280 AI or .270

[reynolds357]

.300 WBY. I dont see the 7WBY as being all that wonderful. My favorite Eastern hunting 7 is the 7WSM.
My 7 b.r. gun is a .284Win.
My western hunting 7 is the 7 RUM.
I use my 7-30 Waters for a brush rifle.
As far as felt recoil, I dont think I can tell you any real difference between the .280 A.I., 7 Rem, and 7 WBY. To me to feel a recoil difference I have to go down to .284 and 7-08,

[taylorce1]

Originally Posted by old roper

Taylor you post on the Nosler site if you think Nosler is padding their data why don't you bring it up on that site their running that site?

I asked Nosler4 by PM to post pressure data and the reply I got was it was safe in their test equipment to shoot. If you go look at the velocities posted on Nosler ammunition they are loading it at least 100 fps slower than max load listed in their manual as well.

I had a buddy run QL for me and while I don't think QL has all the answers it even says that the .280 AI is a little hot at the speeds Nosler is publishing.

Cartridge : .280 Ack Imp
Bullet : .284, 140, Nosler Accubond 59992
Useable Case Capaci: 67.311 grain H2O = 4.370 cm³
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 3.330 inch = 84.58 mm
Barrel Length : 24.5 inch = 622.3 mm
Powder : IMR 4831

Predicted data by increasing and decreasing the given charge,
incremented in steps of 2.0% of nominal charge.
CAUTION: Figures exceed maximum and minimum recommended loads !

Step Fill. Charge Vel. Energy Pmax Pmuz Prop.Burnt B_Time
% % Grains fps ft.lbs psi psi % ms

-20.0 76 45.20 2375 1741 27349 8616 92.8 1.619
-18.0 78 46.33 2432 1826 29074 8873 93.9 1.582
-16.0 80 47.46 2489 1912 30901 9121 94.9 1.545
-14.0 82 48.59 2545 2000 32837 9359 95.8 1.510
-12.0 84 49.72 2602 2089 34887 9585 96.6 1.475
-10.0 86 50.85 2658 2181 37057 9798 97.4 1.441
-08.0 87 51.98 2714 2273 39355 9999 98.1 1.400
-06.0 89 53.11 2769 2367 41787 10185 98.6 1.360
-04.0 91 54.24 2825 2463 44363 10356 99.1 1.322
-02.0 93 55.37 2880 2559 47089 10512 99.5 1.286
+00.0 95 56.50 2934 2657 49976 10651 99.7 1.251 ! Near Maximum !
+02.0 97 57.63 2988 2756 53034 10773 99.9 1.217 ! Near Maximum !
+04.0 99 58.76 3041 2855 56274 10877 100.0 1.184 ! Near Maximum !
+06.0 101 59.89 3094 2955 59708 10967 100.0 1.153 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+08.0 103 61.02 3147 3056 63351 11053 100.0 1.122 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+10.0 105 62.15 3199 3158 67216 11136 100.0 1.093 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!

Results caused by ± 5% powder lot-to-lot burning rate variation using nominal charge
Data for burning rate increased by 5% relative to nominal value:
+Ba 95 56.50 3002 2781 54842 10460 100.0 1.201 ! Near Maximum !
Data for burning rate decreased by 5% relative to nominal value:
-Ba 95 56.50 2853 2512 45158 10698 98.3 1.309

I don't think QL is as good a pressure testing equipment but IME it has been close.

[Kachok]

I am not cherry picking anything those are the fastest loads listed in any of my manuals. If you want a full case on both let's compare again with fastest loads in 150gr.
150gr 270 Win 61.5gr MagPro 2913fps 101% compressed load
150gr 280 AI 63gr IMR7828 3107fps 103% compressed load
To be completely fair Nosler used a 26" barrel for the 280AI and a 24"' for the 270 so subtract 50-60fps and it only holds an aprox 140fps advantage in 150gr in the same length barrel, nothing earth shattering but certainly noticeable, 140fps is about all that separates my 7mm-08 from a 280 Rem in common bullet weights.

[wet]

I have a wetherby vanguard 270 and a rem.700 280. love them both, they are interchangeable and both will kill anything in this country. As said before 270 rounds can be found in any store that sells amo. I reload like you and there is more bullet choice, not that you need it. I don't think you can make A wrong choice.

[natman]

If ammo availability is your concern, why are you even considering a wildcat like the 280AI?

The 280AI is a now a factory cartridge.. It was registered with SAAMI in 2007...

I know news travels slow but its been a standardized cartridge for six years!!!

I stand corrected on the use of the word "wildcat". I should have said "offbeat, only available as semicustom, not loaded by any of the major manufacturers" instead. (No, I don't count Nosler and Norma as majors).

So now that that nit has been picked, SAAMI standardization or not ammo availability of 280AI is going to be tough, certainly not compared to 270!

So I repeat:

If ammo availability is your concern, why are you even considering an wildcat offbeat cartridge like the 280AI?

[.300 Weatherby Mag]

.300 WBY. I dont see the 7WBY as being all that wonderful. My favorite Eastern hunting 7 is the 7WSM.
My 7 b.r. gun is a .284Win.
My western hunting 7 is the 7 RUM.
I use my 7-30 Waters for a brush rifle.
As far as felt recoil, I dont think I can tell you any real difference between the .280 A.I., 7 Rem, and 7 WBY. To me to feel a recoil difference I have to go down to .284 and 7-08,

You have a nice collection of 7's there... The RUM is really a neat setup... I agree the recoil difference would be negligible between the three...

I just despise the 7mm Rem Mag simply for the fact that many conversations about deer hunting degenerate into, "my 7mm Mag is better than your (insert favorite caliber here)."

[Kimber84]

Originally Posted by natman

I stand corrected on the use of the word "wildcat". I should have said "offbeat, only available as semicustom, not loaded by any of the major manufacturers" instead. (No, I don't count Nosler and Norma as majors).

So now that that nit has been picked, SAAMI standardization or not ammo availability of 280AI is going to be tough, certainly not compared to 270!

So I repeat:

If ammo availability is your concern, why are you even considering an wildcat offbeat cartridge like the 280AI?

Well....I repeat, because components for 30 cals are non existent. I am finding piles of .270 and .280 brass all over the place along with about every component bullet you can think of.

I've got the 30 cal guns, just looking for something different

[dgludwig]

I've got the 30 cal guns, just looking for something different

If you want something a little different but offering virtually the same ballistics and case configuration as the .280 Remington, take a look at the 7X64 Brenneke cartridge. I have a Ruger MKII (RS) Model rifle chambered in this cartridge and it has proven to be very accurate. You won't find factory ammunition for the 7X64 Brenneke on shelves at Wal Mart but I've had no trouble locating factory stuff at places like Cabelas, Gander Mountain and at my lgs for that matter. And, since you reload, there should be no trouble finding something to shoot.
There's no practical reason for choosing the 7X64 Bk (Europe's answer to the .270 in terms of performance and popularity) over the .280 Rm or any other ballistically equivalent cartridge that I can think of except having something a "little different". And there's nothing wrong with that.

[reynolds357]

300, I agree that the 7mm Rem Mag. is extremely popular for no apparent reason other than a marketing giant pushed it for many years. The .270 Win is popular because a couple of gun writers made it their life goal to make it the most popular round in North America. In a comparison, I would say the WBY is a slightly better cartridge than the Rem mag. We all know why it never became popular. Wby. designed and built/builds some wonderful stuff. I have almost all the Wby chamberings and love them. Wby. holding them to proprietary status for so many years prevented them from becoming widely popular. Roy made the decision he wanted a niche market and for many years that was indeed where Wby. resided. In my opinion, the .264 Win mag is a much better deer cartridge than the 7 Rem mag. The 7 Rem mag sells like wildfire and the .264 has been relegated to being chambered in a couple $1k+ model Winchester rifles. Marketing, not merits, usually wins the day when it comes to what becomes popular and what becomes a relic.

[taylorce1]

Originally Posted by Kachok

I am not cherry picking anything those are the fastest loads listed in any of my manuals. If you want a full case on both let's compare again with fastest loads in 150gr.
150gr 270 Win 61.5gr MagPro 2913fps 101% compressed load
150gr 280 AI 63gr IMR7828 3107fps 103% compressed load
To be completely fair Nosler used a 26" barrel for the 280AI and a 24"' for the 270 so subtract 50-60fps and it only holds an aprox 140fps advantage in 150gr in the same length barrel, nothing earth shattering but certainly noticeable, 140fps is about all that separates my 7mm-08 from a 280 Rem in common bullet weights.

If you only quote one load from one manual you are "cherry picking data". Lets compare that load for the .280 AI you have up there.

Originally Posted by Kachok

150gr 280 AI 63gr IMR7828 3107fps 103% compressed load

This load is straight from the Nosler 7th edition manual.
Hogdon says max load using IMR 7828 SSC (same burn rate as IMR 7828) is 59.0 grains with a velocity of 2902 fps out of a 24" barrel with a pressure of 60,300 PSI. Now if we go back to Nosler's manual what is their most accurate load for IMR 7828? 59.0 grains at 2923 fps and 97% load density.

Now for the .270 data:

Originally Posted by Kachok

150gr 270 Win 61.5gr MagPro 2913fps 101% compressed load

Straight from Nosler #7 again. Now Nosler says its most accurate load with MagPro was 59.5 grains at 98% load density with a speed of 2838 fps. Now here is what Accurate says I can do with MagPro in the .270 Win with a 24" barrel:

Bullet: 150 NOSLER PART
Min: 54.4 @ 2,706 FPS
Max: 60.4 @ 2,955
PSI: 64,680
COAL: 3.320

Are you sure you want to give me that 60 fps for the 2" longer barrel?

So see I can "cherry pick data" as well to skew things in the favor of the .270. Looking at only one book is wrong you need to average things across several different sources of information. I don't agree with running things near 65K PSI all the time either which I think Nosler is doing with the .280 AI to get their published velocities.

There is no real world performance difference between a .270, .280 (running at 60-62K PSI), and the .280 AI. What it boils down to is the only difference you'll ever see between the .270 and .280/.280 AI is.

1. The .270 is offered in a wider array of factory rifles.
2. There will always be more ammunition choices on the shleves for the .270.
3. The .270 will never have the bullet choices the .280/.280 AI has for the reloader.

[old roper]

Taylorce1, I guess you don't remember posting on your wildcat on the Nosler forum

http://forum.nosler.net/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=10218

You have read about the 280AI and results on that site so why not question the results over there? You posted almost 2yrs on that wildcat.

[taylorce1]

Old Roper if you're that worried about it why don't you go ask? I did and wasn't given the info as I already stated. BTW that wildcat didn't live up to the hype from Gary Reeder as well.

I've got manuals that say the .280 AI running around 90% load density has 60-62K pressure, add 10+% load density and I'll bet you your on the edge of 65K if not over depending on the rifle. I have no doubt that the pressures were safe in the Nosler test barrel, but I'm positive as well not all rifles are built equal. IMO a good reloader never blindly believes a reloading manual anyway.

I have a .270 Win that I can push hard and it doesn't show pressure signs. However most reloading manuals agree that 3200+ fps is probably over pressure for the 130 grain bullet in a .270 Win. So I backed it off and now sit around 3060 fps and you know what? It kills game very well, and is pleasing to shoot.

I aplogize if my exerience is different than yours and if I've bad mouthed your favorite cartridge. It is just my opinion that the .280 AI isn't "all that and a bag of chips." I know as well that life changes and you may not always have ammunition laying around for a hunt or a range session and it is nice to be able to swing by the store and pick up 20 to 40 rounds in a pinch.

[reynolds357]

Taylor Force, I have to concur with what you said. Basically in cases of somewhat similar angles, a larger case will have a higher velocity assuming cases are loaded to the same pressure. There just are not any free lunches when it comes to ballistics.

[Kachok]

No cartridge is "all that and a bag of chips" they are all a compromise between half a dozen variables. I do not own nor have I ever owned a 280 AI I bought a Savage 110 30-06 with every intention of making a 280 AI out of it but turns out the darn thing shoots so well out the box I could not bring myself to tear it down. So I cannot comment on if Nosler or Hodgdon got it right other then to say in general I have found my Nosler manuals to be a more accurate and comprehensive source of information.
I figure 60 fps is a good difference between a 24 and 26" tube for reasonably overbore cartridges like the 280 AI and 270 Win, exact figures vary by your exact load but 25-35fps per inch is the accepted range.
Nobody NEEDS a 280 AI, the 270 Win does everything the other does inside 400 yards, either would make great deer/pronghorn rifle and both are a little on the light side for elk/moose, I have owned two 270s and have been thrilled with them.

[taylorce1]

My comment about the 60 fps was because the accuracy loads were seperated by 85 fps. So if I subtracted the difference that gave a 25-35 fps difference between the two. Which has been my point the whole time, don't expect the .280 AI seriously out perform any other rifle cartridge in the same class it just isn't going to happen.

[bobnob]

I see the cartridges relative to one another this way:

The 7mm RM is the big brother to the 270 Win; it will drive bullets of the same weight about 200fps faster, or will drive bullets about 15 to 20g heavier to the same speed.

In the case of the latter scenario, the two cartridges will have very similar trajectories. The 7RM will of course have more KE at all ranges. Its up to the practitioner to decide whether the game animal hunted requires the extra bullet weight and energy, and recoil.

Now the 280 AI (to come back to the OP) I see as being somewhere in the middle. But loaded to the same pressures, closer to the 270 end of the spectrum than the 7RM.

To that end, if the 270 Win can be safely loaded to near 3000fps with a 150g bullet (which it can, and there is plenty of official data to that level) then I see the advantage of the 280AI existing only in the fact that all those great 160g .284 bullets can be loaded to about the same speed.

However unless one is shooting game large enough to need those 10 grains extra bullet weight (which lets face it, ain't much) the advantage is trifling.


I apologise there are a few generalisations in my post, but really this is about where the cartridges sit relative to one another.


If all things were equal including pressures, availability, twist rates etc, I would choose the vanilla flavoured 280 Remington (non-AI) and shoot 162g SSTs and 160g Accubonds at a nice, steady 2900fps all day long.

I think such a package is a well balanced big-game proposition.

Regards,
Bob

[Ridgerunner665]

I know this is an old thread...but something isn't mentioned here that matters...SAAMI spec'd the 280 Ackley at 65,000 psi MAP (maximum average pressure)...it's right there on the SAAMI website.

Everybody is talking like loading the Ackley over 55,000 is voodoo or something...lol.

[Unlicensed Dremel]

Neither.... .280 (regular). But among those, it's a wash; probably .280 AI. If your rifle won't shoot Nosler Trophy Grade well, it won't shoot. Therefore, you always have factory ammo at a decent price with good brass to use afterward.

[Colt46]

I hear a lot of AI talk and most people who opt for an AI go the .280 route.

[old roper]

It's pretty had to compare SAAMI spec ammo 280 vs 280AI. One advantage to the Ackley you can fire parent case even factory loaded rd if it's headspaced right. My 280AI is long throated but I can load 280 case same COAL fire it may not use same amt of powder.

I can buy factory 35 Whelen,243,222,223 and shoot in my 35WhelenAI,243AI,222AI and 223AI. When I need new brass for the 222AI/223AI I just use AI load in new brass fireform shooting PD.

My 35 WhelenAI I use for elk and this year on a bear tag I use a new 35 Whelen case don't even use fireformed case. I'll shoot fireform cases for practice.

I like 280AI won't of build it if I didn't same with my other rifles. I think Berger data for the 280 is for 26" barrel and used that for my 280AI with his 180gr VLD hunting bullet.

[hogmanjr]

Dont overlook the 25-06 either! I own a 270 and a 25-06 and I have complete confidence in shooting a deer sized animal at 300 yards with the 270 and 400-450 with my 25-06. All calibers listed on this post are great. All personal preference. Dead is dead, right?

[Ridgerunner665]

When you run Nosler load data on QuickLoad with the correct pressure limit set ( QL version 3.8 has it at 65,000 psi)...it matches Noslers data pretty close....bear in mind, no 2 barrels are the same...and powder varies from lot to lot.

Cartridge : .280 Ack Imp
Bullet : .284, 140, Nosler AccuBond 59992
Useable Case Capaci: 66.439 grain H2O = 4.314 cm³
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 3.330 inch = 84.58 mm
Barrel Length : 26.0 inch = 660.4 mm
Powder : IMR 4831

Predicted data by increasing and decreasing the given charge,
incremented in steps of 0.833% of nominal charge.
CAUTION: Figures exceed maximum and minimum recommended loads !

Step Fill. Charge Vel. Energy Pmax Pmuz Prop.Burnt B_Time
% % Grains fps ft.lbs psi psi % ms

-08.3 94 55.00 2920 2650 47545 9707 99.7 1.328
-07.5 95 55.50 2944 2694 48829 9760 99.8 1.311
-06.7 95 56.00 2968 2738 50147 9810 99.9 1.296
-05.8 96 56.50 2992 2783 51499 9856 99.9 1.280
-05.0 97 57.00 3016 2827 52887 9899 100.0 1.264
-04.2 98 57.50 3039 2872 54311 9940 100.0 1.249
-03.3 99 58.00 3063 2917 55773 9977 100.0 1.234 ! Near Maximum !
-02.5 100 58.50 3087 2962 57274 10013 100.0 1.220 ! Near Maximum !
-01.7 101 59.00 3110 3007 58814 10048 100.0 1.205 ! Near Maximum !
-00.8 101 59.50 3133 3052 60396 10083 100.0 1.191 ! Near Maximum !
+00.0 102 60.00 3156 3097 62020 10118 100.0 1.177 ! Near Maximum !
+00.8 103 60.50 3179 3143 63687 10152 100.0 1.163 ! Near Maximum !
+01.7 104 61.00 3202 3188 65400 10185 100.0 1.150 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+02.5 105 61.50 3225 3234 67160 10218 100.0 1.136 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+03.3 106 62.00 3248 3280 68967 10251 100.0 1.123 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+04.2 107 62.50 3271 3326 70825 10283 100.0 1.110 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!

Results caused by ± 5% powder lot-to-lot burning rate variation using nominal charge
Data for burning rate increased by 5% relative to nominal value:
+Ba 102 60.00 3214 3212 67985 9913 100.0 1.133 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Data for burning rate decreased by 5% relative to nominal value:
-Ba 102 60.00 3084 2957 56083 10344 99.9 1.228 ! Near Maximum !



Cartridge : .280 Ack Imp
Bullet : .284, 140, Nosler AccuBond 59992
Useable Case Capaci: 66.439 grain H2O = 4.314 cm³
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 3.330 inch = 84.58 mm
Barrel Length : 26.0 inch = 660.4 mm
Powder : Norma MRP

Predicted data by increasing and decreasing the given charge,
incremented in steps of 0.769% of nominal charge.
CAUTION: Figures exceed maximum and minimum recommended loads !

Step Fill. Charge Vel. Energy Pmax Pmuz Prop.Burnt B_Time
% % Grains fps ft.lbs psi psi % ms

-07.7 94 60.00 2951 2708 43692 11069 97.1 1.352
-06.9 95 60.50 2978 2756 44886 11155 97.4 1.335
-06.2 95 61.00 3004 2805 46113 11238 97.7 1.318
-05.4 96 61.50 3030 2855 47379 11317 98.0 1.302
-04.6 97 62.00 3057 2904 48682 11393 98.3 1.286
-03.8 98 62.50 3083 2955 50025 11465 98.6 1.270
-03.1 99 63.00 3109 3005 51410 11534 98.8 1.254
-02.3 99 63.50 3135 3056 52837 11600 99.0 1.239
-01.5 100 64.00 3162 3107 54309 11661 99.2 1.223
-00.8 101 64.50 3188 3159 55826 11719 99.4 1.208 ! Near Maximum !
+00.0 102 65.00 3214 3211 57390 11773 99.5 1.194 ! Near Maximum !
+00.8 102 65.50 3240 3263 59006 11824 99.6 1.179 ! Near Maximum !
+01.5 103 66.00 3266 3316 60672 11870 99.7 1.164 ! Near Maximum !
+02.3 104 66.50 3292 3369 62392 11912 99.8 1.150 ! Near Maximum !
+03.1 105 67.00 3318 3422 64167 11950 99.9 1.136 ! Near Maximum !
+03.8 106 67.50 3343 3475 66001 11984 100.0 1.122 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!

Results caused by ± 5% powder lot-to-lot burning rate variation using nominal charge
Data for burning rate increased by 5% relative to nominal value:
+Ba 102 65.00 3300 3386 64195 11560 100.0 1.141 ! Near Maximum !
Data for burning rate decreased by 5% relative to nominal value:
-Ba 102 65.00 3110 3007 51123 11783 97.5 1.253

[Ridgerunner665]

I have been messing around with QL and Applied Ballistics for weeks now concerning the 280 Ackley, I have a Nosler M48 Custom ordered in that caliber...

So far...the load below is the best I can come up with for trajectory...I have 4 lbs. of MRP powder, just need Nosler to make some 150 grain ABLR's.

Cartridge : .280 Ack Imp
Bullet : .284, 150, Nosler Accubond LR 58734 G7
Useable Case Capaci: 65.523 grain H2O = 4.254 cm³
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 3.330 inch = 84.58 mm
Barrel Length : 24.0 inch = 609.6 mm
Powder : Norma MRP

Predicted data by increasing and decreasing the given charge,
incremented in steps of 0.769% of nominal charge.
CAUTION: Figures exceed maximum and minimum recommended loads !

