.270 vs .280

Which do you prefer?

  • Total voters
    436
Ardent said:
Yep, you're right, the whole thing is goofy; there's not a thing to gain with .270's :D 7mm=higher efficiency, higher BC's, more bullets, heavier bullets... Yawn... No reason to drop your .270 if you've got one, but it's a foregone conclusion as to which is better. I think people confuse which they like more with which is better. I think I'm done here. :D
Click to expand...

:) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)
 
Ardent said:
Yep, you're right, the whole thing is goofy; there's not a thing to gain with .270's :D 7mm=higher efficiency, higher BC's, more bullets, heavier bullets... Yawn... No reason to drop your .270 if you've got one, but it's a foregone conclusion as to which is better. I think people confuse which they like more with which is better. I think I'm done here. :D
Click to expand...

I agree. The difference is very slim, but there IS a difference, in the 280's favour. You can make the argument that the 270's ALMOST as good as a 280, or that the difference is marginal at best, but you cannot argue that the 270 is BETTER, there's just no support for that argument. (unless you live in some crazy place that restricts the maximum calibre you can use to .270. But that's just plain crazy, right? ;) ). IF I was shopping for a new rifle, and the model I was looking for came in both 270 and 280, it'd be a no-brainer to get the 280. But I'd have no qualms about getting the 270 if not.
 
I just love these who makes the best pick up truck kinda threads.
There aint a hill of beans difference between the 2 cartidges, not that that a game animal will ever know..
280Rem. Max Pressure is 50,000CUP
270Win. Max pressure is 52,000CUP
Supposidly the 280 is lower for the 740 Auto loader, but werent those rifles made in 270 as well?
Things that make you hmmm.
 
270

You know, I always wanted a 280.

Then a buddy gave me a 270 and that settled that.

Besides, if you really need it, you're more likely to find a box of 270 on the shelf in the grocery store in East Pothole, Bindertwine or Seal harbour than a box of 280.
 
Last edited:
LEFTY: Just why do you give pressure quotes 280Rem. Max Pressure is 50,000CUP ----270Win. Max pressure is 52,000CUP ?????

Same gun,
same case strength,
same action,
for all intensive purpose same bullet bearing area:)

Are you by chance relying on the same ancient ballists from the same guys that tried (successfully unfortunately) to kill the .225win :mad:
 
Senior; according to my old Speer reloading manual, the SAAMI pressure limit for the .280 Rem is 50,000CUP and for the .270 Win it is 54,000CUP. I have no idea why they would do this. Maybe Jack had something to do with it!
 
Modern bullet construction is such that there is no significant advantage to either caliber with regard bullet weight.
Many believe that the .280 has an advantage when hand loading, I would disagree. Having hand loaded for both, I found you still are limited by common-sense and pressure and you can heat them both up... but only marginally.
Others argue that the availability of factory loads for the .270 makes it the best choice for non-hand loaders. This argument is also redundant... you can order anything you might need for hunting in factory loads for a .280. And if you lose your bullets when back in the bush it won't matter what caliber you have... the gun will still be empty.
I think that the .270 is better... simply my opinion and being a consummate debater I will argue this point anytime, anywhere with anyone... just because I can.;)

I thnk that the advent of the WSM's has made this argument moot... We should all turn our long action rifles in to the closest museum and move on to the advanced technology... I'm serious.:)
 
BIGREDD said:
Many believe that the .280 has an advantage when hand loading, I would disagree. Having hand loaded for both, I found you still are limited by common-sense and pressure and you can heat them both up... but only marginally.
Click to expand...
I, too, have hand loaded and shot both the .270 and .280 . I hand load the 139 grain .280 for accuracy and speed, with emphasis on accuracy but still attain a speed of just a tad over 3000 '/sec.(which is chompin' at the heels of store-bought 7mm Rem. Mag.
I have killed a lot of animals with a lot of different guns ....but have never before witnessed the almost magical "kill-ability" of the .280....way beyond what the "book specs" would lead you to believe .
The .280 was underloaded(50,000 CUP) to function well in the Rem. M/742 .
 
the keepa said:
I, too, have hand loaded and shot both the .270 and .280 . I hand load the 139 grain .280 for accuracy and speed, with emphasis on accuracy but still attain a speed of just a tad over 3000 '/sec.(which is chompin' at the heels of store-bought 7mm Rem. Mag.
I have killed a lot of animals with a lot of different guns ....but have never before witnessed the almost magical "kill-ability" of the .280....way beyond what the "book specs" would lead you to believe .
The .280 was underloaded(50,000 CUP) to function well in the Rem. M/742 .
Click to expand...
I just can't buy that old "The .280 was underloaded(50,000 CUP) to function well in the Rem. M/742 .[/" stuff. Obviously the same gun was used earlier with the higher pressure 270 :confused: . I believe it is simply a matter of a particular old gun writer attempting to downplay or kill a cartridge for a personal reason.
As I pointed out before that is exactly what happened to the poor old .225! When you see some of the old ballistic charts on this fine cartridge you wonder if they put enough powder in to even get the bullet out the barrel:rolleyes:

With a complete lack of factual support it's nice to finally read BREDDs reasoning for his continueing illogical 270 support "just because I can."
:D :D :redface: :redface:
 
BIGREDD said:
I thnk that the advent of the WSM's has made this argument moot... We should all turn our long action rifles in to the closest museum and move on to the advanced technology... I'm serious.:)
Click to expand...

You go ahead and send those long actions my way. Seriously. MY personal preference is to despise anything with WSM or WSSM after the name. Also, now that winchester is out of business in the USA and not making the Model 70 anymore, I'd suggest the future of those rounds is in doubt.

There's ALOT to be said for the long magnums. No WSM is going to go head to head with the .300 WBY or the .375H&H or the .405 Gibbs. Just ain't gonna happen. You can only make a cratridge so fat and stubby before you excessively limit mag capacity and impair feeding.
 
Just finished hunting yesterday. Used my 270 Cooey i have had since 1962. I have no reason to change calibers it has taken everything i have shot at.
 
newt said:
Just finished hunting yesterday. Used my 270 Cooey i have had since 1962. I have no reason to change calibers it has taken everything i have shot at.
Click to expand...

That's a pretty enviable record :)

Sounds like you don't have any expierence with anything else that may be as good or better !
 
I have had lots of diffrent calibers in the past 35 years, from 30-30 t0 375 HH magnum etc. Then I discovered the 270wsm and that has been my main stay now for sometime. The 270 wsm does everthing I wanted and expected, the the type of hunting I do (deer, moose and sometimes elk) it's perfect. I use the 150 & 160 gr bullets for the bigger game and the 140 gr for whitetail & mule deer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom