.270 vs .280

[mackenzie280]

Good evening gentleman I was at the range recently sighting in my new to me .270, while there another gentleman was also sighting a browning leaver action .22. We got to talking as ones generally does when two gun owners are togeather and he told me the .280 is a far superior round to the .270. Given that this is my first sub .30 rifle I was unsure if he was just bias as he owned a .280. So I decide to pose the question to you all. Is there any Benefit to the .280 Over the .270?

Given that they are both using the same parent case and if my math is correct there is only .007 thousandths of an inch different I find it hard to believe one could be vastly superior to another. But I stand ready to be proven wrong if there is information to the contrary.

Hi
I have two 280's , have shot moose, elk, bear, mule and whitetail deer.
Both rounds are good it boils down to preference. One disadvantage of the 280 is finding factory ammo as it is not that common as the 270.

 

[Finprof]

I have both. The 280 is a Remington 700 Mountain Rifle I bought new around 1990. The 270 is an FN Mauser from the 1950s that I bought to have a Mauser. I like them both. The Mauser action feels better but the Remington stock feels better and balances better. The 280 has a long history with me. It was my deer/hog/elk rifle exclusively for 20 years.

 

[steve white]

Well, we all need SOMETHING to talk about around campfires.

 

[cash_tx]

Well, we all need SOMETHING to talk about around campfires.

Very true. Fast forward or rewind 30 years, and this conversation will have changed very little.

 

[Tubby’s Canteen]

This one got dug up from a ways back , I don’t even own the rifle it was started about anymore.

 

[CBH Australia]

This one got dug up from a ways back , I don’t even own the rifle it was started about anymore.

@colorado dug up a 7mmRm somewhere and this came back up my feed.

I went back and found some old posts.

I quoted Bruce Moulds post as he was one person I spoke with about the 7mm options and other members and I settled on the .280a.i. I'm not sure now if Bruce was still with us when the .280a.i. was finished but he was good mates with jcinsa.

I saw a couple of Bruces rifles including the .280 in an store in Adelaide a while back but nothing I needed.

 

[Str8meat]

I have 4 280’s , zero 270’s people just like what they like.

 

[colorado]

I love my 270 Win. It's great on varmints with Sierra 90g HPBTs at 3400 fps and awesome on big game with 150g Partitions closing in on 3000 fps. The 280 is superior on larger big game, (elk, bears), with 160g bullets but just by a bit.

 

[ftrovato]

Good evening gentleman I was at the range recently sighting in my new to me .270, while there another gentleman was also sighting a browning leaver action .22. We got to talking as ones generally does when two gun owners are togeather and he told me the .280 is a far superior round to the .270. Given that this is my first sub .30 rifle I was unsure if he was just bias as he owned a .280. So I decide to pose the question to you all. Is there any Benefit to the .280 Over the .270?

Given that they are both using the same parent case and if my math is correct there is only .007 thousandths of an inch different I find it hard to believe one could be vastly superior to another. But I stand ready to be proven wrong if there is information to the contrary.

I don't know that I ever took an animal that could tell the difference between a .270 or a 30-06. Maybe the deer have a caliper that shows that the .280 is superior?

 

[Tubby’s Canteen]

I don't know that I ever took an animal that could tell the difference between a .270 or a 30-06. Maybe the deer have a caliper that shows that the .280 is superior?

Again old thread keeps comming up

 

[IvW]

No comparison in my opinion....
7x64 And 7x65R Brenneke is far superior to any .270......

 

[Nevada Mike]

I own/owned rifles in many calibers. For run-of-the-mill hunting up to PG I like the 7mm rounds... 7X57, 280, 280 AI, and the 7mm RM. They work. With appropriate bullets I've killed deer, elk, roan, zebra, impala, reed buck, and more. One shot kills 80% of the time.

I am building a 308 Norma Magnum for chitz & grins, tho'.

 

[cash_tx]

I own/owned rifles in many calibers. For run-of-the-mill hunting up to PG I like the 7mm rounds... 7X57, 280, 280 AI, and the 7mm RM. They work. With appropriate bullets I've killed deer, elk, roan, zebra, impala, reed buck, and more. One shot kills 80% of the time.

I am building a 308 Norma Magnum for chitz & grins, tho'.

I love all three of my 270's; but as far as I'm concerned, 308 Norma Magnum is God's favorite caliber.

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

I love all three of my 270's; but as far as I'm concerned, 308 Norma Magnum is God's favorite caliber.

@cash_tx
And here's me thinking Gods favourite caliber was the 35 Whelen because the great Colonel aka God and his mate the right reverend Mr Howe invented the fantastic 35 Whelen.
HA HA HA HA HA HA
Bob

 

[CBH Australia]

I don't know that I ever took an animal that could tell the difference between a .270 or a 30-06. Maybe the deer have a caliper that shows that the .280 is superior?

Well the .280a.i. is more superior'or than the .280 then.

I haven't owned a .270 so. I can't speculate.

The dead ones certainly can't tell the difference and they don't complain.

Tbe .308 is also good, and as good as the.270 it's just that the .308 is as common as muck and that's why we sometimes look for something a little more unique or classic.

I would like to try 7x57, 7x64 and .280 but I tend to like 7mm's so each to there own.

 

[mauserhunter]

280 any day of the week, 7mm is a sweet spot caliber unlike 270. Only reason I own a 270 is because it's a pre 64 m70, will be building a 280 on the other pre64 action I've got.

 

[Longwalker]

This might be a little controversial, my apologies to those who love the .280. It’s a very good cartridge, but.... The .280 has no real reason for its existence besides Americans sceptical about anything with a metric designation. Remington introduced a cartridge that was almost indistinguishable from its well established predecessor, the 7x64. Then Remington dropped the ball by introducing an inferior load at low pressure / velocity when they launched the cartridge. Then they changed the name and loaded the “7mm express” a little closer to potential, then changed back to .280 name again, and all the while the Germans, who got it right the first time, simply enjoyed a cartridge almost perfect in concept and execution from the start. I have three 7x64 rifles currently. They all do everything I ask of them well. Just bought my first . 270 and look forward to using it with the classic 130 grain load for smaller hoofed game. I’ll never own a .280! Wouldn’t touch one if it was downwind and hiding behind a bush. The 7x64 is a worldwide classic. 7x64 ammunition is loaded to full potential and in a great variety of bullet styles. The . 280 is a wannabe that’s almost as good.

 

[Rem280]

This might be a little controversial, my apologies to those who love the .280. It’s a very good cartridge, but.... The .280 has no real reason for its existence besides Americans sceptical about anything with a metric designation. Remington introduced a cartridge that was almost indistinguishable from its well established predecessor, the 7x64. Then Remington dropped the ball by introducing an inferior load at low pressure / velocity when they launched the cartridge. Then they changed the name and loaded the “7mm express” a little closer to potential, then changed back to .280 name again, and all the while the Germans, who got it right the first time, simply enjoyed a cartridge almost perfect in concept and execution from the start. I have three 7x64 rifles currently. They all do everything I ask of them well. Just bought my first . 270 and look forward to using it with the classic 130 grain load for smaller hoofed game. I’ll never own a .280! Wouldn’t touch one if it was downwind and hiding behind a bush. The 7x64 is a worldwide classic. 7x64 ammunition is loaded to full potential and in a great variety of bullet styles. The . 280 is a wannabe that’s almost as good.

I needed a 280 Rem to be Special! LMAO.

 

[IvW]

This might be a little controversial, my apologies to those who love the .280. It’s a very good cartridge, but.... The .280 has no real reason for its existence besides Americans sceptical about anything with a metric designation. Remington introduced a cartridge that was almost indistinguishable from its well established predecessor, the 7x64. Then Remington dropped the ball by introducing an inferior load at low pressure / velocity when they launched the cartridge. Then they changed the name and loaded the “7mm express” a little closer to potential, then changed back to .280 name again, and all the while the Germans, who got it right the first time, simply enjoyed a cartridge almost perfect in concept and execution from the start. I have three 7x64 rifles currently. They all do everything I ask of them well. Just bought my first . 270 and look forward to using it with the classic 130 grain load for smaller hoofed game. I’ll never own a .280! Wouldn’t touch one if it was downwind and hiding behind a bush. The 7x64 is a worldwide classic. 7x64 ammunition is loaded to full potential and in a great variety of bullet styles. The . 280 is a wannabe that’s almost as good.

Pretty much sums it up.....

 

[CBH Australia]

I needed a 280 Rem to be Special! LMAO.

Nothing wrong with being special.

If the .280 got on the Creedmoor hype bandwagon the .280 would be a hit.

If it were widely available in factory rifles and factory ammo it might have displaced the .270