« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: 270 vs. 280  (Read 3941 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Westbound

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 307
  • Gender: Male
270 vs. 280
« on: February 07, 2009, 06:32:30 AM »
This might have already been done, but I didn't return any search results.

Other that the obvious .277 cal vs. .284 cal bullets, is there a lot of performance difference between these two rounds??

It seems that as they are both use a 30-06 parent case they would fall into the same niche.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Also, I'm not looking to start any "my cartridge is better than yours" fights, I'm jut curious about ballistic performance and real life experience from folks that shoot these cartridges.

Thanks!
Logged

Offline Mt_Sourdough

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 197
  • Gender: Male
Re: 270 vs. 280
« Reply #1 on: February 07, 2009, 06:56:48 AM »
If you hunt things bigger than whitetail deer, then the 280 offers bullet weights up to 175 grain.  There is one roundnose nossler partition at 160 for the 270 handloaders. Besides that odd exception, the 270 bullet weights top out at 150 grains.  The .284(7mm) 165 gr bullets have a small fallowing around here as an elk/deer - either/or round.
Logged
Gotta git'me a bigger ice box

Offline jasonprox700

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 461
  • Gender: Male
Re: 270 vs. 280
« Reply #2 on: February 07, 2009, 10:28:09 AM »
I'm partial to the .280, mainly because I have one.  But here is the other reason.  The case of the .280 is slightly longer than the .270 for safety reasons (.280 can not be chambered in a .270 or .30-06 chamber).  Because of its slightly longer case, you gain a bit in velocity.  It will shoot the 140 gr faster than the .270 will shoot 130's.  It is only slight, but it is still more.  Also, you have more options for loading a .280 than you do a .270. 
Logged

Offline efremtags

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 358
Re: 270 vs. 280
« Reply #3 on: February 07, 2009, 04:59:26 PM »
The 280 on paper makes more sense because of the 7mm bullet selection. In reality they are ballistic twins. Bullets of equal SD will produce the same performance with a minuscule weight advantage for the 280.  I do not think that any animal will notice the effect of an extra 10 grains of weight assuming the same bullet construction between both guns. This is factory ammo. You may gain some edge with handloads, but you can also seat the bullet to the lands and gain the same advantage with most rifles, pushing a few more grains of powder.

270 is way more popular, which shows you logic has nothing to do with why a caliber becomes popular. I think that the 280 is destined for obscurity as the void is currently being filled with short fat Magnums that do the same job in a short action. Apparently peoples arms are evolving shorter so they can no longer cycle long action rifles any more.
Logged

Offline Westbound

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 307
  • Gender: Male
Re: 270 vs. 280
« Reply #4 on: February 07, 2009, 06:23:43 PM »
Quote from: efremtags on February 07, 2009, 04:59:26 PM

 I think that the 280 is destined for obscurity as the void is currently being filled with short fat Magnums that do the same job in a short action. Apparently peoples arms are evolving shorter so they can no longer cycle long action rifles any more.

Did this short arm evolution happen at the same time that deer evolved into creatures that must be shot with a magnum to die properly??   :P

Thanks for all of the input.  I recently got a 270, which is my first medium bore, and I was wondering howit would stack up in the real world against other similar cartridges.
Logged

Offline Ron T.

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 646
Re: 270 vs. 280
« Reply #5 on: February 07, 2009, 08:10:29 PM »
While the .280 Remington cartridge is very slightly superior to the .270 Winchester due to the .280's ability to handle heavier bullets, the .270 Winchester is considerably more popular... and you find .270 factory-loaded ammo almost everywhere.  This is not true of the .280 Remington cartridge.

However, the performance of the two cartridges are very close (ballistically) since there's little difference (only .007") in bullet diameter (.277 vs. .284 or 7mm)... and both use the .30/06 cartridge case.  Whereas the 140 grain bullet is probably the most popular in the .280, the .130 grain bullet matches it in the .270 and is only 10 grains (1/700th. of a pound) lighter.

I seriously doubt that any animal shot with one caliber could tell the "difference" between the two cartridges... i.e., a "killing shot" with one would also be a "killing shot" with the other.

