Random 8
Member
I think the .280 really shines at 145-160 grain weights. Any lighter, the .270 does it better, at 175, the .30-06 does it better unless you really need the higher SD, in which case a .300 or .338 magnum might be a better choice for such heavy critters. You're pushing the .280 to it's limits on Moose.
In my 20 or so years with the cartridge as a primary deer hunting weapon, and taking one moose with a Hornady 175 RN, I've used bullets across these weights. Think of the 145 as the .30/165 and the 160 as the .30/180 in terms of terminal effects with less recoil. One's for deer, the other for elk. The .280 is extremely pleasant to shoot with 120 and 130 grain bullets, and expansion is remarkable. I probably would not use those on edible game.
After that, vs. the .270 its a matter of more bullet mass with similar performance. Vs. the 30-06, it's less recoil and flatter trajectories for similar performance. Splitting hairs no doubt, but it's fun to be different so long as one has enough brass.
Edit to add. The first bullet I tried in the .280 was the Hornady 154 SST. I had a lot of powerlines to hunt, and the ballistics were remarkable. If you wanted a bullet that comes apart in the boiler room of a large whitetail to 200 yards, this was it. I did not want that performance, so I switched to the Speer 145 GS and did not look back. I'd think one of the bonded slugs, or perhaps the newer Gen Hornady LR hunting bullets might have overcome that difficulty. Run the numbers for a 154 ELD, they are impressive for lighter big game, if the bullet is up to the shorter range impacts. My hunting territory has changed, so I may be revisiting a dedicated LR load for my .280. It will be relegated to part time service for the occasional pipeline sit however, as I've gone old school with the addition of a vintage Rem 760 in .300 Sav, so 150 flat bases and short woods shots it will be going forward.
In my 20 or so years with the cartridge as a primary deer hunting weapon, and taking one moose with a Hornady 175 RN, I've used bullets across these weights. Think of the 145 as the .30/165 and the 160 as the .30/180 in terms of terminal effects with less recoil. One's for deer, the other for elk. The .280 is extremely pleasant to shoot with 120 and 130 grain bullets, and expansion is remarkable. I probably would not use those on edible game.
After that, vs. the .270 its a matter of more bullet mass with similar performance. Vs. the 30-06, it's less recoil and flatter trajectories for similar performance. Splitting hairs no doubt, but it's fun to be different so long as one has enough brass.
Edit to add. The first bullet I tried in the .280 was the Hornady 154 SST. I had a lot of powerlines to hunt, and the ballistics were remarkable. If you wanted a bullet that comes apart in the boiler room of a large whitetail to 200 yards, this was it. I did not want that performance, so I switched to the Speer 145 GS and did not look back. I'd think one of the bonded slugs, or perhaps the newer Gen Hornady LR hunting bullets might have overcome that difficulty. Run the numbers for a 154 ELD, they are impressive for lighter big game, if the bullet is up to the shorter range impacts. My hunting territory has changed, so I may be revisiting a dedicated LR load for my .280. It will be relegated to part time service for the occasional pipeline sit however, as I've gone old school with the addition of a vintage Rem 760 in .300 Sav, so 150 flat bases and short woods shots it will be going forward.
Last edited:
