for those who have hunted with both.
which one?
why?
I have calibers above and below, thinking of something new

I can take my .280 and load it like a 6.5-06 using 120 NBT's and then can go all the way up to 160 or 175 Partitions If I want to kill mooses...

I have never owned a 6.5-284, but the 6.5-06 I owned was skookum with 100's...

Please include the 280 AI for comparison also.

270.
Because it's better than either the 6.5-284 or the 280.

Gayer . . . not better

I would say if you are shooting a 140 out of both cases you'd be way out past where most guys shoot,...or should shoot, before you would see a marked difference......

why,...'cuz you want to......

160 woodleighs shoot great in my 6.5-06.

I would say a .280, just because I already have a .260 and am always pushing it a little hard on my 7x57. Otherwise it is a toss up, If you tend to hunt elk more then antelope I would pick the .280, and vice versa I would pick the 6.5-284, but either is fine for most anything. If you mostly hunt deer, its a draw........

What do you see for velocity? 24" barrel?

24" barrel and I want to say 2750 fps, but don't have my notes close. H1000 worked very well and 3 shot groups under .5 are pretty standard.

Never tried a woodleigh pill. Those must be penetrating fools??

Well they may not penetrate like a Barnes but I'd use them on anything. So far the 140 bergers have been all I have killed stuff with using that rifle. The 160s are loaded and ready, just haven't grabbed them yet.

On a side note, the 140 Woodleighs have been shooting great in my daughters 260 and they are short enough to function in the magazine very well.

Wrong.

Be honest with yourself . . .

Zero difference in killing prowess between the three.

Ok. I'll accept your admission that you were wrong.

Whatever dude. GFY.

Awwwww . . . giving up so quick . . . kinda gay . . . 270ish

Hopefully the 270 guy is gone so the thread can get back on track.

It's quite apparent the 270 must be gay ish at least on fairy goats part or he wouldn't be trying to proposition you like that on a public forum.

With that said I have 2 270s but I use them to Cat hunt with so it can be said I like hunting pussy. . Not Gay in this scenario!

Due to lack of twisted barrels I can certainly appreciate my 270s out to about 400 yds however a meager 7/08 toting a 162 A Max carries the same foot lbs of energy at 850 yds as any of my 270 loads do at 500 and a properly twisted 6.5 will most certainly stomp all over a 10 twist 270 out past 500 yds.

Dats why I see a 9 twist barrel or maybe an 8 going on one of my 270s in the near future so I can try out some of the newer high BC bullets in the 270.

This maneuver along with cat hunting will thwart any gay. Ish tendencies from useing the 270.

Shod

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

Happy New Year....

For deer only 6.5 X 284
For elk and other large critters 280

My New Years Resolution......post something related to the OPs topic in each thread I visit.

Shod

How about running 7mm 168 LRAB's?

Tanner I hate doing these number comparisons....so deceptive depending on who is running them and what gets fed in... but like Whelen said when everything is this close it gets hard to distinguish one from the other.

I ran the 175 ABLR in the 280 at 2700 fps,to be fair that's what Hornady says is max and of course this depends how hard you want to stomp on the petal.

Here's what it said:

At 600 yards, the 175 gr shows 1959 fps;1492 in energy;73" of drop from a 200 yard zero;20.5" wind drift.

The 270-150 ABLR shows 2074fps,1432 ft lbs energy;20.1 inches wind drift and 63 inches of drop from a 200 yard zero.

The 270 load gets to about 800 yards before velocity falls below 1800 fps;and the 280 175 load gets to about 700-750 yards before it falls below 1800 fps(thinking bullet expansion here).

Not making a case for the 270 at all but if I were the OP I would get the 280. Looking to me like you have to go to the 264 Win Mag to substantially beat what a 280 has to offer...that's a hunch and I'm not gonna run these silly numbers anymore.

