much.
(BTW Gunwerks and Huskemaw ain't even close to the best equipment for long range-they're just the ones who pay the freight for BOTW to be on TV.That fact alone takes them out of the group of companies I give my business to.)
The fact is having the right equipment is just the very first step of long-range shooting. To be even reasonably accurate at long range requires knowing how to use that equipment-and that takes ALOT of dedication and practice. And "reasonably accurate" is not good enough when shooting at game-we owe our quarry more than that.
IMO there are only a handful of people who have ANY business slinging lead at a game animal beyond 500 yards.Why? Field conditions are NOT range conditions.Even the best at Camp Perry get to take "sighting" shots. There are no "sighting" shots in the field.Plus winds are tricky and play a huge role at long range,game moves while the bullet is on its way,there is no bench to rest on,etc.,etc.,etc.
"Best of the West" doesn't show you the misses and the cripples. And believe me,there is alot of missing and crippling going on out there by guys increasingly willing to take a poke at an animal 1/4 of a mile and more away. It's a sad trend and one that will eventually hurt hunting IMO. I hate to see any more join in the trend so I am not shy about sharing my thoughts-even though I realize they don't count for much.
(BTW Gunwerks and Huskemaw ain't even close to the best equipment for long range-they're just the ones who pay the freight for BOTW to be on TV.That fact alone takes them out of the group of companies I give my business to.)
4
440sixpack
Guest
True story
>LAST EDITED ON Jan-10-11
>AT 10:51?AM (MST)
>
>Ryry my post was smart-alecky and
>for that I apologize. But,like
>many, I am frustrated by
>the trend to sell long-range
>shooting at game as easy.It's
>just a matter of having
>the right equipment according to
>those who are-guess what?-sponsored by
>those selling that equipment.
>
>The fact is having the right
>equipment is just the very
>first step of long-range shooting.
>To be even reasonably accurate
>at long range requires knowing
>how to use that equipment-and
>that takes ALOT of dedication
>and practice. And "reasonably accurate"
>is not good enough when
>shooting at game-we owe our
>quarry more than that.
>
>IMO there are only a handful
>of people who have ANY
>business slinging lead at a
>game animal beyond 500 yards.Why?
>Field conditions are NOT range
>conditions.Even the best at Camp
>Perry get to take "sighting"
>shots. There are no "sighting"
>shots in the field.Plus winds
>are tricky and play a
>huge role at long range,game
>moves while the bullet is
>on its way,there is no
>bench to rest on,etc.,etc.,etc.
>
>"Best of the West" doesn't show
>you the misses and the
>cripples. And believe me,there is
>alot of missing and crippling
>going on out there by
>guys increasingly willing to take
>a poke at an animal
>1/4 of a mile and
>more away. It's a sad
>trend and one that will
>eventually hurt hunting IMO. I
>hate to see any more
>join in the trend so
>I am not shy about
>sharing my thoughts-even though I
>realize they don't count for
>much.
>
>(BTW Gunwerks and Huskemaw ain't even
>close to the best equipment
>for long range-they're just the
>ones who pay the freight
>for BOTW to be on
>TV.That fact alone takes them
>out of the group of
>companies I give my business
>to.)
Thanks for the input guys. And NO i DIDN"T go buy a Gunwerks gun. I was joking around a besides if i had #6000 to blow now trust me it would be on a new truck. I'm far from a rich guy.
>AT 10:51?AM (MST)
>
>Ryry my post was smart-alecky and
>for that I apologize. But,like
>many, I am frustrated by
>the trend to sell long-range
>shooting at game as easy.It's
>just a matter of having
>the right equipment according to
>those who are-guess what?-sponsored by
>those selling that equipment.
>
>The fact is having the right
>equipment is just the very
>first step of long-range shooting.
>To be even reasonably accurate
>at long range requires knowing
>how to use that equipment-and
>that takes ALOT of dedication
>and practice. And "reasonably accurate"
>is not good enough when
>shooting at game-we owe our
>quarry more than that.
>
>IMO there are only a handful
>of people who have ANY
>business slinging lead at a
>game animal beyond 500 yards.Why?
>Field conditions are NOT range
>conditions.Even the best at Camp
>Perry get to take "sighting"
>shots. There are no "sighting"
>shots in the field.Plus winds
>are tricky and play a
>huge role at long range,game
>moves while the bullet is
>on its way,there is no
>bench to rest on,etc.,etc.,etc.
