7mm Express Remington
- Thread starter yodave
- Start date
Thought it would be a good time to show off my Rem 725 280 Rem. It’s around 60 years old now looking great, also an unreal shooter, I’ve had it 12 years and was my first big game rifle, I’m still looking for a classy scope to put on it. 
Attachments
hometownhero
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Toon Town, Sk
Could not agree more.
I’ve seen one Remington marked 7mm express. It was in Hungry Hound Guns in Lethbridge 25 years ago. I was a teenager then and an avid Carmichel reader so was aware it was a rarity. But I couldn’t afford it so it stayed there.
The .280 Remington, also known as the 7mm-06 Remington and 7mm Express Remington, was introduced in 1957 for the Remington model 740, 760, 721, and 725 rifles.
Having been released 32 years after the .270 Winchester, it had somewhat unspectacular sales. Remington renamed the cartridge in late 1978 to 7mm-06 Remington but just before the end of the year they renamed it again calling it the 7 mm Express in an attempt to increase sales. This resulted in people confusing it with the 7 mm Remington Magnum, and Remington changed the name back to .280 in 1981.
280 Remington vs .270 Winchester[edit]
The .280 Remington is capable of generating slightly higher velocities with a given bullet weight than the .270 Winchester, and also able to use heavier bullets due to the larger .284" diameter. .284" bullets also have higher ballistic coefficients at the top of the weight spectrum than .277" bullets. The greater energy and higher ballistic coefficient of heavier .284" bullets give the .280 Remington a slight ballistic advantage over the .270 Winchester.
Initially, the .280 was chambered in the Remington Model 740 semi automatic rifle. To function smoothly in the auto loader, factory ammunition was loaded to pressures of 48000 to 50000psi. The first factory loads featured a 150 grain bullet at an advertised velocity of 2810fps but in sporting rifles, true velocities were closer to 2600fps. The already popular .270 Winchester was loaded to pressures of between 52000 and 54000psi giving much higher velocity, thus the .280 was poorly received by hunters.
Re: Jack O'Connor Quote
And later in life Jack admitted the .280 was superior to the .270...
Having been released 32 years after the .270 Winchester, it had somewhat unspectacular sales. Remington renamed the cartridge in late 1978 to 7mm-06 Remington but just before the end of the year they renamed it again calling it the 7 mm Express in an attempt to increase sales. This resulted in people confusing it with the 7 mm Remington Magnum, and Remington changed the name back to .280 in 1981.
280 Remington vs .270 Winchester[edit]
The .280 Remington is capable of generating slightly higher velocities with a given bullet weight than the .270 Winchester, and also able to use heavier bullets due to the larger .284" diameter. .284" bullets also have higher ballistic coefficients at the top of the weight spectrum than .277" bullets. The greater energy and higher ballistic coefficient of heavier .284" bullets give the .280 Remington a slight ballistic advantage over the .270 Winchester.
Initially, the .280 was chambered in the Remington Model 740 semi automatic rifle. To function smoothly in the auto loader, factory ammunition was loaded to pressures of 48000 to 50000psi. The first factory loads featured a 150 grain bullet at an advertised velocity of 2810fps but in sporting rifles, true velocities were closer to 2600fps. The already popular .270 Winchester was loaded to pressures of between 52000 and 54000psi giving much higher velocity, thus the .280 was poorly received by hunters.
Re: Jack O'Connor Quote
And later in life Jack admitted the .280 was superior to the .270...
- Location
- Somewhere on the Hudson Bay Coast
I love the M-17 style safety lever. If you want a period correct scope, look for a steel tube 6x Weaver mounted in Weaver rings. I think Looky is right though, be hard to beat a modern Leupold 2.5-8X36 from the view point of practicality.
- Location
- Somewhere on the Hudson Bay Coast
I agree with much of what you said except for the part where you suggest that the .280 is superior (without saying so, you seem to allude to greater sectional density) to the .270. Given .277" and .284 bullets of equal weight, the .277 will always have greater sectional density, and where weight and form factors are thre same , the .270 will always have a higher ballistic coofficient. I suspect American bullet manufactures chose to make heavier .284" bullets following the European example, where 7mm rifles were developed with fast twist rifling, while the Americans standardized the .270 bullet for the stubby little 130 gr bullet and a slow for caliber 1:10 twist, which pretty much limits it to the 160 gr Partition and the old 160 gr CIL bullet. There is no reason for this to be true for anyone today since a custom 1:8 .277 bore rifle will happily stabilize 180 gr Woodleighs, and while both Matrix and Berger make heavy .284 VLDs 190 and 195 grs respectively, proper game bullets probably top out at 180 for the .270 and 175 for the 7mm, although as the match bullets show, this can be subject to change.
- Location
- Somewhere on the Hudson Bay Coast
That is if you choose to disregard the 6mm Remington, 6.5 Remington Magnum, 7mm Remington and Weatherby Magnums, and the 8mm Remington Magnum. Then of course there was the popularity of imported 6.5 MS, and Swede rifles, 7X57, 8X57, and with the metric designation of military cartridges like the 9X19, 5.56X45, and the 7.62X51, the American ear became conditioned to the sound. Poor sales of .280 rifles was more likely due to factory .270 ammo being loaded hotter. Had the .270 Winchester and the .280 Remington, or for that matter the 7X64 Brenneke been brought out simultaneously in the US, both loaded to their full potential, the choice would not have been so clear cut, even though the Winchester name carried much prestige at that time.
Hayya YoYo, this gent has a set of Lee's in what yer after.
https://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php/1741795-Brass-and-Dies-For-Sale
https://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php/1741795-Brass-and-Dies-For-Sale
The fact the 270 was out decades before and by that point had already gained a strong following surely didn't help either.
If the 280 was as common as the 270 that's the one I would have picked, but as a first big game rifle for someone who didn't have reloading gear at the time the 270 was a no brainer. Still need to put some 7mm rifles in the locker though, and the 280ai seems just about perfect for a 1-gun hunter (which I am not, but whatever.)
180g 270’s that’s awesome. 280 vs 270 is a classic arguement of bullet weight vs barrel twist vs bullet availability. There so close it’s silly, I think both should have been been made with faster twist rates and larger variety in bullet weights, get a 270 if you want a slightly faster/lighter bullets, and get a 280 if you want something with a bit more weight. But just for arguments sake since this is a 280 thread, larger caliber bullets always have a higher BC (and section density)compared to a smaller caliber, if the bullet is to the same scale, weight (volume) increases by the cube, where cross section is but the square.... sooooo 280 is better.
Wild_Thing
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- In the thick of it!
LOL. Wasn't someone on here writing about how they were at the LGS, trying to buy a box of .280 Rem and the clerk behind the counter, arguing that they were in fact looking for .270 Win?
Ruger couldn’t decide what to call it.
Just needed 7mm-06 and then would have being complete ! lol RJ
