Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Custom Rifles & Wildcats 280 ackley do or dont?

I had no expectations, but it showed me nothing (unless extra work to make it feed is something) that a 280 Remington or 7MM Rem Mag couldn't or hasn't provided.

The trimming argument is, if nothing else, a little silly. I know the 280 AI works and could post pictures of pretty decent sized game taken with mine. But I could also post similar pictures of like game taken with a plethora of factory cartridges as well.

Your saying you had problems making a 280AI feed properly....Hmmmmm.

Right revelatory, that. And bracketed, too.

Apart from the (minor) differences in trajectory and recoil due to powder capacity, what would the same bullet possibly show you?

I was just giving kudo's to the cartridge.
I've got alot of pics of dead things taken with other cartridges as well.

Trimming is just one thing good about AI'ing any cartridge.

Plus a 280AI, is just plain sexy looking.

It has no real advantage over any other, it's just a personal choice.

How boring the world would be if everyone shot a 30-06.

Mine is built on a Whitworth Mouser 98. It feeds fine but required some work to get it too.

Shod

True. But, their plates would still be full.

I think you need to read what I said again.

You wrote: "Trimming is just one thing good about AI'ing any cartridge."

I don't agree and found that the so called ai cases require a little trimming along the way also.

That they do shrink the case LOA as they are fired and fill out that shoulder so the brass gets shorter for a while. That's why some think they require no or less trimming.

Over all the "ai" thing is just a hobby diversion. I would not buy a used rifle with an 'ai' chamber unless it was really special for some other reason. I have three of those ai rifles now and one is still at a dealers for sale. I dropped the price once and it's still there!

For a 7mm hunting rifle a lightweight Kimber 7-08 or else a 24" barreled 7mm mag make sense. The 280ai is just in the middle. It's ok but not a big deal.

What with little 280 Rem brass out there it's impractical.

I get a kick out of the "no trimming needed" argument as well. It's one thing if somebody is shooting competitively or blasting a couple thousand rounds at p-dogs a season; those guys might need to trim brass with the frequency of their haircuts. But most folks will have to trim brass for their big game rifles once every few years. Besides, trimming brass is no more difficult or time consuming than many other mundane reloading tasks. If trimming brass is really that big of a pain, buy a WFT trimmer and be done in no time.

So 7-08 brass is easy to find? 1st place I looked (Grafs) had Norma and Nosler 280 brass in stock but no 7-08 brass. And the 280AI is a SAAMI cartridge now, although Nosler 280AI brass was out of stock at Grafs.

Weighing cases is a bigger pita for me than trimming.

An AI get you 4-5 more grains capacity. Which ain't much...but its more capacity. It will get you 50fps or 2" of barrel. Prior to having any book guidance the AI figures were all over the map for a few decades-which stands to reason--heck, look at some of the stuff posted today on the internet today about somebody's favorite wildcat.

Everyone knew/knows the 280 was loaded light and there wasn't any real empirical guidance to load it to "where it could be" apart from a comparison to similarly constructed bullets with like SD in the 270. And that really didn't matter to guys claiming more wondrous results.

Nosler SAAMIing was a big service to 280 handloaders as it gives a guy real empirical data to work with. Factory cases are a bonus. Prior to that I could see detractors raising a fuss about it and defending the merits of their favorite competing cartridge in its stead ad nauseum--but today its just another cartridge with its fps in the book for everybody to see.

What it's going to show you is 50fps more than a standard 280 could have been if loaded to 270 pressures. The xtra capacity comes in handy with 160s using book COAL. That's about it and that enough for me for some applications.

Feed-wise, it takes a little more pressure to get a long extractor hook (if you still use one) over the rim--but that is true of any sharp shouldered case. Any more feed issues than that is on the mechanic...in a M-700 type there should never be an issue...

Lotsa 7-08 says 308 on the ass end....

The most difficult part of finding 7mm-08 brass is typing in your credit card info after Googling "Lake City 7.62 brass".

True that. And 280 can also be made from 30-06 or any other '06 based case. I guess I fail to see the hatred. But I digress and will leave each to his own.

I think the dislike stems from some 280 AI guys claiming how incredible their round is. Keeping up with the 7 mag, superior to the 270 or 30-06. Things like that. So it's a case of backlash, in a way. The reality is the 280 AI is just fine, but isn't anything special compared to a bunch of other rounds.

Savage 99's case is different, as he is an idiot.

I agree on both counts. Some fellas load the pizz outta it and declare its magic. It is what it is, and that's just a real good round for a do all utility rifle on a .473 LA receiver.

It's kinda like climbing Everest.....just because it's there. I think I may have to Ackley my .250 Savage....just because..

Got it. I like stuff that's different and I equally like stuff that's plain. I try to not to discriminate against any cartridge, although I'm definitely not a magnum guy. 257 Wthby.....Yes. Other magnum rounds I could not care less about. And I have and like to tinker with 223's and 223AI's. 250 Savage and 250AI. 257 Rbts and 257AI. 280 and 280AI. I love to spread the love.

And no argument here on savage99.

Maybe its just Don's charm...:)

Yeah, an enthusiastic endorsement always rubs ya once you already rung stuff out...conversely, so does an advantage minimized by entrenched advocates. The smallest differences are sometimes the most interesting to ferret out.

I am deeply thankful that most of my more grievous handloading sins were pre-internet.

Took me about 10 years to figure out Ken Waters got the numbers he got because he was a lot better at it than I would ever be...:)