Calguns.net

Calguns.net (https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/index.php)
-   Centerfire Rifles - Manually Operated (https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/forumdisplay.php?f=327)
-   -   .280 or .270: close decision (https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=889746)

advocatusdiaboli 02-05-2014 3:54 PM

.280 or .270: close decision
 
I am trying to purchase one near-all around hunting bolt-action rifle for deer through antelope to elk and I am in a quandary.

I hope to draw on people's experience and opinions but my intent is not to create controversy: demand has already favored the 270 by far though much of that is unfortunate timing and marketing. So let's just talk about personal choices and rationales and stay away from editorial pontification and proscription for others please. I am just interested in who chose which and why and how they reflect on it.

The 270 is much more widespread and so ammunition is cheaper and more plentiful and there is more competition in rifles, but 280 offers a wider range of bullet weights which is attractive for hand loading and tuning to a rifle (which I'll do in either case anyway). They are nearly identical ballistically so it's a really close call and it's a difficult decision.

TMB 1 02-05-2014 4:05 PM

I have a Ruger M77 280 Rem and really like it. Another option is 7x64 Brenneke if you can find a rifle in it and ammo for it is cheaper than 280 Rem too. They are ballistic twins.

LynnJr 02-05-2014 4:05 PM

With the 280 you can buy a freight train load of custom target bullets.
With a 270 the only target bullet is a Sierra MatchKing.
Simple answer get the 280.

sprig 02-05-2014 4:11 PM

7mm-08, all the .280 benefits and less kick.:willy_nilly:

advocatusdiaboli 02-05-2014 4:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sprig (Post 13371391)
7mm-08, all the .280 benefits and less kick.:willy_nilly:

The .284/7mm-08 was the runner-up. I just don't know enough about it and too few seem to shoot it. It was brought out to rival the .270 but in a short-action and that meant minor trade-offs. Still, those that do love it because the short action save weight when lugging a rifle around all day. It seems with a 200-yard zero, it is only .4" lower than a .270 at 300 yards and 1.1" less than a .308. so it's differences are in the noise margins in competition for an all-around hunting rifle. My question is rifle selection though bullet selection seems more than adequate.

toby 02-05-2014 4:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LynnJr (Post 13371356)
With the 280 you can buy a freight train load of custom target bullets.
With a 270 the only target bullet is a Sierra MatchKing.
Simple answer get the 280.

He wants a HUNTING rifle not a target queen.:D

OP the 280 is a great round. The 270 a great round. Ballisticly the 280 is heads above the 270 at extended distances when in reality that really means squat in a hunting rifle unless your a long range shooter, beyond 500yrds. Get the 270 you can get 160, 175 grain bullets if you want but they are a hand loading affair. 140-150 grain bullets are all you need I use 130's for everything. Once you find a good shooting bullet who cares how many choices are available, it will only take one to three different ones to find the one that works for your needs. Look at these if you need something different. http://matrixballistics.com/.277-Cal...e-bullets.html
Also check out www.longrangehunting.com

advocatusdiaboli 02-05-2014 5:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by toby (Post 13371670)
He wants a HUNTING rifle not a target queen.:D

OP the 280 is a great round. The 270 a great round. Ballisticly the 280 is heads above the 270 at extended distances when in reality that really means squat in a hunting rifle unless your a long range shooter, beyond 500yrds. Get the 270 you can get 160, 175 grain bullets if you want but they are a hand loading affair. 140-150 grain bullets are all you need I use 130's for everything. Look at these and I know of one more. http://matrixballistics.com/.277-Cal...e-bullets.html
Also check out www.longrangehunting.com

Thanks. I really plan to indulge in long range target shooting to improve my skills, but that investment in a rifle is farther off than I planned right now. So this is for hunting for the most part.

Fjold 02-05-2014 5:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by advocatusdiaboli (Post 13371662)
The .284/7mm-08 was the runner-up. I just don't know enough about it and too few seem to shoot it. It was brought out to rival the .270 but in a short-action and that meant minor trade-offs. Still, those that do love it because the short action save weight when lugging a rifle around all day. It seems with a 200-yard zero, it is only .4" lower than a .270 at 300 yards and 1.1" less than a .308. so it's differences are in the noise margins in competition for an all-around hunting rifle. My question is rifle selection though bullet selection seems more than adequate.

The 284 is a rebated case mid length cartridge with the capacity of the 30.06. Your nomenclature of 284/7mm-08 may be confusing to some people.

The 280 is a vastly under rated round. It's essentially the same case as the 30.06 and 270 necked to 7mm. I have a 270 in a Ruger No 1 but I would have been more than happy if I could have found one chambered in 280. For a short time it was also called the "7mm Express" but people were constantly getting it confused with the 7mm Remington Magnum so Remington changed it's name back to the 280 Remington.

gun toting monkeyboy 02-05-2014 6:09 PM

If you are reloading, there is no reason not to go with the .280. Yes, .270 is more common. But who cares? You reload. There are more 7mm bullets out there for you to choose from. You can easily find 175+ grain bullets for it if you want. And go down to 100 grains or lower if that amuses you. .270 just doesn't have that same range of available bullets.

