.280

powdergun

powdergun

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
251   0   0
In my never ending quest to try something new I have been reading about the .280. My understanding is that this round will perform very similar to the 7mm mag with a bit less powder.

For those of you who have given this round a good test drive what are your experiences with it in regard to:

1) Trajectory as compared to the 7mm mag with similar bullets.
2) Favourite loads
3) Shootabilty as in
- recoil
- fussyness of loads
- stopping power ( always a favourite for discussion:D)
and so on .....

Of course I realize the rifle has a lot to do with it but I was wondering if it is worth the effort playing with a .280 since I already have a 7mm mag. I'm not a huge fan of Mags as I don't need to burn all at powder to shoot at the range and hunt deer which is my main focus so if this round is as good as the literature claims I just might sell the 7mm and buy a .280. I'd like both but you know how wallets and wives are.


Thanks for all your input in advance
 
I've had both and prefer the 280. It does give up about 150fps to the 7mm rem mag for most loads but this does not affect trajectory dramatically at normal hunting ranges . The big 7 handles heavier (175 gr) bullets better but I never used this weight in either caliber and I suspect neither do most people. Most 280's are not fussy and seem best suited for 140 to 160 gr bullets. I use R19 and 150 gr Noslers at just shy of 2900 fps with good results. I don't hot rod the 280 as all it does it wear out brass faster for no real gain in performance. If you want something a little different then the 280 is for you.
 
powdergun said:
In my never ending quest to try something new I have been reading about the .280. My understanding is that this round will perform very similar to the 7mm mag with a bit less powder.

For those of you who have given this round a good test drive what are your experiences with it in regard to:

1) Trajectory as compared to the 7mm mag with similar bullets.
2) Favourite loads
3) Shootabilty as in
- recoil
- fussyness of loads
- stopping power ( always a favourite for discussion:D)
and so on .....

Of course I realize the rifle has a lot to do with it but I was wondering if it is worth the effort playing with a .280 since I already have a 7mm mag. I'm not a huge fan of Mags as I don't need to burn all at powder to shoot at the range and hunt deer which is my main focus so if this round is as good as the literature claims I just might sell the 7mm and buy a .280. I'd like both but you know how wallets and wives are.


Thanks for all your input in advance
Click to expand...

**7mag is a couple of hundred feet/ sec faster on most bullet weights with about 7 or 8 more grains of powder. At 7000 gr. per lbs you will have to load about 1000 rounds to save 1 lb of powder, cost increase of less than 3 cents per round. I my opinion hardly worth considering this as a deterrent to the mag.
**Recoil on the mag is about 2 ft/lbs more per given bullet weight 17ft/lbs vs 19.2 ft/lbs again to me not a deterrent to the mag.
**Stopping power----obvious advantage to the 7 mag. more velocity equals more ft/lbs of energy.
**standard factory barrels on mags are quite commonly 2 inches longer than standard calibres adding to the mag ballistic advantage.
I guess I'm saying that to me recoil and 3 cent per round isn't a deterrent to shooting a 7 mm rem. mag over the 280 remington although I'd take the 280 rem. over a 270 win. any day.
**one thing I didn't mention above is the barrel life advantage does go to the 280 over the mag so that might be another thing to consider.

What model is your 7 Mag, how many rounds through it and what would you ask for it if you decide to sell it?
 
The only advantage I see to the .280 over the 7mm RM is that the former is available in lighter, more compact rifles. Both perform well, and the 7mm is a really good performer if you reload.
 
I reload and have had both a 7mm RM and a .280. I now only have the .280. It's my do everything and in any conditions rifle. 57 grains of H4831 under a 140 grain accubond. Shot a mulie buck at 430 yards this fall and it worked like a charm. Great round.
 
For target and deer go straight to the 708 and have fun...:D
Remmy Mt. Rifle with original Ti stock........
 
I would say go with the 7 08 can load both the 08 and mag with the same bullets any good 140 gr will do. 280 284.....
 
I think when you are choosing between the 280 Rem and the 7mm Rem Mag you really have to consider the weight of the rifle and it's intended use. If you want a 7-1/2 to 8-1/2 lb 24" or 26" rifle the 7 Mag makes sense,...if you want a 6-1/2 to 7-1/2 pound 22" rifle or maybe a 24" in that weight then the 280 makes sense.
I've had them all..280, 280AI, 7 Rem Mag. 7STW....there isn't much difference in trajectory out to as far as most of us regularily shoot,say about 350 yards,..or, to put it another way,..the difference in trajectory is usually less than your ability to hold from a field position.

But I do have to say that the 280 is the only cartridge where people actually believe that you can increase velocity by using less powder when compared to the 7 Rem Mag. The 280 holds roughly 10 less grs of powder but lots of people expect it to run with the 7 Mag at the same pressure and barrel length...not going to happen. Sure 280 handloads can beat some 7 Mag factory loads but you have to compare apples to apples.
 
I love it. Easy to find shelf loads and components. Low recoil. Plenty of punch. More than adequate for legit hunting ranges. Very capable of reaching out for a long range shot.

I had a custom 280 built with a 24", magnum contour barrel and a 1 in 9 ROT. So far, everything I put through it groups under a dime at 200. The smith had some handloads that he chronied at 3040 fps at the muzzle. With the cheapo Federals, the 140s are averaging 2950 fps. 160s are averaging 2850 fps. Have not had time to work up a load but I would expect some handloads are going to give me an extra 100 to 200 fps, not that this is going to make any difference to a deer or moose. Planning to work up a load with heavier bullets, hence the 1 in 9 twist.

Great all rounder that will travel to a few countries with me.
 
280 rem is a great round and in a 7 - 8lb bolt action rig has about as much recoil as I care to shoot regularly.

You can pick up 7mm Rem Mag ammo most anywhere but the same is not true for the 280. But it is available at most good firearm establishments.

For deer I think the 280 with 120gr TSX/TTSX or 139/140gr standard bullets is about as good as it gets. Closely followed by the 7mm-08 rem with the new Hornady Superfomance Ammo!!
 
steve62 said:
I would say go with the 7 08 can load both the 08 and mag with the same bullets any good 140 gr will do. 280 284.....
Click to expand...

The .280 takes the same bullets as the 7mm/08 and the 7mm mag. as well. Warren Page was one of the leading advocates of the 7mm mag. and had a hand in it's design. He envisioned a round with a .270 trajectory but with the .30/06's knockdown power. I don't think anyone would notice the difference in knockdown power between the .280 and the .30/06 at least with 140-150 grain bullets. The 7mm mag. is only superior to the .280 with heavier bullets. My 2 cents.
 
I recall reading an article by Col Townsend Whelen on the .280 Remington. Whelen was a fan of the cartridge, and opined that it was a tad better than either the .30/06 or the .270. He went on to say that it was not so much better that one should swap their current '06 or .270 to get one, but if you had neither, you would be a step up with the .280 over either of the others.
 
Another fan here. When Remington announced the new 700 "Mountain Rifle" back in 1986, I just had to have one in .280. Accurate right out of the box. I used 140-150 gr. bullets with IMR4350 mostly. Easy to get 3 into 1" from the bench. Took several large Whitetails with it over the years and still have it. Great calibre for a light rifle. Recommend the .280, but keep that 7m/m mag also.
Geoff
Victoria,BC.
 
Last edited:
Dont forget the 7x64 which is basically an older version of the 280.
My 7x64 BRNO 600 gets 2990 f/s with a 140 gr BT at good but upper pressures (you get to load the bullet quite far out in some rifles) and is very accurate.
 
farshot said:
Dont forget the 7x64 which is basically an older version of the 280.
My 7x64 BRNO 600 gets 2990 f/s with a 140 gr BT at good but upper pressures (you get to load the bullet quite far out in some rifles) and is very accurate.
Click to expand...
What powder are you using farshot?
Have you tried 160 grainers ?
Sorry for the slight hi-jack.....:D
 
I've had both and now shoot a 7mm-08. I had a load in the 280 with 4831 sc and a 162 gr hornady that was under .5 when I did my part. I found that there was less recoil in the 280 but they were different rifles and felt recoil vrs ft lbs of energy asside i liked the 280 more. In those days I mostly hunted moose and mule deer, the 280 even made a grizzly draw but it was what I had in my hand when I was invited to tag along. You didn't say that you were a reloader but I assumed you were. If you are buying factory ammo stick to the 7mm mag if you handload and want something different try the 280 or even a 7x57 mauser. If you want your wife to shoot it try a 7-08. But you better buy two cause you might not get it back
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom