I am a military collector and as such have long since fallen in love with classic military chamberings. I have sporters/hunters in 6.5, 7, 7.65, 8, and 9.3mm Mauser and they cover most bases very well. My favorites are the 6.5x55 and the 9.3x62 for almost all game in the world. I have a Savage Model 12vbss in 22-250 for varmints and really need only a chambering capable of true long range hunting to have a complete arsenal of quality chamberings for all occasions.

After looking at a lot of the new short this and shorter that I still keep comming back to classic cartridges. Is there anyone else out there who likes the 280 Remington for the type of rifle I need? I am open to suggestion, but on paper it sure seems to offer everything the "newer, better, thought up to sell guns" stuff offered now. Opinions please.

You already have a 7MM so how about the original American long range classic, the 270 Winchester?

Just doesn't talk to me. I think the 280 does everything it does with a better bullet.

If the 280 Remington is a long range cartridge then the king of military cartridges is one as well.

OK, then I'll pontificate on a thing I think is important when building a 280.
Remington designed the chamber dimensions to accomodate weak extraction from the 742/760 series of rifles. The SAMMI spec for reamers cuts a very sloppy chamber. When you handload the round to it's full potential (long range is the game, right?) you will see a lot more bulge at the web than with other '06 based cases at the same pressure. They can be hard to swage back down and it works the brass too much. That's also why the factory loads are so doggy.
If you can find a reamer for the original 7-06 wildcat or talk to a gunsmith that worked around this problem and has a better reamer, you can get a much better chamber for what you want to do.
Factory ammo will load just fine in the tighter chamber as they did not increase the diameter of the case, only the chamber. Someone else's reloads may not, though without full length sizing. And I'm talking about normal 270 or 25-06 presuures here, not hot rods.

I'd go with the 7x64 Brenneke, the .280 Rem is just to common sounding. That's what I'm working on now as I needed a new cartidge to fit between the 7x57 and 30-06 for my safe. I've got the barrelled action and Jeffeoso is helping out with the stock next month. Hope to have it up and running by the summer.

Huh?

What about all the other rounds that are commonly chambered in auto - they don't seem to have received the "sloppy SAAMI" chambered treatment. That's what small based dies were invented for...

BTW, the 280 was chambered in the 721 almost immediately after introduction as well...

Yeah Befus, I feel your pain. I wanted to build one custom rifle & thought about the chambering for awhile. The .270 & .30-06, while great carts. , just too vanilla for me, but I didn't want another wildcat round. So for me, the .280 was a perfect fit for my "mountain rifle". I love it, hopefully it never gets sold.

You know I thought about the 7x64 Brenneke, but when I looked at the loadings recommended here on the reloading pages the velocities were SO much slower than 280 Rem. I decided to move on. Just one 140 grainer listed over 2800fps. BTW, the AR data does not inclue 280 Rem?

In the lower 48 there isn't anything that will do it better than .280.

9.3 x 62, it wasn't my idea; I'm just the messenger. They had some complaints, particularly with the 270 in the 742. The 280 was partly an answer to provide a brand name alternative to the 270 cartidge plus one that didn't tear off rims. Poor gun care may have had a lot to do with it but when you sell rifles to the masses you have to make them work, regardless.

Depends on what you mean by "long range". If 400 yards is long range then the 280 is perfectly fine. For 500 or 600 it drops off too much because it is moving a heavier bullet than the 270 and doesn't have the powder capacity of the 7 mag or 300.

Now, if we're talking about 280 AI, it's a different ball game. The 280 AI may be the best compromise or balancing act between recoil-powder capacity-bullet selection-ballistics. I think I see a 280 AI in my future!

this is not a complete arsenal. it is only complete when you have a cat enter your yard and get away because you couldn't decide what to shoot him with

quote:

---

Originally posted by befus:
....<snip>... and really need only a chambering capable of true long range hunting to have a complete arsenal of quality chamberings for all occasions.

After looking at a lot of the new short this and shorter that I still keep comming back to classic cartridges. Is there anyone else out there who likes the 280 Remington for the type of rifle I need? I am open to suggestion, but on paper it sure seems to offer everything the "newer, better, thought up to sell guns" stuff offered now. Opinions please.

---

Just a suggestion:


Nothing wrong with the .280 Rem, though.

-Bob F.

I'm a big fan of the 280 Remington. Extremely sensible. BUT, you havea 7x57, hopefully with a decent bbl length on it. It will most anything the 280 will, just slightly slower.
I submit that you don't "need" the 280 and it certainly won't give you a longrange gun.
The 300 Winchester is old enough to be called a classic, and it will bring home the goods out farther than most of us are smart enough to not shoot. It would definitely give you something you don't have, in terms of performance (not that you need it with that list, but, hey, you started it, not me!) and still give the finger to all the latest must-have advertising blitz darlings. (Though I confess to wanting a 7mm WSM Featherweight!)
My two cents.

Have used a .280 for a long time for deer and elk size stuff, with 160 gr. Nosler Partitions, and have been happy.

I'm a bit surprised no one has mentioned the 7mm Rem. Mag. since we're talking mainly 28 calibers. I'm not big on the belted case magnums. This is the only one I own, but mine is a real sweetheart. It's an older Remington 700BDL, the one with the fleur-de-lyse checkering. It weighs 8lbs. which eats up a lot of the recoil. I put a Pachmyer Decelerator Pad on it as well. Cutting down on the recoil allows me to shoot much more accurately. It reliably shoots under 1" (5 at 100yds) so there's not much to gripe about. It's really a hard hitting caliber. Just one mans opinion. Best wishes.

Cal - Montreal

I've been checking on this thread now and then and it just now occurred to me that you're nowhere near a complete arsenal. You certainly shouldn't be admitting that in public anyway. Always leave the door open for more. What if you get the 280? How will you justify another rifle then?

My 2 cents on the original question: I figure the 9.3 is pretty much a 30-06 with a little more thump. With a 6.5 and 9.3 there's really no good justification for something in between. In your shoes I'd be looking at something bigger than than the 9.3x62. Since you don't like the newfangled stuff maybe an 8mm boomer? Either the RemMag or, for some European flavor, the 8x68mm. If you prefer 9.3mm then the 64mm Brenneke would offer plenty power, but maybe not as flat as you have in mind. Lastly, my beloved 300WinMag could be a good answer. I guess it too is a just a 30-06 with a little more thump, but in a different way. I lied, lastly I'll throw in the 7RemMag since you seem most interested in 7s.

Yadiyadiyadi, this ramble looks like a lot, but it's probably still only 2 cents worth.

The 280 is an excellent round. Loading Data can be a little soft i.e. some manuals list higher charges for the 270 with equal weight bullets.
If you can afford it the best excuse for buying a new rifle is that you just want it. Beyond a point most of us reached a long time ago every other excuse is more a rationalization.......DJ