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

Lou,
I selected my sources because they are reloading manuals that others could reference. This seemed to be a more reasonable approach than finding a bunch of data from numerous websites and averaging it all. My point is that the 280 with optimal handloads is about 100fps faster than the 270 with optimal handloads in any given bullet weight. When you find a lot of basically random data and average it you obtain an idea how the cartridges perform with average loads.....Not the optimal loads that I was discussing.

It seems that any data I present that runs counter to your preconcieved notions,you dismiss as biased, untested, or insignificant.

When people point out that the 280 is capable of a little more velocity with bullets of tougher constuction or more accuracy with game worthy match bullets or less wind deflection and drop with its better B.C. in its best long range bullets, you say No, It's not fair to compare them that way.

I have a friend who is a Calvanist, he thinks God made some folks just to damn them. I have attemted to show him that a loving God wants all men to come to Him. No luck, he ain't listening. Doesn't matter how good my argument is, I'm damned if I do and I'm damned if I don't in his mind already.

I wonder if hardcore 270 fans are really just Presbyterians looking for something else to fuss about.

JB, I see your point, ammo availability is everything. Just wondering , Do country stores in your part of Montana stock 9.3X72R ? Eileen wouldn't have one if they didn't,right?

RuralDoc,

I showed data from 2 other 7mms on the same cases as 270 rounds loaded to the same pressure. In the case of 1, the best case velocity from any source and the average of all sources was the same. In the other case, the best case velocity from any source showed a ~30 fps advatage to the 7mm, while the average best case of all sources said it was something like 45fps. I'm not sure how much more optimal you can get than comparing the best case velocity of any source, unless you happen to have only one source that shows a larger than normal best case velocity and it happens to be the way you want it to look. If I only pick the best case velocity from 1 source what does that tell me? If you have reloaded and ran more than 1 gun over a chrony in your life, you should know that a sample of one is worthless to draw any reasonable conclusions about a round. Also, you seem to be the one with the preconceived notion that a .280 should be a certain fps faster than the .270. I asked you a bunch of times where you came up with the 100 fps number and the best I can tell it's from over your chronograph, but now I'm guessing you just want it to be 100 fps. I find it touching a scientist can be so emotional about something and ignore lab pressure tested data.

As far as sources, we are on the internet. Everybody can go to the online sources I mentioned and use them for free. It's very easy unless maybe you are using dialup. In any case, it's a lot easier than driving down to the nearest gun emporium and shelling out $35 for your single source.

I did not say the it was not fair to say a .280 with high BC match bullets shot flatter or had less wind drift or anything of the sort. I actually ran the numbers if you would take the time to read my post. It was very clear there was a slight advantage. I'm not sure how somebody could miss something so obvious. I do stand by the statement if you want to compare the 2 rounds as hunting cartridges, compare hunting bullets. If you want to compare them as match cartridges, compare match bullets. Is that too hard to understand or is it that your argument is better when you take things out of context?

I'm not sure that 7mm bullets are more stoutly constructed than .270 bullets. I have not noticed it over the years. I have shot a bunch of game with Ballistic Tips, Hornady Sp, and Nosler Partitions in both, and have not noticed any difference (like everybody else, except apparently you).

-Lou

Lou,

You asked me to produce objective data that agreed with my opinion that the 280 was about 100 fps faster than the 270 with bullets of the same weight. I provided three sources. Speer manual 8th edition. Nosler manual 4th edition. Nosler manual 5th edition.

I tried to have fun with you but must have crossed the line. I was just trying to make things interesting with a bright guy with a different opinion. Your last post indicates things have turned nasty.

My apologies for offending you, I guess engineers really are sensitive guys after all.

If we are comparing say, 150gr 270 bulet to a 150gr 7mm bullet than yes, the 280 will run faster than a 270.

But if we comapare similar Sd and BC, as with a 150gr 270 bullet to a 160gr 7mm bullet, then I say no, the 270 will generally produce more velocity.

I've chrono'ed a slew of 270's and 280's, and my observation is when I compare them 22 inch barrels tend to favor 270's, 24+ inch barrels tend to favor 280's.

Having said that, I've got a 25 inch Douglas Premium Barrel that thinks it's a 270 Wthby........... But it just seems to be an exceptionally fast barrel.

Casey

I was not offended, so no need for apologies. Engineers, in general, are not sensitive. However, they can be blunt when defending their data. I admit my last post was meant to have a bit of sarcasm. Sorry if it came across as nasty as it was not my intent.

Doesn't the Nos 4 & 5th have the same .280 data/.270 data? I could be wrong as I gave the 4th away along time ago and a buddy has borrowed the 5th and never returned it. The new one is due out in July, so I'm not too worried about it. Speer #8 is based on traditional pressure signs, which have been proven over and over to not be reliable.

This has been a fun discussion, but a bit played out (well, maybe more than a bit). Funny how we can make such a big deal out of 50 fps.

-Lou

Alpinecreek,

I killed my first bull elk in about 1994 on the western slope of Colorado .On the Veitch ranch north of Durango,outfitted by a fellow named Casey. The bull was a nice 4point taken with of all things a 270 with an X bullet. The place was beautiful,right in the shadow of Lone Cone.

I was wondering if you were that Casey.

Britt

No, it wasn't me I have heard of the outfit and ranch though. Lone Cone isn't too far from my home.

Casey

Not to start up any acrimonious exchanges (honestly) but regarding the original question - it seems a bit of a 'no brainer' if one is looking for some a bit 'different' the .280 is clearly the choice.

Regarding any 'theoretical' differences, well I don't see how .007" bullet diameter can possibly make much of a difference in anything. However, if being slightly 'bigger' makes the .280 clearly 'better' in any absolute sense, then clearly necking down is a bad idea, so the .25-06 must just be worthless. Further, it must have been a bad idea to neck down the .30-06 at all, so both the .270 and .280 are worthless. Finally, it must clearly be advantageous to neck up the .30-06, making the .35 Whelan the ultimate logic development of the .30-06 cartridge case, for all purposes. Since none of that is true, and necking up or down has it's own trade offs and compromises, then the .270 Win must be ever so slightly better than the .280 Rem in some regards and the .280 Rem must be ever so slightly better than the .270 Win in other regards.

That being said, in practice they each also have distinct differences. The .270 Win is clearly more popular overall, which has advantages in terms of availability of various rifles chambered in it as well as factory ammunition. For reloaders, there is a wide variety of 7mm bullets available, of various designs. For those that like to 'tinker', the .280 Rem has great appeal as a cartridge that didn't quite live up to its great potential. For those that just want to find a rifle of their choice chambered in a round of that class, preferably at a good price, and likewise easily find factory ammo for it, similarly at a good price, then the .270 Win is the way to go.