-Mb

Thefeeder 02-05-2014 6:41 PM

><
 
270 is my vote.....you can find a box of shells anywhere.....been used for ever for a reason...when shells were on sale, 30-30, 30-06, 270 were always listed.

And it works...I have " Calif field tested " the round for many years.

pennstater 02-05-2014 6:46 PM

Hmmmm. I think the heaviest you can go with the .270 is 160gr. 175 for the .280. But, if you are hunting antelope, deer and perhaps elk, the 154gr Hornady in .280 works, as does the 150gr Barnes TSX for elk. But, that 160gr Partition in .270 might be the ticket for elk. Confused? That .280 tho,might be a pretty nice rifle to work with. Either way, you won't go wrong. Hmm, now I'm thinking about 160 in 270! Damn it!

Coyotegunner 02-05-2014 6:55 PM

I have owned rifles a few times in 270 and usually traded them or sold them.
I just prefer the 280 and the 7mm-08.I reload for both.
Reasons:Mild recoil,easy on brass,enough energy at hunting ranges to kill anything in the lower 48.

SansSouci 02-05-2014 7:28 PM

Were I given a big game rifle do-over, I'd buy a .280 Rem. I think it's the perfect cartridge for all North American big game.

ElvenSoul 02-05-2014 7:42 PM

If you get the .280rem...you will always wonder..Ackley Improved...it will drive you mad until you do it.

Just fyi Rugger is selling the #1 in 280 in the light A Style for just one more year!

ElvenSoul 02-05-2014 8:11 PM

If your reloading you can get the 7mm-08 to damn near 7mmSAUM Power!

scotty99 02-05-2014 8:48 PM

There is not a bad decision to be made here, as these are all among the very best all-around cartridges there are. If commercial ammo is a big concern, the .270 wins. If you want a shorter, lighter rifle, 7mm/08 wins. If you don't mind a larger rifle and are reloading, .280 wins.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

NordicDave 02-05-2014 10:00 PM

I fully confess my ignorance concerning .270 & .280 rifle rounds, and would like to learn more.

Why would someone choose a .270 or .280 over a .308 or .308's ballistic sibling .30-06?

BTW... Guns & Ammo Mag had an interesting article on history and reloading .280 Remmington. http://www.gunsandammo.com/2012/05/2...on/?show=slide

Thanks!

rm1911 02-06-2014 12:30 AM

Both rounds are based on the '06 case. So why not just go with original. You can't really improve upon perfection :):)

ElvenSoul 02-06-2014 2:24 AM

A 280AI can approach very close to 7mmMag Performance with handloads.

pennstater 02-06-2014 4:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rm1911 (Post 13374411)
Both rounds are based on the '06 case. So why not just go with original. You can't really improve upon perfection :):)

^^^This wins!^^^

toby 02-06-2014 4:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rm1911 (Post 13374411)
Both rounds are based on the '06 case. So why not just go with original. You can't really improve upon perfection :):)

Why do you think the others were invented?.........who want's a boring 30-06?:rolleyes:

pennstater 02-06-2014 5:04 AM

Imitation is the purest form of flattery.:)

ElvenSoul 02-06-2014 5:21 AM

To fire the .280 heavys 175 & 180gr you are going to need a 1:8 3/4 twist barrel. Although my friends TC Venture with a 1:10 twist can fire the 160gr. Still thinking of picking one up!

advocatusdiaboli 02-06-2014 5:24 AM

I know someone with .280 Ackley-Improved and it's a great round. It's halfway between the .270 and the 7mm RM but without the need for a heavier rifle to mitigate that magnum kick. But while now SAAMI approved, it is still really a wild cat in terms of popularity. That isn't really a problem for me bullet-wise since I intend to reload, it is in finding a good average-priced hunting rifle—a custom rifle is just beyond my budget. If I were well-funded, wanted a precision longer range rifle with a low recoil, and wanted and could fund custom rifle, then absolutely.

advocatusdiaboli 02-06-2014 5:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rm1911 (Post 13374411)
Both rounds are based on the '06 case. So why not just go with original. You can't really improve upon perfection :):)

Hard to argue with—it's tried and true as is 308 if you want a lighter rifle.

However, I want something a bit flatter shooting so when I push distance for practice, I can refine my skills better because of less hold over guesstimating. For actual hunting it matters little since I like what Jeff Cooper said about long range hunting (if I remember it right):" after 300 yards, it's not hunting, it's guessing."
And in that range, 270, 308. 7mm RM, and 30-06 (and 280 and 7mm-08) are all in the ball park.

