Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters 7x57 vs 280

I asked this elsewhere, but don't want to hijack the thread and it may get more traffic here .........


Everything else being equal, what is the velocity differential between the 280 and 7x57 using reasonable maximum loads in a modern action?

7x57 just because it says 7x57.DK

I have two 7x57 loads that both test near 55 KPSI, and which both put a 160/162 grain bullet at a trifle under 2750 FPS.

Maybe someone can chime in with an equivalent 280 load, so you can get a basis for comparison.

I would not expect much difference at equal peak pressures. The 7x57 is about perfectly balanced, case size vs. bore. The 280 should beat it by a bit, but not much.

EDIT: Also found a 7x57 test that I did on 150 grain bullets. Those were right around 50 KPSI and 2800 FPS. Both the 7x57 and 280 are capable of somewhat higher pressures than this.

as a benchmark, according to the Remington website for same bullet factory load.

280 figures are listed above the 7x57.

Cartridge Type Bullet Muzzle 100 200 300 400 500
Remington� Express� 140 PSP CL 3000 2758 2528 2309 2102 1905
Remington� Express� 140 PSP CL 2660 2435 2221 2018 1827 1648


Energy (ft-lbs)
Cartridge Type Bullet Muzzle 100 200 300 400 500
Remington� Express� 140 PSP CL 2797 2363 1986 1657 1373 1128
Remington� Express� 140 PSP CL 2199 1843 1533 1266 1037 844


Short-Range Trajectory
Cartridge Type Bullet 50 100 150 200 250 300
Remington� Express� 140 PSP CL 0.1 0.6 zero -1.9 -5.1 -9.8
Remington� Express� 140 PSP CL 0.0 zero -1.4 -4.4 -9.1 -15.8


Long-Range Trajectory
Cartridge Type Bullet 100 150 200 250 300 400 500
Remington� Express� 140 PSP CL 1.5 1.4 zero -2.8 -7.0 -20.5 -42.0
Remington� Express� 140 PSP CL 2.2 1.9 zero -3.6 -9.2 -27.4 -55.3

This help at all?

.280 holds about 10 gr more powder whiich I would say equates to 140-150 fps.

Lou

Factory specifications for a 7mm MAuser are worthless comparisons to the handloader who is the only person to realize the potentioal of this case size. A modern rifle in good condition being the only rider.

AGW

AGW- duh!!! Of course you are right on the money. I am an idiot who needs sleep. Apologies. Still- kind of surprised the differences aren't even greater.

Well, I run a .280 with 139s/140s at 3100-3150. With slower powders the on paper data suggest thats possible at 65Kpsi.

My dad used to run a Ruger 77 in 7x57 in a 22" bbl with 140s just at or under 3000fps. Shot it for years with great results.

Id say on paper the difference is about 200fps...in the field, no practical difference.

I would have to say tha as a hunting rifle, either will do about the same. As I pointed out on another thread , I have never been able to a .280 to shoot unless i loaded down quite abit.
But I have owned 3 7X57s and they work great for me.
I know my .280 experence is a fluke but I have had about 3 or 4 280d and a 280 AI and none of them worked for me...tj3006

My guesstimate is in a 22" barrel they are pretty much one in the same. In a longer tube the extra case capacity of the 280 allows more of the slow burning stuff. Both great cartridges imo.

Can run 280/160's at 3,000 fps when taken to AI pressure level.
That's 300 fps faster than the 57.

Also why would I want a 7x57 when the 708 is available in more rifles?

And yes I read the long thread about the 7x57 and also read back in the mid 70's a Rifle magazine article about how to hot rod the round.

I have no reason to buy or build one.

I can load down the 280 if I want milder recoil.

I remain unimpressed.

Sing it Bob. Hope you had a good Christmas. Steve

Maybe the best way to really determine the difference in velocity potential between two cartridges is to perform tests including multiple rifles and loads loaded to the same pressure as determined by the latest test equipment. Since I don't have access to such resources, I would tend to use an approximation.

Experienced folks have stated many times, both here on the campfire and in print, that the velocity increase of a somewhat larger cartridge is approximately one-fourth of the case capacity increase. So, if the 280 case has about 10% more capacity than the 7x57, then by the rule stated above it will shoot about 2.5% faster than the 7x57. So, then, if we have a 7x57 load that shoots a bullet 2700 fps, according to the rule the 280 will shoot the same bullet 2768 fps with the same pressure. The real difference may be a little more or a little less, but that's not really important to me. To say the difference is "about 100 fps" is close enough for me. Incidentally, that's about the same difference between the 308 and 30-06.

-

Around 100 to 150 fps difference.

Can you can get a 7x57 160 loaded 2,850 to 2,900 fps?

Anybody?

I've loaded the 175 in the 280 using 58 grains of 7828 for
2,800 fps.

What can 7x57 users get?

Another 10K of psi and you should get be able to get 2,850.

What are you 7x57 owners using for actions? Long or short?

If not short then I don't see the need.

SAAMI for the 7x57 is 51Kpsi. Pitiful. But, a handloader and a modern rifle can run it at modern pressures up to 58-60K psi safely . At that, in the long action, the 7x57 isn't a .280...assuming the .280 is loaded to it's potential like the .270...the difference being case capacity.

One should look at my screen name when I say this to understand the gravity of it: "The 7x57 has it all over every 7mm in terms of nostalgia, long standing game experience, and cool factor." Short action be damned...the 7x57 is cool.

Depends on how much pressure you are willing to run. Back of the napkin calculations say that those velocities are attainable in the 7x57, if you're willing to run pressures in the low to mid 60Ks. I'm not.

Alliant does list 2750 and 2800 FPS 280 loads at 58 KPSI for the 280 with 160 grain bullets. On average, that's a bit better than my 2750 FPS 55KPSI 7x57 load. My load is actually 2747 FPS, and that puts the difference at 53 FPS. IRL, the difference may even be a bit more than that.

The 7mm and 270 bores are not well matched to 30-06 size cases. When the bullet exits the muzzle, the pressure in the barrel is still high, and more of the energy stored in the compressed gas is wasted into the atmosphere. So the efficiency of such cartridges is lower. A 270 bullet in a 308 case will almost match the MV of a 270...the difference is much less than 308 vs 30-06, and that's why.

None of this matters much. The 280, 270, and 7x57 are all very fine cartridges. Minor differences in efficiency are mostly academic.

Why would I prefer a 7x57 over a 7mm-08? Good question. The 7mm-08 is also a fine cartridge, and commercial ammo is plentiful. I have a 7x57 because that's the barrel I got a good deal on. And it's more cool. If I had gotten the same deal on a 7mm-08 or 280 barrel, I'd probably be shooting that and liking it as much.

I've loaded for both and have owned several 280's, 3-4 7x57, but have only worked with 140's in each because there was no requirement for a 160 for my hunting.All these rifles had 22" barrels and ran the gamut from Remington Mountain rifles to full blown customs.

Bottom line was 2800-2850 from the 7x57;3000-3100 with 140's from the 280 Rem.Back then,only RL22 gave the velocities I liked with great accuracy from the 280.I have not messed with either cartridge in over a decade because they do nothing that can't be done with a 270.

Back in the 80's there were a few gungacks running around getting over 3000 from 140's in the 7x57 using Norma 205. I would not want a steady diet of those loads, even today.This is the same old story of the smaller case coming close to the larger case with light bullets, but the spread increases when bullet weight goes up.

I would say the chances of safely hitting 2900 with a 160 in the 7x57 are grim from sporter barrels.Only one load in the new Nosler manual hits that from the 280 Rem.

Much as I admire it,and setting "cool" factor aside,the 7x57 cannot deliver the velocities of a 280 because it holds less powder.If you desire 2900 from a 160 gr bullet, get the 280; even then, you'll be lucky to get it from 22" barrels at safe pressures IMO.