Step Fill. Charge Vel. Energy Pmax Pmuz Prop.Burnt B_Time
% % Grains fps ft.lbs psi psi % ms

-07.7 95 60.00 2884 2770 47834 12249 98.1 1.279
-06.9 96 60.50 2910 2820 49171 12335 98.4 1.263
-06.2 97 61.00 2935 2870 50547 12418 98.6 1.247
-05.4 98 61.50 2961 2920 51966 12497 98.9 1.231
-04.6 98 62.00 2986 2971 53428 12571 99.1 1.216
-03.8 99 62.50 3012 3022 54939 12642 99.3 1.201
-03.1 100 63.00 3038 3073 56495 12708 99.4 1.185 ! Near Maximum !
-02.3 101 63.50 3063 3125 58100 12770 99.6 1.171 ! Near Maximum !
-01.5 102 64.00 3088 3177 59757 12828 99.7 1.156 ! Near Maximum !
-00.8 102 64.50 3114 3229 61468 12881 99.8 1.141 ! Near Maximum !
+00.0 103 65.00 3139 3282 63230 12930 99.9 1.127 ! Near Maximum !
+00.8 104 65.50 3164 3335 65041 12975 99.9 1.113 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+01.5 105 66.00 3190 3388 66904 13014 100.0 1.099 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+02.3 106 66.50 3215 3442 68823 13049 100.0 1.085 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+03.1 106 67.00 3240 3496 70801 13080 100.0 1.072 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+03.8 107 67.50 3265 3550 72840 13110 100.0 1.059 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!

Results caused by ± 5% powder lot-to-lot burning rate variation using nominal charge
Data for burning rate increased by 5% relative to nominal value:
+Ba 103 65.00 3218 3448 70558 12646 100.0 1.078 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Data for burning rate decreased by 5% relative to nominal value:
-Ba 103 65.00 3043 3085 56181 13034 98.5 1.183 ! Near Maximum !


Now I love the dear old 270 as much as anybody...but it can't quite compete with this...and this is using the Litz verified BC of the 150 grain ABLR (.295 G7)




140 grain Accubond...again, with a corrected BC.




If thats not solidly into 7mm Rem Mag territory...I'll drink the Rio Grande...the 280 Ackley is essentially a "long" 7mm Remington Short Action Ultra mag...the case capacities are very nearly idectical....and the standard 270 Win isn't even close (~100 fps behind)...now, if you Ackley the 270....things even out a bit.


A lot of folks mention Hodgden's online load data for the 280 Ackley...it appears Hodgden didn't load the 280 Ackley much past 60,000 psi for their testing...leaving 5,000 psi on the table, hence the lower velocities they show...I think they rushed to get data available (a good thing) and didn't quite do all their homework on the pressure limit as set by SAAMI.

One more thing...about the pressure limit of the 7mm Rem Mag...SAAMI set it at 61,000 psi because the 7mm RM is very prone to random pressure spikes which can send it well into unsafe territory if its loaded any hotter with certain load combinations...other rounds suffer this too, the 243 Win for example.

Very few rounds are SAAMI spec'd at 65,000 psi...and of those few...most, but not all, are relatively new rounds using modern case designs.

http://www.saami.org/specifications_...essure_CfR.pdf

Just a few things I felt were worth throwing in here...

[taylorce1]

I thought a couple of days on this one before I posted again. Ridgerunner665, I hope everything works for you as planned. One thing I've learned over the years of reloading and shooting, accuracy is more important than velocity. Trajectory is easy to compensate for with the proper optics or sight choices.

Wind is the big problem, and at 800 yards if you only reach 2800 fps your only going to have to correct 1.4-1.5 MOA more for the wind vs. your 3100 fps load with the 150 AB bullet. So I wouldn't worry about getting into 7mm RM territory as it isn't necessary to reach long range. I'd worry about finding the load with the least amount of vertical dispersion for shooting at 800 yards.

[Ridgerunner665]

No argument there...but I do try to find both accuracy and velocity...doesn't always work, but sometimes it does...the optic is a Zeiss HD5 3-15x42 with lockable turrets (16.5 MOA of adjustment with zero stop installed...enough for 800 yards, only plan on shooting 600 for the most part anyway)

Speed is why I'm going with the MRP powder...it's what Nosler uses in their Ackley ammo...it gives good speed at moderate pressure, and tends to be accurate....Reloder 22 is supposed to be good too.