Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles The almighty 280 Remington

..............which is so easy to have,with a minimal uptic in recoil and powder consumption,that it exceeds the 280 easily. You can geta 160 from the 280 at 2900;give it a 25" tube,throat long,and feed it a slow burning double-based propellant,and it'll go there...but you're redlining.In comparison, the 7RM is,as Larry says,a "free lunch".....

...The 7RM sorta crushed in its' wake,the 280 and the 264....not that these aren't good.....but if I'm gonna chase velocity with heavy 7mm bullets,I'll start with more capacity.....redlining cartridges to achieve preconceived objectives,has never been my strong suit.I like "capacity"...

If I liked the rifle, I would buy/use a 280 tomorrow...because it's really good.But won't go out of my way to chase one down....BTDT.If it has a 06-length action,and 24" of 7mm tube,it'll be a 7RM,cause it is just too easy.

I have 3 - 280's ! If in 1925 the .270 would have been the .280, there would have been "zero" use to bring out the .270 !

6.5: I assume you ain't really serious....the 280 existed before the 270 came out...it was the 7x64 Brenneke round,indistinguishable from the 280 Remington....I gotta believe you know this.

So there goes another half-baked theory of cartridge evolution and revisionist history.

Next..................

BobinNH,

I must admit it was a baited answer that goes back to a controversial post from last year ! I didnt say the above, it was actually said by Craig Boddington . I guess he doesnt know what he is talking about ???

Kev

6.5: I'm not gonna accept everything CB says at face value.He also has written of a 30 caliber minimum for elk;yet his longest elk kill(and quickest)by his own admission,was with a 270......

So much for that.....

I enjoy Craig Boddington and read him a lot cause I like him,and he hunts cool places;but following him when it comes to calibers will make you dizzy.....

The 280 has been around in one form or another since like 1912...whether the Brenneke version, or Elmers' 285OKH,280 Rem, 7mm Express,etc.,and it still can't grab mainstream traction.

Why I LMAO when pundits proclaim "...this or that would happened if the 280 came out first....." BS...it WAS out first,and has existed aside the 270 since day one...it remains a cult cartridge,will never be as popular as the 270,7 rem mag or 30/06...

It has taken Harvard B-School Marketing wizz-kids just to keep it respirating.......

In the November 2006 issue of Rifle, John Barsness had an article titled "Approximating the .30-06." I believe it was his best article ever.

You have to remember also back then the Brenneke had that Euro look of 7X64, which we Americans did not like and some still dont. I will always take the .280 over the .270 ! Much more versatile ! I load for both and the numbers dont lie ! It was just touted by O'Connor and it was like Jordan pumping Nike !

Kev

Actually, the 7x64 *is* a very popular round in Europe and is fairly popular in the UK as well.

One or two European countries won't allow civilians to own rifles in "Military calibers"' France being the main one that springs to mind. No 308in or 30-06 for those guys, no 7x57mm either, so the 7x64 pretty much reigns, although in recent years an American upstart in the form of .270win is also gaining popularity , driven more by the rifles its available in than any balistic criteria.

The 7X64 and the .280 Remington aren't the same cartridge. They are close but not the same.

Laughin' here...............

This stuff is so old, hashed & re-hashed, sliced & diced, that it's now new..............yet again.

But FWIW, I am re-barreling one of my standard 280's to the AI version.

MM

OK Kev:Tell us what you see that it's "much more versatile".....no coined phrases....tell us about your loads, chronograph results,bullet performance,what you have killed with one that you could not with another....

..You own a whole bunch of overlapping calibers so surely you have seen vast differences illustrating this versatility...

Let's hear it....I'm willing to be re-educated.

More versitile? Does it wash windows? Maybe you need to enlighten us with those Numbers.

I'm afraid that you'll have to be sent to a re-education 'camp' for that one. Let's start with an 'easy' one. Repeat after me:

"Obama is good"
"Obama is great!"
"I will vote for Obama next election"

deadkenny: I can't hold 6.5(Kev) to it....I know he can't do it....just wanted to bust chops a little.....

Now you've got it!

Since most of the cartridges that have stuck around simply involved 'trade-offs', its easy enough to point out the advantages and ignore the disadvantage of your cartridge of choice. The fact is, if you want more 'efficiency', then perhaps the 280 'beats' the 7mm mags. However, by the same logic the 7x57 and 7-08 'beat' the 280. Conversely, if it's more velocity that you're after, then it works in the other direction. It's good that there is so much choice, so that one can 'tailor' one's selection to particular needs / wants. However, to argue that one cartridge is 'better' in any absolute sense than all others is rather meaningless. Having said that, 270 rulz, 280 droolz :P

Sorry, but it's too late now. You've been scheduled for re-education. This will go much easier if you cooperate. Now, repeat after me......

Aren't you the same guy that sarted this thread?

http://24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/4687449/Fill_in_my_blanks#Post4687449


Yep, I thought so, case closed

If You come on here and come close to bad mouthing the .270, the azzholes come unglued !

I can run 139/140 gr. 280's all day at 3150. You might get 3200 in a 270 with 130's if You push it and add bbl length.

Your 270 cant run 140's as fast and after that take your pick on bullet weights !
145
150
154
160
175
Can the 270 shoot anything over 150 very adequate ?
Go check B.C.'s

Oh the 270 has killed everything in the world, and so has a .22 if you really want to look !

The 280 can do everything a 270 can do and above 130gr. it does it all better !

Give me some tried and true facts of why the 270 is better ? Because Jack said so ? Jack told Warren Paige he should have built a 280 rather than a 270 , because it was a better all around cartridge. Paige had built a 280 , but didnt have the heart to tell Jack. O'Connor didnt know enough about the 270 either I guess ?

Kev

I am running 140 TSX bullet at 3140 out of my 270 win. The 280 does it better, how is that?

Are there differing degrees of dead? I can shoot all the way through an Elk with a 270, so what's your point? That is assuming you have one

Why exactly are you throwing a hissy fit over .007"...?