lightweight build - .280ai or .284 Win on a long action and 21" barrel?

[Newtosavage]

I know what many of you are going to say - why a 21" barrel? I'm sure that seems awfully short to some of you. But I'm dead set on going no longer than 21" to keep this rifle a manageable length and weight. Why a long action? Because I already have one to build on, that's why...

Now with that out of the way, I need your opinion. Would you rather go .280ai or a long-throated .284 Win?

I'm having a barrel built and can go with either option. I was thinking since this is a long action build on a short barrel, maybe the .284 Win would be the better choice? I could then seat long coppers like the 145 LRX or high-bc bullets like the 162's and 168's as long as I wanted.

Thoughts?

 

[WeiserBucks]

Lapua brass is on the horizon for the 284 if that sparks your interest. Otherwise either one will work well.

 

[Newtosavage]

Lapua brass is on the horizon for the 284 if that sparks your interest. Otherwise either one will work well.

It does. I just learned that today which is what had me second-guessing my .280ai choice.

I love my 7mm-08 but have always wanted a rifle in 7mm with a little more "oomph" for elk. The .284 Win seems ideal if I can seat longer bullets in it. I'm concerned that the .280ai will just burn more powder (or not, in the shorter barrel) and will just give me more recoil without any gain in velocity.

 

[Rob5589]

.284 on a long action performs very well. I could easily push a 175 at close to 2800, fed great from a LA AICS mag, no ejection issues. A 145 would really zip along.

 

[Newtosavage]

.284 on a long action performs very well. I could easily push a 175 at close to 2800, fed great from a LA AICS mag, no ejection issues. A 145 would really zip along.

I think I'm going .284. That cartridge has always piqued my interest, and since I'm building it on a long action that I really like, with a custom barrel, I should be able to get exactly what I want.

My goal is to send 145 LRX's downrage at 2900-ish. Nothing too crazy but certainly more than I can ask from my 20" 7mm-08.

 

[Werty]

I love my 280 rem, I'm going to start hand loading 195 Berger. I want a little something extra incase if g bears. If they shoot like they are supposed to. I'll be real happy

 

[Rob5589]

2900 should be easy. H4350 worked in mine, other guys used 4831sc with good results. R15 worked too but not the accuracy I was looking for.

 

[Newtosavage]

I love my 280 rem, I'm going to start hand loading 195 Berger. I want a little something extra incase if g bears. If they shoot like they are supposed to. I'll be real happy

I had a Ruger stainless in .280 Rem a while back and that's a rifle I probably should have kept in hindsight, only it was kinda heavy like most 77's are.

 

[slick]

284! 284! 284!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Fire_9]

Check out the absolute hammers if you want to push it a little harder than normal

 

[Newtosavage]

284! 284! 284!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The deed is done.

I have no idea why I didn't think .284 from the outset. But there it was right there on their list of reamers, and it made me re-think. Especially with the 21" barrel.

This is gonna be fun.

Thanks for the help!

 

[Newtosavage]

I can push 131 Hammer Hunters to 2900 in my 20" 7mm-08. They are impressive bullets.

Check out the absolute hammers if you want to push it a little harder than normal

 

[Tobey]

I'm contemplating a very similar build, 284 on a shorter barrel for suppressor use. What twist did you go with for the bullet weight range you mentioned? I'm mostly interested in 160 jacketed or 140 monos for this build

 

[Newtosavage]

I read quite a bit and just went with 9 twist. I don't plan on shooting real heavy bullets, so I think that will be just fine.

 

[Rob5589]

I read quite a bit and just went with 9 twist. I don't plan on shooting real heavy bullets, so I think that will be just fine.

9 should be fine. Remember though, it's the length more than weight, especially with monos. Mine was 8.7 using the 175 smk, no problems.

 

[Newtosavage]

9 should be fine. Remember though, it's the length more than weight, especially with monos. Mine was 8.7 using the 175 smk, no problems.

Right. I think the 145 LRX's and 162 ELD-X's are about the same length, and I have read that 9 twist will work for the 162's, so I'm hoping that will be fine. I don't mind using 139 LRX's either. Already have a few 100 for my 7mm-08, where they run 2850. I sure wouldn't mind spitting them out at 3K though!

 

[Rob5589]

The now discontinued 162 Amax worked fine in a 9 twist 7RM. Those two should be fine as well.

 

[Newtosavage]

The now discontinued 162 Amax worked fine in a 9 twist 7RM. Those two should be fine as well.

That's good to know. My Tikka was a 1:9.5 and it shot 162 ELD-X's lights-out. So I'm sure 1:9 will be fine.