Howdy,
I understand what eldeguello is saying, but my choice is .280. Mainly because that is what I have. My brother shoots the 7X57 and won't touch a .280. Pay your money and take your choice! Both are GREAT, just have different reloading requirements and are meant for different niches in the shooting world!
Coach

I thought that the Corvettes analogy was a good one. One is a true classic the other more modern and higher performance. The ideosyncrasies I've found with the two are as follows:
The 7x57 comes in more different throats than almost any other cartridge. If it's throated for 175's it might not shoot 140's as well as you want and vice versa. Reloading Data often is quite underloaded in deference to older rifles in this caliber.
The 280 is often handicapped in it's reloading data. It was originally a bit underloaded when it was produced to fire in semi-automatics. If you examine a number of reloading manuals the will list a higher propellant charge for the same powder and same weight bullet than the do for the 270. A larger bore diameter with larger capacity will almost always handle a larger powder charge and give higher velocity than the same weight in a smaller caliber i.e. you should be able to drive a 140gr bullet faster in a 280 than in a 270 but the manuals often don't reflect this.
A good rifle in either caliber makes for a superb hunting rifle......DJ

The only way you can go wrong is to NOT select a 7x57mm. I have owned this fantastic cartride for more years than I like to remember in various rifles. Right now it is a CZ 550 in 7x57mm. Now, I have been accused of hotrodding it by some poster, but to heck with that. I will wring out every possible foot per second and foot pound of energy that I can out of this round with reasonable accuracy ... period. That is not hotrodding. That, my friends is exploiting the possibilities. With my 7x57mm loaded with the 162 grain Hornady SST, I get an honest 2,855 fps chronographed average. I put it on one of the freebe balistics program and that equates to 2,855 fps and 2,932 fpe. At 400 yards I am still supposedly getting 2,367 fps and 2,045 fpe. At 700 yards this puppy is still going 2039 fps and has 1,496 fpe left. Way to heck out at 1,000 yards, the little 7x57mm Mauser with my 162 grain Hornady SST is traveling 1,714 fps and has 1,090 fpe remaining. I have used the round on mule deer, elk, antelope, whitetail deer, wild boar, javelina, coyote and even one turkey in Texas (shot legally I might add). A couple of years ago I had to go to Tulsa, Okla., to a funeral and while in the city I went to a gunshop. The fellow there, when he found out I live in New Mexico, said there is some darn good elk hunting here. I agreed. He asked what I used and I told him a 7x57mm Mauser. The fellow proceded to tell me that shooting an animal as majestic as an elk with a pipsqueak like my 7x57 was damn near criminal, that I needed something in the order of a 7mm Magnum with a 160 grain bullet going at least 2,900 fps from the muzzle to even consider taking on an elk. I thanked him for his weatlth of information and got the hell out of there. All this is not to say the .280 is less than ... I just think that when it comes between the two cartridges, in my humble opinion, the little 7x57mm steps right up to the plate and takes its place. Tom Purdom

Hey Tom, please forgive my fellow Okie, Not all Okies are quite that stupid (although some may argue the point in my case) ........DJ

It's about like discussing the difference between the left and right side of a nice rack. Either in fine, both even better if given the AI treatment. And you thought I was talking about something else...

Hey, I just thought it was kind of funny. The same thing could have happened in any city, in any state. I graduated from Northeasten in Tahlequah in 1974 and have been a newspaperman in several states. I may be moving back to Oklahoma in the not too distant future because of some health problems, but that is life, I guess. Have a tolerable day if you so desire. Tom Purdom

I'm usually a traditionalist but this time I'll take the .280 for the additional performance.

i have 4 custom 280's and 1 7x57..weakness of the 280-1.winchester brass is all nickle plated.2. it is the most difficult cat. i have to get to shoot well. 3.it is hard to find factory ammo, none of the local stores carry it. 4.i have never been able to get any of my 280 (shilen & kreiger barrels) to hit the speeds published in the gun magazines.strengths.. it shoots a hornady 154 bullet about 2800 fps which is about perfect for deer.

7x57 weaknesses- hard to find ammo. strengths. 1. winchester still makes brass for it. 2. you can mark a custom 275 rigby. 3. you can shoot a 139 hornady flat base 2850 fps easily and 154's 2750.4.it is the perfect deer deer rifle. i have had and sold several to friends all of which i wish i had back.

Well, I have one of each. Plus several 7-08's. My position is: if you own any one of the three, don't rush out and trade it so you can buy one of the others.
Now if you want to see an awesome deer cartridge for east of the big river, load up any one of the three with a 154gr Hornady ROUND NOSED bullet. It will hammer a whitetail down on the spot!!!! I would surmise the same combo would work well on mulies but have never used it out west.

I've had a number of each. I been able to get good fps numbers from the 7x57s, but never great accuracy. I've been able to get OK accuracy with the 280, but never good fps numbers. That includes factory and custom barrels for each. I think I'm gonna sell my current 280, and then have Hart re-barrel my current 7x57 - maybe they can make it shoot. I can't tell a wit of different between the two on game up to medium-small elk, so I prefer the 7x57 for less powder consumption and recoil.

9.3

Since current rifles reuire a std. action for both, I would & did go w/ the .280 for my lt.wt. mountain game rifle. I haven't tried the 175gr bullets but have settled on various 160gr pills for all of my hunting, 160gr Speer OR NAB for deer/antelope & 160grNP for elk size game.

7x57 - perfect blend of soft woodland and flat hard hitting open country cartridge for the noise and recoil sensitive shooter.

I've owned both and am currently on my second .280.
I get over 3200 fps. with the 120 gr. Barnes XBT and .6 MOA groups with my latest .280. The 7X57 isn't going there w/o nasty, erratic pressures.
Both fit the long action. The 7X57 uses an out dated throat design which burns out barrels faster and sometimes produces less accuracy than the short throated .280.
The 7X57 will kill elk class stuff quite well. All the way to 400 yds. I used the 140 gr. Nosler Partition @ 2800 fps. for many years and had no problems killing anything.
Neither recoils enough to be an issue for me.
With the 30'06 vs. .308 debate, the .308 has an edge over the '06 because of the very cheap surplus ammo availiable for it. The 7X57 has very little of this currently availiable. Little of it is non corrosively primed. So, there isn't much to gain there. E

I love them both but for versitility I'll take the .280 rem.

I like them both as well, I would be fine with either one in a Mauser action, the 7X57 would be more natural. But I wouldnt put a 7X57 in a Springfield.

Well, I will have to give my nod to the 7x57 as well. I have owned at least one, sometimes two or three, for the past 35 years, and have come to respect the "mauser" offering very much. This is not intended to denigrate the 280 in any way, it just lacks the charisma of the old 7x57. I have taken a lot of game with the 7x57 over the years, including several Elk and about 10 moose. It is effective and mild mannered. I have reached 3000 with the 140's, 2940 with 150's and 2825 with the 160's with a 24" barrel in this chambering. My present 7x is a 700 Mountain rifle [floorplate model] which is the nicest one I have ever owned, and surprisingly accurate for the first three shots. The 140 Partition will often get under 1" at 100 meters. and the 160 is just slightly more accurate, on average. What else can I say...Oh yes, in 1991 I won a 1000 yard competition with my 7x57 - group measured 8-3/8" Not bad for a 100 year old design!! regards, eagleye.