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

I figured so, but I didn't want the 280 guys busting out their supposed trump card (the 162 Amax) without a rebuttal.

For me, I'll happily keep chugging along killing stuff with my 270.

If anything walks after hit with either, then it's the shooter's fault.

ruraldoc,

That's very interesting about the inaccurate .270's you've owned--since it illustrates some sort of law of chance. Between me and my wife we've probably owned 15 .270's. I can't remember one that wasn't capable of 1" or better accuracy at 100 yards, including a Remington 760. At least four have been among the most accurate big game rifles I've ever fired, factory or custom, and three of those were factory rifles: a Mark V Mauser, a J.C. Higgins FN Mauser and a Remington 700 ADL. The last would average three 150-grain Hornady Spire Points in an inch--at 300 yards.

Every 280 that I have owned has been a bolt rifle,the 270s include a couple of other action types.

Right now I have a BAR in 270 that is pretty close to a 2 moa shooter,and the first rifle I ever owned was a Ruger M77 that was just as bad.

On the other hand I currently have 270s in a Sauer 202 and a Merkel K3 and both are wonderfully accurate. My Steyr model M is a full stock 270 and shoots great too.

I also foolishly sold a Remington M7600 in 270 that shot close to half inch groups at 100 yards.

So far I've not seen a lemon in 280,maybe it is just luck of the draw.

Those 202's do shoot, don't they?

I've only had four .280's, one custom, but they all shot very well.

Yeah, he can write a coherent sentence, even a well constructed paragraph, a real treat here on the Fire...

And, he actually starts with a theme, develops it, draws conclusions and finishes his thoughts without fluff, rabbit chasing, over reaching statements, glittering generalities, insults, name calling, chest thumping, preaching or moralizing, etc, etc.

Quite unique and refreshing...

DF

I wonder how much the whole "7mm Rem. Express" experiment set the .280 back? From what i've read it created a lot of confusion.

I bought my "7mm Express" new in 1979 because it wasn't a .270 or a .30-06. Even at that tender age I was on the way to semi-loonyism (sp) and didn't want a rifle that everyone else had. A quick look at any handloading manual shows no practical difference between the three so for me it was the "like" and "different" factor. On a good day my ADL will still shoot three 175gr Nosler Partitions into an inch at 100 yards and the velocity is somewhere between 2775 and 2800 according to the Millenium Pro.

Lately though, due to time constraints I have been shooting a "one shot group" just to check the zero. There are other rifles in the safe but I always pick up the boring, reliable and accurate .280 when it's go time. By the way my, rifle is barrel stamped 7mm Express. It has never failed to do its part and it will be the last one I sell.

Beats me why they didn't stay with the sexier, 7mm Express name. Sounds a lot more exotic than a plain .280.

Oh well, Remington marketing decisions often don't make a lot of common sense.

DF

I have a Ruger 77 in 280 that has the barrel stamped with "7MM EXP REM". Shortly after buying it, I called Ruger and asked about it, but the CSR with whom I spoke told me that Ruger had never stamped any 280 barrels with the "7MM EXP REM" name.

I have only owned a couple of 270s and 280s; still have three of the 270s, a S&W A (Husqvarna 8000 action), a Ruger 77 Mark II RSI, and a Remington 700 in a Rynite stock, but only the Ruger 77 in 7MM EXP REM. I have thought about cutting the barrel back to 18.5" and installing the barreled action in a 77 RSI stock, but since I'm not too likely to use it much, decided that I'd just leave it as is and put it to sleep.

The greatest benefit, that I can see, of the 270 over the 280 is the ease of which factory ammo can be found both far and wide. I almost always carry a spare/loaner rifle in 30-06 with me when I travel more than a couple of hours from home to hunt, just so that I know that I'll have a rifle with easy to find ammo in the event that my primary ammo get lost or forgotten. This has only been put into practice once, when I loaned to a guy from OH who was staying in the same motel as us in eastern CO. His only rifle was a 6.5x55 for while the ammo had been misplaced and nobody in his hunting party had brought a spare rifle. I loaned him the 30-06 and he used it to successfully punch his tag. That particular 30-06 is gone, but its replacement is the CLR that I bought here in 2011 as a donor action for a 7x57 that I was looking to have Mr. Forbes put together for me. The CLR shot so well with Federal's least expensive 150 grain Power-Shok load that I've put the 7x57 project on the shelf, at least for the time being.

I've been at stores when the conversation at the guncounter went something like this:

"Give me some of that Remington 7mm ammo," says the joe off the street potential buyer.

The counter monkey responds with, "What kind? I've got 7mm Remington Magnum, 7mm-08 Remington, and 7mm Remington Ultra Magnum."

"Well hell I don't know. My gun is a 7mm, and it's a Remington. 'Bout all I know. Let me see a box of each,I should be able to tell by lookin' at the shells."

Having another cartridge in 7mm Express Remington on the shelf would just add to this confusion/cluster. I believe that is one of the primary reasons Remington switched up the name to the 280.

I think that the sequence of Remington names for the 280 ran in this order:

1 - 280
2 - 7mm-06
3 - 7mm Exp Rem
4 - 280

John Lacy's book on the Remington 700 discusses the 7mm-06 and 7mm Exp Rem to some degree, but I don't recall any of the specifics.

Or lately-

"We ain't got no 7mm ammo, period, and don't know when we will ever have any"

My buddy from Idaho bought a Ruger No. 1 around 1983 or so that was stamped .280 Rem/7mm Express. They covered their bases on that one.

Yikes!

Or lately-

"We ain't got no 7mm ammo, period, and don't know when we will ever have any"[/quote]

Here - "We ain't got no ammo..."

Predictably, this thread has become as logical as arguing over who makes the best pickup truck. My family has .280 Rem., .280 Ackley Imp., 7mm Rem. Mag, and 7mm-08. All are good. The .280 Ackley and 7mm Rem. mag have a lot of overlap, but the Ackley is more pleasant to shoot and is by nature a more accurate cartridge. The .280 shoots 140 gr bullets on as flat a trajectory as the .270 Win. shoots 130 gr. The .280 shoots 150 gr. much flatter than the .270 shoots 150 gr. and will handle 160 gr. when needed. The .280 Ackley has been to Africa and killed zebra, greater kudu, sable, waterbuck, and sitatunga, all of which are good sized animals. All of these cartridges are excellent deer cartridges.

You cannot blame the gun for you running out of ammo. Can't blame cutlery for being overweight either.

All of these work fine. Most important is that the rifle fits you, comes naturally to your shoulder, has a good trigger, and that the scope is properly mounted. That said, we are hunters, not gun nuts.

Blancocounty,

Not sure if I understood one part of your post where you say the 280 will shoot a 150gr much flatter than the 270.

How can that be?

- Bob

Think I bought my #1 in late '82.Still shoots under a minute if I do my part.

It's no great trick to get 150 grain bullets to exit the barrel from a 280 at 3000 fps.The 270 will get about 2850-2950 fps without pressure signs from typical sporters.

This does not amount to a world of difference but the advantage does lie with the 280 with most hunting bullets of 150 grains.The exception to this may be the new long range accubonds,the 150 grain version in 270 has an awesome BC.