Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters What's wrong with the 280 Rem?

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.