.270 vs .280

[Tubby’s Canteen]

Good evening gentleman I was at the range recently sighting in my new to me .270, while there another gentleman was also sighting a browning leaver action .22. We got to talking as ones generally does when two gun owners are togeather and he told me the .280 is a far superior round to the .270. Given that this is my first sub .30 rifle I was unsure if he was just bias as he owned a .280. So I decide to pose the question to you all. Is there any Benefit to the .280 Over the .270?

Given that they are both using the same parent case and if my math is correct there is only .007 thousandths of an inch different I find it hard to believe one could be vastly superior to another. But I stand ready to be proven wrong if there is information to the contrary.

 

[Ridge Runner]

Like most things I'll most likely catch flack on this......but here goes.....

(Rhetoricaly) What can't you kill with a 270 and need a 280 for?.....

IF one is into maximum powder charge reloading, various bullet weights and this-that-and another....blah..blah..blah...

It boils down to you have a 270 ....why do you need a 280....their isn't a significant agruement to be made...justifying which is better.

Just my 2 cents

 

[375 Ruger Fan]

Phil Massaro wrote a good article on the subject: https://www.americanhunter.org/articles/2018/5/18/head-to-head-270-winchester-vs-280-remington/

270 ammo is much more common and easier to find. If you are a reloader, the 280 is attractive since there are lots of 7mm bullets.

I will stick with my 270.

 

[sestoppelman]

Pretty much it. A matter of preferences. Only talking about a 7 thousands difference in bullet diameter and the case is essentially the same, with the .280 having a few grains more capacity.

 

[bruce moulds]

having shot out 2 x 270 barrels, and am on a 2nd 280 barrel, on game, I feel moderately qualified to comment.
a little added history.
after the 2 x 270s, I went to a 30/06, and while it was good it lacked the trajectory requirement for what and where I hunted compared to the 270.
on the other end, the 25/06 had the trajectory, but lacked the "knockdown" of the 270.
in this area of guns, I was looking for max recoil in the vicinity of the 30/06.
going to a 7mm rem mag gave me the power of the 30/06 with a bit better trajectory than the 170.
the versatility of 7mm bullets became very apparent with choices from 120 gns to 175 gns for many applications.
but I wanted a lighter rifle for carrying in steep rough country where I had to carry water, survival stuff, and over 100 rds of ammo as well.
the 280 in a lighter rifle gave about the same recoil as the 7 mag, and proved to shoot flat enough for the job.
a 140 gn 7mm bullet is neck and neck with a 130 gn 270, and a 160 gn 7mm is similar to a 150 gn 270, while a 120 gn 7mm equals a 110 gn 270.
here we are talking similarities, but in each case the 280 is a noticeably slightly better killer.
then we come to the 175 gn 7mm bullet in 7mm.
readily available 270 bullets do not match this.
if you already have a 270, and it satisfies you, there is little point in going to the 280.
on the other hand, if you want just a little more killing power and versatility, the 280 will give it to you.
both are superior game killers to the 25 and 26 cals, and give better barrel life.
the whole thing is even more interesting with the modern breed of controlled expansion bullets.
bruce.

 

[Tubby’s Canteen]

Thank you @375 Ruger Fan that was very informative

 

[Rem700stw]

Good evening gentleman I was at the range recently sighting in my new to me .270, while there another gentleman was also sighting a browning leaver action .22. We got to talking as ones generally does when two gun owners are togeather and he told me the .280 is a far superior round to the .270. Given that this is my first sub .30 rifle I was unsure if he was just bias as he owned a .280. So I decide to pose the question to you all. Is there any Benefit to the .280 Over the .270?

Given that they are both using the same parent case and if my math is correct there is only .007 thousandths of an inch different I find it hard to believe one could be vastly superior to another. But I stand ready to be proven wrong if there is information to the contrary.

I own both. I have hunted with both. Nothing on the receiving end of a well placed shot will be able to tell the difference I assure you. Nor will anything on the receiving end of a poorly placed shot.

 

[sgt_zim]

280 can be loaded to just short of 7mm RM. a 270 Win won't do that.

as a reloader, there's just nothing interesting about 270 to me.

present company excepted, a lot of guys I've run across who shoot 270 seem to be under the impression they launch magic death rays and are super-flat-shooting. they'll shoot 130 gr cup and core at white tails, then wonder why there's so much blood-shot meat. 150 gr bullets shot out of 270, 280, and 30-06 all have similar recoil. so why would I limit myself to the bullet selection of 270?

IMO, if Remington had come out with 280 first, the "270 vs 280" argument would have never become a thing - 270 would be a minor foot note of interest to people like Boddington and a few others. 280 isn't appreciably better, unless you consider versatility to be better.

 

[Dr Ray]

I believe it’s like cars. Some like white and done don’t. I think it’s simply a matter of personal choice.

 

[Graham Hunter]

I own two 280s and six 270s. I grew up on Jack OConnor and the 270 was my 1st BG rifle. I have shot many animals with both. The only advantage is the 7 cal has a bigger selection of bullets if that is important to an individual! I am taking my 7x64 (280) to the Eastern Cape in March.

 

[Hearties]

If you don’t reload - 270.
If you reload - 280.
If you reload, want the granddaddy of both and have a sense of nostalgia - 7x64.

 

[bruce moulds]

when referring to both, you might hear that the 270 is as good as the 280, but never the other way around.
bruce.

 

[Red Leg]

when referring to both, you might hear that the 270 is as good as the 280, but never the other way around.
bruce.

The .280 is as good as the .270.

 

[Standard Velocity]

If you don’t reload - 270.
If you reload - 280.
If you reload, want the granddaddy of both and have a sense of nostalgia - 7x64.

^^^^

 

[35bore]

Re-invention of the wheel. Which is how great cartridges are created, I understand that. In this case 270 vs 280, I have no idea why the 280 was created. Wildcats be wildcats. There is a long list of cartridges that spawned from other cartridges that became phenomenal creations. I love the 6mm Remington but it doesn't really have that much of an advantage over the 243 really. I'm glad someone created the 6mm but it wasn't a necessity to fill a gap. I guess thats where I am going with my little rant here. Just because me or anyone else has an opinion on any said cartridge, in the end its just shit for an opinion. If you like it and it does what you bought it too do, then its the right one for you. Regardless if there is a "better"....

 

[mackenzie280]

Good evening gentleman I was at the range recently sighting in my new to me .270, while there another gentleman was also sighting a browning leaver action .22. We got to talking as ones generally does when two gun owners are togeather and he told me the .280 is a far superior round to the .270. Given that this is my first sub .30 rifle I was unsure if he was just bias as he owned a .280. So I decide to pose the question to you all. Is there any Benefit to the .280 Over the .270?

Given that they are both using the same parent case and if my math is correct there is only .007 thousandths of an inch different I find it hard to believe one could be vastly superior to another. But I stand ready to be proven wrong if there is information to the contrary.

Hi
I have two 280’s and have killed moose,elk,whitetail and mule deer with them over the last 30 years.
The only downfall of the 280 is almost any store that sells ammo will have 270 shells and not 280 shells in stock.
I do believe it’s a personal choice, shoot what you like!
I have never been hunting in Africa yet, do many use the 280 on plains game?

 

[Beretta391]

The wife has taken hers to Namibia 4 times. She has had great success with it. Harvested everything from warthog to eland with it and everything in between. She uses Hornady Superformance ammo, 139 gr GMX ammo. The few bullets we have found look just like a commercial. Most are pass thru’s.

 

[Red Leg]

Hi
I have two 280’s and have killed moose,elk,whitetail and mule deer with them over the last 30 years.
The only downfall of the 280 is almost any store that sells ammo will have 270 shells and not 280 shells in stock.
I do believe it’s a personal choice, shoot what you like!
I have never been hunting in Africa yet, do many use the 280 on plains game?

It would work fine there. After all, the 7x57 is considered one of the classic PG calibers and the 7-08 has had a lot of recent adherents. From the game animal’s perspective they are all essentially the same.

 

[Newboomer]

Sounds like two peas in a pod. No noticeable difference that I can see. Why not go to a 7RM and get the best of both? More power, just as good range, wide selection and availability of ammo, all in one package.

 

[meigsbucks]

My 2 cents worth... I grew up reading Jack O’Connor and have used the ,270 a lot. However, Jack also wrote an article extolling the virtues of the .280. His successor at Outdoor Life, Jim Carmichael is a huge advocate of the .280. I’ve long been enamored with the .280 however, have seldom used it. Something I hope to rectify.
IMO, you could probably shoot 100 animals with each and not notice much of a difference. The ability of the .280 to handle 160 gr and 175 gr bullets with relatively high B.C. gives it a slight edge for larger game like kudu or elk.
In the .270, I now use the 130 gr Barnes TSX almost exclusively. So far, in the .280, I’ve only used the 140 gr Nosler Partition. Both have given excellent results on deer size game.