A friend is trying to persuade me to buy his Sako .280.

I know it's a fine rifle, but ammo is getting more and more scarce and neither Remington nor Ruger chamber their new rifles for it.

What's wrong with the .280?

It's too good to be true, so people won't believe in it.

Don't worry, the popularity of the 280 Rem. waxes and wanes. It will never be mainstream but I doubt it will every go away completely.

There are too many rifles out there chambered in 280.

Landrum

There is only one problem with the .280. It isn't a .280 AI - yet.

Absolutely nothing is wrong with the 280 Rem. I've never owned one but I hand loaded 1 for a friend. IF I had bought a 280 yrs. ago instead of a 270, I would be just as happy and maybe more so since there are more bullets weights available.

As has been stated on this subject many times, the 280 came on the scene TOO LATE and therefore too far behind the 270 to ever catch up.

From experience I can tell you the 270 will do NOTHING the 280 can't do. NO animal has or will tell the difference when shot with either one.

If you can buy that Sako for a good price, and you like that particular rifle buy it. You will not be disappointed.

Nothing wrong with that except it sounds like the real problem is you don't handload. Nuff said..

The trouble with the 280 is that it is shy by 24 thousandths in bullet diameter.

Laffin, now that is funny....

If the price is reasonable I would jump on it. A fine cartridge in a fine rifle with a high "cool" factor. The local mini-mart probably won't have any .280 ammo. So what. There is plenty available on-line if you don't handload. The best thing about the .280, besides being an outstanding cartridge, is that not every azzhat owns one.

As long as you don't try to equal a 270W and run it 5k psi over max SAAMI pressure, it's a fine cartridge.......

I like 280 more than 30-06 for a one gun arsenal down here in the south..[did I just say that outloud??]...Out west, runnin 180s and 200s would be more important for biggish beasties.

The 280 Remington is a GREAT cartridge. It fell into the shadow of the 270 Winchester and was poorly marketing by Remington. I almost bought another two weeks ago at the Chantilly (VA) gun show, but walked away to think about it and when I returned, it was gone.

Somebody tried to "improve" the perfect cartridge? That's the only problem with it.

The only thing that I can think of is that you can't buy a box of shells in a gas station in podunk. If that carrys no weight, nothing

The Sako 280 is fully capable of the SAME pressure of ANY 270W.

+1

I'd say jump on it, sounds like a fine combination to me. Guess it kinda depends on what he wants for it. Is it scoped?

Sure, jump on it and if doesn't work out, you can always clean up the chamber and barrel with a 30-06 reamer. Then you'll have something you can buy ammo for and kill the big stuff.

Not a damn thing wrong with it.

Nothing.

It just got caught in a squeeze play between the 270 Winchester and the 7RM back in 1962,and lost the popularity race to those two other cartridges.

It's still a very good cartridge.

It is, but...........it doesn't have the factor of a 7x64.

Amen to that!

czech1022
Aint a damn thing wrong with a 280. Shooting like type/weight bullets, you'll be hard pressed to see any difference at all when shooting test media compared to a 270 or 30-06....or in heart/lung for that matter.
Charlie

?

Nothing wrong with it!

Buy it and become a handloader.

Just for the record, Remington's website lists 3 rifles in .280:


280 REMINGTON

Model 700 Mountain Rifle LSS
Model 700 Alaskan Ti
Model 700 XCR II

In my opinion the 280 Rem had no business in the M740 autoloader, everyone I know wants them in a bolt action.
Did Remington ever offer it in the Sendero?

I owned a Sako M75 in .280 which I sold to a friend, as he really wanted one. I then promptly purchased another .280, this one a Cooper.

I really like the cartridge. I am not going to say that it is "better" than the .270/'06 but it is certainly as good. Sako rifles tend to shoot very well with a number of different loads, mine always have so the amount of factory ammo should be no big deal. While not a lot of loads, there are plently of good ones for a hunting rifle.

The .280 is the cartridge I've always wanted but could never justify the purchase of due to the fact I have a .270 and a .30-06.

If you had a .280, you wouldn't need either of the others....

(Sorry, couldn't resist... )

What he said.

To use that logic, if you had a good 30-06, you certainly wouldn't "need" a .280 either..

Unless of course,you actually LIKED not being able to find ammo anywhere.

My .280 pushes Barnes TSX 140's at 3050 fps with no excessive pressure signs at all, from a 22" bbl....

If your not hand loading, the 280 factory ammo is generally loaded to weaker pressure than factory 270 ammo.

There's this thing called the internet now where you can order ammo and have it shipped to your door.

Midway lists 22 different boxes of ammo of .280 Rem for sale. Damn near obsolete....

I've never not seen 280 Rem ammo in any gun store bigger than a baitshop. Course I load and tend to not forget to bring important stuff like ammo when I hunt, so I don't have to rely on Bucky's Bait and Car Repair to save my hunt.

I've never had a 740 Auto loader, but I do have a 7400 Auto in 280. It's been 100% reliable, and it is as accurate as any rifle that I have ever fired. It shoots cloverleafs with Winchester Supreme Fail Safes. They are a tad spendy at around $35 for a box of 20, but I ordered all that I will likely ever need on the Web. I do believe the have morphed the Fail Safes into a new improved cartridge now, and I have not tried them. I also roll my own, and my 280 will never be for sale. I started with an 06 (Colt Sauer), and I love it. I have a Savage 270 that shoots great. I had a Ruger 7 mag, but it would not shoot to my expectations, but to be fair, it was probably due to my flinch from the recoil/muzzle blast. It was acceptable at shorter ranges, but at longer pokes, I didn't feel confident enough to make a clean kill. My favorite for big game (deer, bear, hog), by far, is the old Amish Assault Rifle in 280. I did remove the plastic dust cover to keep it from rattling and spooking deer. YMMV.

I have often thought of working w/ a 280 Rem., I think it would be a fine cartridge, thinkin' a nice featherweight winny would be about perfect.
Got two 270's, a 7x57, and a 7Rum, just no room.......although I could sell the Rum and one 270.

Gunner

Yeah, Remington, Cooper, Browning, Weatherby only stamp the weaker actions .280 Rem. The .270 Win's are all factory 1sts and sprinkled with pixie dust so they can handle that extra 5k psi.

You do realize most of the premium .280 Rem ammo's out there by Nosler, Federal and Hornady these days tend to have the same performance for the .280 Rem as the .270 Win?

In fact Nosler and Hornady list faster max loads for the .280 Rem in 140 gr than the .270 Win in 140 gr both of their reloading manuals. In fact the max load for the .280 Rem 140 gr using RL-19 is 134 fps faster than the fastest max load listed for the 140 gr .270 Win in Nosler 6.

You boys need to realize it ain't 1977 anymore.

Which Sako ? ( 85, 75, ...)

Nothing wrong with .280 , Enjoy!

Yeah,well I have 2 270's and 4 30-06's and I got a 280 so I wouldn't spend anymore time worrying about justifying one or buying another 270 or 30-06 that I really didn't need either. Some guys put their extra dough into passbooks and I put mine into more guns. I don't need but got inexpensively so its not hard to let them go for more than I paid for them when I want to. Only downside I can see so far is the price of the ammo for guys that don't reload and they prolly don't care about that though. Magnum Man

And if you had either of the others, you wouldn't need any of the others...

Then a Sako in 22 Hornet should be able to run 65k psi too?.......

You obviously haven't read the other posts on this subject.

No XXX XXX, the 280s pressure limit was set for the auto of yrs past. It wasn't set for the cartridge itself. Do some homework.

edited to add:

Now, it's 2:00 pm cst. With less attitude, I refer you to P.4 of this thread and read Bighorn's and Foxbat's posts.

In bolt actions the 280 is/should not be limited to the pressure limits of the auto and especially the Rem 740.

Honestly, there is no reason any modern bolt aciton 280 can not operate at the same pressures of the 270.

This really is not new news!

Extra dough? Sorry but in this economy I forgot what it's like to have anything left after bills.

Love mine to death, shoots small groups with 140 grain TSX, and everything I've shot with it has fallen down promptly.

Have a good friend that probably owns a dozen rifles and they're all chambered for the 280. The only one that isn't is a 243 for his daughter. You'd think he would want to try something different but he won't be swayed.

There is a pretty big gap between them two.You best get a 280 to fill it!!!

The only advantage to a 270 Winchester is it's easier to find ammo. Performance wise... no one with a 270, 280, or 30/06, has enough reason to replace one with another... Purchase and enjoy your good fortune!

What's a 280? Oh wait I'll check the history books.

It was my dad's favorite non-short action cartridge. I bought him a rifle for Christmas many years ago and told him he could pick any standard production rifle in any caliber. He chose a Ruger 1B in .280 Remington.

the biggest advantage that the .280 has over the .270 is that, in most shooters minds, the 25-06 is too closely overlapping the .270 to own both... the .280 not so much...

most any 7mm owner can also find a place for a quarter bore in his line-up...
thus the seed of wisdom is sown....

+1

280 runs lower pressures than a 270 Winchester.

There is a great write up in Ken Waters "Pet Loads" explaining the virtues of the 280 and how it excells over the 270 Winchester.

Some years back in the 60's, family found a real killer load in the 7 Mag with 61g of IMR 4831 with a CCI250 and a 160g Sierra BTSP with turned out to have a velocity of 2950 fps.

I duplicated the load in a Rem 700 with a 24" barrel with a load of 58.5g of IMR 7828 with a Fed 210 and 160g Sierra BTSP at 2940 fps(this load is right out of the Nosler Manual). This bullet/load combo just drops deer in thier tracks in either the 280 or the 7 Mag, and is one of the all time really great loads that I have seen used on deer by many hunters.


For guys that like the 7mm 140g Bullets, the std 280 will do a much better job than the 270 Winchester at coming up with many load combo's at higher velocities, and once again, you will see that the 280 runs less pressure than the 270W.

The BC of the 7mm bullets you just have to like.

I have two 270W currently and I would have liked to turn them both into 280's until recently when I found a load in the 270 for the 110 tipped tripple shock at 3550 with 57g of R#17 with a federal 215...that load is nothing to sneeze at with 2" groups at 300 yards with a 3.5-10 Leupold. Deer do not stop the 110g Tipped tripple shock when shot from any angle...very little recoil from this round; compare this load to a 257 Weatherby.

A few years back, I came up with a load for the 280 using a 120g Barnes X with 50g of R#15 at 3240 fps, really flopped deer and exits from any angle. 49g of C2 was another good load for the 280 with the 120g X bullet at 3160...very little recoil.

If the 280 had been introduced about 5 years ago combined with the powders we have today without all the old pumps and autos out there, you would see some astounding numbers not heard of today. The Ackley Improved version of this cartridge is one of the very best Ackley's I have ever worked with, which will be right on the heels of the 7 Mag with the 140's, but the 7 Mag(especially in customs) will stomp all over the 280 AI with it's capacity to handle slower powders with the heavier bullets.

In short nothing. It has had a couple of issues that have hurt it. #1 the 270 was already well entrenched as the lighter 30-06 alternative. #2 it was always under loaded a bit below it's potential plus the 7mm mag was pretty fresh at that time and everyone was moving into magnums. I actually think it would be a great one gun choice even though I have never had one.

The 270 could NEVER equal a 280.

Remington must have sprinkled pixie dust on the 740s that are chambered in 270 as they seem to be able to run the 65k psi that SAMII has spec'd.

For those so enamored,a 140 AB in 270 has a BC of .496;the bullet easily moved at over 3000 from the vastly inferior 270...

The same weight and style in 7mm goes .485 BC and is started at the same velocities;generally I have gotten 3050 to 3080 from a 22" tube in the 280...in contrast to 3100 or more from 130's in the 270.

All of Noslers figures for the 280 are from a 26"tube;those for the 270 from a 24"....personally I run 22" in both.

BC's for the 150's in both are too close to call,as are velocities.

So....if you see a large difference between the two,on the range,or in the field on animals,you might also beleive in the Easter Bunny. Having shot oodles of both,and hunted with them both as well,my suspicions are long since confirmed.The reasons that I read these highly amusing reports on the 280's "vast" superiority for home entertainment value, only.

Anyone really paying attention, will notice that the real "magic" in 7mm comes with bullets 160 gr and up...and for my tastes,the 280 with those weights, while useful,gets completely smoked by the 7mm's of true magnum capacity.

If I am going to make the leap over the huge chasm that is .007 inch,I am not going to house it in a case of stingy capacity,and run it through the roof in a 24" tube.....I'll take the magnum hull,start the heavies really fast in the same barrel.

THAT is where the difference lies...this will be borne out in the field and the range.You will see it, if you look.

I like the .280 over the .270 simply because i can shoot 175's at useable velocities. A .280 shooting a 175 at 2600 fps will do anything a 30-06 will do with a 180 at 2700 fps.

For deer they are equal but if an elk is on the list then I believe the .280 wins easily.

What would said 280/175 do that a 270/160 will not?

Nothing wrong with the 280, will do the job the 7x64 do since 1917 and is not far from your 30-06 in most standard loadings. Most of good knowledgebable of your gunwriters think the same. Its only problems: it's not a former US govt caliber, never was pushed by proeminent writers like O'Connor and is not magnum...For the rest it kill, and well if bullets are adapted to game and placed where they need to be!

Bob - Very Well put, accurate assessment, & chronos will verify.

+1

15 grains is fairly significant and the 175's are spitzers whereas as far I know the 160 .270's are semi-spitzers. Didn't say they wouldn't work, just that I believe the 7mm's do it better.

??? why??? and on what kind of target??? I'll not pick on you over it, as i used to think the same way...
15 gr is half of a .22 short bullet... shave 15 gr of lead and hold it in your hand...

the .270 made it's reputation as a killer with 130s...

I agree with that assessment totally.

Run a 7mm WSM, 7mm rem mag etc etc with 160+ high BC slugs at ,2,900 FPS + and yes you are literately adding a few hundred extra yards of range to a good .270 WCF. Of course, you are also amping up the recoil (and most likley barrel length) to get that performance.

I remember 30 years ago when the .280 was the absolute DARLING of the custom rifle crowd. Everyone fixated on the supposed ballistic "sweet spot" BS.. The .280s only true advantage was the BULLETS. At the time ,7mm hunting slugs as a whole had BC numbers far above most 270s, which were mostly flat based bullets with lead spitzer tips. There were also no 140g .270 slugs at that time and most guys were using 130 grainers.

Once Nosler started building BT slugs 25 years ago, the BC numbers of newly designed .270 slugs started to creep up to where they are just as good as any other hunting weight 7mm or 30 cal bullet. And since then in terms of popularity, the 280 has retreated back into the .270s shadow. For most folks the very slight performance gain of a .280 is simply not worth the logical hassles.

As a matter of fact, the effect of the new .270 bullets has been so great, that 40 after the 7mm mag and .280s debut, when Winchester unvieled the WSM rounds in 2001, the .270 took off like a scalded cat because the 7mm was no longer vastly superior in hunting weight bullets. If it were not for the 1,000 yard shooters running the 7MM WSM with match slugs, it would have been dead 5 years ago.

Which is a good thing, because the 7mm WSM is a fine round and deserves to be more popular. Frankly I think a rifle like a m70 Extreme Weather in 7mmWSM dropped in a McMillan Edge weight stock at about 6.75 lBs may be the ultimate worthwhile performance enhancement over a run of the mill .270 WCF.

A "few hundred extra yards" over the .270?

I always take my .280 Remington ammo with me. I don't rely on Mom's & Pop's Hot Dogs & Storm Windows Company out in the middle of the boonies to supply me with ammo.

L.W.

In terms of energy at the target with the loads I was talking about-yes.

According to every Ballistics program I have ever run the numbers on, when you compare the following loads-

.270 WCF 150g Berger with a .531 BC at @ 2800 FPS MV

7mm WSM with a 168g berger with a .617 BC @ 2,900 FPS MV


The 7mm WSM hits with the same energy at 600 yards as a .270 does at 400. And given the BC advantage of the heavier 7mm slugs, the further out one goes that only gets more pronounced. Not to mention less wind drift as well.

I am sure both rounds could be loaded hotter but those velocities are achievable with both rounds with those bullets.

I am also not saying the average hunter even needs that advantage out to most reasonable hunting distances, but it does not mean it's not there.

And my real point was that such 7mm magnum loads sure as hell offer more of an advantage over a .270 than any .280 will provide.

Dude, Walmart doesn't even carry .280 ammo.

And BTW, unless you are super human- even YOU forget things. Or the airlines lose them for you etc. If you are in a remote outfitter's camp or overseas- good luck finding any .280 ammo in a pinch.

Hell, one might forget the rifle, so what good is ammo you can find everywhere....

In your case, I am sure that would be an advantage for you.

Go run some more ballistic programs, let the men actually do the shooting.

Coming from a dink shooting smallbore hack like you, that's rich.

Gotta be a long barrel to get that vel..

You bet it would..LOL

Thanks for pointing that error out.

I just corrected it on the post.

It should have read 2,900FPS.

it's the saturday afternoon soaps @ 24hourcampfire.com... guys pulling bullet specs and ballistic charts out like a gunslinger blazing into action... like we aint all read the same chart or loadbook page a hundred times...

i mean... come ON...

if everybody had to pull a real trigger 10 times to post, and shoot at live game twice for every opinion offered on a cartridges usefulness for hunting, it would sure calm down a bit as to wild opinions...

and i like hearing why joe likes the accubond over the ballistic tip, or the interlock over the partition... and i like reading about the rifle jack put together... might not be my choice, but it'll probly work for him, and i dearly hope he's on my side when push comes to shove...

Jim,

Thanks for the clarification, though it's about what I expected.

I just got back from the range, where the 130 270 slugs dropped so far at 300-400 yards, I had to arrange a relay team 200 yards out,to get them on target

Fun thread!


JohnW please excuse the ballistic gack....sometimes there is no choice!

sounds like you needed the Acme Bullet Booster...

At the muzzle the energy difference is 225 ft/lbs (2402 vs. 2627), at 300 yards (1457 vs. 1737). This is based on the BC of both bullets from the Nosler specs and using the handloads.com calculator.

That is over a 15% increase in energy. Again, on an elk size target, that would seem to be significant. Especially considering the 7mm has the edge in sectional density. Again, not saying the .270 isn't good, just saying that for ME I would rather have a bigger bullet that should penetrate better on an elk. I want any extra advantage I can get if I have to take a quartering away shot on a large animal.

all right then, thanks...

You left out the part where I said "...for ME I would rather have..."

The original post was "What's wrong with the .280?" I was simply saying why I liked it over a .270 for a certain application. Wasn't implying other people had to feel the same way or they were ignorant for feeling that way.

Yes, the .270 will kill anything as dead as anything else and will do so in a very effecient manner. As will pretty much anything else you choose to shoot animals with.

Guess I'll have to insert some statistics from what is generally known as "real life."--

My wife and I and our hunting companions have taken a total of 139 big game animals with the .270 and .280 and various other rounds of similar bore diameter and muzzle energy, including the .280 AI, 7x57/7mm-08 and .308. (Seventy-eight of those animals were taken by me.) In North America the animals have ranged up to elk, moose and bison, and in Africa they included such supposedly large and tough animals as gemsbok, wildebeest and zebra. The ranges ran up to 400+ yards.

I have yet to see an observable difference in "killing power" that couldn't be attributed to bullet placement, and maybe the type of bullet used. In no instance did the headstamp of the cartridge make the slightest bit of difference, depite statistical differences in bullet diameter, ballistic coefficient, retained energy or any other ballistic gack.

Now, maybe if we'd shot another 139 big game animals at ranges past 400 yards some demonstrable differences would show up--but I really, really doubt it.

PS--And in answer to the orginal question, there's nothing wrong with the .280. I used a custom .280 for several years in the 1990's, and it works fine. In fact it's just as good as the .270!

To the OP, nothing. Everyone has their pet guns and loads and such. There will always be a debate over what is better.
I chose a .280 Rem and now a .280AI because I like 7mm bullets (I handload), and I have NEVER had a .280 that was not very accurate once the right load was found. I had a Sako 75 that liked everything, it shot the 160gr NP into tiny groups.

If you really want speed get a 7mmSTW or a 7.21 Lazzeroni Firebird nothing can touch it, a 160gr pill at 3550fps.

Please explain to me just what "muzzle energy" does for you .

sorry, then... i didn't mean to misrepresent what you said...

and i do believe that there are better cartridges for some applications... in my mind those situations generally involve longer shooting distances, windy landscapes, and truly fast cartridges...

other than that i much prefer to talk rifles, woodwork, riflecraft, and hunting...
as a young single guy i traveled a bit and mostly used the .243 for everything...

Please explain to me just what "muzzle energy" does for you . [/quote]

It was just a starting point to begin the comparison.

I mae knot bee that guud at tinkin

But it seems to me, all else being equal, a cartridge with more muzzle energy would have more energy at long range too...I dunno, its just a theory...

So what does that do for you?

As someone said, bullets matter more than headstamps.

I've got some 7x57's, a 280, a 7-08 and a 280AI.

Do I need all four cartridges? Absolutely!

Why? Because it is just a lot more fun for me to mess with them regarding accuracy, velocities, bullets, powders, brass, primers etc.

They all kill cleanly out to 300 yds, which is about the maximum I feel comfortable to shoot at game. And I do like a long stalk.

Steve

Three things...

1) Any reasonable "headstamp" will kill any animal at any reasonable distance with any reasonable shot placement with any reasonable bullet...DUH!

2) We all have personal reasons for liking what we choose and for the most part none of those reasons are all that valid when compared to the reasons other people choose something different.

3) We run into trouble when we turn subjectivity into objectivity.

These discussions are a whole lot more enjoyable when we keep these things in mind.

So tell me about this whole energy thing again.

Just giving MY reasons for MY choice, not demeaning anyone else's choice or saying anyone else's choice is invalid.

I'll make a stab at it:

Kinetic energy is the simplest and most universal "killing power" formula, the reason it's quoted by more hunters than any other formula--at least by hunters who firmly believe that killing power can be reduced to a number.

My experience is that the more firmly a hunter quotes kinetic energy as a basis for the choice between various cartridges, the fewer the animals the hunter has taken. This is only a general trend, however, not a rule--and certainly no more valid than regarding kinetic energy as THE answer to killing power.

Kinetic energy is also the most-used number in 24hourcampfire arguments over ballistic gack, followed by inches in trajectory.

In most of a lifetime as a rifle loony I've tried a bunch of cartridges other hunters firmly told me were far more wonderful and amazing than other cartridges of about the same power. I found that all of them worked very similarly, within certain broad categories, despite the magic often attributed to 40-degree shoulders, metric bullet diameters, and differences in ballistic coefficient or muzzle velocity that, once we do the math, usually work out to less than 10%.

Now, there are other differences, such as panache, history, cool, trendiness, blah blah blah. If somebody firmly believes that the .280 (or .270 Winchester, or .280 Ackley Improved, or 7x57, or 7mm WSM) has one or more of these characteristics, then they'll feel more pleasure when shooting and hunting with their rifle. This pleasure is undoubtedly more "real" than any of the supposedly provable differences in ballistics between similar cartridges, but very few hunters understand or can explain this. So they fall back on what they mistakenly believe are hard numbers.

trajectory is consistent... wind deflection can be a booger...

I chose the .280 Remington to be a Contrarian. If I mention ".270" or "30-06" to my friends they know exactly what I am talking about. But mention "280" and their eyes get a bit cloudy and mystified. When I tell them it is a "270 necked up to 7mm" or a "30-06 necked down to 7mm" they get a bit more comfortable. Then they ask me why the heck i choose such a thing? I tell them because 160 grain 7mm bullets have really high BCs and so I can get the best of both worlds with a tweener... very flat shooting... less wind drift... then they will go off and look for the ammo and not find it, then find it on the internet and realize it is 1.5X the cost of 30-06 or 270 and come back and tell me I am nuts. I just grin. Who cares. "life is too short to spend it with an ugly gun".

One day I will find a new production Winchester Featherweight with a gorgeous walnut stock, and I will drop the coin for the .270 or the 30-06... as I doubt I will find it in 280...

Well said JB. Where you put the bullet is still the most important "pre gack item", all the different cartridges are just to amuse the experimenter in us.Find one you are comfortable with and make meat to fill the freezer. Magnum man

Yep!

I have a confession to make. I did have a Featherweight in 280 for a few months until I needed an action for a 9.3x64, oops.

I generally only load one bullet weight and type for any given rifle. I end up with more rifles in good times, and have more to sell in bad.

I have a 7mm-08 for use with 140 grain Accubonds, a 7x64 for 160 grain Accubonds, and a 7mm Rem Mag for 160 grain Partitions. For 175 grain Partitions I use a 7x57. Logical? No. Any less logical than what I have read above? A little bit.

If I could cop a Sako in 280, it would already be in the safe. Great rifle, great cartridge. And no, the 7x64 would not have to find a new home. It has a different throat than the 280.

Perhaps because it does not quite equal the 7-mm Rem Mag?

What's all the fuss? I'm sure many hee havr had muh more experience hunting with the cartridges in question tnam I but in 60 plust years I've used the 30-30 some when I first started but th 30-06 was THE carridge to go with so most ov the various deer I have killed have fallen to that round. I didn't even own a .270 until 1973 and only took two deer with it plus an antelope in 2009. Gee, all three animals died from the first shot. Who'd a thunk? A few years back while cruising a gun show I snagged a 1909 Argentine barreled action in .280 Rem. plus a stock blank for a very good price. ($300) I took the package to my gunsmith and he did the stock for me in the classic style and then he farmed the checkering out to Sterling Davenport for that to be done. I haven't shot it much, either being too busy or already working with a couple of other rifles so the .280 Rem. hasn't gone hunting. I was kind of planning to use it this year but I didn't draw a tag for anything, a large vet bill and my truck in the shop wiped out any money for a play for pay hunt anywhere so I guess that .280 will have to wait until next year, the Good Lord a willin' to give me another year. I guess my point is if I put the bullet in the proper sticking place, the animal will die. If I don't then a long nasty trail job and maybe a lost animal with be the result. It would be the same if I used a .270, 30-06 or the very latest gee-whiz super .300 magnum.
What a sit the Indian guide said to jack O'Connor on one of his hunts? "Any gun good. Shootum good." To me, that says it all.
Paul B.

The only problem with the .280 is the .270 marketing department did a better job of consumer awareness.

The .280 is my absolute go-to for just about everything. And as someone mentioned not every azzz-hat owns one, which makes mine a proud rarity. And I can punish paint with danged near every shot at whatever distance.

The 270 had a 30-something year head start.....remember the 256 Newton and the 7x64 Brenneke existed already in the 1920's.....looks like Winchester wanted to split the baby between them,and have their own marketing niche.Made no sense to bring out a cartridge identical to the 7x64...

Remington "ate it's young",and helped kill the 280 with the 7RM...the rest is history.

Nothing if you are a reloader. If you are not, you can get same performance at half price from 270 Win.

a 280 owner,

Sycamore

The .280 is a fantastic cartridge; in fact it is almost as good as the .30-06.

That company has made an art form of it.

In its wake there's a number of excellent cartridges that have been poorly marketed and then to left to languish and fade into oblivion.
Perhaps not total oblivion, thankfully there's always loonies to keep them breathing..

7x64 is just the 7x57s loudmouth brother.
Does not have anything meaningfull new to say - but does so loudly.

Seems to me that just not enough companies chamber for it, hard to buy one when very few produce them.

NOT 1 THING WRONG with the .280, usually very good shooters, mild recoil, big performance, BUY IT or send his address to me.
MartyC

orion03,

Actually, it's the other way around. Not many rifle manufacturers chamber the .280 because not many people express much desire to own one. About the only hunters that do are the 5% (at most) who are rifle loonies.

The 280 Remington is one of THE BEST CARTRIDGES OUT THERE!

Just got back from Nebraska, where I took a whitetail doe and a mule deer buck with my .280. Got lots of questions about my choice of .280, over other calibers. After awhile, I just reply with, 'I already had .280 dies when I had the rifle built."

An accurate, repeatable .280 setup, with 140 gr. Accubond bullets at around 3000 fps, is a fairly deadly deer killer.......

The 280 has not worked on anything except Whitetail, Mule Deer, antelope, sheep, goats, caribou, Red Deer, Sita Deer, & Roe Deer for me. Will shoot a slightly heavier bullet than a 270 & extremely versatile. From a practical stand point does nothing a 270 will not do. Definately, a handloaders caliber.

Owning a .280 is not about "need". To quote a friend. "If I NEEDED it, I'd already have it- I WANT it, so just hush up and indulge me!"

In terms of the cartridge itself, nothing is wrong with it. It's a very versatile and useful on a large spectrum of game.

From the perspective of the market however, it's trying wrest away market share from two of the most popular and well established cartridges on the planet, the 270 and the 30-06. Not enough difference between them to justify a third cartridge in the same general niche.

Plus it was developed by Remington, a company that couldn't market a bucket of water to a man whose pants were on fire.

The M700 seems to have done pretty well. And the Core-Lokt bullet line...

And the 7Mag...

I've said it before and it�s still true. The 280 Remington is an excellent cartridge for all but dangerous game. Obviously, elephants and Cape buffalo are out of its realm (unless you to be trampled) and I'd be careful of deer hunting in prime grizzly country (never know who you'll run into), but it�s great for virtually all else.

It is a fine round, that doesn't do anything the 30-06 or 270 does.

Nothing, it's why I dont own a 270 Win. The 280/7x64 will do anything the 270 will.

What's wrong with the .280 is this: it kicks too much for prairie dogs, and it is a little light for buffalo.
If you can get past those faults, it is pretty good.

That is why they make varmint and buffalo calibers! I do not think many of us here just have one gun for everything, that would not be much fun!!

Well, you are right on this. The 280 Remington is not an elephant cartridge, but the 7X57mm is (according to DWM Bell who killed many with this less powerful cartridge). But then, there is the story about mad dogs and Englishmen!