Rebarreling a rifle and loading Long vs. set back

Long winded, so please bear withme. I’ve tired researching some of theissues I’m raising and was unsuccessful in finding an answer so I’m hoping thatthe community can point me in the right direction with either an answer ortowards published material that I could get ahold of for future reference.

I have a Remington 700 BDL in30-06 that I plan to rebarrel to a more manageable caliber due to injuries andnerve damage that I sustained in the military.

Main use for this rifle would behunting – pigs, deer, and hopefully up to Elk sized game as opportunity knocks- with some informal target shooting from time to time with friends, so withhunting in mind I’m thinking about a 7mm caliber but am not married to theidea. I am also looking to keep the woodstock that came with the gun and have the barrel channeled out as I want thenew barrel to be a heavy varmint profile as I do not like sporter profilebarrels. I only bought this rifle in thefirst place because I got a smoking deal for it years ago at Walmart in thewake of the Remington trigger fiasco and they were selling off their stock dirtcheap. I’ve read some older posts andgood things about Pac-Nor rebarreling and blue printing actions and was thinkingabout a Remington barrel nut package so that it would be easier to change outbarrels. I want to keep the wood stock purelyfor aesthetics and sentiment as it takes me back to my youth growing up withvarious wood stocked rifles. Corny, I know.

Calibers for consideration are6.5x55 Swede and 7x57 Mauser and their ballistic twins the 260 Remington andthe 7mm-08 Remington. I will reload sofactory ammo loads and restrictions as relates to the watered down ammointended to be shot in century old rifles will not be an issue here.

I really like what I’ve readabout the 6.5x55 Swede and 7x57 Mauser and their effectiveness on game but Icannot find any published data on updated, or modern loads if you prefer, foruse in a modern manufactured action that can bring these two grand oldcartridges into the modern era and breathe new life into them. I’m not looking to load either to anywhereclose to magnum levels, I just want to get ‘a little more’ velocity to increaserange and effectiveness on game as it relates to the velocity at range requiredto have a bullet reliably expand for damage and penetration. Basically, the lack of any modern load datais the limiting factor for me concerning these two cartridges.

As for the 260 Remington and the7mm-08 Remington, although they have published reloading data for modernactions, my only reservations are what I’ve read about bullet setback when itcomes to 140gr bullets in the 260 Remington and 140gr and above bullets for the7mm-08 Remington and the corresponding reduction in case capacity due to therestriction of being used in a short action. It seems to me that this setup actually reduces the effectiveness ofthese cartridges with the use of heavier bullets by limiting any untappedpotential in velocity and energy that might otherwise be obtained if theseheavier bullets were to be set forward into the case to make use of theresulting case capacity. So what if somejackass, like me, decided to use a long action and to have a barrel chamberedto either a 260 Remington with a 140gr bullet set forward or a 7mm-08 with a 150to 165gr bullets set forward? I’m surethat a specialized reamer will have to be created for this, or does anyone knowif there is currently one already in existence? Has anyone out there already tried this already? If so, what were the results and who did thework?

If I had my choice I’d prefer eitherthe 6.5x55 Swede or 7x57 Mauser with updated load information as that wouldinvolve less smith work and has the better aesthetic cool factor, especiallywhen combined with a wood stocked hunting rifle. Second choice would obviously be either the260 or 7mm-08 Remingtons with the modern loadings and ‘full length’ cartridgesfor the heavier bullets, but at a cost of additional equipment (reamers) tochamber the barrels.

In short, does anyone out therehave any knowledge and or access to material regarding:

1 – safe, modern reloading datato improve the performance of the 6.5x55 Swede and 7x57 Mauser;

2 – knowledge of anyone who havehad chambers reamed for the 260 Remington and or the 7mm-08 Remington forlonger bullets that are not set back into the cartridge – effectively lengtheningthe cartridge and making it longer than what would fit in a short action andthus necessitating the use of a long action;

3 – knowledge of theeffectiveness of lengthening the 260 and or the 7mm-08 and if it improved theballistics of these cartridges;

4 – know if such a reamer in 260Remington or 7mm-08 already exists and where to get one as I’m sure I wouldneed to provide a barrel manufacturer with one to produce what I needed, orknow of a barrel maker that already has such a setup and produces said barrels;

5 – suggestions on who to chooseto do the gunsmith work if I chose to the course of action to go with a ‘modified’or lengthened 260 Remington or 7mm-08 Remington.

Any help that can be given,either in free knowledge or being pointed in the right direction for readingmaterial would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
Steve

Depending on how "long" you want to go you can have a chamber reamed to fit those longer projectiles and most reputable smiths can turn out what you want. I launch 175s out of a 7mm-08 without compromising case capacity. Work up loads starting with conservative powder charges!

Rusty,

Thanks for the quick reply.

Question: You are able to reload 175gr bullets in the 7mm-08 with no set back? I'm assuming that your are also using a short action as well.

I must have read an inaccurate post as I an certain I read that with either caliber 140gr bullets would 'start' the process of bullet setback to be able to still fit and feed into a short action. Forgive my ignorance - as although I've reloaded pistols for almost 20 years I am just starting to reload for rifles - but as bullets get 'heavier' in a caliber they tend to get longer, so .... at least for the 7mm-08 the 175gr does not setback into the case? What about the heaviest 7mm bullet, the 180gr.

If this is the case then there is no sense in considering the 7mm-08 in the Remington 700 long action then as if I decide on that cartridge in the future it would be easier to just buy one in a short action already set up - or rebarrel one of my short actions.

This would be so much easier if I could get my hands on load data specifically for modern actions for the 6.5x55 or the 7x57. :confused:

I'm using a long action that actually has a reused factory barrel. The throat was very long from the factory. Actually what prompted me to go up in bullet weight was getting my projectile close to the lands. Your rifle is a long action? I would think in 30-06 it is. Short action would likely run out of magazine length.

It really is dependent upon how long the throat is to what you can accomplish regarding seating depth.

It sounds like you are worried about lost case volume due to the longer heavy projectiles? If you have an idea on what you want to accomplish it can be done. I only chose heavies as a way to get within .020 of the lands. My Remington 06' also has a ridicously long throat. Not sure why remmy has such long throats in many of their lineup.

Don't go with the European military cartridges. Yeah, they're perfect. But, when you look for cartridge cases, good luck. And 6.5 Swede has a larger than normal head diameter, which requires modification to the bolt, and there's no fireforming from available brass. I know you can use 6mm Rem, but availability is still an issue. It works, but it's not optimal. Now, between .260 and 7-08, I totally agree with the plan to use a long action. When it really counts, you're going to single-load anyway, such as target shooting and hunting. When did you ever get off a second shot hunting that absolutely had to be [U]right now[U], such that you could not single-load the followup shot? It's pretty uncommon. Also, you really don't gain much velocity or killing power at longer range by loading the bullet way out in the case. What you might gain is the ability to move the ogive closer to the lands. I agree that can be an issue. Just ask about the reamer's freebore when you get the rifle. I just like the ability to load those .308-based cases as long as possible, and run them out of the long action. I use a minimum shank seating depth of 0.15", just to make sure there's good contact. If I can't twist the bullet loose from the neck with my fingers, I figure it'll stay together in the magazine. I second the motion on being curious about why Remington chambers their throats so long. I can't hardly get to the lands. There is a popular reamer in .260, called the Match Reamer, and it is just right for throating, from what I understand. The 7-08 may not have the same issue. I would want both of those calibers to have a 1:8 twist barrel, so I could load the heavies when I want. Both the .260 and the 7-08 can easily be formed from available cheap high-quality Lake City or Federal surplus military cases. The old Federal cases have the most case capacity. They are both excellent, even for F-class shooting. I would not hesitate to recommend the 7-08 as my first choice, since you have the option of light bullets, or moose-heavy bullets. Can't go wrong with .260, but hunting power is a bit less, in comparison. 260 AI increases the power, and you can always run that reamer through to upgrade, if you start out with straight .260. There's also a 7-08 AI reamer. I use two steps when sizing .308 to .260: First, going to 7-08, then to .260. Sometimes I also turn the case necks, but I have not actually found case neck wall thickness to be an issue when doing this. You know your case neck is too thick when a bullet will not drop freely through the neck of a fired round.