8mm Remington Magnum

L

ligonierbill

New member
OK, I didn't have one. In fact, I didn't have any "magnum length" cartridges. And this one has always intrigued me. Craig Boddington likes it (Elmer didn't), and I found an old TFL thread with some love/hate views. Anyway, I bought a Remington 700 BDL circa 1986 in this round.

I like old and forgotten cartridges, so I was not too surprised to find brass is pricey. OK. Dies are readily available, and though the selection is smaller than 308 or 338, bullets are also. Stuff is on the way: Sierra's 220 GameKing, Barnes' 200 TSX, and 20 rounds of Nosler ammo loaded with their 200 Accubond. I will be interested to see how the commercial ammo does, as all that I've read indicates it under performs. But the real test for me will be how my loads compare to my 338 Win Mag. Accubond 225s go 2,800, and TTSX 210s go 2,860 from my Savage 116. Published data indicates I should be able to beat those numbers substantially.

No, I'm not thinking of replacing the 338. Although Woodleigh makes a 8mm 250, it's kind of ungainly, unlike the sleek GameKings I favor in the bigger bore. And Swift does not make a 275 grain A-frame in 8mm. The two calibers to me are more different than some writers seem to think.

In any case, I will give this a try. Not that I need to invite opinions from this crowd, but of course all views are welcome.
 
Since my 1st hunting rifle was the old 8x57, I have been a fan of anything 8mm.

I have shot the Cutting Edge 225 gr MTH for a while. CE offers 2 high BC bullets but they are mostly single feed due to their length.

G1 BCs are listed as .640 and .750 which should do well for long range shooting/hunting.

I have never hunted with them, just shot to a 300 yd target. No 1000 yd ranges within reasonable distances around here.

I load them with H1000 to 2800fps +/-
 
I owned a Remington Custom Shop 700 in 8mm Rem Mag for a few years. I launched the Hornady 220 gr at right under 3,100 fps using H450 (which is very similar to Reloader 19). It shot as flat as a string and kicked harder than anything else I had shot up to that point in my life. The fireball out of the muzzle was spectacular. It really was a stomper, fire 5 or 6 rounds in a row and it would make me dizzy. I tell people that firing it was like having your head slammed in a car door.

Keepin mind that many of the 8mm bullets available these days are for lower velocity cartridges, but maybe the Barnes or Cutting Edge would be a good bet.
 
I don't expect to go quite that fast, but Sierra tested in a 24" 700 just like the one heading my way. They ran up 3,000 fps with several powders, but their "hunting load" is 2,950 using IMR-7828. I don't have anything on hand slower than Re-22. They tested that to 3,000 also, but checking their loads on QuickLoad Re-22 is estimated to push the spec MAP. So I ordered a can of 7828. Won't hurt to have a really slow powder around, and at more than 80 grains a shot, I'll use it up. Barnes loads their 200 TSX to about 3,050.

We will see how the recoil compares to the other medium bores I shoot. I do like the BDL stock. I was banging away with my 7 Mag yesterday, checking some 175 loads off the bench. They go just under 2,900. So, another 50 fps and 45 grains, shouldn't be too bad. (Famous last words.) I'll post my experience in a few weeks.
 
You'll be disappointed in the performance next the the 338WM. The recoil velocity is the culprit and it is fierce. For the expense of 3" brass, I'd have it re barreled to 375. Then, the bite will match the bark.
 
I have a 700 BDL in 8mm Rem mag. Never shot it. I bought it just because the 100% rifle was offered to me for half the price of the Leupold scope on it. Its too pretty to shoot.
 
There are simply very few, if any good 8mm bullets. That is what doomed both the 8mm Magnum and the 325 WSM. Not that it won't kill stuff and for someone who likes oddball cartridges it certainly fills the role. It uses about the same amount of powder to shoot the same bullet weights to the same speeds as 300 Weatherby magnum. For virtually the same recoil and the same energy numbers. At least at the muzzle.

The difference is much better aerodynamics of the 30's. At only 100 yards a 200 gr 300 Weatherby is leaving a 200 gr 8mm mag in the dust. No animal will ever notice .015" of bullet diameter. That is less than your fingernail.
 
Probably the biggest reason Elmer Keith didn't like the round is because Remington really didn't put a lot of thought into it.

They hamstringed its performance with bullets that were too light and a few other seriously suspect moves, and it just didn't fill a niche.

To quote Elmer Keith at the writer's meeting where Remington announced it...

"What the hell good is it?"
 
I promised a report, so here it is. I picked up the 700 yesterday. Bore looked good, function fine, didn't even run a patch through it. So, off to the range.

First up, I ran 5 Nosler Custom commercial loads, 200 Accubonds advertised at 3,000. These are "loaded for Midway". LabRadar says 3,070 avg/14.6 std. Looks like this is a "fast" rifle. I had just bore sighted the scope, so I expended my 5 getting on target. How about the recoil? A recoil calculator says it hits back about 20-30% more than a 338, but it didn't feel like it. Shooting off the bench, there is a pretty good push, and the muzzle comes up, but I didn't get the "loosen your fillings" shock I get from my Savage 116 338. I think it's the shape of the stock. Really need to shoot them side-by-side.

Now my loads, all IMR-7828 SSC. Barnes 200 TSX went 3,044/5.0. The 220 SGK were definitely running faster than Sierra's testing. I was already at 3,000 a grain under their 2,950 "hunting" load, so I quit. The "SSC" powder is supposed to be the same as the original 7828 (now discontinued) that Sierra used, but that's why we work up. And as I found with the commercial ammo, this is a fast rifle. I settled on 2,973/6.1 as my go to.

I did not shoot for group, but I really need to take the gun apart, check for barrel contact, etc. I know the 7 Mag 700 I inherited from Dad benefited greatly from a little sanding.

I don't want to get into comparisons, but I will say this rifle compares very well with my 338 for 220 and lighter bullets. And I'm anxious to try some 8mm Woodleigh 250s. Of course, the 8 can't shoot 275 Swifts, which the 338 does very well, and I'm anxious to try some 338 Woodleigh 300s in that one. Bottom line, they're different guns with different strengths.
 
Well, if you copied Sierra's load down to the case and primer, it sounds like your barrel is faster than the 700 BDL barrel Sierra developed the load in. How it would compare to a SAAMI pressure and velocity barrel, we can't tell from Sierra's data. I am curious. Have you measured the water overflow capacity of your as-fired cases? 300 Win Mag cases have a pretty wide range of sizes, from about 87.5 grains of water capacity (Tulammo and Remington) to 95.5 grains of water capacity (Norma), so I am wondering if there might be a similar situation with 8 RM? It looks like a case with about 2.5 grains less water overflow capacity than the one Sierra used would just about account for it.
 
Filled a fired case with water, and it's 101.2 grains. The standard per QuickLoad, is 98, and 97 exactly matches my velocity. I used Nosler cases and CCI 250. Sierra used Remington 9 1/2M and Remington cases, but I doubt that would make that much difference. I will say that this rifle has some dings on the stock and a few rub marks on the barrel, but I pulled it out of the stock and found the underside pristine. I don't think it was out of the safe that much or fired often. Just tight, which is fine by me.
 
Last edited:
Mike Irwin said:
Probably the biggest reason Elmer Keith didn't like the round is because Remington really didn't put a lot of thought into it.

They hamstringed its performance with bullets that were too light and a few other seriously suspect moves, and it just didn't fill a niche.

To quote Elmer Keith at the writer's meeting where Remington announced it...

"What the hell good is it?"
Click to expand...
Seems like Elmer also had a problem with the lack of taper on the case as well.
 
He'd be wrong on that; it feeds real smooth. Remember Elmer considered 33 the minimum bore for elk. I think he would have liked a magnum length 338. In fact, he (and others) invented one, the 334 OKH. Unlike the original 333 OKH based on a 30-06 case, that one was a full length 375 H&H like the 8 Mag. In his view, why would you shrink it to 323! But Elmer wasn't always right. I like my big 8.
 
Sounds like you scoped out the case volume issue and have correctly concluded you have a fast barrel. Otherwise, there is no way you would get to your velocity numbers with that much extra volume.

If you switch to hBN-coated bullets or treat the bore with Sprinco Plate+ Silver, you can reduce velocity a little by reducing friction. But if you have no pressure signs, that is more an option than a requirement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top