>
>"Best of the West" doesn't show
>you the misses and the
>cripples. And believe me,there is
>alot of missing and crippling
>going on out there by
>guys increasingly willing to take
>a poke at an animal
>1/4 of a mile and
>more away. It's a sad
>trend and one that will
>eventually hurt hunting IMO. I
>hate to see any more
>join in the trend so
>I am not shy about
>sharing my thoughts-even though I
>realize they don't count for
>much.
>
>(BTW Gunwerks and Huskemaw ain't even
>close to the best equipment
>for long range-they're just the
>ones who pay the freight
>for BOTW to be on
>TV.That fact alone takes them
>out of the group of
>companies I give my business
>to.)
Thanks for the input guys. And NO i DIDN"T go buy a Gunwerks gun. I was joking around a besides if i had #6000 to blow now trust me it would be on a new truck. I'm far from a rich guy.
Cahunter805
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 3,360
LAST EDITED ON Jan-10-11 AT 02:48PM (MST)[p]Cbeard. I fully understand what you are saying. I think BOTW is a show that really builds a false sense of how long range shooting and hunting is. Yes they are very well built rifles and those guys can shoot very well. What it doesn't show is the countless hours of practice time they spend with the rifles developing loads and honing their skills. BTW Aaron and Mike now have their own show and are no longer with BOTW. They also are teamed up with Nightforce now. I enjoy shooting long range and think it has its place. Here is another thing to think about. There are many guys including myself that practice a lot with their rifles at long range and can shoot very consistent. Some people say its wrong,unethical to shoot that far at game. To those people I ask this? What about the hunter who takes his rifle out of the closet a week before season stats. He goes and buys a box of ammo to sight in. Shoots 3 shots to sight in and then goes hunting. This hunter sees an animal at say 250 yards and decides that since the box of ammo says it should only be 6" low at that far decides to shoot. Maybe he hits the animal or maybe he wounds it. Is this unethical of him? My point is practice may not make perfect but it sure helps build confidence in one's shooting.
W
woodtick
Guest
LAST EDITED ON Jan-10-11 AT 03:19PM (MST)[p]+1 Cahunter
I love the guy I see at the range every year a couple weeks before the hunt. He comes and unsheathes the old 3006 with a tasco scope shoots it 4 times, hits the box 3 times @ 100 yds and then he has the balls to tell me I shouldn't be shooting at a target that I can't see with out my naked eye. Thats my favorite then there is this younger kid who I see up there all the time shooting his rifle, he can't hit much past 450 yards by my hell he sure can hit anything else closer than that dead center! Every one has a limit and those that don't care it obviously shows when we find dead deer every year that has been gut shot or grazed in the back leg. Know your limit and know your gun. I've learned from my own bad experiences that you need to know your gun! Thats all I'm saying. Good luck in the draws this year!!
TICK
TALL, WIDE, AND HANDSOME
I love the guy I see at the range every year a couple weeks before the hunt. He comes and unsheathes the old 3006 with a tasco scope shoots it 4 times, hits the box 3 times @ 100 yds and then he has the balls to tell me I shouldn't be shooting at a target that I can't see with out my naked eye. Thats my favorite then there is this younger kid who I see up there all the time shooting his rifle, he can't hit much past 450 yards by my hell he sure can hit anything else closer than that dead center! Every one has a limit and those that don't care it obviously shows when we find dead deer every year that has been gut shot or grazed in the back leg. Know your limit and know your gun. I've learned from my own bad experiences that you need to know your gun! Thats all I'm saying. Good luck in the draws this year!!
TICK
TALL, WIDE, AND HANDSOME
cbeard
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,458
I hear you guys and have two replies:
1)Two wrongs don't make a right; and
2)Even for a yahoo like you describe the margin for error is much greater if he is shooting under 300. Now those same yahoos are shooting out to 1000-just because some other yahoos on TV told him it was easy.
Sorry guys by definition it's all about the $$$ with those who make a living in the hunting "industry". If there's money to be made the vast majority of them don't give a rat's patootie about the animals that are crippled or the long-term effects on hunting. That's just the cold hard truth and why hunting and TV don't mix IMO.
1)Two wrongs don't make a right; and
2)Even for a yahoo like you describe the margin for error is much greater if he is shooting under 300. Now those same yahoos are shooting out to 1000-just because some other yahoos on TV told him it was easy.
Sorry guys by definition it's all about the $$$ with those who make a living in the hunting "industry". If there's money to be made the vast majority of them don't give a rat's patootie about the animals that are crippled or the long-term effects on hunting. That's just the cold hard truth and why hunting and TV don't mix IMO.
Cahunter805
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 3,360
2)Even for a yahoo like you describe the margin for error is much greater if he is shooting under 300. Now those same yahoos are shooting out to 1000-just because some other yahoos on TV told him it was easy.
I like my rifles to be 1/2-3/4 MOA at 100 as it helps build confidence in hitting where I am aiming.
This debate is as age old as ford vs chevy. To each their own.
Good luck in the draws this year everyone! Don't forget to get out and practice before the seasons do start! Never hurts to practice.
I like my rifles to be 1/2-3/4 MOA at 100 as it helps build confidence in hitting where I am aiming.
This debate is as age old as ford vs chevy. To each their own.
Good luck in the draws this year everyone! Don't forget to get out and practice before the seasons do start! Never hurts to practice.
4
4000fps
Guest
I think people that think a 280 or any 7mm for that matter isn't a long range round, better go study up on ballistic coefficients, and charts. Nothing trumps a 7mm other than maybe a 6.5...
4
440sixpack
Guest
The 7x57 is a great choice too, I think I can, I think I can.
Chesterwyo
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,551
Maybe I'll take my remington model 7 in 7mm-08 out and thump an elk at 700 yards with it. It shoots a 7MM bullet after all.
4
4000fps
Guest
With a 140 VLD, and a turret...no problem!
4
440sixpack
Guest
Can I get a 1000 yard turret for my 30-30?
Maybe not, but I could get support for the idea around here.
Maybe not, but I could get support for the idea around here.
LAST EDITED ON Jan-12-11 AT 01:16AM (MST)[p]
440, I'm gonna build a 300 savage throated for 155 scenars. Gonna call it the "sleeper". Why? Just for those days that guys like you show up, that have more money than experience and want to put a bit of cash down.
You think I can get hits with the little 300 savage at 1000? Wanna bet on it? lol
It wasnt long ago you showed some interest in LR shooting..GO into it with an open mind, not like you know everything already.
FYI, you brought up the lousy 7x57...a truly anemic cartridge right?or maybe not...
Going off memory, your 300 win load is a barnes 180 tsx @ 3200.
so @ 1000 you have: 1406fps with 790ftlbs
the anemic 7x57 @1000 with a 168 going 2700fps?
1489fps with 827ftlbs
obviously neither is a viable hunting load that far out (to some), but the little 7x57 is no slouch, nor the 7/08..since this post is about the 280, it handily hands both rounds their ass at that range...
440, I'm gonna build a 300 savage throated for 155 scenars. Gonna call it the "sleeper". Why? Just for those days that guys like you show up, that have more money than experience and want to put a bit of cash down.
You think I can get hits with the little 300 savage at 1000? Wanna bet on it? lol
It wasnt long ago you showed some interest in LR shooting..GO into it with an open mind, not like you know everything already.
FYI, you brought up the lousy 7x57...a truly anemic cartridge right?or maybe not...
Going off memory, your 300 win load is a barnes 180 tsx @ 3200.
so @ 1000 you have: 1406fps with 790ftlbs
the anemic 7x57 @1000 with a 168 going 2700fps?
1489fps with 827ftlbs
obviously neither is a viable hunting load that far out (to some), but the little 7x57 is no slouch, nor the 7/08..since this post is about the 280, it handily hands both rounds their ass at that range...
4
4000fps
Guest
Funny part is, the 308 is accepted as a long range round, because it is used as such by the US Military. But if you neck it down to a 7mm, it shoots flatter, has a better ballistic coefficient, but suddenly it is not a long range round...
I like the idea of the 300 Savage. That case was ahead of its time!
I like the idea of the 300 Savage. That case was ahead of its time!
S
shootinfool
Guest
>Would you put your money on
>a 300 mag or the
>280 making a clean kill
>on an elk at 700
>yards?
>
Well, that depends on who is behind each gun and how much work and preperation has gone into being able to make this shot!
My suggestion is that you pick a round that you will be happy with. If that is a .280, then so be it. It is your money to buy with what you wish. That being said, whatever round you choose, practice with it. Put in the time and effort(and money) to be able to make the kind of shot you desire to make. I would not spend time arguing with anyone over which round is better for a 700 yard shot. If you learn the gun and spend the time a .280 will do the job any day of the week. The key here is to know YOUR limitations and never go beyond them. When a person finds themselves going beyond their limitations on game animals is when wounded animals are the result, no matter the weapon.
>a 300 mag or the
>280 making a clean kill
>on an elk at 700
>yards?
>
Well, that depends on who is behind each gun and how much work and preperation has gone into being able to make this shot!
My suggestion is that you pick a round that you will be happy with. If that is a .280, then so be it. It is your money to buy with what you wish. That being said, whatever round you choose, practice with it. Put in the time and effort(and money) to be able to make the kind of shot you desire to make. I would not spend time arguing with anyone over which round is better for a 700 yard shot. If you learn the gun and spend the time a .280 will do the job any day of the week. The key here is to know YOUR limitations and never go beyond them. When a person finds themselves going beyond their limitations on game animals is when wounded animals are the result, no matter the weapon.
4
4000fps
Guest
I actually don't condone shooting animals at 700 yds, regardless. But...I know it can be done, and I know a 7mm-08 can do it. I have never had trouble getting within 400 yds of a critter though, and like the better odds of shorter shots. It is fun to ring gongs at 700+ but most elk I have shot have been under 100 yds.
BPKHunter
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,749
So funny...but I love the debate. What I don't love is the opinionated and uneducated that think there opinions are facts.
Fact: A .280 remington, 140 gr Accubond(.485 bc), 2850 fps(22" factory Ruger), (57.0 gr RL19 powder/Fed 210 primer), will provide 1963 fps and 1198 ft/lbs @ 600 yds, and 1833 fps and 1045 ft/lbs @ 700 yds. I know this gun shoots this as I have personally chronographed it many times.
Opinion: 140 grain Accubond will easily handle a deer at 1000 ft/lbs of energy, and will handle elk at 1200 ft/lbs. Therefore based on this criteria and Noslers assertion that the min vel for that bullet is 1800 fps, I say this round is adequate for 700 yds on deer and 600 on elk.
Opinion: It is no harder to dope for elevation at 600/700 yards than at 300 yards, both require adjustment. I use clicks or my zeiss ballistic reticle.
Opinion: If you can consistently, 9/10 times, hit a milk jug at a given distance, in given atmospheric conditions, you can consider the same shot on game. Buck fever must be considered.
Opinion: I would rather use a gun with less recoil to practice than one that I consider to have excessive recoil or excessive over-bore and very short barrel life which would limit my off season practice(i/e a .280 rem vs a 300 RUM). Each person must consider their personal limits of recoil tolerance, but barrel life is less subjective.
Fact: Higher BC bullets will clearly outperform lower BC bullets at longer distance in terms of wind resistance and energy(I don't mentiond drop as if you can correct for that reliably it isn't a relative factor).
Opinion: If you find an efficient mix between velocity, bullet weight, and ballistic coefficient and match that to your PERSONAL recoil tolerance and reasonable barrel life you can find the chamber and round that might best fit you. For example, my teenage sons use 140 gr accubonds in .270/.280 remingtons @ 2850 fps and I use 168 bergers in a 7mm Mag at 3050 fps. The 7mm has much increased range, but requires a heavier guna and more recoil which I handle more easily at 200lbs than their 130lbs. 6.5 and 7mm bullets have very high bc's in standard to heavy weights, .270, 300 and .338 being less so.
Question: If I find the right gun and an accurate enough load to consistently hit a deer in the vitals at a given range and that gun can provide enough energy to ethically kill that animal then what is the problem?
Comment: Why do some people say things like "No one should be taking that shot with that gun"?
Opinion: A .280 with the right load and enough practice "can" be an effictive big game gun out to 6-700 yars!
Try that barrel out with a few loads and if it doesn't shoot most loads around MOA then consider a custom barrel before you spend a few hundred dollars finding the right load. Typically you can find one, but a well built and propertly fitted custom will get you there quicker.
Brian
Fact: A .280 remington, 140 gr Accubond(.485 bc), 2850 fps(22" factory Ruger), (57.0 gr RL19 powder/Fed 210 primer), will provide 1963 fps and 1198 ft/lbs @ 600 yds, and 1833 fps and 1045 ft/lbs @ 700 yds. I know this gun shoots this as I have personally chronographed it many times.
Opinion: 140 grain Accubond will easily handle a deer at 1000 ft/lbs of energy, and will handle elk at 1200 ft/lbs. Therefore based on this criteria and Noslers assertion that the min vel for that bullet is 1800 fps, I say this round is adequate for 700 yds on deer and 600 on elk.
Opinion: It is no harder to dope for elevation at 600/700 yards than at 300 yards, both require adjustment. I use clicks or my zeiss ballistic reticle.
Opinion: If you can consistently, 9/10 times, hit a milk jug at a given distance, in given atmospheric conditions, you can consider the same shot on game. Buck fever must be considered.
Opinion: I would rather use a gun with less recoil to practice than one that I consider to have excessive recoil or excessive over-bore and very short barrel life which would limit my off season practice(i/e a .280 rem vs a 300 RUM). Each person must consider their personal limits of recoil tolerance, but barrel life is less subjective.
Fact: Higher BC bullets will clearly outperform lower BC bullets at longer distance in terms of wind resistance and energy(I don't mentiond drop as if you can correct for that reliably it isn't a relative factor).
Opinion: If you find an efficient mix between velocity, bullet weight, and ballistic coefficient and match that to your PERSONAL recoil tolerance and reasonable barrel life you can find the chamber and round that might best fit you. For example, my teenage sons use 140 gr accubonds in .270/.280 remingtons @ 2850 fps and I use 168 bergers in a 7mm Mag at 3050 fps. The 7mm has much increased range, but requires a heavier guna and more recoil which I handle more easily at 200lbs than their 130lbs. 6.5 and 7mm bullets have very high bc's in standard to heavy weights, .270, 300 and .338 being less so.
Question: If I find the right gun and an accurate enough load to consistently hit a deer in the vitals at a given range and that gun can provide enough energy to ethically kill that animal then what is the problem?
Comment: Why do some people say things like "No one should be taking that shot with that gun"?
Opinion: A .280 with the right load and enough practice "can" be an effictive big game gun out to 6-700 yars!
Try that barrel out with a few loads and if it doesn't shoot most loads around MOA then consider a custom barrel before you spend a few hundred dollars finding the right load. Typically you can find one, but a well built and propertly fitted custom will get you there quicker.
Brian
sageadvice
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 11,849
BPKHunter, I find no fault with your logic...other than you might be giving credit to some guys ability to shoot that far at game. I can't make myself, i won't, and i've been at it a long time.
Aside that, Yes a 280 Rem has the goods! I believe in the 7mm-o8 as well. That said, my new barrel, 6-7 years ago, was in a .280AI. My handload put 140 grain pills out the tube @ 3250 FPS from a good crony. Put that in your puter and you'll have something to think about!
Joey
Aside that, Yes a 280 Rem has the goods! I believe in the 7mm-o8 as well. That said, my new barrel, 6-7 years ago, was in a .280AI. My handload put 140 grain pills out the tube @ 3250 FPS from a good crony. Put that in your puter and you'll have something to think about!
Joey
BPKHunter
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,749
>BPKHunter, I find no fault with
>your logic...other than you might
>be giving credit to some
>guys ability to shoot that
>far at game. I can't
>make myself, i won't, and
>i've been at it a
>long time.
>
>Aside that, Yes a 280 Rem
>has the goods! I believe
>in the 7mm-o8 as well.
>That said, my new barrel,
>6-7 years ago, was in
>a .280AI. My handload put
>140 grain pills out the
>tube @ 3250 FPS from
>a good crony. Put that
>in your puter and you'll
>have something to think about!
>
>
>Joey
Joey,
First, I feel very strong about not shooting beyond one's ability. That said, I don't believe that long range shots are necessarily unethical, but they probably are more often than not.
Second, I have done a LOT of research into the best round for me and do think the 280AI is about it. 98% of 7mm Mag performance with 90% of the powder = very efficient, plus NO rim. If I just had the money for a custom rifle.
>your logic...other than you might
>be giving credit to some
>guys ability to shoot that
>far at game. I can't
>make myself, i won't, and
>i've been at it a
>long time.
>
>Aside that, Yes a 280 Rem
>has the goods! I believe
>in the 7mm-o8 as well.
>That said, my new barrel,
>6-7 years ago, was in
>a .280AI. My handload put
>140 grain pills out the
>tube @ 3250 FPS from
>a good crony. Put that
>in your puter and you'll
>have something to think about!
>
>
>Joey
Joey,
First, I feel very strong about not shooting beyond one's ability. That said, I don't believe that long range shots are necessarily unethical, but they probably are more often than not.
Second, I have done a LOT of research into the best round for me and do think the 280AI is about it. 98% of 7mm Mag performance with 90% of the powder = very efficient, plus NO rim. If I just had the money for a custom rifle.
Disclaimer:
The poster does not take any responsibility for any hurt or bad feelings. Reading threads poses inherent risks. The poster would like to remind readers to make sure they have a functional sense of humor before they visit any discussion board.