My eyes hurt


Side Note: In all this number crunching I couldn't help but reflect on what we have collectively known all along...it's pretty hard to beat a 7mm magnum of some sort with the heavy 7mm bullets of 160 gr and up as a LR outfit...they just stomp the smaller stuff due to the higher velocity.We do get into issues of more powder, a bit more recoil, etc., but for hunting who cares?

I know more than one guy who gets 3000fps with the 140gr class of bullets from a 6.5x284. So, that will change your figures.

I know more than one guy who gets 3000fps with the 140gr class of bullets from a 6.5x284. So, that will change your figures. [/quote]

And I know of more than on guy who gets 3000fps with a 150 out of the 270 so it doesn't change anything realistically. Are you under the impression that only the 6.5x 284 can be pushed hard?

In barrels of equal length pushed to saami specs the velocities of the 140 6.5 x 284 vs the 150 270 are to close to record a difference. Of course we can push either cartridge beyond that limit but to only push the 270 hard and leave the 6.5x284 at saami specs wouldn't seem like an apples to apples comparison.

Shod

And I know of more than on guy who gets 3000fps with a 150 out of the 270 so it doesn't change anything realistically. Are you under the impression that only the 6.5x 284 can be pushed hard?

In barrels of equal length pushed to saami specs the velocities of the 140 6.5 x 284 vs the 150 270 are to close to record a difference. Of course we can push either cartridge beyond that limit but to only push the 270 hard and leave the 6.5x284 at saami specs wouldn't seem like an apples to apples comparison.


Shod [/quote]

I know the 142gr matchkings at 3000fps is a common load for 1000yd matches in the 6.5x284. I have NEVER heard of 3000fps with a 150gr 270 bullet. Most guys have problems getting there with 140s. 130gr 270 loads generally run 3100+ fps.

Personally, the one factor no one is mentioning is the higher SD values of the 6.5 mm bullets compared to the 7mm or .277 bullets. That is a bigger factor in game killing than BC values.

I have.. My rifle actually,and a 23" Douglas barrel with 58.5 gr H4831....nothing bad happened.

And 3200 fps with the Barnes max load of RL25 with a 130 gr Barnes bullet. I don't operate at those velocities but I have seen them more than once.

I would wager a small sum that many match shooters routinely push cartridges harder than most hunters,judging from the number of blown primers I hear talk about from the guys at my range during summertime matches.

As to the higher SD,the 175 7mm at 310 ranks among the highest SD's in the Nosler line and I saw nothing in 6.5 that comes close in the Nosler lineup...even the 140.Maybe some of the roundnose 6.5's of 156-160 gr will do it..

Near as I can tell, only the 220 gr 30 cal,the 250-338,and the 400 gr-416 exceed the 7mm 175 in the Nosler lineup.

Not this matters a whole bunch since bullet construction blows holes in most SD numbers in the real world;omce it htis games animals those SD numbes go to hell in a hand basket unless construction is good....and if you match good construction with high SD,you have a good penetrator ; but if you mix high SD with shidty bullet construction all you have is a long bullet.

Trying to persuasively argue that a 6.5 cartridge of comparable capacity,shooting roughly equal bullets,is some how a better game killer than a .277 or .284 is gonna cause me to yawn and walk away. I don't believe it.Sophistry.

Try comparing the 6.5-284 and 270 in equal length barrels. Comparing 28 or 30 inch 6.5-284 match barrel velocities against a sporter 270 with a 22" barrel is obviously stacking the deck in the 6.5's direction.

Minutia defines the topic, even with the 270 interjected into the topic. I have pretty decent hunting rifles proven at long range in 6x284, 6.5x284, 25x284, 270, 280AI, and some multiples of those calibers. I usually find myself with a 280Ai with 162s in my hand for no particular reason (if I am not grabbing a 243Ai). Not sure of the intangible factor that drives me to run 280AIs, probably familiarity, but something always directs my hand when I open the safe to grab my 280Ai over the other chamberings discussed in this thread and many others not not discussed.
My advice is to built several of each then just hunt with the ones you like best, they all do a remarkable job killing stuff even if you put decent bullets through vitals.

