.270 vs .280

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

Nothing wrong with being special.

If the .280 got on the Creedmoor hype bandwagon the .280 would be a hit.

If it were widely available in factory rifles and factory ammo it might have displaced the .270

@CBH Australia
If Jack O'Connor extolled the virtues of the 7x64 or the 7mm-06 instead of the 270 then maybe it would have been more popular but No Merricans being what the is had to invent the odball 270 and ol
Jack fell on love with it.

The .256 Newton aka 6.5/06 was around the same time bit no they chose the oddball 270. It's supposed to be roughly two thirds the diameter of the 06 bit in my book is only half as good as it. The 280 gives the best of both the 270 and the 06.
Just my opinion and that's not worth much.
Bob

 

[Longwalker]

Of course the .280 is a very good cartridge. No question about that. The main reason I prefer the 7x64 is the finely crafted European rifles that are chambered in 7x64, and the design of the CIP standard chambers and barrels for the 7x64.
The 7x64 specifies a faster rifling twist than most .280 rifles, better suited to the heavyweight bullets. Remington came up with a lame 165 gr. RN as the heavy load for their slower twist rifles. In comparison, 7x64's easily stabilize 175 gr. spitzers. Those long heavy bullets hit hard and penetrate deeply. Remington also made the .280's throat shorter than the 7x64, supposedly to ensure accuracy. But properly made barrels can shoot high pressure loads very accurately with some "freebore" - IF the unrifled portion of the chamber throat is not made too loose.
My 7x64 rifles have no problem shooting the light 120 gr. RWS cone point bullet with a fast and flat trajectory into teeny, tiny groups. It is interesting that the 7x64 has no trouble with light, short bullets at the same time has the proper twist and enough throat length to use high pressure 175 grain loads that penetrate really big critters well and result in a cartridge that punches above it's weight class. The 7x64 more versatile than the .280, has always been loaded to full potential, and has been doing what it was designed to do, really well, for a few decades before the .280 was even thought of.
That's why I prefer the 7x64. But I'm open to using a .270, just need to gain some personal experience with it.

 

[7x57Joe]

My 7x64 stutzen has the longest throat of any rifles I've ever had but, it is amazingly accurate with bullets from 130 through 175 grains. With the short barrel, I can't get much more velocity over a hot loaded 7x57 but, it's more than ample for anything I put it up against.

 

[ve7poi]

Got both plus a 280AI and a 7x57AI just to try out lol
270win in a pre 64 win 70 rest are Remington 700 based rifles.
So far 270 win exceptionally accurate and a keeper.
But of the others the 7x57AI is becoming a favorite as far as accuracy and velocity

Up date just returned from hunt in Namibia see hunt report Zana Botes safaris
used a 270 with 140tsx hand loads

 

[RayAtkinson]

Apples to oranges, Id pick the 270 as components are a bit easier to come by out of the USA..Add the 30-06 to this thread and it would surpass both by a tad..

 

[TOBY458]

Apples to oranges, Id pick the 270 as components are a bit easier to come by out of the USA..Add the 30-06 to this thread and it would surpass both by a tad..

I agree. With today's bullets, the 30/06 will do about anything that's needed in a cartridge of that class. Load it with 130gr Barnes TTSX and it makes into a very flat shooting deer rifle. Much like the 270. Load it with 150gr bullets and it performs much like a 280. Load it with 180- 200 gr bullets, and it will surpass them both on larger game.

 

[MS 9x56]

Two peas in the same pod as far as I can see. Not enough difference to even generate an argument. Although I must admit a preference for 7mm bullets.

 

[JakeH]

The .280 will generally allow for you to shoot heavier bullets, if that’s your kind of thing (and it is for most here). It’s probably the most efficient of the children of the ‘06 but the differences between it and a .270 are small. The .270 is going to be easier to get ammo for in a pinch.

Full disclosure: My deer rifle is a Steyr Pro Hunter chambered in .270

 

[MS 9x56]

If I am not mistaken 270 bullets are available up to 170 grain right on the heels of the 7mm 175 grain. Again not enough difference to bother with.my issue with the 270 is the nonexistent supply of my favored round nosed bullets.

 

[mauserhunter]

If I am not mistaken 270 bullets are available up to 170 grain right on the heels of the 7mm 175 grain. Again not enough difference to bother with.my issue with the 270 is the nonexistent supply of my favored round nosed bullets.

Ya but 99% of 270s out there cant shoot more then 150 grain bullets, I've had some 270 that wouldn't even spin 150s enough. Every 280 made with shoot 175s.

 

[MS 9x56]

Ya but 99% of 270s out there cant shoot more then 150 grain bullets, I've had some 270 that wouldn't even spin 150s enough. Every 280 made with shoot 175s.

Not sure where you got that figure 99% but since I don’t own a 270 I can’t dispute it. Still not enough difference to argue over.

 

[rgsiii]

If we were able to put these and similar discussions in a magazine, we could sell millions of copies--look at Jack O'Connor. Not much difference between them for hunting.
However, I have have all the mentioned calibers and for some reason my 7x64's and 7x65R all shoot MOA.

 

[Mike70560]

According to a lot of people one is the perfect cartridge and the other is not good for anything. Which one? It all depends on the one they own.

 

[rgsiii]

According to a lot of people one is the perfect cartridge and the other is not good for anything. Which one? It all depends on the one they own.

I think that is true for a lot of things--best retriever, best car and so on.

Being originally from Lafayette, I can say with absolute certainty of only one thing. NEVER put tomatoes in gumbo! I miss the seafood.

 

[rookhawk]

Good evening gentleman I was at the range recently sighting in my new to me .270, while there another gentleman was also sighting a browning leaver action .22. We got to talking as ones generally does when two gun owners are togeather and he told me the .280 is a far superior round to the .270. Given that this is my first sub .30 rifle I was unsure if he was just bias as he owned a .280. So I decide to pose the question to you all. Is there any Benefit to the .280 Over the .270?

Given that they are both using the same parent case and if my math is correct there is only .007 thousandths of an inch different I find it hard to believe one could be vastly superior to another. But I stand ready to be proven wrong if there is information to the contrary.

Your friend is correct if we are discussing calibers, rather than cartridges. Every cartridge has its sweet spot for a given application, but .284" caliber bullets do have a bit of magic to them.

1.) Lots of weight options.

2.) Many 7mm / .284" calibers are chambered with long throats, resulting in excellent accuracy with heavy for caliber bullets.

3.) The difference between a large 270 bullet (140gr .277") versus a large 280 round (175gr .284") puts it up a weight class in capability. While a .270 is marvelous for Elk, a .280 caliber allows for use on thicker skinned and tougher game.

4.) The B.Cs and S.D.s of 7mm bullets are magical. This allows for deeper penetration and inherently more stable and less subject to wind deflection.

 

[JoePiperIV]

I can not personally attest to the performance of the .280 Remington as I have never owned one however I have had a Remington 710 in .270 Winchester for 20 years now and it is a tack driver out to 250 yards. My Dad has a Sako AV also in .270 Winchester and has used it since the mid 1970s and it also drives tacks. I personally believe in setting the rifle up for the range you intend to shoot at, buy a scope you can see out of well (recently upgraded my 710 from the Bushnell it came with to a Leupold VX Freedom 3 X 9 - 40) and practice regularly. Just my $0.02 for whatever it is or is not worth.

 

[mauserhunter]

Not sure where you got that figure 99% but since I don’t own a 270 I can’t dispute it. Still not enough difference to argue over.

Unless you have a Custom barreled 270 with a fast twist rifling and that's been throated you can't shoot any heavier then 150s, so just about every 270 out there is slow twist.

 

[DG870]

If I remember right Nosler makes 160 grain semi spitzer in 270 that will stabilize in a 1/10 twist barrel. That should be a thumper at reasonable hunting ranges . I’ve used 175 grain round nosed bullets in the 280 for pig hunting. Hit hard but not real fast. I think 140 to 150 grain bullets are in the sweet spot for these two cartridges for most applications. Better balance between speed and bullet weight. If you really to go heavier there are better cartridges that hold more powder.

 

[Chaplin]

The 280 Remington is loaded pretty weak by the factories. With handloads it should be ok.

What matters more than the cartridge to me is the specific rifle.

In the WSM's the rifle that stands out is the Kimber 8400. It's light and handy not that a 280 can't be made up as a Featherweight.

The 280 was popular at one time for custom rifles. Today the 270 WSM is quite popular.

Note that Nosler has a rifle chambered for the 280AI.

 

[IvW]

Neither can be compared to the German Brenneke.....