280 Remington

[T.R.]

Years ago, I was stationed in Michigan with USAF. My boss hunted with a Remington auto-loader in 280 and shot many deer with it. Whether it killed any better than other suitable cartridges is a subject of much discussion. I read somewhere that the 280 Improved with 24 inch barrel will nearly replicate 7mm MAG ballistics.

Good hunting to you.
TR

 

[Newtosavage]

I reload so ammunition that the stores carry has never been much of an issue for me. Being it came out in '57 and the .270 and 30-06 were many years before it, I really don't understand its point. I've heard better BC, but noticeably? Doubtful. I like it simply because its something different to own.

For me, the "point" was 160-grain Accubonds. I just don't feel comfortable shooting lighter bullets at something as big as an elk. I know people do, and good for them. But I won't. So that ruled out the .270 for me. Now that I have an '06, I wish I had just gone straight there.

 

[dranrab]

CDNN has synthetic Ruger Hawkeye 280's for $429 right now.

 

[Newtosavage]

Sadly, my love for Ruger Hawkeyes has passed. Love the action. Hate the barrels and the extra weight.

 

[DM~]

maybe easy to neck up 270 brass might have to trim them. I wonder if any one tried it

Tried it? Over the years, I've made a bunch of them, as I'm sure many others have too...

DM

BTW, Rem. re-named it 7 Express Remington for a while...

 

[SwampWolf]

Years ago, I was stationed in Michigan with USAF.

Did you happen to be stationed at Wurtsmith, AFB in Oscoda? I was stationed there in the early sixties and killed a few deer in the Huron National forest in those days.

 

[denton]

The 280 is specified by SAAMI for 60 KPSI MAP, though I've read that commercial loads were a bit lighter, as previously mentioned.

Ackley did some experiments "back in the day" to see if the .277 bullet was capable of making full use of the case capacity of the 30-06. Since the 7mm bullet is only a little larger, .284", I think his results apply. His conclusion was that the 270 just about as well might have been made from the 308 case, with only 50 FPS loss.

The net result of all that is that the 7mm-08, 7x57, and 280 are all going to give very similar results.

The 280 is (unjustly) one of the least popular chamberings. You might be able to drive a very favorable bargain on that basis. (Set the barrel back a bit, rechamber to 7x57 and instantly become the coolest guy in your hunting group. )

 

[old heeler]

Year ago I had 7mm Express later I got Rem 700 SS 280 with 24" barrel. I rebarrel that rifle for Spec 280AI and I use that rifle for elk/deer tags but have other rifles so doesn't get hunted every year.

I hunt with 180gr Partition in 30-06,150gr ABLR in 270 and 160gr AB in the 280AI. I haven't hunted with them but shoot few Berger 180gr VLD in 280AI and Hornady ELD-X bullets.

I consider the 280 like 284 and don't see any brass from Win for that.

 

[Newtosavage]

Set the barrel back a bit, rechamber to 7x57 and instantly become the coolest guy in your hunting group.

Maybe the best advice I've seen on this thread.

 

[DM~]

I DO prefer the 280 over the 270, but for deer it really doesn't make any difference at all, AS LONG as you choose proper bullets in each one.

With MY 280, I've shot white and blk tailed deer, blk bear, caribou and I don't remember what else?

It worked just fine! It's a GREAT cartridge...

DM

 

[MistWolf]

Maybe the best advice I've seen on this thread.

I've dealt with both calibers. Nope. If I'm gonna run a long action I'm going to get the full benefit of the 280. If I'm gonna go with a shorter cartridge, I'm going the full Monte with a short action and the 7mm-08

 

[Newtosavage]

I've dealt with both calibers. Nope. If I'm gonna run a long action I'm going to get the full benefit of the 280. If I'm gonna go with a shorter cartridge, I'm going the full Monte with a short action and the 7mm-08

Fair enough, but IMO the difference between the 7 Mauser and the .280 is quite a bit of recoil without a lot of FPS gain. I owned both and after a while wasn't sure if the juice was worth the squeeze so to speak. I'm starting to have that same feeling about my '06 compared to my .308's. But I shoot quite a bit too. Someone that goes through a box or two of shells a year probably won't care.

I shoot hundreds of rounds/year and the '06 (and the .280 before it) just didn't get shot as much as my .308's.

 

[MachIVshooter]

Set the barrel back a bit, rechamber to 7x57 and instantly become the coolest guy in your hunting group.

Maybe the best advice I've seen on this thread.

7x57 has a certain romance to it, but that would be a huge waste of money. That'd be like taking your Duster and replacing the 340 with a 318 (or 327 to 305 for Chevy guys, 302 to 289 for the four letter word crowd)

The .280 has a legitimate place in the big game cartridge category, where it has an edge over the smaller 7mm rounds (especially with heavier bullets) without the noise and recoil penalty of the magnums. I bought my sister a .280 for her first hunting rifle, and she took a nice cow with it the first year using Sierra 150 grainers hand loaded to 3,050 FPS. If one already has a .270, a .30-06, a 7x57, .308, etc., there'd be no point in adding the .280, since they'll all accomplish the same thing where hunting is concerned. But it's still a great round with slight advantages over those 4 and others to the handloader.

 

[MistWolf]

As the owner of a 280 Remington light weight Mountain Rifle, I am well acquainted with the caliber's recoil. I didn't get the 280 to be a heavy 7x57. I got it to be a light 7mm Remington Magnum. The 280 gives me performance close to that of the 7mm Remington Magnum but with less recoil, less powder and more magazine capacity.

I did think long and hard about getting the 7x57. It's a grand old caliber that I much admire. But the cold hard facts are, there's nothing the 7x57 can do that the 7mm-08 cannot.

The 280 wasn't designed for the type of shooting where hundreds of rounds are typically shot. It was designed to kill elk humanely with less recoil than the 30-06. For the shooter who fires a lot of rounds, there are plenty of calibers that are designed to get the job done with less recoil.

I grew up as a fan of the 7x57 and the 7mm Remington Magnum. But when it came time to plunk my own money on a rifle, the 280 was a more practical choice than either.

 

[Newtosavage]

MistWolf, by chance is yours a Remington mountain rifle?

It was designed to kill elk humanely with less recoil than the 30-06

While that may be true (and I'm not a long range target shooter) I would think the .280 would have a great appeal to the long range crowd, pushing the high BC 7mm bullets faster than the 7mm-08 can.

And I agree the .280 is more practical than the 7mm-08 and the 7mag for most folks.

 

[denton]

My 7x57 is a 98 commercial Mauser action, and it is instrumented for measuring pressure.

Ackley was right: Case capacity beyond that of the 308 adds diminishing velocity advantage in a bullet this size. The case may have more capacity, but efficiency is less and the gains are small. The 7mm Mag burns a huge gob of powder to get its muzzle velocity. It may be very effective, but it is also very inefficient: 40% more powder for 5% more muzzle velocity.

The muzzle velocity advantage of the 280 over the 7x57 (loaded to more modern pressure) is just about nil. Here are a couple of 7x57 loads for comparison.

150 grain bullet, 56.6 KPSI, 2864 FPS
162 grain bullet, 56.1 KPSI, 2762 FPS
(Note that these loads could accept more powder, for 75-100 additional FPS)

I don't find 280 loads on the Hodgdon site that exceed this. To be fair, if you're shooting a modern bolt action rifle, there is room to go up a bit in some of the 280 loads (a bit light, in honor of some older, weaker actions), and you might safely exceed these velocities by a small amount. But not by much.

The reason smaller bore diameters have less efficiency is that when the bullet uncorks the barrel, the energy stored in the compressed gas is lost to propulsion. With the same case volume and powder, bigger bore volume releases the gas at lower pressure and less propulsion energy is lost. Less wasted energy is more efficient. So you have to watch ratio of the case volume to the barrel volume (expansion ratio).

 

[mshootnit]

CDNN has synthetic Ruger Hawkeye 280's for $429 right now.

Sale over?

 

[MistWolf]

My 280 is a Remington Mountain Rifle.

It's been my experience through the years that the 280 generally delivers higher velocity than the 7x57. Both calibers are pressure limited in factory loads. Both calibers benefit from careful handloading to modern pressures. Neither caliber is a bad choice. Bullet selection is more important to terminal performance than the difference of 200 fps or so at the muzzle. Still, I choose the 280 over the 7x57 in a long action and the 7mm-08 over the 7x57 in a short action. If I'm going to run a 7x57, I'm going to use a Mauser 98 action sized for the 57mm case

 

[DM~]

MY .280 is a "mountain rifle", built before mountain rifles became popular, with everyone making them...

I used a Rem 700 action with a Douglas premium feather weight bbl... I made the stock out of a nice piece of walnut, and knocked out the stock in less than a week, as I was headed sheep hunting... I just hammered something out that fit me and be damned with nice lines of anything else! NOW, I some times wish I would have taken more time, but the stock sure hasn't hurt the performance of the rifle!! I did take the time to "properly" bed the action ect...

It's light weight, quite accurate and totally reliable, and has put a LOT of meat in my freezer...

SO, I'm a big 280 fan, preferring it over the 270, with the 280's better choice of BIG game bullets...

Here's a nice blk. tail I shot on Kodiak Island,

And a blk. bear I shot on Bear Glacier, both with my "light weight" .280,

BTW, I moved up to the .280 from the 7x57...

DM

 

[old heeler]

My 7x57 is a 98 commercial Mauser action, and it is instrumented for measuring pressure.

Ackley was right: Case capacity beyond that of the 308 adds diminishing velocity advantage in a bullet this size. The case may have more capacity, but efficiency is less and the gains are small. The 7mm Mag burns a huge gob of powder to get its muzzle velocity. It may be very effective, but it is also very inefficient: 40% more powder for 5% more muzzle velocity.

The muzzle velocity advantage of the 280 over the 7x57 (loaded to more modern pressure) is just about nil. Here are a couple of 7x57 loads for comparison.

150 grain bullet, 56.6 KPSI, 2864 FPS
162 grain bullet, 56.1 KPSI, 2762 FPS

I don't find 280 loads on the Hodgdon site that exceed this. To be fair, if you're shooting a modern bolt action rifle, there is room to go up a bit in some of the 280 loads (a bit light, in honor of some older, weaker actions), and you might safely exceed these velocities by a small amount. But not by much.

The reason smaller bore diameters have less efficiency is that when the bullet uncorks the barrel, the energy stored in the compressed gas is lost to propulsion. With the same case volume and powder, bigger bore volume releases the gas at lower pressure and less propulsion energy is lost. Less wasted energy is more efficient. So you have to watch ratio of the case volume to the barrel volume (expansion ratio).

One think I know about Ackley and I used his loading data and it was my first 7x57AI also did 30-06AI and shooting 3 of them now from 22 cal up to 35. In a modern rifle just look at Nosler data for 280, it has 26" lilja barrel, 160gr high 2800 to 2929fps and 150gr max at 3006fps.

He build lot of AI increasing case capacity and velocity vs what your posting about. I have SAAMI Spec 280AI and I also have 280AI build before Spec 280AI and it's right in line with Nosler data used before spec and Sierra data.

Ackley was one of the first to shorten 30 H&H case for his 25,270 Ackley Mag.

 

[RAT807]

I bought a 280 Remington 700 back in 1990 to replace a 270 for better and larger bullet selections. I do not regret that choice.
A couple months back I had 270 owner out shooting steel around 450-470 yards. My 280 impacts were noticeably larger than his 130 grain Remington ammo impacts. I also shot some 130 grain in 264 Mag and impacts were more than double the size of the 270.
Muzzle velocity was within a couple hundred FPS for the 3 rounds but down range velocity plus visual and audible impacts on steel left no doubt the 270 did not have the power of the 280 or 264 Mag

 

[Newtosavage]

Both calibers are pressure limited in factory loads. Both calibers benefit from careful handloading to modern pressures. Neither caliber is a bad choice.

After owning both, I cannot agree more with this statement.

 

[dranrab]

Sale over?

Yes. It only lasted about 5 days. CDNN still has a lot of them in stock though, so if you want one keep an eye out or join their email list. I suspect they'll put them on sale again.

 

[FN in MT]

The 280 is specified by SAAMI for 60 KPSI MAP, though I've read that commercial loads were a bit lighter, as previously mentioned.

Ackley did some experiments "back in the day" to see if the .277 bullet was capable of making full use of the case capacity of the 30-06. Since the 7mm bullet is only a little larger, .284", I think his results apply. His conclusion was that the 270 just about as well might have been made from the 308 case, with only 50 FPS loss.

The net result of all that is that the 7mm-08, 7x57, and 280 are all going to give very similar results.

The 280 is (unjustly) one of the least popular chamberings. You might be able to drive a very favorable bargain on that basis. (Set the barrel back a bit, rechamber to 7x57 and instantly become the coolest guy in your hunting group. )

I don't agree that "the 7x57, 7mm-08 and the .280 will give very similar results". The .280 has more case capacity, so can achieve higher velocity. That said.....My wife and a few kids who loaned her rifle...have all handily killed cow and spike elk with a 7mm-08 and 160 NP's.

Also.....check on Custom rifle chamberings....The .280 and .280AI are two of the most popular for Custom rifle makers. It may be a relatively dead cartridge for Joe Lunchbox ,but for folks who know something about rifles, it's been very much alive for many years.

I'm a .280/.280AI fan, so maybe the flawless service both rounds have given me these last 30 years is coloring my thinking? From impala to black wildebeest, elk to whitetails. NEVER a failure or any drama.

 

[Varminterror]

I read somewhere that the 280 Improved with 24 inch barrel will nearly replicate 7mm MAG ballistics.

That has not been my experience with the .280AI and 7RM. The .280's a great round, but even blown out, it doesn't have anywhere near the capacity as the 7RM.

Maybe if you compared a 26" .280AI to an 18" or 20" 7RM? I owned 24" 700's in both at one point, while the difference might not have meant much of anything in the field, there certainly was a difference. One eats more powder, barks louder, flies faster, and punches harder.

I'm considering doing another 280AI on one of my .30-06 Ruger M77MkII's, but I'm leaning more towards another 6.5-06 Imp instead right now.