Familiarity is worth a lot more than all these silly conversations touting one among these closely comparable cartridges as markedly superior to another...in other words, I agree.

If the .270 with 150 LRAB can generate 2900fps, does anyone have the numbers for a .280 gunning 150 LRAB with .652 BC. Velocity, drift, drop.

CLB: The BC for the 150 7mm ABLR is.611, not .652.

Nosler shows a top velocity for a 150 from a 280 as 2995 from a 26" barrel,so that's what I gave it(giving the 280 a deliberate advantage). It shows a top velocity for the 150 gr 270 bullet as 2913 from a 24" barrel,so I gave it 2900.

The 284 bullet also has a bit more base area for gas to work on than the 270 so you will likely see a skosh more velocity.

According to the Hornady Ballistics lab the 280 shades the 270 at 600 yards by 60 fps;by 3.9" in drop; by 4/10ths inch in wind drift; and by 85 ft lbs in energy.

If you start them both at 2900 fps,the equation changes in favor of the 270 by the same fractional margins.It wins at 950 yards; if you want to call 3" less drop,a 2" advantage in wind drift,and 25 ft lbs in energy as "winning" LOL!

Pretty excruciating stuff and almost impossible to prove in the field with a rifle in your hands.

Yeah you can go to the heavier 7mm bullets in the 280 with higher BC's but you can't start them as fast. So it's still a horse race by a nose.

I posted on another forum about the 270 ABLR leveling the playing field with the 280AI 162 amax for longrange shooting.

Where Eddie?

That has been my thinking as well. The 150 .277 LRAB looks like one heck of a bullet!

Thanks Bob. Was thinking 150 while looking at the 168...

In the end all of the cartridges mentioned have a lot to be desired and the 7 mag as Bobin mentioned is probably a step up if wanting to go long range or maybe even short range for that matter.

Shod

I have a question maybe someone can answer.

When you start getting a LONG bullet shot out of a gun like the 270 with a standard twist, what does the rotational velocity do to penetration? It would seem that the LRAB may tend to yaw and tumble when used at the limits of it's range once it hits the animal? Could this happen even if it shoots accurately because the rotational velocity would be less than other guns like a 6.5mm?

would a long 6.5, 7mm, or .308 caliber have the same possible issues? We all know the 6.5s tend to have 1-8" or faster twist [except for remington screwing the 260rem with a 1-9"], so would it be less likely to tumble and yaw inside the animal regardless of bullet length or design?

+1





+1

I have been told that a fast twist helps keep an expanding bullet more point on in game animals,but if it were an issue with a 10 twist 270 you would not see 150-160 gr bullets from 10 twist 270 barrels do so well in penetration on the likes of moose, elk,and other stuff.A 10 twist isn't exactly "slow" and since the 270 has by now accounted for a few million animals worldwide,discussions of its terminal effectiveness is kind of moot.

I have seen the 270-160 gr Nosler Partition used on a couple of elk;one friend has used them on a couple of New England moose and another used them on his brown bear in Alaska.Can't tell you if they tumbled in the game (which can happen to ANY bullet)because they all exited and I have never seen a recovered one.Ditto with 150's.

I very much doubt it will be an issue of any kind with a 150 gr ABLR bullet in a 10 twist 270.

I know those long 156-160 gr RN 6.5's had a reputation for penetration when started at low velocity back in the days when bullet sucked and guys killed cape buffalo and other large stuff in Africa with them. But I guess it was not all roses since even Bell stopped using them on elephant due to riveting and excessive bending in elephant skulls...he eventually even stopped using the 175 7mm bullets and ended up using the 318 WR and 250 gr bullets for skull shooting elephants.

I sort of doubt there is any inherent superiority of 6.5 bullets in terms of penetration and terminal effect over anything equivalent in 270,7mm,or 30 caliber today.

Obviously hunting season is over for most of us.

Selmer when you can get me (of all people) to sift through ballistic programs and compare bullets for tiny differences.....you better know I am bored.

I rest my case.

Tell your cute little daughter that water buffalo tastes like chicken