Optimum bullet weight for 280 Remington?

MD

MD

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
13   0   0
I guess I should have asked this question before committing to buying two boxes of Federal 140 grain loads for this season, but here goes:

Is any particular bullet weight better than another out of the 280 Remington for all-round BC hunting?

I don't reload so if I remember right, across the counter I can get loads with 140, 150 and 165 grain bullets.

I'm usually hunting deer or black bear, but there are chances at moose and elk in some areas I haunt too.

I'm not going to change anything this year, the gun shoots the 140 grain bullets fine, but for the future maybe I should go up 10 or 20 grains.

Thoughts?
 
Last edited:
140 grain class of bullets is about ideal for a 7mm of the 270/30-06 case capacity.
I don't see why you would ever have to change bullet weight.
 
I have used up to 175 partitions. I now use 140 & 150s. I have a lot of factory 150 Norma ammo, but if I had to buy more it would be 140s. Put where they belong and it will drop any NA animal.
 
My 280 is catholic in it's tastes, and shoots the 140 Partitions, 140 ABs, 150 Partitions, and 150 Scirocco IIs equally well.

For all round use, I have settled on the 150s for now, but would not see any issue if I had to use the 140s. Dave.
 
If I had a 280 (I would really consider an ai) I'd be shooting the 162/8's out of it. Just worked up something with 162 hornadys in a 7mm-08 2675fps and could go a little warmer yet. This load still will put out over 1000 ft/lbs at 700 yards that is good enough for deer
 
I'll go against the grain a bit here and show my preference for heavier bullets; for your purposes I'd choose a 160 gr Partition or A-Frame. I've shot 140s and like them, and the 150 gr Scirocco is the ###iest bullet in the marketplace, but if you want a single 7mm bullet to do everything, a dual core 160 is the answer. These bullets penetrate deeply enough to bring down the heaviest North American game, yet they expand on light game, even as velocity drops off at longer ranges. And they don't need 7mm magnum velocities to fly flat and hit hard; a 7mm/160 at 2800 is comparable to a .308/190 at 2800 even though SD only tells part of the story.
 
There seems to be a preference for 140's... I shoot the 139/140's from my 7-08's, 150/154' from .280/7X57's and 160's from 7 RM... for my purposes, these are good balances of trajectory/energy to case capacity.
 
Boomer said:
I'll go against the grain a bit here and show my preference for heavier bullets; for your purposes I'd choose a 160 gr Partition or A-Frame. I've shot 140s and like them, and the 150 gr Scirocco is the ###iest bullet in the marketplace, but if you want a single 7mm bullet to do everything, a dual core 160 is the answer. These bullets penetrate deeply enough to bring down the heaviest North American game, yet they expand on light game, even as velocity drops off at longer ranges. And they don't need 7mm magnum velocities to fly flat and hit hard; a 7mm/160 at 2800 is comparable to a .308/190 at 2800 even though SD only tells part of the story.
Click to expand...
rr

Thanks, Boomer,
Thats been my train of thought with every 7 mm I've had from the 7x57 on up to my current 28 Nosler.
For reasons unknown to me a 160 gr. load had shot the best or equally as well as anything lighter and has by far done better on the bigger game, especially under tougher conditions..
 
I'm with Boomer on this. I use 160 Partitions in my 280 for elk and moose. They just work. Would I try anything lighter for large game? No. I like the deep penetration from the Partition. For deer anything in the 139/140 range is more than adequate and I have used various brands of bullets on whitetail and mule deer with good effect. I don't have a preference, but the cheap Interlocks work just as well as the expensive Scirrocco on deer. Shoot whatever gives you the velocity and accuracy you desire.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom