.280 Handi Questions

[bayman1975]

Has anybody had any experience with a .280 caliber Handi?  I'm looking to buy a new barrel, and was thinking of the .280.  I've compared the ballistics of the .270, .280 & 30/06, and it appears that the .280 is a pretty good load.  What do you think?

[Couger]

Compared to the .270W and .30/06, if the three rounds were each loaded to the same pressure shooting the same weight and brand of bullet, say all 150 grain Nosler Ballistic Tips, the .280 with have a flatter trajectory with longer retained kinetic energy.

I know this to be true, at lease from Nosler's data when I once "mapped out" the figures.  The .277 slug actually barely outperformed the .308 bullet.  Really quite surprised me!

I believe the .284 caliber is "the best" caliber for hunting North American game (in the lower 48 states).

Still, I'm yalking about splitting hairs when comparing the .270-.280-.30/06.

I should add I've killed more than a dozen deer, elk and proghorns with the .270.  Not a bad round, but not "magical" either.  I'd rather have a .280 or '06 actually.  The .270 destroy way too much meat and of the three, relies most on high velocity to be effective as a BG killer.

I like the idea of being able to eat up to the bullet hole, and the '06 should theoretically cause the least amout of meat wastage/tissue damage.  But I like the better bullet selection of the .280 over the .270.

[MSP Ret]

Bayman, I have a .280 that has been shortened as a woods gun and it's still great!!! The .280 is one of the best all around calibers out there. It does not get it's share of the limelight but it's wonderful!!! If you reload it's even better, many, many, good .284 bullets out there. This caliber can really "do it all"!!!!....<><.... :grin:

[Ditchdigger]

My 280  is a consistant 1 1/4" shooter,and with the 26" barrel will outperform the 30 06 and the 270. If you reload you can get really close to 7 mag. performance. It's one barrel that does'nt get traded or sold much because its such a good hunting cartridge.The Rem 150 corlokts chrono 2975 fps. in mine and that's more than I've seen in 30 06 in reg.factory loads in most guns.  Digger

[jason280]

I bought a .280 Handi last week, and finally got around to shooting it today. My first group, and this was out of a clean barrel, went into less than 1" at 100 yards.  The load was factory 140gr or 150gr Remington Core-Lokts (not sure, I lost the box).  The velocity was around 2900fps, but I need to check my paper to get the exact velocity.  The only other factory load I tried was the Federal Premium High Energy 140gr Trophy Bonded Bear Claws (that's a lot of capital letters!).  Its rated at 3150 on the box, and three shots averaged closer to 3130fps out of my 26" tube.  They also went into an inch at 100 yards, so this gun is definitely promising!  

I tried a few loads with 4350 & 4831 behind a Speer 145gr spire point, and the gun shot better with 4350.  I got several 1.25-1.5" groups, and even a 1" group, but velocity wasn't what I was looking for.  However, I didn't really push the loads to maximum, and the fastest velocity was right at 2750.  4831 was much faster, and I got almost 3000fps with a below max load.  However, it looked a little a hot and accuracy wasn't great.  I need to play with both powders and my OAL, and I think I can get a 3000+ load under 1.25" with no trouble.

As far as the .280 cartridge, it is my favorite.  I have hunted with a Remington 700 Mountain Rifle in .280 for over ten years, and it has taken quite a few deer.  I don't think there is a better deer gun available, and the .280 can cleanly take game out to 300 yards with no trouble.

[Brett]

I have a Handi in .280 Rem. also.  My experience has been the same as that of the other fellows.  Good performance and small groups with 140 gr. Remington Core-Lokts.  Don't think you would be disappointed if you got one.  :agree:

[RemingtonMagnum]

I am a Triple Master Third degree Die Hard 30-06 fan. It want be changing!

Don Jackson Remington Magnum

[Duce]

Bayman1975: I agree with everything said about the accuracy of a Handi .280. What I didn't like was the longer [26"] barrel, it seemed ill balanced, and just didn't handle well for me [a personal thing rather than some hard fault]. My choice was a .270, if the .280 came in a standard length and contour? I'd defininately handle a .280 to make sure you like the balance. If you should go with the .280, I  still have .280 dies and empty brass, if interested please PM me. Have a Good'un:  :grin: <>< Duce:

[.308]

 What I didn't like was the longer [26"] barrel, it seemed ill balanced, and just didn't handle well for me

I agree with that 100%, sir. The 26's just feel nose heavy to me. Another reason I hope they stick with their plan to bring the .35 Whelen back in a 22" barrel.   Now I didn't say I didn't like them, just they feel nose heavy and I prefer the 'feel' of the 22" Handi's.

[Couger]

I can't knock someone's desire to handle and shoot a "shorter" 22" Handi-Rifle, but I'm one of those folks who really like longer barrels.

I'm looking forward to shooting a 26" .280 Handi-Rifle, altho I'll also own a 22" .30/06 barrel as well.

Many good comments have been made about the .280.

He's by no means a hero to me, but Jack O'Connor praised quite lavishlt the .30/06 and .280 - not just the .270 Tinchester!

O'Connor called the .270 and .280 "sisters.

[Mac11700]

I like the idea of being able to eat up to the bullet hole

The 45-70 gives these results most of the time    

Jason...that 280 of your sound awsome....and has always been on my want list for Handi barrels..if you ever get around to it..I've heard of some pretty good accuracy coming from them with the Barnes Triple shocks and Nosler partitions...and the powders your using..

Mac

[Daniel Laws]

I just got back from a hunting trip to AL.  I managed to shoot two of those 105 pound AL does with my 280 Handi.  Both were double lung shots, one passed thru just behind both shoulders and one entered thru the shoulder and exited just behind the other shoulder.  I was using 139 gr. Hornady spire points (the cheap ones) in front of a much less than maximum charge of H414.  Both exit holes were about the size of a silver dollar.  Meat damage was very minimal, even on the one that hit the shoulder blade.  Both were shot at about 140 yards, 10 seconds apart, and the second one was at a dead run.  They both traveled about 30 yards after the shot.  I've not shot the gun seriously for a group, just zeroed it about 2 in. high at 100 yds.  With these results, I'm afraid to even clean it til season is over.  To put it mildly, I love mine.

[safetysheriff]

Compared to the .270W and .30/06, if the three rounds were each loaded to the same pressure shooting the same weight and brand of bullet, say all 150 grain Nosler Ballistic Tips, the .280 with have a flatter trajectory with longer retained kinetic energy.

I know this to be true, at lease from Nosler's data when I once "mapped out" the figures.  The .277 slug actually barely outperformed the .308 bullet.  Really quite surprised me!

i know that i can't possibly be the 'last word' on this argument, but i'm reasonably certain that there is something wrong with the idea conveyed in the second paragraph above, and the situation with the first paragraph is probably the same.  

the .270 win' is just plain more cartridge than the .308 was designed to be.    the .270's higher working pressure than the .280 is something that has been somewhat ignored by handloaders (whether right or wrong) when firing the two rounds in 'bolt guns'.   but the actual velocities achieved and the sectional density of the .270 caliber make it virtually an equal to the .280 Rem' for Most real-world circumstances.  

the sectional density of the 150 gr' bullet is obviously, irrevocably, greater in the .277 diameter than it is in either the .284 or .308!   nothing will change that.  since that is so, it remains that the ballistic co-efficient of the .270 Win' can probably be made greater than either of the other two.   remington makes their .280 projectiles seemingly with more bc' than they do the .270's.    sure, because the .280 was their baby, no?  

i'll take the .30-06 and the .280 as the biggest hammers in the group if handloaded with their heaviest bullets......but still see the .270 as the real deal in killing power for all game through the size of elk.    and, that includes my personal fondness for the .308 with its high working pressures and its excellent bullets for match shooting.  

of course, that just my opinion,

ss'

[Couger]

Guess I should have spelled it out more plainly for some .....

Once upon a time I transcribed "Nosler data" from the Nosler manual into a spreadsheet ...... for my own amusement  (altho a friend/gun clerk suggested I do so) ......

Taking 150 grain Ballistic Tip bullets (in three separate "calibers"! - not cartdges per se, (I never mentioned the .308 Winchester till now)

The .284 (caliber bullet) outperformed the other two CALIBERS.  End of story.

I did fail to mention that I started them each out at 3000fps (for my convenience) - and yes, some will say that's hypothetical, or impossible or whatever ......  But I stand by what I wrote earlier.

Funny how the .270 Winne worshippers have the most problem when praising the capabilities of the .280R, or the other excellent 7mm European cartridges of similar specifications and performance overe the .270.  Guess I'm a .270 heritic!    :roll:

What's your favorite football team or brand of truck?  I'll "dis" that too!    

I suggest to anyone you do a similar exercise for yourself.  Just choose three identically "configured" bullets of the same weight, in the three calibers (.277, .284, and .308), all spitzers, or boattails, or FailSafes or GameKings, etc - but don't mix and match.  Start them all at the same exact velocity and map their trajectories to at least 500 or 600 yards.

The .284 will be the most "efficient" of the three.

[safetysheriff]

couger,

i think i detect an air of superiority on your part.   you did mention the ".308 bullet" so i ran with that.  

you seem to think that some need it spelled out more plainly.  i tried to explain, indirectly, that sectional density and ballistic co-efficient are related with bc' somewhat dependent upon sd'.   that's why a .270 Win projectile can/will Probably be developed that exceeds the bc' of either the .280 or .308 projectiles if you compare the given manufacturers apples to apples, etc.

you remind me of " a little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing!"   i don't think that needs to be explained more plainly............

i'm just askin' you to think about it.    end of story......

ss'

[jason280]

I just picked a pound of RL 19, which I will be trying in my .280 over the next week or so.  I also ordered some 145gr Speer Hot Cor bullets to try, so I hope everything comes together.

I checked my figures on the factory .280 loads I shot, and here's what I got.  The first group I shot with the .280 Handi, which was with a spankin' clean bore, was a 3-shot group with Remington 150gr Core-Lokts.  The group was less than 1", and here is the velocity readings for the three shots:  2936  2930  2930

Now that is what I call a consistent factory load!  I pulled one of the rounds, and it had 54.6gr of some stick powder, which looked a lot like IMR4350 or 4831.  Bullet weighed in at exactly 150gr.

[safetysheriff]

jason'

i've got to give it to them, Rem' built some consistent ammo' with whatever lot of 'fodder' you bought there!   that's amazing.

alliant has developed, over a long period of time, one great reputation for producing consistency into their Reloder 15, which the military continues to use.   i would guess they do the same with their other Rel' powders.

i think you made a good choice for the .280 propellant.    i'd say that your load of 154 gr' Hot Core's and a reasonable dose of Rel' 19 would be able to get you an elk of considerable size.   i'm not familiar with the bc' of the Hot Core's, but if it's good then i'd say 300 yds' would be no problem.

John Barsness wrote some stuff about elk hunting that i found interesting while looking at www.findarticles.com.   i put his name in the search function and studied a bunch of what he had to say.    he usually strikes me as a very reasonable, middle-of-the-road type of writer.  

good luck,

ss'