The .280 Remington...........

[John R.]

JD338 has the group measuring correct. Group size is measured CENTER TO CENTER. If the group is real small like his were, you measure outside to outside and subtract the bullet diameter.  :grin:

[Brithunter]

Hi All,

     For me I cannot see why Remington just did not adopt the Standard 7x64 Mauser cartiridge instead of trying to re-invent it. After all it's pretty much a copy of it  :roll:

[kombi1976]

Hi All,

     For me I cannot see why Remington just did not adopt the Standard 7x64 Mauser cartiridge instead of trying to re-invent it. After all it's pretty much a copy of it  :roll:

Easy answer for that, BH.
It wasn't based on the 30-06 case.
The sad truth for many cartridges at least up until recently was that they didn't stand a chance in the US unless they were based either on the '06 or the .308.
I'm certain that if someone else had invented the .308 that short action cartridges would not have been considered as important as many would have us believe.
Look at the 8x57, 6.5x55 and the 7x57.
The 8mm was never given a chance and the 6.5 and 7mm have been downloaded as well.
Only the 6.5 is regularly chambered by US arms companies and yet many are punting for the 260 to replace it.
All of the Mauser cartridges are tremendous cartridges of similar age to the '06 but "they don't come from round here."

[Slamfire]

Hi All,

     For me I cannot see why Remington just did not adopt the Standard 7x64 Mauser cartiridge instead of trying to re-invent it. After all it's pretty much a copy of it  :roll:

Easy answer for that, BH.
It wasn't based on the 30-06 case.
The sad truth for many cartridges at least up until recently was that they didn't stand a chance in the US unless they were based either on the '06 or the .308.
I'm certain that if someone else had invented the .308 that short action cartridges would not have been considered as important as many would have us believe.
Look at the 8x57, 6.5x55 and the 7x57.
The 8mm was never given a chance and the 6.5 and 7mm have been downloaded as well.
Only the 6.5 is regularly chambered by US arms companies and yet many are punting for the 260 to replace it.
All of the Mauser cartridges are tremendous cartridges of similar age to the '06 but "they don't come from round here."

Because of the existance of the Norwegian's Krags chambered for the 6.5x55 the ammo companies won't ever load it to its true potential. To much liability don't you know. Those of us who like the .260 know we can get ammo loaded to modern rifle specs over the counter, or at least the internet.  :wink: I like it because it likes the 129 Hornady bullets, at least my two do.  

[Masterblaster1]

Like you guys, i too shoot a .280. It is a handi rifle with a 26 inch bbl, and bushnell elite 3200 3-9x40. Very sweet shooting and low recoil. This November will be my first chance to use it for deer here in Michigan. My question is, is a 175 grain Hornady interlock spire point to much bullet for deer? I have these handloaded up with 50 grains of IMR 4831 and they are SUPER accurate. My other choice is a handload with 139 grain Hornagy sst's with the same IMR powder, but it is 55 grains. BUT, they are not as accurate as the 175's? Lastly i could use 150 grain REM factory coer-lokts or Fed HE 140grn Trophy Bonded Bear Claws.. ugh the choices
any help would be appreciated as i am used to using slow heavy bullets for deer(had been using a Marlin 336 c in .35 Rem.)

[Drilling Man]

My rifle loves the 145 Speer BT's, and i've harvested quite a few animials with it and that load, includeing whitetails, caribou, blk. tail deer, blk. bear ect....

  Personally i think the 175's are to heavy for deer and may not expand as much as you'd like, in such a light animial.

  Best all around 280 bullet is the 140 Nosler partition!!!

  Drilling Man

[Brithunter]

Hi All,

    Err no the 30-03 case was copied from the 7mm Mauser, which led to the 30-06 after the Germans adopted the first pointed Spitzer bullet for the 7.92 in 1905 being of 154 grains in  weight.

    And as for 175 grn 7mm bullets being to heavy for deer,  ahhhhhh what you need is the original RWS 173 grain H-Mantle bullet which is a copper capped HP bullet with explosive expansions for te first part then the middle and rear drives through like the partition bullet which I believe may have copied the H-Mantle. I have personly used the 173 grn 7x57 on a nice Roe Buck in May. Fastest I have ever seen a deer drop, still had the grass in his mouth, talk about lights out. He just vanished dwon into the grass. I never saw him drop, one moment he was in the scope, the rifle fired and lifted in recoil slightly and the buck was gone.

    In fact if we realy look back neither the .270 nor the .280 really offer any improvement over the .280 Ross of 1906 which fired a 140 grain bullet at just over 3000fps. Now with the modern slower burning powders I wonder just how that would perform better than with the powders of 1906. OK the Ross uses a slightly larger case as Sir Charles found that the 30-06 case which was just on the market then could not hold enough powder to reach velocities he was looking for. Sometimes I wonder if there really is anything new in the shooting world :roll:

[Drilling Man]

RWS 173 grain H-Mantle bullet which is a copper capped HP bullet with explosive expansions for te first part then the middle and rear drives through like the partition bullet which I believe may have copied the H-Mantle.

  I'm wondering, when did the H-mantle come onto the scene???  NP's have been around for a long long time.

  Drilling Man

[Harry Snippe]

why didn’t this cartridge get received better by the shooting public? Lawdog [/b]

As far as I can tell...there were several reason it didn't.

Timing...when the cartridge was developed...Winchester ruled the market...and if you wanted a rifle...a Winchester was what most people wanted and bought...and since Remington introduced it first in their model 740 Autoloader...that was the first strike against it.The majority of sales in that period were bolt rifles and lever rifles...it wasn't till much later on that Remington offered in their 760 pump...and 721-725 bolt rifles...then...in 1962 Remington came out with the 7mm Magnum...and  then...as now...speed sells rifles...

Marketing...then as today...certain manufactures put restrictions on the dealers as to what products they can sell and the amounts they can get to sell....also..autoloaders weren't in as much demand then...nor were they as accurate as what is being offered today...and Remington didn't push as hard to sell them  then thru aggresive sales and media tactics.....a sad fact that remains true today as well..

Comparison...what cartridge was the 280 compared  when it came out...even as it is today...the 270 Win...Then...back in 1957...the 270 had already been in the media's and hunter's hands for 32 years...high praise had been lavished on it. and so many wonderful stories had been published about it's virtues..and justly so...because it is still a great cartridge...talk about going up against a rock wall...in stead of trying to sell it on it's on virtues...they tried to say it was better than a beloved cartridge...bad choice...start knocking a favorite...and people will turn against you...even if it can be better...

Factory specs...they speak for themselves...yes...the 280 can be handloaded to much higher pressures...but...high pressure/velocity handloads isn't what sells rifles and certainly wasn't in 1957...having factory ammunition that produces the faster load is...and until SAMMI changes it...it will always be underloaded...just like  so many other  great cartridges are.....the 45-70 comes to mind on this...

What's in a name...the name change between 1979-1980.. hurt this cartridge immensly...perhaps not to dedicated handloaders...but to the genneral public...Remington in their ignorance tried to pump new life into a lagging sales line by infering a difference of speed...hense the "7mm Express " monicure...and failed miserably...

Handloaders know the virtues of the cartridge...they always have...but till the 280 stands on it's on merits...and till folks stop trying to say it's Better than this cartridge or that cartridge...namely the 270...it will never truely get the respect it should have..

Mac

WELL SAID!

Then we have the 7mm Saum which is reported equal to the 280 AI or Ackley improved. The 280 AI   is rated " the cream of the crop" to hand loaders.
Well the 7 mm saum is not breaking down any doors. Why ?

The 7MM and 30 SAUM came out after Winchesters WSM which hold a bit more powder.


Maybe they should have called the 7 saum  the 280 SAUM. So many get wraped up in a name.
From what I have been told the last thing a deer or elk sized animal hears  is "Bang" It is then all over and for the hunter - the work begins.
I never minded the hole being in MM or the fraction of an inch.
The 280 shoots a bit flatter than the 3006 right ? If your in open country that might be an advantage.
I shoot an "06 and was asked what I thought of the 280 in the moose camp. Well I never used one myself but from what I heard  " buy it" :wink:

[GeorgiaDave]

Hello from Georgia,
   MyCousin in law recently bought a NEF laminated .280. After shooting it a bit he started to realize that it is quite expensive to feed. He knew that I reload and that I also had a NEF .243, so he started poormouthing about how much he would like to find someone who wanted to trade something cheaper to shoot for a "really fine .280". I have never paid much attention to the " 7 MM express" before but after a bit of research I went ahead and traded the .243. So now I have a .280.

   The things that I have found most attractive about this cartridge is the fact that it is only marginally behind the 7 Mag ballistics. I feel that it is superior to a .270 simply for the option of shooting a heavier bullet. It also provides a ballistic coefficient not atainable in most other rounds, which for some bullets is above .500. This alone shows that this is a viable option for loooong range service. I have not had the chance to try it out over the standard 100 yards, but it will soon find it's way to the back of my 500 yard range. I hope it does as well as it is capable of.

   All this being said, I still love to shoot deer with my 55 lb. take down recerve while shooting wooden arrows of of the shelf with no sights !!

Dave

[JPerryE]

Hi All,

     For me I cannot see why Remington just did not adopt the Standard 7x64 Mauser cartiridge instead of trying to re-invent it. After all it's pretty much a copy of it  :roll:

The 280 has a slightly longer body to prevent chambering into a 270. As a result, it also has a slightly larger powder capacity than a 270 too.

[JPerryE]

Time for all those that shoot/reload for this fine cartridge to come forward and tell the rest of us why you love this much maligned cartridge so much.  Factory data doesn't do the .280 justice and I, for one, wonder why that is?  Plenty of excellent bullets available in 7mm(.284 caliber) so why didn’t this cartridge get received better by the shooting public?  Lawdog
 

If you are able to go back to the early sixties and read some of the reveiws at the time, the 280 got a bad rap by some dun writers of not being a true 7 mm. There were a lot of 7mm bullets available but some people believed that they couldn't be used in the 280. Remington wasn't able to overcome some of the negative press. Also, even though the auto loaders and pumps were chambered for 270 and 30-06, another bad rap was that the 280 wasn't loaded to the same pressures as the 270 or 280.

Finally Remington gave up and renamed the cartridge the 7mm Express. That lasted for awhile but with the popularity of the 7mm Remington Magnum, the 7mm Express was left in the dust.

It wasn't until people started looking for smaller and lighter rifles again, like the "mountain rifle." that the 280 was seen by a new generation of shooters for the terrific cartridge that it is.

I've been shooting that "mountain rifle" for the last 40 years!  A 280 that, with scope, weighs just a tad over 7 pounds.