Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters 270 Winchester versus 280 Remington

So your saying you have actually killed squirrels and coyotes with a .270. Stunt shooter, I bet you never tell about the wounded squirrels that got away.

So when do the hunting seasons start.................???????

I have a couple of .270s and a few .30-06s and a 7x64 Brenneke, which is not interchangeable with the .280, but close enough that Speer recommends interchanging load data, which in my experience works just fine and produces .280 velocities. Now, I want a .280 to add to the collection just because I've never owned one.

With all that said, if I had to sell all but two, I would keep my favorite .270 and my .375 and go hunt the world. And not because I think the .270 is better than the '06 or .280, but because that is the rifle I like.

I like the way you think..

I didn't read the whole thread but between 270 and 280 there is 7 thousandths (.007) of an inch difference, do you really think that any animal on Earth cares one tiny bit which one it gets hit with?

You want to get a 280 and then a 7mm Mag? they are so close to the same that it doesn't matter.

kutenay thanks for offering to watch over that 270FW for me!

I cold leave that with you and RD Finn cold baby sit the Simillion rifle and I would not have to be bothered worrying which one to hunt with...

The 270 FW is an early Classic...5 digit number....looked pretty good to me.

My first 280 came by default in that it wasn't a 270 but the rifle was so nice(a custom Mauser stocked by Kevin Campbell)that I couldn't pass it up. I have had several more 280's since then. I would buy another 280 if I bumped into a rifle that I really liked.

Arguing which is better between the .270 and .280,well that's like "pole vaulting over tick turds."

I'm surprised I didn't catch any mention of Remingtons model 740 autoloader in this thread of which the .280 Remington was birthed for. This rifle was designed for the .30-06 cartridge but there was a desire for a .270 Winchester offering in it. Remington felt the rifle was not strong enough to stand up to the hotter loaded .270 so they came out with their own "270" which is the .280 Rem. They then factory loaded it to the same pressure as the .30-06 and the problem was solved. But a couple years later Remington revamped and strengthened the model 740 and it became the famous model 742 which was strong enough for the .270 Win. thereby relieving the .280 of it's duties. If that fact alone wasn't bad enough for the future of the .280 Remington introduced the 7mm Rem. mag which sold like wildfire and mostly relegated the .280 to the scrap heap of history. Mostly that is, except for some rifle loonies who almost keep it relevant.

Famous? More like infamous.

The 742 Hangmaster should join the .280 on the scrap heap of history.

They go together perfectly.

Being from PA, I've never been allowed to use one for hunting. So I can't say how good or bad they are and will have to take your word on the issue.

Another question I had:

Comparing the 270 to 280 when it comes to reloading. Which has better potential when it comes to handloads? Your thoughts?

Font enlarged so that maybe the people who don't read will catch this.

280 Remington wins. Larger, heavier bullet loaded at equivalent (to the 270) pressures makes it more flexible. That said, there's nothing wrong with the 270, especially with premium bullets.

If we follow that statement to its logical conclusion, the .30-06 beats either one, and the .460 Weatherby might be best of all.

Plus, over the decades I've known quite a few rifle loonies who handload for the .280. Exactly ONE has hunted with bullets over 160 grains, while I've known hundreds of .270 handloaders who use 150-grain bullets, and quite a few who use the 160 Nosler Partition. Apparently the long-touted belief that 175-grain 7mm bullets make the .280 superior for handloading is pretty well ignored in what is often called "the real world."

It could just as easily be argued that these days the .270 wins, because not only does it have just as great a weight-range of bullets as the .280, but its bottom end is better, due to bullets for the 6.8 SPC.

Six one; half dozen the other.

Like 'em both!

This note in the September 2013 issue of Rifle Magazine, pg. 23-

Om September 2012, David
Bailey won the 2012 F-Open Class
National, which allows any cartridge,
at the NRA Whittington Center
in Raton, New Mexico, with a
.280 Remington. The event is 1,000
yards and quickly sorts out the
men from the boys, pertaining
to accurate rifles and cartridges,
with many of the �super duper�
magnums falling short on performance.
In spite of wind gusts
and generally poor weather conditions,
Bailey read the wind accurately
(a key factor) and managed
to win with a remarkable score of
1,283-59x.
Bailey�s Bat-action rifle (smithed
by King�s Armory in Arlington,
Texas) features a Bartlein 32-inch
barrel with a one-in-9-inch twist
and is chambered for a no-turnneck
.280 Remington. His handload
consisted of Berger 180-grain
Hybrid bullets pushed 2,860 fps
using Hodgdon H-4831SC powder,
Wolf primers and Remington cases
with �very little brass prep.�
A moderate velocity 7mm, the
.280 Remington offers consistent
accuracy and is apparently hard to
beat in stiffly contested 1,000-yard
competition, even by ballistically
faster cartridges.

'Nuf sed...........

+1000.

IMHO, anyone owning a 270, a 280, or a 30/06, has no practical reason to switch between any of the three. It's about preference. No so much about performance.

I'd agree with that.

2 wanna-be '06s and the real thing, IMO.

Still, they are great excuses...errr...reasons to buy more rifles, so none are bad.

As well as the 30-06 has done for me for 50+ years, I have never seen any advantage in a 270 or 280. My choice between the two is the obvious 270. I go some strange places and am prone to forget things like ammo and tags, etc.

CRS will eventually get YOU, too!

My 280 KS C prefix LH Rem 700 has a very short throat? Is this common? Way short of mag length.