Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles 6.5x284 vs .280

We all know the 270 is a great round, and there is little to choose between it and the 280.

But with the disadvantages of (slightly) lesser case capacity, lesser selection of high BC bullets and rifles twisted properly to shoot them, and a (slightly) smaller bore diameter, all of the advantages lie on the 280 side of the ledger. You cannot deny the facts (unless you're a 270 apologist).

Most of the advantages go to the 6.5x284 as well.

Looking at the 6.5x284 and the 280, and then saying that the 270 is better than both of them

Kinda like saying the 8mm is better than a 30 or 338


Clearly your plans to upgrade your 270 to 280-like performance, and your pussy hunting activities with the 270 are very manly endeavors.

But for the rebarrel, why not just go 280 and have a bunch of bullets to choose from

6.5 X 284 26" barrel
140 gr Berger 2900 fps
1000 yds
812 energy
1616 fps

270 24" barrel
150 LR Accubond 2900 fps
1000 yds
911 Energy
1653 fps

Don't mean to burst your bubble Mr Whelen but were not still living in 1940!

Your statements of what the 270 may or may not be capable of are significantly INACCURATE!!!

Just for the Record in this comparison I was giving the 284 26" of barrel in comparison to a 24" 270. Not apples to apples advantage 284 and the 270 still comes out on top.

SHOD

Hey, I didn't say the 270 wasn't good, assuming if it will shoot the LRAB out of a 10 twist barrel (I know the 6.5 will shoot out of an 8).

I took exception to his PG's "better" statement. If you ignore EVERY measurable, it is the equal of the 280. Only a fool would say it is better.

Besides, LOOK AT THE TOPIC. The OP doesn't give a phuuk about the 270.

Anyway, if I was looking to shoot longer range, either of the cartridges THE OP INQUIRED ABOUT offer more high BC bullet selection, and would be a better choice. Especially in an off the shelf rifle.

The ONLY reason I can think to go 270 is easy availability of ammo.

(BTW, I think the velocity for the x284 is right for 24" anyway)

No we're still here.

Of the OP's two choices I would take the 280....I suspect there is more ammo around and brass as well.The 7mm bullets are great too.The trade off is the same it's always been...the 7mm handles heavier bullets.

On the hijacked thread subject, I just ran the Hornady Ballistic lab for the 150-270 ABLR (.625);the 7mm-150 ABLR (.611);and the 7mm-168 (.652).

I gave them all 2900 fps even though it would take a pretty warm load to get that in a 280 with a 168 and we are really getting into 7 Rem Mag velocities.

Sorry to disappoint you guys preaching old 270 stuff but the differences between the three bullets to 1000 yards is not worth mentioning...that includes wind, too.Go see for yourself.



Shod is right;you guys preaching 280 superiority are giving antiquated info today.I think you'r just annoyed because there are 277 bullets that rival the 7mm pets

Always trying to tromp on the ole 270 comparing fast twist 7's to factory twisted 270's. Same ole [bleep], same song second verse and on and on. Ya know you can get a fast twist barrel for a .277 right??

Back on topic, get a 280. I like it almost as much as a 270.

raybass they got nothing better to do than repeat the same tired nonsense....been listening to the 280 mavens for years.They all read too much.

I've got an old favorite L691 Sako in 270 weatherby that I hold in high regard..I think a 9 twist barrel is in its future, fingers crossed for the 170VLD we keep hearing rumors about..I'd shelve the 7wby in heartbeat.

oh to the OP, go 280

Of the 2, I'd go 280 or even the good ol 30-06

rosco seems the gaps are closing up....

Yep..But they'll prolly come out with the 195 7mm at the same time, and I'll be confused all over again

The point is tho, I've got a fast 270 and 7mm..I've shot both side by side at 1100, 162's in the 7 and 150VLD's in the 270, one pretty much does what the other does.

Keep in mind this is from two magnums, not from something I'm fighting to keep stable.I've also not found the 162 to live up to claimed BC (thats sure to get things started here).that or the 150VLD is lots higher than advertised..I'm pretty sure which ones correct tho...

The 270 guys like to start the discussion, and then act offended when a few facts are interjected.




There . . . fixed it for you




I don't see too many slippery 277 bullets.

Wonder if the 277 LRAB will be changed to be suitable for shooting something more than paper/steel?

Or if the fast twist 270s will be rolling off the line soon?



