Why would one choose 280 rem over 30-06?

[adcoch1]

You wouldn't think that .007" would make such a difference, until you hand load and start shopping for bullets.

I wouldn't trade my 7-08's ability to throw 162 grain ELD-X's for anything a .270 can do.

And this is the main reason I don't like the 270...

 

[Arkansas Paul]

I just like to be different.
I don't own a .280 at the moment, but had a Handi Rifle chambered in it. I loved the caliber, but hated that rifle.
I killed several deer with it, and they all went bang/flop. But I've killed several times more with a .30-06 and when you hit them in the same place, they do the same thing.
Recoil wise, I can't tell a bit of difference.

I love the caliber and if Savage releases their factory .280 AI chambering, I'll be mighty tempted.

Some won't go for it because you can't pick up ammo at Wally World, but that's not an issue. I haven't bought centerfire ammo off the shelf in several years (with the exception of .380 acp).

In any event, I'll keep my Vanguard in .30-06 as well.

 

[cdb1]

I like the .280 Remington and if didn’t already have a .270 and a 30-06 I might get one. The first bolt gun I will buy though if I ever get a .284 caliber will be a 7x57/.275 Rigby because my favorite author growing up was Jim Corbett.

 

[Slamfire]

And this is the main reason I don't like the 270...

Always wondered why Winchester selected .277 as a bullet diameter.The diameter is 10% less than a 308, and that has to be the reason. Some number picked arbitrarily, something different, to expand the market place. It was also not .284, American's had not cottoned to the 7mm Mauser even though that is an excellent, well balanced cartridge. I think the 257 Roberts proceeded the 270 Win, and of course, Americans were not using 6.5 mm's in 1923. Americans understand inches, not millimeters, cartridges which have metric dimensions caused issues for people who only used Imperial units. I hope they never change the gas pump to liters as I only think in terms of gallons.

 

[Garandimal]

...IMHO, the .280 is superior to the 7mm Rem Mag, not performance-wise, but the cartridge is pert-near perfect efficiency-wise...

BTW: this post is from a devout .270 shooter.

Then, as a .270 devotè (or deviant), you should know that the .270 WIN is THE perfect cartridge, efficiency-wise.

...They are twins imho UNLESS you don't roll your own. In that case the .270Win (and the 30-06) blows the 280Rem out of the water. Soooo much more ammo to choose from, they sale 270 and '06 everywhere and alot of factory 280Rem is watered down compared to these 2...

Spot on.

.280 REM - Get it cuz you want it.

Think the 7mm-08 makes for a better mountain rifle, and the .270 WIN/150 gr. NP's have convinced most everything they have connected with to just stop/drop/die.

The 150 gr. Accubond and 145 gr. ELD-X are also supposed to be very effective long range performers.




GR

 

[Archie]

I have a desire for calibers 6.5 and 7 mm. Mainly the 'old' ones like 6.5x55, 6.5x54 MS and 7 mm Mauser/.275 Rigby. They are lighter, don't abuse the shooter as much in recoil and for a hunting rifle will shoot well and kill most game as far as the hunter-shooter can hold reliably. I have a few 'appropriate' rifles as it is, so any 'new' .280 would have to be a bargain. That's the only thing limiting me.

 

[Garandimal]

You wouldn't think that .007" would make such a difference, until you hand load and start shopping for bullets.

I wouldn't trade my 7-08's ability to throw 162 grain ELD-X's for anything a .270 can do.

And this is the main reason I don't like the 270...

Really...?

.270 Winchester 150 Grain Nosler AccuBond LR

Grain Weight - 150 Grains
Muzzle Velocity - 2900 Feet Per Second
Muzzle Energy - 2801 Foot Pounds
G1 Ballistic Coefficient - 0.625
Sectional Density - 0.279

Not even a little bit?






GR

 

[adcoch1]

Really...?

.270 Winchester 150 Grain Nosler AccuBond LR

Grain Weight - 150 Grains
Muzzle Velocity - 2900 Feet Per Second
Muzzle Energy - 2801 Foot Pounds
G1 Ballistic Coefficient - 0.625
Sectional Density - 0.279

Not even a little bit?






GR

Admittedly the opinion was formed a long time ago and is emotional and unreasonable, but dang, I didn't know about that 270 bullet! Those are some great numbers.

 

[cdb1]

I certainly have irrational dislikes:
.308
7mm RemMag
6.5 Creedmoor

 

[natman]

The 280 is a fine cartridge in its own right. However there is just enough real world difference between a 30-06 and a 270 to justify having both. The 280 tries to split that difference and there isn't enough to make any sense. That's why the 280 is unpopular despite its merits. The only reason to own one now is to be different for the sake of being different.

 

[someguy2800]

I really like my long action cartridges, I am a fan of both 270 and 30-06 and own both, but my father in law is fanatical about the 270. For that reason alone I'd buy a 280 over a 270 just because I am so tired of him going on an on about how anything less than a 338 win mag is worse than a 270. There are some very nice 7mm bullets in the 140-160 grain range that I find appealing.

 

[Keyfer 55]

The available of 3006 Springfield ammo. Speeke for it's self .Rem .280 /7mm Express like resurrecting
a dinosaur .It shadowed by the 7mm Remington Magnum . It just came out at the wrong time.

 

[old heeler]

Really...?

.270 Winchester 150 Grain Nosler AccuBond LR

Grain Weight - 150 Grains
Muzzle Velocity - 2900 Feet Per Second
Muzzle Energy - 2801 Foot Pounds
G1 Ballistic Coefficient - 0.625
Sectional Density - 0.279

Not even a little bit?

GR

2018, Nosler corrected BC for most of Nolser ABLR and most were adjust lower. The 270 150gr ABLR is now .591

https://www.nosler.com/accubond-long-range-bullet/

 

[Nature Boy]

Question: Why would anyone choose a (____) over a (____)?

Answer: Because I wanted a (____)

 

[troy fairweather]

2018, Nosler corrected BC for most of Nolser ABLR and most were adjust lower. The 270 150gr ABLR is now .591

https://www.nosler.com/accubond-long-range-bullet/

ad that is at 3000 fps. bc is not constant with fsp

 

[Demi-human]

Answer: Because I wanted a (____)

…but they didn't have any. So I got this. Now I can't find any Ammunition for it...

 

[mcb]

ad that is at 3000 fps. bc is not constant with fsp

Pet peeve of mine, by definition BC (Ballistic Coefficient) should be a constant, or we would not call them a coefficient. If someone reports more than one BC for various velocity ranges for a particular bullet then it means they are using a ballistic model (Typical one of the Gx models) that does not fit the bullet they are trying to model and are shoehorning it into the existing models rather than creating one that fits. This is becoming a more prevalent problem with all the VLD bullets that don't fit any of the common models well and extreme long range shooting that is becoming more popular. We really need to bring ballistic modeling into the computer age...

And despite its short coming I am partial to 270 Win over 30-06 or 280 Rem.


My 1956 Winchester Model 70 in 270 Winchester.

 

[Garandimal]

ad that is at 3000 fps. bc is not constant with fsp

So - you are saying that the 7mm-08/162 gr. ELD-X, at 2600 fps, out of 26" Bbl., isn't getting anywhere near a BC of .630 (G1)?


And for similar Sectional Density?

Still take the .270 WIN/150 gr. at 2830 fps out of a 22" sporter, BC .591.

​

And given the rough average of 5 fps/100 yards/0.01 of BC?

The 7mm-08/162 gr. ELD-X would catch up at ~ the 1,000 yard line, with more drop.




GR

 

[SwampWolf]

That's why the 280 is unpopular despite its merits. The only reason to own one now is to be different for the sake of being different.

And that's reason enough for some; certainly for me when the itch needs scratching.

 

[natman]

And that's reason enough for some; certainly for me when the itch needs scratching.

Then by all means scratch it. Just don't kid yourself that there's some profound difference between a 270 and a 280. The game certainly can't tell.

 

[H&Hhunter]

Nothing wrong with the .30-06, .270 Win, .280 they all do about the same thing. But I like the 6.5-06 most bestest of the 06 derivatives in regards to lots of kill, flat shooting and low recoil. I have no idea why Winchester didn’t just standardized the old .256 Newton (6.5/06) and call it good, but they didn’t and the .270 was born and the rest is history.

Edited to say the .270 is a great round! But ballistcally the 6.5 is just a bit better. If you’re interested in inconsequential increments I guess it matters.

 

[Bfh_auto]

…but they didn't have any. So I got this. Now I can't find any Ammunition for it...

And now I need to reload ammo for(___).

 

[SwampWolf]

Just don't kid yourself that there's some profound difference between a 270 and a 280.

I'm not trying to kid anyone; certainly not myself. See Post No. 17...

 

[Slamfire]

We really need to bring ballistic modeling into the computer age...

I have, more of less, given up on the ballistic coefficients provided by bullet manufacturers, I consider them advertising. Target bullets have wildly differing published values, as target shooters want the highest ballistic bullets possible, and so, that’s what they get. For many, the placebo effect is real. Some placebo tests are interesting. One involved telling the patient, that they were being given a placebo, and a significant percentage of patients reported positive effects! Don’t doubt bullet manufacturer’s have figured this out. Between essentially identical bullets, shooters think the bullets with a higher ballistic coefficient buck the wind better, but they really can’t tell the difference on target because of chaotic nature of wind and they are never shooting different brands in identical conditions. But, shooters can read ballistic numbers, and so, they believe the bullet with the higher published number has to be bucking the wind better. I have seen this all the time on the firing line. A guy has a hot streak, and it is all due to the new bullets he purchased. Sometimes it is real, usually, it is not. I used to compare the ballistic coefficients of Sierra Match bullets, in 223 and 308, compare them to the Hornady numbers, and I could never figure out why there were such differences. I used to compare my come ups between brands, and decided, buy some, shoot them, if they shot good, they were good.

Shooters take these numbers for real. A bud of mine, a F Class National Champ, I remember when he was shooting a 7 mm Mauser. He dumped his 6.5 Rem Magnum for the 7 mm Mauser because someone offered a 7mm bullet with an extremely high ballistic coefficient, and he won matches with his 7mm Mauser. Then, the bullet manufacturer dropped the ballistic coefficient, and he sold his 7mm Mauser rifle. Went back to a 6.5, various cartridges and wild cat versions. Anyway, last I saw, he is shooting a 7mm wildcat, because someone has a 7mm bullet with an ungodly ballistic coefficient.

 

[MistWolf]

Why would one choose a 280 over a 30 06?

That's a very good question. Let's explore the subject and see if we can't find the answer, shall we?

I have a fascination with this caliber for some reason...this question won't leave my head...

What do you know? We didn't have to go far to find your answer.