I didn't bring it up...Legally I have to qoute the source, or both myself and the board can be liable for copyright infrigment if a reasonably large piece of an article is reposted and not at least quoted in that manner.

I have in fact been notified by an author in the past concerning just such an issue as it relates to these pages.

In reality, I would have prefered not to quote the source at all. The reason of course being that the name of theauthors really has nothing to do with the facts as they relate to the story.

Of course if you think the article is factually incorrect then that would be a legitimate complaint about the author as it pertains to the subject.

JC, I appreciate you quoting the source. Nothing wrong with that. I also appreciate what DM said regarding gun rag writers. I don't take every thing they say as gospel either.
================================================== =

DD,
Gasp, what a leap!

In some cases no. In other cases, absolutely.

Of course not.

The shot (accuracy), no. The result (getting the job done anyway), sometimes.
[Don't fly off to extremes, I don't advocate larger cartridges to allow for sloppy shooting, rather, I advocate them as they allow more of a safety net.]

Good shooting is always a good thing, on the other hand….
There is no God given guarantee that good shooting will always occur each time on the hunt. (except on the Internet)

It isone proud hunter who implies thatHIS bullets go absolutely to the mark every time AND that anyone on any given day that fails that standard is judged incompetent or “bad”.

In the field, "caca" sometimes happens and as the tracking joblooms, questions enter one's mind.The obvious questions beyond “how can I take that shot back?”are…. Whatkind of "coverage"did I allow myself for that kind of human error?.... What are myodds of acquiring that animal, given what I chose to carry into the woods today? IMHO, with a 270 on elk, the answer isone'scoverage is “not much.”

IMHO the 280 would be a step towards a safer margin vs. the 270…. (30-06 with heavy for caliber bullets, even better).

Good enough for me. Thanks for the responses!

You are welcome. Have a good one!

My God, stop the presses!!! How could I EVER been so foolish as to mis-name the 7mm Express Rem. as the 7mm Rem. Express!!!! My sincere apologies to all who may have suffered because of my fat-fingers!!!!
We all should know that the 7mm Express Rem. (a now defunct nomenclature for a current produced cartridge) and the nomenclature for the 7mm Rem. Express, ( a never-produced factory round ) are best left to the imagination. My sincere apologies, once again.

Hi Aimiable:

You can buy the Sako in 7x64 Brenneke, which the .280 duplicates. I believe the 7x64 Brenneke predates the .280 by fifty years. The Speer Manualsstate thereloading data is interchangeable. The 7x64 is one of the most popular rounds in Europe (no military cartridges available to the public, eg .30-06, .308, .223, 7x57 etc).

I purchased one about a year ago (Sako AV) and just found one in the fiberclass model that I would like to purchase. I have been using the 156 gr Oryx and it has become my go-to gun for coyotes. It is a great round for those yotes and probably goats as well.

CE

Aimiable

BTW, Huntington's has Norma 7x64 cases for $50/100, which is a steal. Also, I would not buy the Beretta/Sako model that requires a key to start. Look for a AV or Fiberclass, should go for $900/$1,100 respectively.

Good luck,
CE

I’m not 100% sure and you would have to check, but they do have the 280 Rem. listed in the Sako 75 Hunter as per link.... http://www.berettausa.com/product/pr...ifles_main.htm Unless this page hasn’t been updated for a long time...

Hi Trail:

Thanks for posting that link. I had been looking at this one:

http://www.sako.fi/

In any event, you still need to push in the clutch and turn the key toget those Beretta things to fire.

CE

No problem Colorado. Yeah, I’ve looked at both links before and find the Beretta page has more info...