Then again, if I ever go on a long range antelope hunt, I'd rather appreciate that flatter trajectory I think. that is ultimately why.

advocatusdiaboli 02-06-2014 5:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NordicDave (Post 13373935)
BTW... Guns & Ammo Mag had an interesting article on history and reloading .280 Remmington. http://www.gunsandammo.com/2012/05/2...on/?show=slide

Thanks for the article link.

ElvenSoul 02-06-2014 5:46 AM

Just fyi a new Win Mod 70 Featherweight 264Mag is flat out awesome!

NapalmCheese 02-06-2014 6:38 AM

Since you plan on loading for it anyway: 280 is mo different, therefore mo better.

Mark B 02-06-2014 7:52 AM

honest question,
Just curious, You mention "long range", "up to Elk", "target" and seem to be leaning towards 7mm. Why not 7mm Rem Mag? Just seems to me that thjis cartridge fits that bill with authority no?

advocatusdiaboli 02-06-2014 8:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark B (Post 13375472)
honest question,
Just curious, You mention "long range", "up to Elk", "target" and seem to be leaning towards 7mm. Why not 7mm Rem Mag? Just seems to me that thjis cartridge fits that bill with authority no?

This is just my assessment and of course is tragically flawed for that reason...

By long range I mean 300 yards (once I can hit in a 6" group every time) and I'd go to 400 if I could again get the rounds in a 6" circle every time prone, sitting, standing or however I'd shoot. I'll use a laser range finder and ballistic turrets for humane kills when I have time to set up the shot. If I cannot cut it, I'll practice until I can or not take the shot.

7mm RM is a valid choice and I considered it for while but I finally let it go for a couple of reasons. The 7mm RM is only marginally better but you need to add a 1/2 pound the the rifle to get recoil down to 20 ft-lbs and it would be tougher train with and hard to keep down to less than a MOA sitting or standing. Plus, when I am not shooting Elk with my kin in Oregon, then I'll be humping extra weight on every deer, antelope, and hog hunt. It has the same sectional density as 270 and the same ballistic coefficient—just more powder. .270 and .280 kill plenty of Elk. This is my biased personal opinion, but I think the 7MM RM is a bit over-rated due to it being called a "magnum" when it's advantages over .270 and .280 are minimal. But that's just me and flawed arguments as I said earlier. But that is why there are so many cartridges out there.

Mark B 02-06-2014 8:14 AM

And there you have it. :) Looks like sound reasoning to me thanks.

ElvenSoul 02-06-2014 11:29 AM

Op check out Remington 700 LSS Mountain Rifle in .280Rem.

advocatusdiaboli 02-06-2014 11:35 AM

I will. I kind of liked the Remy 7600 pump but they are way too expensive at over $1,000 in 7mm-08 (for a mountain rifle). I thought they made them in .280 but they don't seem to be available.

duckman1 02-06-2014 12:06 PM

.270 for all of the reasons you outlined in your original statement plus the fact you can find it on a shelf in just about any sporting goods store or hunting camp.


Think about forgetting your ammo or having your ammo separated from you during travel.

advocatusdiaboli 02-06-2014 2:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by duckman1 (Post 13377291)
.270 for all of the reasons you outlined in your original statement plus the fact you can find it on a shelf in just about any sporting goods store or hunting camp.


Think about forgetting your ammo or having your ammo separated from you during travel.

That is a valid concern with air travel these days. The .270 is a venerable all-around cartridge and I couldn't go wrong with it. At all. .270, .280, 7mm-08...all possibilities.

One could mitigate the lost ammo risk by shipping some ammo to their destination lodge or guide ahead of time. Cost is minimal and the peace of mind...precious.

toby 02-06-2014 2:24 PM

If I had to rely on ammo sources from forgetting my ammo on a hunt I would be doubly screwed because I don't shoot factory ammo and most of the calibers I shoot are wildcats. 43 years and never had an issue loosing or forgetting my ammo.

russ69 02-06-2014 3:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rm1911 (Post 13374411)
Both rounds are based on the '06 case. So why not just go with original. You can't really improve upon perfection :):)

I'm in the same place. Elk will want a big 30 cal bullet.

264winchester 02-06-2014 4:19 PM

Ballisticly the 280 is heads above the 270.......................

UHHH Correction:
The .284 bullet selection is heads above the .277 bullet selection.

For .277
Berger is wayyyy overdue on the 170 gr EOL, Matrix has 165 and 175 gr, Nosler has 150 gr ALR, Sierra has 135 gr, Woodleigh has 180 gr weldcore protected point. So you see not much selection compared to the .284 and the .308 is king of selection.

264winchester 02-06-2014 4:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by russ69 (Post 13378550)
I'm in the same place. Elk will want a big 30 cal bullet.

Try telling that to Scandinavians who use the .264 diameter on moose.

mark501w 02-06-2014 6:11 PM

.270 is a good cartridge so is .280 when everybody is buying up everything even though they can't use it I saw .270 on the shelves.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:17 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.