.260 and .280 Remington
- Thread starter jackrabbit000
- Start date
Aren't 8mm Mauser, 30-06, 7.62x54R all pretty much the same thing when hunting in the field ? Why would they have all 3 ? Yes, it's true that if all humanity had was .22lr, .223 Rem, .308 win and .338 lapua those 4 cartridges would suffice for all hunting we could ever hope to do as a species on this planet.
But variety is the spice of life. And people buy them. So gun companies keep coming up with new ways to do the same thing. No reason you can't just get a .270 win and be pleased that you'll always be able to find ammo for your rifle
But variety is the spice of life. And people buy them. So gun companies keep coming up with new ways to do the same thing. No reason you can't just get a .270 win and be pleased that you'll always be able to find ammo for your rifle
I have a 280 Remington simply because I'm used to it ( I've had one for 35 years). At one time it was the darling of the custom crowd who have moved on to other cartridges. The 280 and 270 are ballistic twins and handle heavier bullets a bit better than short action rounds like the 260 or 7-08 though the new boutique bullets have made this a moot point to a large degree. Having only a few cartridges would be like living on steak and potatoes but that would be boring too.
They are the same as every other cartridge, and those of us that use them find them useful and interesting, although if I didnt handload, I would stick with the .308, 7-08 or.270.
I could live the rest of my years with a .22lr and a .300wm and have no complaints.
I could live the rest of my years with a .22lr and a .300wm and have no complaints.
There is nothing wrong with the 280 Remington, except it always stood in the shadows of the 30-06 Springfield and the 270 Winchester. The 280 was introduced in the 740 semi-auto but never took off. Later it was resurrected as the 7mm Express in the bolt actions because it can obsorb higher pressures and shoot faster. It's a cartridge that makes a comeback, however it's popularity fades away quickly, overshadowed immensely and recently by the 280 AI and the 7mm-08.
The 260 Remington, well I don't know much about the cartridge except that it too sat in the shadows of the bigger 6.5 cartridges and it's ballistic twin, the 6.5x55 Swede.
The 260 Remington, well I don't know much about the cartridge except that it too sat in the shadows of the bigger 6.5 cartridges and it's ballistic twin, the 6.5x55 Swede.
See I look at it differently, I have a 260 and a 280, and I wonder to myself, why would anyone want a 270.
Seriously though, the 280 is similar to the 270, but in my opinion the 260 is in a different class altogether.
Wild_Thing
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- In the thick of it!
Although they each have their following, both the .260 and .280 Remington are victims of too little, too late and Big Green's inability to properly market their own products.
I've shot a .280 Remington for many years it kind of turned me into a .284 junkie,as I now have a 7SAUM and a .280AI as well.Being a handloader I've always appreciated the large variety of .284 bullets avaiable.I don't think I'll be switching away from the .284 anytime soon. Mur
With a 260 and a 280 I am quite contented with those as my go to rifles. I am going to use the 260 in a bench rest match at the club tomorrow. The 260 accounted for a deer in its maiden season. The 280 has done me well on coyotes, black bear and deer. The difference between the .257 and 260 is the same as the 270 and 280 - .007 of an inch. Just not worth arguing over.
the 260 is a short action, for the short action fans, like me. but I like the 270, as well. Oldest son just got a 280, so no experience with it, yet. sounds like it should be as good or slightly better than the 270. I think I know what Rembo would say.
but I like the 270, as well. Oldest son just got a 280, so no experience with it, yet. sounds like it should be as good or slightly better than the 270. I think I know what Rembo would say. 
- Location
- Somewhere on the Hudson Bay Coast
Bingo! Which is why folks looking for a new rifle should be more concerned with the rifle than the cartridge its chambered for. It is far easier to purchase an unsuitable rifle than it is an unsuitable cartridge. All modern bottleneck cartridges shoot flat to their zero range, all of them fall off dramatically beyond their zero range, and all of them (between 6.5 and .30) are available in a broad range of bullet weights and lengths, and all of them between 6.5 and .30 caliber are suitable as general purpose hunting rounds. I was looking for a .30/06 for my son, but found a deal on a Ruger .270 I couldn't pass up. I just finished loading some Woodleigh 180s for it, and I'm anxious to see how they perform against my 240 gr .30/06 loads. If I was restricted to a single rifle, I might wring my hands between the .30/06 (or .270, or .280) and a .375, but in the end I'd be happy with either.
How much of a ballistic difference is there between a 130G bullet from a 270 wby compared to a 140 grain bullet from a 280AI ?
