Mystro said:
There are too many variables when throwing hand loads into the mix. How can hand loads be objectively proved?
They can't and neither can the loads you post all the time from Hornady. Hornady's speeds came out of their test barrels, not shot from actual rifles. There is no indicator as to how accurate those loads were either, what is Hornady's acceptable accuracy standard? Plus there is no telling how accurately your personal rifle will digest those loads.
Your just looking at paper ballistics put out by a manufacturer, which might be totally different from the real world ballistics from your rifle. They only way is for each shooter to get an objective opinion of any load is to shoot it through their own rifle. You might find what Hornady puts on paper might be far different from what you get in real conditions.
Plus without shooting any of these loads across a chronograph you'll never really know how they are performing. That is the only way for me to actually prove that my ammunition I load is doing what I say it does. That way I know that my loads are close to the published reloading data I use.
You should really take what the manufacturer published data with a grain of salt. Even if you shoot factory loads if you really want to know what they are doing spend a little money on a chronograph and tripod. Go to the range and shoot a 10 shot string across the chrony and then you'll actually have an idea of what the cartridge is doing.
JD0x0 said:
I believe this pressure was for the early made .280rem's with weaker chambers, and it's plausible to safely load .280rem up to 65,000psi like the other 06' based cartridges, even though the SAAMI max for the .30-06 is listed at 60,200psi. I believe newer actions can safely be loaded to 65,000PSI as well.
You are correct to a point the .280 Rem was introduced in a Remington auto loader and pump rifles first. They really don't have weaker lock up or "chambers" as these rifles were already chambered in .270 Win. There isn't enough difference the two cartridges to allow one to operate at 65,000 psi and not blow up and to force the other to operate at 60,000 for fear of damaging the action. What I'd imagine was really the problem is if Remington loaded to 65,000 psi like the .270, the 7mm Rem Mag sales might have been hurt.
At 65K psi the .280 would be nipping on the heels of the 7mm RM and possibly beating it with certain weight bullets. Remington already had a successful thing going with the Rem Mag, but they had downloaded the cartridge to where it only slightly out performed the .270. This was probably done to make the recoil from such a small bullet more tolerable IMO.
There is no real difference between the .270 and .280 except on paper. In modern bolt action rifles they are ballistic twins when loaded with equal weight bullets at equal pressures. Both are great cartridges in their own right.