I've killed big game with a "borrowed" .270... and it's an extremely effective caliber if the bullet is placed anywhere within reason.  But if I had a choice, I'd choose the .280 Remington over the .270 Winchester simply because of the wider choice in bullet weights.

However, if I already owned a rifle in one caliber, I wouldn't trade it for the other caliber.


Strength & Honor...

Ron T.
Logged
"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."  - Thomas Jefferson

Offline Swampman

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (44)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16518
  • Gender: Male
Re: 270 vs. 280
« Reply #6 on: February 08, 2009, 01:44:08 AM »
I prefer the .270.  I seem to have bad luck with the 7mm'ers.
Logged
"Brother, you say there is but one way to worship and serve the Great Spirit. If there is but one religion, why do you white people differ so much about it? Why not all agreed, as you can all read the Book?" Sogoyewapha, "Red Jacket" - Senaca

1st Special Operations Wing 1975-1983
919th Special Operations Wing  1983-1985 1993-1994

"Manus haec inimica tyrannis / Ense petit placidam sub libertate quietem" ~Algernon Sidney~

Offline RaySendero

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1064
  • Gender: Male
Re: 270 vs. 280
« Reply #7 on: February 08, 2009, 02:32:21 AM »
Quote from: Swampman on February 08, 2009, 01:44:08 AM
I prefer the .270.  I seem to have bad luck with the 7mm'ers.

I also prefer the 270!

If you need a larger rifle than the 270 - You'll need to step up to something along the lines of a 338 WM, 35 Whelen or 9,3x62 - Not a 280!
Logged
    Ray

Offline Drilling Man

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3643
Re: 270 vs. 280
« Reply #8 on: February 08, 2009, 02:40:25 AM »
  Make mine a .280 pleaseeee...

  DM
Logged

Offline Lone Star

  • Reformed Gunwriter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2359
  • Gender: Male
Re: 270 vs. 280
« Reply #9 on: February 08, 2009, 05:49:36 AM »
In the field there is zero difference between the two.  While armchair "hunters" quote ballistic tables and cite the miraculously better killing power provided by an additional 15 grains of bullet weight, the fact remains that both cartridges fire bullets within 0.007" of each other in diameter and at velocities usually close enough to be covered by normal extreme spreads.  Remove all markings from the rifle, load it for him and let him take game with it - and no hunter would be able to tell you which chambering he is using.



.
Logged

Offline while99

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 286
Re: 270 vs. 280
« Reply #10 on: February 08, 2009, 07:00:54 AM »
If you handload, get a .280 because of better availability of heavy, spitzer-type bullets.  If you don't handload, get a .270 because of it's higher "Walmart factor" I.E. availability of ammo.
Logged

Offline Swampman

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (44)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16518
  • Gender: Male
Re: 270 vs. 280
« Reply #11 on: February 08, 2009, 02:20:26 PM »
If you want to shoot heavy bullets get a .30-06.  It's pretty much the best North American cartridge.  Just my 2 cents.
Logged
"Brother, you say there is but one way to worship and serve the Great Spirit. If there is but one religion, why do you white people differ so much about it? Why not all agreed, as you can all read the Book?" Sogoyewapha, "Red Jacket" - Senaca

1st Special Operations Wing 1975-1983
919th Special Operations Wing  1983-1985 1993-1994

"Manus haec inimica tyrannis / Ense petit placidam sub libertate quietem" ~Algernon Sidney~

Offline 1911crazy

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4793
  • Gender: Male
Re: 270 vs. 280
« Reply #12 on: February 08, 2009, 04:20:19 PM »
I vote for the 280rem.

Since i been collecting most of the 7mm mauser military surplus rifles i figured on getting a 280rem  since i had the reloading dies, lead cast stuff and many boxes of 280 empty cases already given to me.  But in looking for a rifle in 280 my chances are slim to none finding a cheap used rifle.  The only other thing i can do is to rebarrel one of my military actions so i can shoot the 280 rem.  Or how can i get an affordable rifle in 280rem. I also notice these rounds aren't that popular too. I know the 30-06 is 7,62x61mm so i will need a longer action to handle it.  Is it worth doing or am i beating a dead horse.

