Not only is it enough, to my way of thinking, it's about perfect. But then again, I have no credentials on the subject, so don't listen to me. But do listen to rcmodel and Jim Watson who say the same thing.
But then again see contra with ArmedBear & H&H Hunter, who are both very learned and wise.
I suppose if you want a dedicated elk/moose/caribou caliber, you'd probably be better off with a .35 Whelen, .350 Remmag, 9.3x62mm, .338 win mag, .338-06 A-square, .325 WSM, .333 OKH etc., or even an 8mm mauser, .30-'06, .444 marlin, .45-70 gov't, .358 Win, .348 Win, or .35 Rem.
But .280 and .270 which are virtually identical to each other, are only a scrunthair away from the .30-06. I wouldn't hesitate for a moment to use it even if knowing I'd be shooting at the bull of a lifetime at 300 yards, *assuming* that it's the gun I was most comfortable with and the best shot with!
Also keep in mind that the .280 (aka 7mm Rem Express), like the 6.5x55 and 7x57, is "dumbed down" a bit in factory loadings for semi-autos that they were originally chambered in, so if loaded to its capabilities, can meet and exceed the .270 win performance (albeit just a small amount). With the better BCs of 7mm bullets than either .270 or .30-06, it's arguably a better long-range choice than either of them, espec. with the heavier 175 gr bullet family. The .280 is a 7mm remmag on a small diet. When loaded to it's capabilities (handloads), it can do 93% of what the remmag can do ballistically, and 98.6% of what it can do for all intents and purposes in reality. The 7mm remmag is considered by many to be a good elk round. And I cannot imagine that anyone, game or hunter, could be able to tell the difference between a 175 gr .284 bullet from a .280 rem and a 180 gr .308 bullet from a .30-'06 (the most commonly preferred elk round bullet weight in .30-06), travelling within 75 fps of one another at the muzzle. That's less than 3/100ths of an inch in bullet diameter, and only 5 grains of weight, in the exact same case. To my mind, the .280 rem *IS*, in essence, a
".30-'06, but with better bullet BCs".
FWIW, I've recently decided that I'm narrowing my caliber/rifle collection to just four for large game, not counting muzzleloader (with only two "brass families", you'll note):
1. .243 Win [6mm], for deer/sheep/antelope/goat sized stuff, at long ranges (a Western/Mountain/Desert/Beanfield rifle) (24" turnbolt, with 80-85 gr loadings)
2. .260 Rem [6.5mm], as an all-purpose round, for essentially all game at all short & medium ranges, mostly for whitetail deer, hogs, & self-defense (18" semi-auto, with 129 Hornady SSTs)
3. .280 Rem [7mm], for larger game (a Canada/Alaska/Elk/Moose/Caribou rifle, & African plains game rifle)(22" turnbolt, undecided on load as of yet)
4. 9.3x62mm [9.3mm], for smaller dangerous game (brown bears, lion, leopard, croc, warthog, etc.) and large African plains & North American game (giant eland, yak, bison)(20" turnbolt, undecided on load as of yet)
Wait a sec - I may be full of it - is the 9.3x62 based on .30-06 or am I smokin the ganja weed here? Regardless, it's the same basic sized case as .30-06/.270/.280/.35 Whelen.
If I ever actually make it to Africa
with a buff/ele/hippo tag, then I'll buy or borrow another dedicated rifle, probably in .416 Rigby or .458 Lott.
This simplification setup allows me to eliminate many others I own or have owned, including .45-70, .270, .30-06, .25-'06, 6.5x55, 7mm remmag, .300 winmag, and others.
