Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters 7mm-08 vs. 284 Winchester

Curious as to real world 284 performance w/today's propellants.

Assuming using a short action, in 22-24" bbl, does the 284 offer '280' performance in an SA platform?

Figuring a 7/08 gets 120/3100, 140/2900, and 160/2750ish, what can a 284 handloader safely expect with like length bbl?

What about brass quality of say WW 708 brass vs. ??? 284 brass?

Bore life any big difference? Feeding?

I know a few hardcore 284 fans must have some info to chime in on their favorite. Open ears. OH, and JB, I think you mentioned a SAUM recently, if so maybe you want to speak about it vs. the 284...

Thanks.

Yes.
A quick check of a loading manual will tell the difference between a 284 and a 7-08, or a 7x57. Very little performance difference between the 284 and a 280.
I have a 284, a 7-08 and several 7x57's.

In the one 7-08 I owned 140/2900 would have been a pipe dream. With a 22" barrel it had to be pushed hard to get to 2800 and an accuracy load was below this. In spite of this it took a couple of caribou and some small mulies with 140 partitions with no problems.

Jim

I have had both. Now I have a 284 only. Much easier to meet the velocity I want with a variety of loading combinations, some of which are bound to be very accurate.

I dont have anything to add here, I was just wondering if someone could educate me about the 284.
If i understand correctly, the 7-08 comes from a 308 case, and the 280 comes from a 30-06 case, what about the 284?

The 284 is not based on any other cartridge, it was designed by Winchester from the ground up the match 280 ballistics in a short action, so that it would fit in their Model 88 lever and Model 100 autoloading rifles. To accomplish this, the case was made larger in diameter than the cartridge rim (called rebated rimless). It was the first American commercial cartridge to use this form. It could lay claim to be the first short, fat cartridge made in the US - far ahead of the WSM's. SAUM's, etc.

That help?

Flinch, not sure but the 284 is not based on the 308, or '06, or anything else I know of but I am not an expert on the 284. It was designed with a rebated rim, fatter and about the length of a 308 for short actions, designed with a capacity like a 280 according to Wiki in it's inception. I think the case was 'drawn from scratch' but may be wrong, intro'd in 1963 I believe.

Having heard some meaningful gains in performance with new powders like RL17, wondering what real world differences might be there, and received a PM on one gent's performance.

162 at 3070 w/23" tube IIRC. SO, if a 7/08 shooter wanted long distance, a nice gain would be had in the 284, still a short action, but a substantial gain over just doing a say AI version of the 7/08.

I appreciate the replies gang. I love the little 260 and have shot the 7/08s a good bit and like them also, but seeing how alot of long range guys stuff the high bc 162 Amax into the 7/08, figured the 284 might be a logical step up, while having better bore life then the WSM and SAUM, using less powder, blast, and perhaps recoil as well. No doubt in long actions a 280 and 7 RM loaded up do well for their intended use, but I do happen to prefer short actions when possible.

I learned also some hard core users neck up 6.5-284 Lapua brass, others claim WW is as accurate, but less brass life. Also, bore life is said to be much better than the 6.5 version, and offsets the higher cost of bullets. High BC/SD can be had for both, though stuffing long 7 bullets into a short action takes some consideration, i.e. mag box length, etc.

Anyway, I have a better understanding now of where the 284 fits and it's performance envelope. It's been jacked down to 6mm and 6.5mm, and I believe even 22 cal. Up to 338 and likely higher, but the 284 may have never hit it's true potential in terms of commercial success.

I do prefer a std size case like a 7/08 for 2 reasons, you can form brass from other readily found cases if need be, and I believe you can put one extra round in the magazine.

I think if one plans finding WW 284 brass is not much an issue. Smooth proper feeding and setting up a mag box for intended loads might be more critical issues...or concerns.

I can certainly see the place for the 284, even with the 7/08 and fairly popular 270 WSM for short action lovers if one wants to reach out a little farther at times.

Edit: John G, thanks, was typing when you posted

Thanks, it seems I learn something new here everyday.

I've been shooting the 284 for over 30 years and find that it generally gets between 100 and 150 more fps than the 7mm-08 with the same bullets. A larger gap with lighter bullets and a smaller gap with heavier bullets.

My 7mm RSAUM gets about 200 fps more velocity than my 284 with the 140 grain BT, both rifles are Remington 700s with 24" barrels, with the 284 using a rechambered 7mm-08 barrel. I also get about the same velocity with the 270 WSM and 140 grain BTs, but don't have a 7mm WSM to compare to.

My loading goals are to find loads that are the best balance of accuracy, velocity, and bullet penetration for a particular rifle/cartridge/bullet combination, so they are generally not loaded for maximum velocity or pressure.

FWIW, I much prefer the 25-284 and 6.5-284 to all other bore diameters that are possible with the 284 case. In this day of premium bullets, there is little that a 140 grain .284" bore bullet will do that a comperable 130 grain .264" or 120 grain .257" bore bullet won't do equally well, assuming that the shooter does his/her part. I am, of course, talking about loading for hunting, not loading for competative target shooting.

Jeff

Flinch, I have learned alot, forgotten alot, and want to learn more, keeps it fun. ALOT of knowledge on this board, if you can't find it here, well....may not.

Jeff, we have the same goals! Getting there w/no more recoil/blast, etc. than necessary is nice, as well as trying to manage expense of it all

I was looking out of curiosity as much as anything, but esp. if someone's application was a long range arm in a Short Action, and wanting to use the 162-180 high bc bullets.

I don't shoot formal competition, but do listen/learn alot from those who do, and apply their knowledge whether its loads, etc.

Thanks much, appreciate the feedback. Sounds like the 270 WSM may have largely filled that niche for hunters at least. My brother has a Montana mfg. 270 WSM that shoots awful well with factory loads tested at 200 yds, but it is a tad heavy. He has done well using it on deer.

Still wondering when Winchester would do the 270-08 and load 140 Accubombs Might sit real well 'tween' the 260 and 7mm-08!

I can say before the ABs, I sure preferred the looks of the yellow tipped bullets (150 BT in 270 WCF was my 'go to bullet') to the red and brown ones, and the blue ones sure look cool. A 250-3000 someday.... I don't often need to shoot far around here on deer/hogs anyways.

Jeff, just wondering, ever try RL17 in your 284? I might have thought the speed diff would have been inverse what you seen, i.e. More powder, higher spread using heavy bullets?

O.K.
So this discussion has brought up a point that has been bouncing around my gray matter for awhile. The 6.5 and .25 calibers kill better than their balistics can account for. This is the reason we like them. Now taking in the Taylor knockdown factor as good and valid, it does place more emphasis on caliber and weight over velocity. With the composition of the newer bullets being so tough we can increase average veolocities without blowing them up so easily.

I wonder if anyone has looked to see what the combination of velocity, bullet weight, AND sectional density has on penetration. Jeff's last comment brings this up. What can a 140 gr .284 do that a 130 gr .264 or 120 gr. .257 cannot. Velocity seems to be the key for the lighter bullets, assuming bullet composition is good AND sectional density is atleast_____?. SD should increase for the increase in the biomass of the target ie. it takes more penetration for a moose vs a proghorn or deer. As velocity drops bullet weight needs to increase to keep penetration up. Something to consider when we argue the virtues of this cartridge, over that, and so on. If a given cartridge of a given caliber, and sectional density, can acheive the target velocity per species then it works. If we limit any of these factors we risk failure and lost game.

What are your thoughts on this?

I have been shooting the 284 since 1965, I believe. More recently I have also loaded and hunted with a 30-284. I describe the 30-284 as a hot 30-06.

The only long shot I ever made on game was with the 284 shooting Sierra's 140 at 2950 through a 20" pipe on a Browning Micro Medalion. Measured 437 yds. Nice whitetail buck through both front shoulders. Nasty exit wound.

It was loaded with 50g of IMR 4064. I had loaded it with 51g but had cratering flat primers with very short case life. DO NOT BEGIN LOADS WITH THIS MUCH POWDER. Follow reloading manual instructions.

I have since learned that this case likes H4350 best for accuracy but gets the highest velocity from Re17. For me, H4350 is the very best powder for this case.
Love the 284.

Jim

I haven't done anything with the 284 for several years, but IIRC the load that shot the best groups with 140 grain BTs in my Remington 700 was 48.0 grains of H4895. I don't have access to all of my reloading data, it is on a different PC, but I don't recall using any RL-17.

Jeff

Jim in Ontario, I had TWO 700s chopped to 21", BOTH rifles shot 2900-2950 with Varget and IMR4064. IIRC, my load was about one grain over book max, in partial sized RP brass, and Safe in MY rifle. One could back that load down a gr. or 2 and never see much if any difference in the field IMHO with the 7/08.

Rug3, had one in 7/08 very handy rifle and accurate, almost too pretty to hunt.

Jeff, thanks for the f/up.

Hard for me to believe a 30-284 can get more velocity than an 06 when case capacities are almost the same.Fact is unless you have the 30-284 in a long action it aint gonna happen.My opinion Huntz

Back in the late 1980s, I had a 30-284 built on a rechambered Remington 722 in 300 Savage. This rifle had a 24" barrel and did its best work with bullets in the 130 to 165 grain range. It was an OK performer, but nothing to get too excited about, so I pulled the barrel and converted it to 25-284, via a rechambered 257 Roberts barrel.

The problem, if it is a problem, with the 284 in a short action is the OAL issues with longer/heavier bullets. In general, the lighter/shorter for diameter bullets seem to fit the action better. I've never owned a long action 284 or 284 based wildcat, so I can't speak to the merits of a longer action, but have owned several short action Remingtons and 2 Savage 99s.

Jeff

Huntz,

You are probably correct it your estimation. This 30-284 is a Ruger #3, Douglas 24 inch, and throated so that the bullets could be out there. It was throated specifically for Barns 165. L o n g.

My description was it is like a hot 30-06. There are some guys who have posted loads for the '06 at velocities that I couldn't reach safely. This particular 30-284 likes them hot. Compressed H4350 loads. I find the max loads in most manuals for 30-06 are good working loads for it and I can safely go a few more grains before I get pressure signs. Got a little more velocity over my chronograph then the books show for max 30-06.

I found it to do best when loaded to the max.

Good observation.

Thanks

Jim

Jim

The 284 does duplicate 280 performance in a short action. While the 7-08 is a great cartridge, all things being equal it will be 100-200 fps behind the 284 because of case capacity (there can be an inherent difference in vel in rifles similarly chambered;i.e., a "fast" 7-08 may come within a 100 fps of a "slow" 284) . You expect you might be hard pressed to get a 7-08 to hit 2900 fps with a 140-gr without standing on it. On the other hand, my 284 will hit 3100 fps with R17 and a TTSX 140-gr at full stride but without "standing on it."

I've never noticed a meaningful lack of quality in 284 brass. If you're not a handloader I would definitely stay with the 7-08

I've done alot of shooting with the 284, the 7mm-08 and the 7x57. By a fair margine the 284 wins, but really with the heavy weight bullets. The fact is, the light weight is the 154 grain. Those, 162's and the 168 grain MK shine in the 284. My go to powder is H4831sc.

My philosophy is not to use the greater case capacity to push a lighter bullet faster. I get my trajectory advantage by shooting a heavier bullet with a higher B.C. That also gives me an advantage in the wind, and an advantage in terminal ballistics.

It should be noted that both my 284's do not follow standard patterns. One is built on a M70 coyote action and ignors the magazine. The other is built on a M700 long action. In both cases the throating is optimized for long bullets. This load would not fit in a short magazine. In the case of the M70 it is throated so the bottom of the boat tail on a sierra 168gr MK is flush with the bottom of the case neck and touching the lead. Same with the M700 except I used a Hornady sst as the referance.

Fyshbum, a good question. Re: SD, bullet construction is not something that has a 'number' attached to it, i.e. a Barnes monometal bullet is not apples to apples with a cup/core bullet SO comparing SDs is not an 'absolute' indicator if you will on penetration.

I would LOVE to see bullet companies use a standardized ballistic media, and show wound channel and penetration studies at varying speeds, but the tests would take money, and time, and I am not sure all companies would want to participate. In my mind, there may be a correlation in the higher the penetration, the smaller the wound channel (width), as less frontal expansion can enhance penetration, of course weight retention does help also.

No doubt, regardless of what bullet hits game, PENETRATING vital organs and destroying those will accomplish a clean kill, yet if you lack enough penetration, a bad non lethal wound might occur, or likely a mortally wounded shot animal is not recovered as it gets a long run in before expiring.

Crosshair, no doubt, once you get on out a bit, 300-400+ yds, a higher bc heavier slug will usually overtake lighter slugs in speed/energy and maintain that momentum further out.

Can you tell us any chrono speeds for your 284 w/162 and 168s?

Thanks.