The 270 is a good round too i wouldn't sell that one short either. Big game have been taking with this round too.

They hunt in europe with just a 6,5x55mm swede mauser and take large game like reindeer and moose with just a 6,5mm.

It sure can get really confusing when looking for a new caliber to hunt with.  We have the magnum this or stw that or short magnum or a shell that will take down an elephant with just as much kick so i go down too.  I guess i'm just overwhelmed with so many choices.

But really with the 7mm mauser being one of the most flatest shooting rounds there is how does the 280 compare to it in accuracy?

I know on the ballastics caculator using a 125yd zero with the 7mm mauser from the muzzle to 125yds the bullets path varies about 1/2" to 5/8" if that.  Now how does the 280 compare in real world accuracy? Do you think the gain in power is worth going from the 7mm mauser to the 280 rem?

Now where does the 270win fit in with both the 7mm mauser and the 280?  I think the 7mm mauser has less power.
Logged

Offline jcn59

  • Trade Count: (37)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1450
  • Gender: Male
Re: 270 vs. 280
« Reply #13 on: February 08, 2009, 04:51:11 PM »
Am I the only one here with a couple boxes of 170 grain jacketed round nose bullets for the .270?
Logged
Vote them all out, EVERY election!
 
Does anyone remember the scene from "Quigley Down Under" showing the aborigines lined up on the skyline as far as you could see?   That needs to be US!
NRA Life Member

Offline Siskiyou

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3417
  • Gender: Male
Re: 270 vs. 280
« Reply #14 on: February 08, 2009, 05:46:46 PM »
jcn59:  I have to respect you for having the 170-grain bullets.  If you have not you might want to save the boxes in plastic wrap.  Museum pieces, I did read where a hunter used them to take a moose.

Having spent a short time in an area neighbors shot their moose with 30-30 Winchesters, 250-3000 Savage, and British .303, killing a moose with a 170-grain bullet from a .270 Winchester would appear to be overkill. ;)

Logged
There is a learning process to effectively using a gps.  Do not throw your compass and map away!

Boycott: San Francisco, L.A., Oakland, and City of Sacramento, CA.

Offline LONGTOM

  • Trade Count: (391)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4644
  • Gender: Male
  • IF ONLY I COULD GO BACK-I WOULD BE A MOUNTAIN MAN!
Re: 270 vs. 280
« Reply #15 on: February 09, 2009, 02:22:49 AM »
On the line of top weight bullets in the 270 as being 150 except one 160gr round nose.
I don't know who made them or where they came from but I do have two boxes of handloaded 270s that are loaded with 200gr hollow points.
The only animal I ever shot with them was a groundhog at about 80yds.
It did have substantial recoil compaired to any factory ammo I ever shot in the 270.
Although heavy for caliber I think these would prove suitable for larger game at moderate ranges.


LONGTOM
Logged
NRA Benefactor Life Member
NAHC Life Member
NRA Member-JAMES MADISON BRIGADE
IWLA Member
NRA/ILA Member
CCRKBA Member
US OLIMPIC SHOOTING TEAM supporter

"THE TREE OF LIBERTY FROM TIME TO TIME MUST BE REFRESHED WITH THE BLOOD OF PATRIOTS AND TYRANTS".
THOMAS JEFFERSON

That my two young sons may never have to know the horrors of war. 

I will stand for your rights as my forefathers did before me!
My thanks to those who have, are and will stand for mine!
To those in the military, I salute you!

LONGTOM 9-25-07

Offline RaySendero

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1064
  • Gender: Male
Re: 270 vs. 280
« Reply #16 on: February 09, 2009, 06:39:47 AM »
Quote from: jcn59 on February 08, 2009, 04:51:11 PM
Am I the only one here with a couple boxes of 170 grain jacketed round nose bullets for the .270?

jcn,

You may have a collector's item there! I've never seen such - Who made'em?
Logged
    Ray

Offline WyoStillhunter

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 299
Re: 270 vs. 280
« Reply #17 on: February 09, 2009, 09:29:23 AM »
I have never owned a .270 but my father has used a Rem. 760 pump in .270 exclusively since he got it in the 1960s.  About 15 years ago I bought a M700 Mountain Rifle in .280 to be the all-around rifle for the rest of my life.   :o :o  Well, I have commitment issues and many rifles have come and gone since then.  The .280 went to my grown son.  It is handy and a great shooter which has taken lots of antelope, deer, and elk.

There is a significant difference between 25-06 and 35 Whelen.  But the three middle children of the '06 family represent a considerable degree of overlapping capability.  The .280 in a well made, full sized rifle may be the best of the lot as an all around rifle for the reloader.

That said, I wish I had bought the M700 Mountain Rifle in .270 to begin with.  It would have a little less recoil.  Factory ammo would be a little more available wherever ammo is sold.  With the development of premium bullets the .270 more nearly approaches the versatility of the .280 for larger game.  Frankly, I could be quite happy hunting the rest of my life with 130 gr. .270 ammo, and that includes any animal I will likely ever hunt (antelope, deer, elk, black bear, moose).
Logged
Quote
Hunt close, then get closer.

Offline mannyrock

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2081
Re: 270 vs. 280
« Reply #18 on: February 09, 2009, 10:06:08 AM »

   The .280 comes closer to the concept of the "all-around" rifle than the .270 (being able to handle heavier bullets at the top end), but only if you handload.

   If you don't handload, then forget it, and get the remarkable .270.

Regards,

Mannyrock
Logged

Offline charles p

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2374
  • Gender: Male
Re: 270 vs. 280
« Reply #19 on: February 09, 2009, 10:09:32 AM »
Got the 270 and a 280.  Also have a 280AI.  Mine are as different as night and day because of the gun weights, barrell lengths, scopes, etc.  All are equally as effective on game.  Just depends on what you want to carry on a given day.
Logged

Offline roper

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 714
Re: 270 vs. 280
« Reply #20 on: February 09, 2009, 10:38:04 AM »
Quote from: charles p on February 09, 2009, 10:09:32 AM
Got the 270 and a 280.  Also have a 280AI.  Mine are as different as night and day because of the gun weights, barrell lengths, scopes, etc.  All are equally as effective on game.  Just depends on what you want to carry on a given day.
 

I agree with you 100%.   
Logged

Offline LONGTOM

  • Trade Count: (391)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4644
  • Gender: Male
  • IF ONLY I COULD GO BACK-I WOULD BE A MOUNTAIN MAN!
Re: 270 vs. 280
« Reply #21 on: February 09, 2009, 11:18:07 AM »
charles p covered it quite nicely!


LONGTOM
Logged
NRA Benefactor Life Member
NAHC Life Member
NRA Member-JAMES MADISON BRIGADE
IWLA Member
NRA/ILA Member
CCRKBA Member
US OLIMPIC SHOOTING TEAM supporter

"THE TREE OF LIBERTY FROM TIME TO TIME MUST BE REFRESHED WITH THE BLOOD OF PATRIOTS AND TYRANTS".
THOMAS JEFFERSON

That my two young sons may never have to know the horrors of war. 

I will stand for your rights as my forefathers did before me!
My thanks to those who have, are and will stand for mine!
To those in the military, I salute you!

LONGTOM 9-25-07

Offline flintlock

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1405
  • Gender: Male
Re: 270 vs. 280
« Reply #22 on: February 09, 2009, 11:23:49 AM »
I've got a brother that has used a 7mm-08 and a .280 on whitetails since the early 80s...
I've got another brother that has a .270 for him and another for his son...

We kill 40-50 deer a year on our farms, when I skin them and help track deer hit, dang if I can
tell any difference in any in the three... ;D
Logged

Offline LONGTOM

  • Trade Count: (391)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4644
  • Gender: Male
  • IF ONLY I COULD GO BACK-I WOULD BE A MOUNTAIN MAN!
Re: 270 vs. 280
« Reply #23 on: February 09, 2009, 11:53:39 AM »
That really doesn't supprise me.


LONGTOM
Logged
NRA Benefactor Life Member
NAHC Life Member
NRA Member-JAMES MADISON BRIGADE
IWLA Member
NRA/ILA Member
CCRKBA Member
US OLIMPIC SHOOTING TEAM supporter

"THE TREE OF LIBERTY FROM TIME TO TIME MUST BE REFRESHED WITH THE BLOOD OF PATRIOTS AND TYRANTS".
THOMAS JEFFERSON

That my two young sons may never have to know the horrors of war. 

I will stand for your rights as my forefathers did before me!
My thanks to those who have, are and will stand for mine!
To those in the military, I salute you!

LONGTOM 9-25-07

Offline High Brass

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 308
Re: 270 vs. 280
« Reply #24 on: February 10, 2009, 07:52:31 AM »
Quote from: flintlock on February 09, 2009, 11:23:49 AM
I've got a brother that has used a 7mm-08 and a .280 on whitetails since the early 80s...
I've got another brother that has a .270 for him and another for his son...

We kill 40-50 deer a year on our farms, when I skin them and help track deer hit, dang if I can
tell any difference in any in the three... ;D

That's about what I would figure.  I have a 280 and doubt that it would matter on game whether it was 270 or not. 
Logged

Offline Lone Star

  • Reformed Gunwriter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2359
  • Gender: Male
Re: 270 vs. 280
« Reply #25 on: February 10, 2009, 03:55:46 PM »
Quote
You may have a collector's item there! I've never seen such - Who made'em?

No real collector's value.  Speer made the 170 RN for many years, discontinuing it in the mid-1970s.  Like their discontinued 275-grain .338" bullets, hunters realized they just didn't need ultra-heavy .270 bullets to kill anything.




.
Logged

Offline 454Puma

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 539
Re: 270 vs. 280
« Reply #26 on: February 14, 2009, 05:16:12 PM »
I had this debate with myself when I was younger, drooling over which caliber would be my first center fire. It was mainly between the .270 and the '06. Well with my dream that has come true to live in the Rockeys I'm glad I went with the '06. as it is the Caliber for the rockey's! The bullet wts available in my mind make it the caliber for just about anything to be hunted. The .270 is a great caliber but just doesn't have the veratility of the '06. The 280 is just a slight improvement on the 270!
Logged
One shot , One Kill

Offline nw_hunter

  • Moderators
  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5221
  • Gender: Male
Re: 270 vs. 280
« Reply #27 on: February 14, 2009, 05:25:45 PM »
Quote from: Lone Star on February 08, 2009, 05:49:36 AM
In the field there is zero difference between the two.  While armchair "hunters" quote ballistic tables and cite the miraculously better killing power provided by an additional 15 grains of bullet weight, the fact remains that both cartridges fire bullets within 0.007" of each other in diameter and at velocities usually close enough to be covered by normal extreme spreads.  Remove all markings from the rifle, load it for him and let him take game with it - and no hunter would be able to tell you which chambering he is using.



.

RIGHT ON
Logged
Freedom Of Speech.....Once we lose it, every other freedom will follow.

Offline BBF

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10042
  • Gender: Male
  • I feel much better now knowing it will get worse.
Re: 270 vs. 280
« Reply #28 on: February 15, 2009, 04:45:15 AM »
 As posted above, Speer used to make a 170 gr RN in 277. They used to make a 105 gr RN in .243 as well.  I do recall some 160 gr 270 Win factory loads from Canadian maker Dominion and Imperial.
Logged
What is the point of Life if you can't have fun.

Offline Drilling Man

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3643
Re: 270 vs. 280
« Reply #29 on: February 15, 2009, 11:15:43 AM »
Quote from: flintlock on February 09, 2009, 11:23:49 AM
I've got a brother that has used a 7mm-08 and a .280 on whitetails since the early 80s...
I've got another brother that has a .270 for him and another for his son...

We kill 40-50 deer a year on our farms, when I skin them and help track deer hit, dang if I can
tell any difference in any in the three... ;D

  I agree on deer sized animals.  I don't agree on bigger animals though...  I can honestly say that the 270 bullets just didn't perform as well as 7mm bullets on bigger animals when the shots got tougher...

  DM
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
« previous next »