Opinions on the .280 Remington

We all know J O'Conner's favorite was the 270. I have been a fan of O'Conner for years... He once remarked, when discussing long range shots at game, that he considered 300 yards a "fur piece" I have never heard that description in those words ever before or after but I know what he means...

He also said that an African outfitter once told him that the differences in cartridges is mostly "in the minds of the hunters"

Then there was old Elmer Keith who once made the remark in an old Guns and Ammo mag that he considered the 30-06 with 200 grain bullets to be a fair varmint round!...I don't think he said that tongue in cheek either.

As you can see, even hunters with vast experience have different opinions.
 
When I decided to build an expressly built just for me rifle, one of the things I had to ponder was, "What cartridge will it be built for?" I already had several 30-06s and .270s so that left them out. I already had three 7x57s, two factories and one custom so which way to go. Finally I decided on the .280 Rem. Recoil is definitely lest than my .270s and 06s but the rifle came out somewhat heavier than the others. Accuracy with Remington factory ammo is not all that good at 1.5" butI plan to use reloads anyway. The bullet I'm working with is the Nosler 150 gr. ABLR which has proven to be rather finicky in my 7x57s. Playing with the seating depth in the .280 had shown promise. I have the loads worked up and am just waiting for the weather to clear up. Raining and very windy. :mad: The preliminary test with the .280 looked good so I'll be setting up the same type test for the 7x57s. I'm pushing the test at 2800 FPS which duplicates the factory load but have worked up to 3010 FPS. After I find a sweet spot I'll up the velocity to see if it holds up.
Paul B.
 
If you look at the 280 by itself, it's an excellent cartridge for all around North American hunting.

If you look at it relative to the 270 or 30-06, there isn't enough difference between the 280 and the other two to justify the cost and poor availability of ammo. No animal lost to a 270 hit would be taken with a hit in the same place with a 280.

Which is why the 270 and the 30-06 are perennial top sellers and the 280 is fading away. It's not that it isn't a great cartridge, because it is, but that there isn't enough difference to justify people bothering with it.
 
Back in 1990, my hunting buddy and I were drawn for elk licenses in NE Wyoming. I brought my .308 carbine shooting 180 grain core-lokts. My partner took his custom Browning in 280 Improved featuring a 24 inch barrel. His handloads nearly replicate 7mm MAG ballistics!

My buddy shot a big bodied 5 X 5 bull and the animal toppled over within 100 yards of impact. His mushroomed 140 grain Nosler partition bullet was recovered from just under the hide and it looked exactly like the magazine pictures.

I shot a tender eating spike bull with my .308 carbine. Same results. A dead animal taken with a 150 yard shot through the chest organs. Did the 280 Improved "kill better" than my .308? No, but it has much flatter trajectory for truly long shots.

280 Improved is a keeper!

Jack
 
Jim Watson
Clark,
I don't understand your table.
What do the yards numbers measure?
Click to expand...

I must have done a poor job it you did not understand.

The yardage is normalized to the 7mmSTW.
The yardage is how far a 7mmSTW would shoot before the bullet slowed down to the muzzle velocity of the cartridge in question.

Example: The 7mmSTW has a muzzle velocity of 3158 fps, while the 280 Rem has a muzzle velocity of 2961 fps.
It will take 152 yards for that bullet to slow down from 3158 fps to 2961 fps.

That does not mean the 7mmSTW necessarily has 152 yards more range. The problem is usually hitting something, not how much energy the bullet still has.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top