Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Finn Aagaard on the 280 Remington

The .284 150BT is an impressive killer.

As is the .280 150 NP ;-)

I dont think there are too many 150/165 grain bullets in the .277/.284/.308 zone that won't kill the chit out of damn near anything that is hit where they are supposed to be.

Did I mention 270's suck

I always preferred 150s in a 270, might try some 140s, 130s never impressed accuracy, and feel behind in retained energy.

Finn liked the 338/06 a bit, but also the 6.5x55. Even praised the mini 7mm - BR. Finn knew shot placement works, and mild recoil enables accuracy vs hurts it like a heavy recoiling round.

MM - I agree, and one might throw in the 140 PT in a .264, not that I would choose it over a good 125-130

Well, after 12 years of lurking (10 registered), I finally feel compelled to join a conversation (albeit a bit late to the game).

My two favorite writers growing up were Finn Aagaard and Bob Hagel. Both of them had "been there and done it". Both of them wrote in a no-nonsense style that was heavy on facts and real world observations. Neither seemed to be pushing an agenda or writing to sell equipment or outfitters. I respect Aagaard very much.

I primarily hunt big game in two different scenarios - high plains pronghorn and mule deer, and dark timber elk, mule deer, and occasionally black bear over bait. I have way more rifles capable of fitting the bill for either (or both) scenarios than I need. After twenty-five years of hunting, I pretty much use two rifles exclusively now.

My plains rifle is chambered in .25-'06 Rem with a 24" barrel pushing a 115 grain Partition at 3,100 fps. My timber rifle is the same make and model in .280 Rem sporting a 22" barrel, loaded with 160 grain Mag Tips at 2,750 fps. I use these rifle/load combos because they are extremely accurate, they kill their intended quarry quickly, and most importantly, I have the utmost confidence that they will put my bullets where I intend them to go, and the bullets will perform as necessary once they arrive.

I have several other rifles in chamberings that would be just as effective (.260 Rem, .270 Win, .308 Win, .30-'06 Spr, etc...), but the .25-'06 and .280 are my go-to rifles now and have been for several years. I believe in them and myself when using them.

Lack of common availability of ammo in both calibers is a concern when travelling more than fifty miles from home. As noted multiple times in this thread, stuff can happen when one travels. My backup rifle for plains hunting is a .270 Win with 130 grain Spire Points, and my backup woods rifle is the .30-'06 using 180 grain Grand Slams.

I have taken many head of game with my primaries, have never lost an animal I've shot, and all kills have been quick and humane. Some might say that my backups are more effective for my hunting needs than my primary rifles. Perhaps in theory that is true. But the .25-'06 and .280 shoot more accurately for me at all realistic ranges and have plenty of killing power for my needs. I simply have more confidence when hunting with them.

Which in my opinion is the most important factor when selecting a rifle for a hunt.

Aagaard liked a lot of calibers, including the .280 Remington. I suppose arguing over the minutiae regarding the advantages/disadvantages between two similar calibers can be fun, as this thread evinces. But in the end, it's all just dancing on the head of a pin.

Welcome out of the shadows, and congrats on a thoughtful first post.

+1

Good post.

DF