Yes . . . Shod was right



MAYBE SOMEBODY SHOULD RESURRECT THAT 270 THREAD IN CASE SOMEBODY WANTS TO TALK ABOUT IT

Your long range argument isn't helping your cause. The 270 works exactly the same as the other two at the ranges nealy all game is shot. The availability of factory ammo for the 270 is a huge advantage, as is the number and variety of rifles it is chambered for. The 270 wins.

When people poo poo the ammo availability issue, I'm reminded of a few years ago I was working in the mountains for the Forest Service. Packed my Ruger 270 for a bit of summer practice, and to use for the unlimited bighorn hunt in September. I brought along what I thought was enough ammo to get through the summer, something like 100 rounds of handloads. Welll..... that was a mistake, as that summer I was introduced to marmot and ground squirrel shooting!

Before long, my ammo supplies were dwindling. I figured I'd better keep some handloads for sheep, but wanted to keep blowing holes in marmots. A look around the local stores produced a couple boxes of 270 ammo, which I bought to continue the fun. Funny thing, about all that was available locally was the basic 223,243,270,30-06 type ammo. I suppose I could've made a long trip into a bigger town had I needed 280 ammo, but with $4.00 a gallon gas and a less than reliable vehicle, I didn't need the hassle.

Agreed.



Agreed.

And if your shopping new your Forked with a 280.... BUT if you really want a choice you only have one... THE best one.. And it rhymes with GFY, uh I mean MANchester....

Haters, sic

W

Is a .25-284 close enough ? I've hunted extensively with two .280's.
Based on experience with other rounds and enough long range shooting to understand the difference, the 6.5-284 would have the edge at ranges over 400-500 yds. That's because the heavier 130-140 gr. bullets for it have very high tested BC, on the order of .600, thus they drift less in the wind. The .280 can't push anything with a tested BC that high nearly as fast. That also means the bullets for the 6.5-284 will expand further out.
I'd like to see the guy that can tell the difference between the wound channel made by a .264 bullet and the same class of bullet with a .284 diameter.
As big a fan as I am of the .280, I have to admit that the factory ammo for it doesn't appear to loaded to the round's full potential. If I were stuck with factory ammo, I'd buy a .270 instead of a .280.
In a long action rifle, you can load the long 6.5 bullets out where the base of the bullet isn't seated below the case's neck and shoulder junction. This tends to make the rifle more accurate.
So, if you are doing a dedicated long range rifle, I'd say the 6.5-284. If you are after a regular sporter for 400+ yd. shooting, I would bother with the 6.5-284. E

Whelen:

-280 Rem. 162 Amax @2800 fps.(max vel in Hornady Manual

-270 150 ABLR @ 2900 fps. (max vel in Hornady Manual)

The BC of both is.625, correct?

Run them. Let me know what you find. I used a 200 yd zero and 10 mph wind.

In fact, the 270 seems to be showing an edge at the 850 yard mark in drop and wind...check it out. Let me know what you think.

Run the 6.5/284 for the OP while you are at it with the 140 Amax.......................................oh.....never mind the BC of that bullet is only .550.

BTW, the 270-150 ABLR only needs a 10 twist to run.A 9 would be nice but not needed.

lemme know what you think.

Hey Bob, I don't need to run them

With calibers that close, similar velocities, and identical BCs the downrange performance has to be very close.

Like I said, if the 150ABLR is good for anything besides paper or steel, then I'm interested. But I have seen some pretty poor reviews in that regard so far.

But I'm the wrong guy to convince anyway. I am not a long range shooter in any sense of the word. I have shot far more animals under 100 yards than over 200, and 400 probably maxes out my skill set.

The OP never stated it, but I assumed he was either looking for something for longer range shooting, or else he was looking for something a little less common. If that's the case, either the 6.5x284 or the 280 fits the bill.

I've killed elk and deer with both and if I had to pick which one.

I'll take the 6.5x284.

It does it all with less recoil.

Bob, if you're gonna' focus on ABLRs, then run the 7mm 175 LRAB in there too. That's an interesting bullet to me, but I don't know if a .280 would really get it rolling enough to see much benefit. Looks like 2750 is about the top end...

BTW- I ran 162 A-Maxes at 2850 with a bit of room to spare out of a 22" Mountain Rifle barrel via 280 Rem; that was a damn good combination.

Tanner