Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: 280

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Yukon Canada
    Posts
    1,289

    Default 280

    I am thinking of trading some seldom used guns for a new Thompson Prohunter. Im thinking of getting it in 280 remington for an all purpose rifle. Does anyone have any experience with this caliber in the north? I am not a fan of the 270 for moose, Ive seen it fail to many times even with good bullets(it killed the moose they just went 5 miles) but looking at my reloading books the SD of the bullets are better than the 270 by quite a bit so should get better penetration?

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    porcupine creek
    Posts
    225

    Default .280

    I don't think there would be a bit of difference , probably less than that .

  3. #3
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    419

    Default

    Let see, 280 Vs. 270. Pretty much same case, 280 has a slightly larger capacity, 270 loaded to heigher pressure. 280 uses, a .284" bullet, a 270 uses .277" bullet, so .07 difference. Dont think any critter is going to notice a difference. The 280 probably gets a nod for bullet selection. IMHO both would work for a fellow hunting here if he is experienced and can place his shots well when the situation is right (this is very important when hunting with a single shot).

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Missoula, MT
    Posts
    448

    Default

    I really like my 280 and believe it is superior to a 270. Lots of good bullets across a spectrum of applications. the heaviest I use is a 160 either partition/accubond or TSX. I usually use Accubond; excellent accuracy and also performance. JMO. J.

  5. #5
    Member shphtr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Chugiak
    Posts
    1,376

    Default 280 vs 270

    The only SIGNIFICANT difference I see between the 270 and the 280 is a much greater selection of bullets in 7mm...but this difference is such that if given a choice I would definitely opt for the 280.

  6. #6
    Member Timber Smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Sovereign Mountain, Alaska USA
    Posts
    211

    Default Handloader? >>> 280

    Pretty much a tossup, as far as availibility of factory fodder the nod goes to the 270. 280 is more versatile; bullet weights up to 175gr, 270 limited to 160gr. Personally I prefer the 280 (especially the AI version). The 280 is my solution to the 270 vs 30-06 debate. I like 7mm due to the bullet selections and might even think of dropping down to the 7mm 08. Ballistically it is pretty impressive and can be had in a compact lighter package than the 280 or 270. Is any game you hit well with a premium bullet really going to know the difference? For moose with a 280 or 280AI I prefer 175gr Nosler Partition.


    "AND YE SHALL KNOW THE TRUTH AND THE TRUTH SHALL MAKE YOU FREE."

    JOHN VIII - XXXII

  7. #7

    Default

    Both are fine cartridges for non dangerous game, but they are essentially the same case and there is no way on earth that you could measure the difference in field performance between a 150g Nosler partition from a .270 and a 160g nosler partition form a .280. I have shot most of my moose with a .270, not because it is absolutely the best option but because it is what i had in my hands at the time. I could not tell the difference between a 300 mag, 7mm mag, 30-06 or a .270, moose shot in the heart/lung mostly do the same thing. And they just don't walk 5 miles with holes in both lungs that is just a physiological impossibility. So perhaps shot placement was to blame?

    If i did it again I might choose a .280, but they fill the same niche and are adequate for all game except the big hairies for which they are both inadequate IMO.

  8. #8

    Default

    Everyone here said it pretty well. I own both and certainly have never been able to see any difference in killing power between the two. An often overlooked bullet for the 270 is the 160 nosler partition semi spitzer. It seems to be every bit the equal of a 175 7MM bullet. I realize the 7mm has a bit better performance down range but I have never had to shoot over 300 yards at big game anyway. I like to keep the "hunt" in hunting!

  9. #9

    Default .270 works okay

    Dorm, that's the bullet I used for the one moose I took with the wife's .270. She was supposed to take it, but got nervous, buck fever I guess. I had the 160 Partitions loaded up well. Worked like a charm. Second shot was for insurance and to convince the poor guy he really was a goner, which he didn't seem to realize.

  10. #10

    Default 160 Partition

    Hey mauserboy! That bullet definetely raises the performance of the 270 and makes it quite a viable elk & moose gun!

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Yukon Canada
    Posts
    1,289

    Default 270

    With the 270 and moose, yes shot placement was the problem in most cases, however over the years i have seen moose shot at the same angles with larger calibers and those moose didnt go as far and lost a lot more blood due to better penetration. One moose 2 years ago tho was shot in the lungs with a 270, that moose went 2 miles and never bled at all that we could find. only found the moose because of ravens the next week. Im not proud to tell that story but its true, and i have been guideing for a lot of years and i would have sworn that moose wasnt hit...... it was. thats the only time in 22 years guideing that ive lost a moose, with 30/06 and up I have not seen that happen, i know it could i just havent seen it.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •