Home Forums Reloading Big Game Rifles .270 win vs .280 rem

Thought the samething.Just didn't want to be the first to say it....grining

Personally, I've had a hard time getting the same level of performance out of the 280 Rem. that I have out of the 270 Win.

Maybe it's just been the luck of the draw, but all of the 280s I've owned have been much more fussy in terms of accruacy, and I've had a lot harder time achieving the same velocities with similar-weight bullets.

Everything about the 270 has been easy, accurate, and fast, even with a 22" bbl..

I find the often-stated "greater bullet selection" advantage to be more of a numerical difference than it is anything else. There are a great many fine .277 bullets on the market from nearly all manufacturers weighing between 100 grs. and 160 grs. (a few heavier than that) -- certainly enough to satisfy any bullet requirment that you'd ever have for and hunting you'd ever do with any cartridge in this class.

Sometimes mere statistics get in the way of common-sense......

AD

There are 2 .280's,a .284Win.,and a .280AI in my gunsafe.I guess you could say I lean to 7mm over the .270.Monashee

I am a huge 270 fan. That said I do believe the 280 is a better well rounded round. From power to bullet selection.

I've owned and loaded for aslew of each. I've hunted more with the 270 simply because, well, I have... What one will do the other will do, provided we keep the playing field equal. There is no difference whatsoever in field performance;any differences lie in the brain of the shooter, not as to the cartridges.

Mostly, I've bought the 280's when I've run into a rifle I really liked, and knew I could make the 280 perform like a 270.So it made no difference to me.

My general observation is that the 280 is somewhat more finicky to work with than the 270, and generally does not go as fast.The fewer bullets is a moot point, unless you like to play with bullets. In hunting applications, load one good one, learn the rifle and load, and go hunting.

Jack O'Connor was of the opinion that killing power was "90% mental" and he couldn't have been more right.

Guys would learn more about that aspect of things by spending more money on hunting trips, rather than more rifles in similar, and largely redundant, chamberings.

I'm of the belief that you can learn far more with one or two good all-around rifles that you really hunt with a lot and widely, rather than a safe full that you seldom hunt with. Paper targets and chronographs can only teach you so much, and much of what those things teach is inane............

AD

A lot of great discussion here. Good information to have. It sounds like 270 v 280 comes down to personal preference. If I want a 280, get a 280.

Maybe I shouldn't be too concerened, but I want to learn more about the velocity difference between the two. One of things that was drew me towards the 280 was how nicely it fit between the 270 and 7 Mag. But if I'm going to have problems reaching 270 velocities with 280 factory rounds, then I'm not sure its worth the trouble. Take a look at these two charts:

.270 Win Ballistics
280 Rem Ballistics

From the info on those charts, the 139/140 Grain .280 Rem Bullets match - and is some cases - exceed velocities in the same factory .270 bullets.

I am looking for an all around rifle. Something I can hunt whitetails with all season, and take for Mullies/Elk when I get the chance. But we shoot A LOT during whitetail season. Let me define A LOT: We manage two high fenced ranches - one is 4600 acres, the other 1200. Between the two, we have over 350 tags to fill from October through Feb. There are plenty of weekends where I shoot 15 times and bring down 15 does. The country has some elevation change, thick brush, and many acres of open country. Shots range anyhwere from 75yrds to 350. I would say the majority of shots fall between 150 and 250 yards.

Like the previous poster said, every advantage that one caliber has, the other one is nearly equal. I should probably just get the one I want and enjoy it. No doubt I will have a gun chambered in each someday. But right now, I can only afford one!

"DWS" (darn well said) Allen and I totally concur.

Mark D

As I live in Central British Columbia and can hunt Mulies,Whitetails and Moose in the hills behind my house,my 7mm's get carried(and shot!)quite a bit!My wife took a nice whitetail with her .280 about a mile from the house last season.As I'm retired and hunt a lot,I guess I'm in the fortunate position to be able to hunt a lot with my "similar and largely redundant" safe queens!LOL Monashee

I've burned out barrels over 3 decades with both rounds.

Put me down for the 280.

Put me down for the 284Win.....heh.

Actually, the only reason I really like the 280/284Win over the 270, would be that they arent as popular in my neck of the woods.

Other than popularity and personal choice, they're all good killin machines...

Good post, AD.

AD is right to a point.Not everyone has the opportunities to get out and hunt as much as I do.All of my 7mm's have a purpose to me,and I like the fact that on any given day my wife or I can pick any of them from the rack and they will do the job if we do our part.It would be the same if they were .270's!That being said,I still don't know why I bought that .284Win!It's a nice rifle and shoots great and I just couldn't resist!Right Trev? Monashee

Bill,

We both know a 150 out of a .270 cannot kill a TX whitetail...
The .280 160 is capable though...

Grin...

Once you realize that you dont need the 284 and want to sell it back, I'll be here with open arms....heh.

Something about the 7mms that I like. Especially the ones that arent as popular as the 7RM....

Having owned and killed deer with both - I'll take the 280. I bought one in 1982 when no one heard of it (I still have it), have killed a truckload or three of deer with it, and would not hesitate to build a dedicated deer rifle from the 280 hull.

An AI would be way cool though..........

Exactly! the 270Winchester was introduced by Winchester in 1925, It was 14 years later Jack O'Conner first started writing for Outdoor Life in 1939
(I don't the date of his first article about the 270.)

Regardless, they are both well established cartridges. To each his own, to argue one is superior to the other is no more than splitting hairs.

I recently decided that I wanted a smaller caliber than my .30-06 which was then the smallest caliber/cartridge I owned. I didn't really need something else; I just wanted something new to play with. I've never owned or hunted with either a .270 Win or .280 Rem but my choice came down to those two cartridges. I picked the .280 Remington. Why? Well, I like to think of it as my poor man's 7x64 Brenneke.

-Bob F.

I'd say shooting the .280 in order to be "different" than the .270 is a wasted effort. Why? Because, well, seven thousandths of an inch doesn't really make them different.

Also, as someone sagely pointed out above, the heaviest bullet normally utilized in the .280 is the 160-grainer. Well, there's also an easily available .277" 160-grain bullet for those who want it, as well. What's more, it has a better SD number than the .284" 160-gr. bullet. So, for me, advantage to the old boring .270 WCF.

scott

allen:
I don't doubt what you say is true, and I have learned to respect your experience and opinion.

But the 2 cartridges have virtually identical case capacities and the difference in bullet diameter is only 0.007". Intuitively, they HAVE to be very close in performance. And any statistically significant difference in either accuracy or velocity (all other factors, barrel length, pressure, etc) being equal) would be hard to understand.

Individual rifles may vary a lot, but the average 280 and the average 270 can't be much different.