.280 or .7mag.

[thelaw]

want a 7mm bore but which one. this will be my allround rifle. i do reload. i like the 7mag. performance, but have read about headspacing and short case life with it. as far as the .280 goes, what kind of velocities do yall get out of 24" or 26" barrels with 140-160grainers? some manuals i've seen shows quite a difference between the 2 cartridges, while others show only a 100fps or so. the biggest game animal i intend to ever hunt will probably elk. i know both are adequate, but just would like to here what everone else has to say.

[mcrae555]

I have a 7mm Mag and I don't have any of the problems you mentioned.  I find mine very easy to reload for.  My rifle is a Tikka Whitetail Hunter with a 24 inch barrel and she shoots 175's at 2800 fps very accurately!  I have used 160's but my gun shoots the 175's so well that I don't anymore.  If I am hunting deer I use a 7mm/08 anyway the 7 mag is for big stuff.  I personally like the 280 and I think it is a better suited cartridge for a lighter weight allround hunting rifle.  My Tikka is 9.5lbs all decked out and gets heavy at the end of the day!  If I was to get a 280 I would go with a Remington Mountain rifle it really would be a great gun to carry all day when elk are in the mix.  I would personally stick with the 160's if Elk are in the plan.  Just my opinion of course.

McRae555

[Coyote Hunter]

thelaw -

Like mcrae555, I also shoot a 7mm Mag and don't have the problems you mention.  Been doing it for over 20 years and, in fact, the 7mm Mag was the first cartridge I reloaded.

Back in the early days I pushed the 160g bullets a bit hard and did, in fact, get short case life, with 5-6 reloads being typical before I would start getting case-head separations and have to get all new brass.  

In those days I didn't have a choronograph and the data I was using was already old.  When newer manuals came out the max charge went down by 2.0g and I followed suit.  The result was a dramatic increase in case life - I just threw away brass that had been reloaded 18 times, and full-length resized every time.  These days I do have a chrono and hate to think what those old loads might have been running - because the ones I'm shooting now are at velocity for max loads.

I can't tell you how many rounds I've sent down range with my 7mm Mag, but its been shooting full-house loads for over 20 years and it still shoots .5" groups at 100 yards.  My guess would be somewhere beyond 2,000 rounds.

One nice thing about the 7mm Rem Mag - you can download it even further - say to .280 Rem specs - and case and barrel life should be along the lines of "forever".

[gunnut69]

I think you'd be well served by either the 7mm Mag or the 280 Rem.  I built my daughter a custom Remington m700 in 280.  They are fantastic and kill well.  I load the 140 ballistic tips from Nosler with a moderate load in the 280.  Don't remember just now the load just that is was a moderate one and the daughter hasn't used more than 1 per deer since..  That's a fairly soft bullet and at reasonable velocities it kills very well indeed although at some loss of penetration.  I love the 7 Mag and it's probably a better all around rifle than even the 30-06(that oughta stir the hornets nest).  The 7 Mag though will generate recoil on a par with the 30-06 using similat bullet weights(velocities are nearly the same) but will shoot a bit flatter and will retain energy better at longer ranges.  I've also heard it claimed the 7mm Mag outpenetrates the -06 but with the right bullets either will penetrate all that you could possibly need.  I'd feel a little undergunned only against the largest of the north American big game with a 7mmMag in hand.  I only have two 7mmMags right now.  For years an old model Ruger 77 with an old Redfield 3x9 was all that I could want.  I've shot coyotes at 350+ yards and death was violent indeed.  I've also shot deer and have never recovered a single Nosler 160 grain Partition.  Ranges on the deer were from a few yards to over 400.  All were quick clean kills with meat loss more dependant on where the bullet ranged than the rifle.  Worst meat loss I ever saw was a Winchester 94 in 44 mag.  The range was excessive (over 250 yards) and the shooter a farmer picking corn just kept shooting.  The result was bullet holes in all 4 quarters and little edible meat.  Truly a poor perfomance.  The 280 doesn't have the case capacity to generate the velocity with the heavy slugs but will nearly match the mag with lighter bullets.  I would hate to have to make a single choice.  For whitetails only there is little difference but the mag may have a slight advantage on heavier game.  Recoil is not bad with either.  If you can shoot a 30-06 the 7mmMags are almost identical..  Case life with any belted or rimmed round is greatly improved by adjusting the sizer to resixe the case as to fit the chamber and not just set the die down on the shell holder.  That is reloading 101 and not really an issue.  Ammo availability is a lot better for the Mag than the 280, especially out west. A couple years ago I picked up a M70 SuperGrade in 7mmMag.  The rifle was a great deal.  I haven't worked up a load for it yet.  No real urgency as the Ruger is always ready..

[safetysheriff]

I have loaded 7 mm Mag' for my buddy's Ruger, stainless steel, Model 77 Mk II.   The shellholder has to bump the die pretty hard to get the brass to chamber (loaded).    I'm guessing that in that Ruger the cartridge is headspacing on the shoulder.    I would expect to get reasonable life out of decent brass in that rifle, and I'd expect Ruger's stainless steel to last a rather long time.     Maybe you can find one similarly-chambered in a Ruger, do a trigger job per www.centerfirecentral.com, and then go on shooting one of the best rifles (for the money) out there!

For a chamber not so tight / short I'd partial-length re-size my brass using a full-length die and experimenting with how far I'd keep it up off the shell holder (you may already know how it's done, but others may not).

I like IMR 4350 in the 7mm Mag'.     It kicks, but it's accurate!

Good luck.

[PA-Joe]

For an all round gun go with the 7mm08! Only a few 100's fps les in a 24-inch barrel and half the powder.

[longwinters]

I have been going thru the same quandry.  I have a 7mm and have not experienced any of the problems you have mentioned although I have not loaded up the hottest loads.  I guess for just deer though I would go with the 280.  Reasons being less powder used and less recoil.  For a more all around rifle the 7mm would get the nod (which is why I am staying with mine).  

Long

[Zachary]

I have many rifles, 3 of which are 7 mags, and none of which are 280.  Why?  Well, first off there's just something special about a 7 mag, at least to me.  Second, I am not a handloader and factory loads for the .280 are nothing compared to that of the 7mag.

Zachary

[Questor]

I think the Speer manual characterizes the 280 as being a practical equivalent to the 7mm mag, but with less recoil. This is based on the small difference in velocity between the two.  I also note that there are some attractively lightweight guns in 280.  Personally, I'd go with the 280. But if I didn't handload, I'd use the 7mm mag.

In my case, if the 270 is inadequate for the game sought, then it is most likely that the 270 WSM, 280, 7mm mag, 30-06, and many other 30 caliber guns will be inadequate too.  Therefore, get a bigger gun.

[7magWoodsman]

I love the seven mag myself and would rcommend this to anyone that can handle the recoil...kinda like a quicker kickin 30/06...if recoil is a problem I would go with the 7mm/08 or perhaps the 260 rem. depending on the game I was after. Never had any case troubles myself but I have never tried handloading a ground to air missle either.

[Mohawk]

I have a Handi-Rifle in .280. Works great on hogs and deer. I wanted something with 30-06 performance but wanted something different than everyone else. The .280 fits the niche well. Loaded with standard 150gr. Rem. Core-lokts it goes through and through on hefty hogs. Good caliber.

[brasschaser]

I'd go with the 7mag if you really need the power and distance or a 7mm/08 rather than the .280/7mm-06.  The 7mm/08 is so close to the .280 in velocities, usually within 100fps that there's really no advantage and the 7mm/08 is far more popular, likely more accurate too.

[lilabner]

A well placed shot from a .280, or a 7x57, for that matter, will kill a bull elk very neatly. If your mostly hunt game smaller than bull elk, I would pick the .280. You'll probably shoot it better (most of us aren't quite as good shooting magnums) and that will compensate for the 7mm Mag being a tad more powerful. I hunted with a very accurate 7Mag for several years before going back to my first love, the 30-06. The animals seem to go down just as quickly and if you don't shoot over 300 yards on game (most of us shouldn't) the trajectory is plenty flat enough.

[SHW]

Another vote for the 7MM Rem Mag.