Stepping back a few years...

[sestoppelman]

Remington Model 725, just acquired. First year manufacture in .280 Remington, a great round. Round introduced in 1957, rifle one year later. This one has some battle scars, but metal is very good, bore about perfect, and no mods to it, still has original butt plate.
Tight chamber and not much throat to go with the long 3.6+

" magazine box, but I can get it throated if I want to. 3 position Enfield type safety.
Slapped a sort of vintage Redfield 3-9X Tracker scope. Hope to get it to the range in a few days.
Always wanted one of these 725's, the last iteration before the 700 began.

 

[Graham Hunter]

Excellent rifle in a great caliber.

 

[crs]

Looks like a good one from the same era as my pre 64 M70 Feather weight .308 .
Enjoy!

 

[sestoppelman]

Seems to function properly, flings brass into the next zip code! Nice trigger.

 

[enysse]

Congrats, the woods is a little rough but everything else looks very nice!

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

Very nice, looking forward to hearing how it shoots!

 

[sestoppelman]

Congrats, the woods is a little rough but everything else looks very nice!

Pretty good for 61 years old. I got 5 years on it and I look a little rough around the edges too.

 

[cpr0312]

Nice!! Congrats!!

 

[PaulT]

Pretty good for 61 years old. I got 5 years on it and I look a little rough around the edges too.

Well, that just saved me a post

 

[Ray B]

Nice!! The trimming down of the Enfield action hit its best iteration with the 725s. Enjoy

 

[Hoss Delgado]

Lovely Rifle
Not familiar with the caliber though. Is it similar to a .270 Winchester ?

 

[Mekaniks]

Cool rifle

 

[Ray B]

Is it similar to a .270 Winchester ?

The 280 is "almost" the same as the 270. The differences in case are the bullet is .284" rather than .277", so it takes slightly heavier bullets, and as a safety measure, the 280 case is slightly longer from base to shoulder so that it won't chamber in a 270 (thus causing dangerous pressures if the .284 bullet is fired into a .277 bore). Ballistically the 270 outperforms the 280 with factory loadings because the 280 was chambered in a bunch of non-turnbolt actions such as pumps and semi-autos so the loads for the 280 didn't push the limits. In a good turnbolt such as the 725, the 280 can be hand loaded to greater performance and versatility than the 270.

 

[sestoppelman]

The 7x64 is its metric near twin.

 

[Mr. Zorg]

I'm planning on picking up my new-to-me Zastava 7X64mm bolt rifle on Monday. If you use Norma's ballistics app or look through their latest catalog, Norma loads .280 Remington cartridges to the same muzzle velocity as their 7X64mm cartridges. I've read some companies don't load .280 Remington cartridges to the same level due to various pump and semiauto rifles chambered in .280 Remington as @Ray B mentioned.

 

[Mr. Zorg]

At least for the 156 grain Oryx projectile.

 

[sestoppelman]

I load my own so never bother with factory fodder. With my previous .280 I could easily best any factory load for .280 and equal some for the 7 Rem mag.

 

[Mr. Zorg]

No doubt!

 

[Mike Van Horn]

The 280 lMO is very under rated, along with or 28 cal like 7mm08, the 284. Good selection of bullets. All work very good on medium sized game
The 280 is also very easy to reload for

 

[sestoppelman]

This is my second .280, first was a rebarreled Ruger 77 .270 Win. Had it for many years then sold it a while back, still had dies and ammo from that one, so reasoned (if that's the right word), that I needed another one and here it is.