I'm in the market for a mild mannered all around gun and need some advice

J

Jim870

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
21   0   0
Location
Hampton, New Brunswick
So I am entertaining the idea of getting a milder mannered all around rifle for big game. I have in the past debated the merits of the various mild mannered standards, my goals are simple a rifle around 7lbs before a scope maybe a touch more maybe a touch less.
I handled a TC dimension today and have to admit while the looks weren't the most impressive the handling certainly felt good. So do any gun nuts own one and how do you like it?
Any other lighter weight $800 or less rifles that folks would recommend, bonus points if it is available in .280 Remington.
 
Sounds like you know what you want already. My two cents is this, the lower weight rifles kick more, just a consideration. Myself, I prefer the 30-06 as I can play around with bullet weights for all big game, I also prefer the feel of wood over composites, but I'm willing to carry the extra couple pounds.
 
Ruger M77 Hawkeye is a great rifle for that money. Think you can get it in .280? Usually I would recommend an S2 Vanguard but I think they are a tad heavier and don't think they come in .280
 
Winchester featherweight stainless classic (stainless / walnut) if it was me, no .280 but .270 is the same thing with less marketing, the original 7-06. Even an experienced handloader will struggle to tell you which bullet is less than a human hair fatter if tossed the two, we're talking .277 to .284 or .007"... That's less than the thickness of a sheet of paper, actually the difference is less than half the thickness of a sheet of paper wrapped around the bullet... And you'll find ammo on every small town shelf. This all said, the .270 does lack the niche factor if you're into that.
 
Jim870 said:
So I am entertaining the idea of getting a milder mannered all around rifle for big game. I have in the past debated the merits of the various mild mannered standards, my goals are simple a rifle around 7lbs before a scope maybe a touch more maybe a touch less.
I handled a TC dimension today and have to admit while the looks weren't the most impressive the handling certainly felt good. So do any gun nuts own one and how do you like it?
Any other lighter weight $800 or less rifles that folks would recommend, bonus points if it is available in .280 Remington.
Click to expand...
Since Hampton is just down the road from me, I know what you will be hunting ...... mostly deer.

Q? .... Are you a handloader? If not, you stuck with what you can get here in SJ. and I too would recommend a 270 over 280 as it would be harder to get here. As mentioned a 7/08 would be tough to beat. It would kill anything we have here in NB and be easy to shoot.
 
I have also had good luck with my xbolt, the hunter model would be closer to your desired price then the extreme weather or maybe even the featherweight.

And I agree with supercub 100% , if you dont handload the. Save yourself the headache of finding ammo and get a .270 over the .280 especially for here in nb, you can find a box of .270 anywhere.

The closest place to sell .280 is probably doirons and they probably dont carry them regularily, might be a special order.
 
SuperCub said:
Since Hampton is just down the road from me, I know what you will be hunting ...... mostly deer.

Q? .... Are you a handloader? If not, you stuck with what you can get here in SJ. and I too would recommend a 270 over 280 as it would be harder to get here. As mentioned a 7/08 would be tough to beat. It would kill anything we have here in NB and be easy to shoot.
Click to expand...

I do handload and for the next couple years yes I will be hunting mostly deer. I will also probably be filling that tag with a bow as I can see as many whitetails, bucks and does, drinking a coffee on my deck in a single morning than I do in a week at deer camp. In fact the dimension I handled was a 7mm-08
 
A .270 in a standard weight rifle is able as mild mannered as it gets. I've got a couple in FN M70s; one featherweight and one Cabelas Featherweight Super grade. Both handle nice and about like shooting a water pistol. I don't think they can muster enough recoil to bounce on the bags. Good stock design does wonders.

The advantages of the .280 are hopelessly exaggerated. More bullet selection? How many do you need anyway? If you did feel a pressing need for more bullet weight the 160 Partition has been sitting there since forever.

The difference between a .277" and .284 is exactly the same as the difference between the bore and groove dimensions of a 7mm barrel. Some times I wonder if someone in the twenties didn't just get mixed up and made a cartridge/rifle with a 7mm bullet instead of a 7mm bore.. Its not like the Americans exactly embraced the metric system.
 
I currently shoot a 280 and have had a 270 . . . the difference is to hand loaders is insignificant.
Buying over the counter, the amount of 270 is probably 10 to 1 better than the 280.
Going to a short action and a 7mm08 is a reasonable alternative if trying to shave weight.
My 280 is in a Remington 700 BDL SS from 1994 but then all of my CF rifles are 700's.

$0.02 rounded down is $0.00 . . . opinions now must be worth $0.03 or more
 
I've got a couple 1950s Husqvarna Model 4100 rifles, one in 7x57 and one in 270 I haven't shot yet. The 7x57 is my light weight do-all rifle. For now. If the 270 shoots well when it comes back from the shop with a new butt pad and a trigger job it might replace the other one as the current darling.
 
On either side of the Weatherby lay a .280, and a .270 cartridge. The order of size may not be as you expect. Very few can tell without studious consideration which is the .270, and which is the .280; they are the exact same cartridge the .280's just harder to feed off the shelf.

Can you tell if the left, or the right is the .280? What's truly impressive about the .280 is it's managed to sell as well as it has.

 
Agreed both are excellent indeed, but there's little point in trying to feed a .280 unless you've got thousands of 7mm bullets for some reason. The .270 is spot on the identical thing just with a hundred times the rifle selection and ammunition availability. If a nice rifle came up in .280 and everything about it was perfect, I'd use it in a heartbeat. But if shopping for a nice rifle as the OP is with no clear winner in mind, I certainly wouldn't shoehorn myself into the .280 corner when the .270 is offered in literally every quality production rifle.
 
Baaahhhhh 270 HUMBUG..........7X57, 280 Rem, 6.5X55, 264 WM.........anything but a 270..................

I was just reading an article on the 256 Newton, and apparently Winchester was working on a very similar cartridge but old Newton got there first and patented, or did something, anyway Winchester ceased research using the 6.5 bullet and went to a .277 bullet instead in order to keep off old Newton's toes. See now that would have been a truly magnificent cartridge and is as a wildcat. Old JO'C would have written all the same stories and praised it just as highly, maybe even more as Winchester was paying him anyway and today the debate would be between the 260 Win vs 30-06.........260 Win vs 6.5X55........260 Win vs 7X57..........260 Win vs 260 Rem..........260 Win vs 280 Rem etc, etc, etc........

I have used and highly recommend a 264 WM in that class of rifle, only slightly more popular than the 280 but a real killing machine with 140 gn Parts.......shoots flatter and hits harder than the 270 with no more recoil, better bullets and selection..........or if one wants greater capacity and shorter barrel the 7X57 in a modern action, will also do everything the 270 will and more............ANYTHING BUT A 270 WIN !!!!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom