Reading the link below it is clear that this cartridge had quite a checkered history since 1957.
It seems Remington had to get its own version of the 270 Win; but with their name on it.
In 1979 it was loaded to higher pressures to boost sales and renamed to the 7 mm Rem Express.
The new name of the 7 mm Rem Express was dropped 2 years later in 1981.
How is it doing today in the USA versus the 270 Winchester.

http://www.norma.cc/content.as...k=Calibers&Title=280 Remington

Warrior

The 280 Rem. was also called the 7mm/06 for a while.

While the 280 is a great cartridge, the 270 is still ahead in sales.

Joe A.

I really like my 280 built on a pre 64 fwt action with a 22" douglas barrel. Have it rigged for 140 gr accubonds w/54-55 gr H4350 and shoots bugholes. Has been promoted to be my go to S. Texas deer rifle and antelope rifle. May also be the lucky lady if I decide to make a dall hunt soon.

quote:

How is it doing today in the USA versus the 270 Winchester.

The .270 is selling 50 to 1 over the .280 Rem.....

IMO, the .280 is a better cartridge (handling 175 grain bullets easily) but bear in mind....the average American hunter don't know squat about rifles.....they know .30-06, .270, and .243....and shit don't flush up hill and paychecks come on Fridays!

I am under correction, but don't think Winchester ever adopted the 280 Rem, whereas Ruger has added the 280 Remington to its line of chambered cartridges. Are there any other manufacturers that followed suit?

The 280 Remington has a large selection of 0.284 inch bullets and as such has more possibilities for reloaders, unlike the 270 Winchester which has limited bullet types and weights.

I would also wager to say that the 7mm Remington Magnum has stolen a great deal of attention away from the 280 Remington due to the marketing of "Magnum" calibers of the 60's and 70's.

Warrior

this is just me, but i would take a .280 over a .270 any day. no particular reason, as both are good cartridges - just personal opinion.

Winchester made a few 280 Rem rifles in their
lightweight back in the 80's. My Dad bought one in 1987? I think. I have in now. It is a push feed with a laminated stock. A beauty and
very accurate although after the thin barrel heats up it opens the group up a little. You
would be hard pressed to find a better deer
pronghorn rifle. Rifle and ammo availability
is where 270 beats 280 not in performance.
I load 140 and 160 NP for most hunting.

I love my 270 with 140 Nos AB's, but admit that a .280 with a good 160 or 150 grain bullet would be more practical for my part of Africa.

7x64 -- predates, every bit as good, and i just like it!

Rem underloaded the .280 so it would function smoothly in their pump and auto loaders.They realized the cartridge was to good die so they loaded it up and renamed it the 7mm Express.That lead to confusion so they went back to calling it .280 Rem.Winchester also wanted a 7mm and brought out the .284 Win but they made it to fit the 88 lever gun's magazine which was so short bullets had to be seated deep which reduced the powder capacity.

The .280 has been fashionable for a number of years (along with .280 Improved) for custom rifles. Fads in custom rifle chamberings come and go due to various influences, one of which being that if very few factory rifles are chamber for a cartridge then it per se becomes more popular for custom rifles.

Sako chambered a few .280's in the years that it was most popular as a custom rifle, but those are difficult to locate these days.

And yes, Remington's own introduction of their instantaneously popular 7mm Magnum in 1962 greatly overshadowed their own .280 chambering. They perceived the .280 as primarily a round for their Model 740(2) autoloader and Model 760 pump and as a previous poster stated kept the SAAMI pressures low to ensure slick operation in those rifles.

The 280 is pretty much a cult following IMO. Few factory rifles made & not as diverse a selection of ammo. I love mine, I chose it because it WASN'T a 270. With 140gr bulelts for antelope & deer & 160gr premiums for elk, it will do it all in a lt.wt. rifle w/ less recoil than the 06. Better than a 3270, probably not, but certainly diff.

quote:

Remington's own introduction of their instantaneously popular 7mm Magnum in 1962 greatly overshadowed their own .280 chambering.

Having two 7 mm's competing in the same line-up is bound to rob each other's market share.

What is often forgotten or rather not so glaringly obvious to would be buyers, is that the true potential of a larger cased magnum, such as the 7 mm Rem Magnum, is only realized with longer barrels. To achieve its full velocity potential a barrel length of 26 or 27 inch is commonly needed. In shorter 'sporter' barrels of approximately 22 inches, the cartridge ballistics deteriorate to much the same as achieved in a .270 Winchester, whilst having the muzzle blast increased as well, but used with a 26 or 27 inch barrel though the true benefit of the cartridge over the .270 Win or 280 Rem becomes apparent. That means that the 270 Win and 280 Rem holds a particular niche in lighter and shorter 'mountain' rifles.

Water capacity of these cartridges in question are:

270 Win ............... 67.0 gr
280 Rem ............... 67.5 gr
7 mm Rem Mag ..... 82.0 gr

Warrior

I have a winchester classic featherweight in 280. Shoots everything well.

quote:

Originally posted by tasunkawitko:
this is just me, but i would take a .280 over a .270 any day. no particular reason, as both are good cartridges - just personal opinion.

+1 I love the little blued/walnut M700 Mountain Rifles that Remington used to chamber to .280 Rem. Great little rifles.

My first custom rifle mid 60's was a 7mag I'd also shot a 284,270,308 and 243. Back then I never considered the 280 also we didn't have computers so word of mouth or read a gun rag was about all the information you had to rely on.

Later I added the 7mm Express also a 280 and I'm about to have that rifle rebarreled. I still shoot a 270,284,243 added a 280AI plus some other calibers like 30-06,270WSM,300WSM and 30-338mag got a 270Wby in the works.

Seems like too many are worried about what someone else should be shooting.

I built a 700 Rem. mountain rifle chambered in 280 in the 70's, long before any of the factories got on the band wagon.

I've shot caribou, deer, blk. bear and many other big game animals with it, and it's been an excelent rifle and cartridge.

I think it's a very under rated cartridge, and a much better choise for the bigger animals than the 270 Win...

DM

quote:

I think it's a very under rated cartridge, and a much better choise for the bigger animals than the 270 Win...

Agreed.

I guess this is so only by virtue of heavier bullets that are factory loaded in the 280 Rem, such as Federal's 160-grain Trophy Bonded or AccuBond at 2,800 fps. Typically the heaviest bullet is a 150 grainer for the 270 Win. In component form, 175 grain bullets can be loaded to 2,681 fps. These heavier bullets are not available in .277 caliber.

Warrior

quote:

but bear in mind....the average American hunter don't know squat about rifles.....they know .30-06, .270, and .243....and shit don't flush up hill and paychecks come on Fridays!

That's the truth. My uncle hasn't bought ammo in years...He just shoots whatever .30-06 people leave at his farm. I've seen him load the magazine with different stuff at the same tine. How he hits anything is beyond me.

LWD

I have a winchester model 70, that is a classic. Cannot remember when I bought it, but in the 90's I think. Not a push feed. Never shot anything in it but Remington green box 150 grain coreloked. Shoots good enough. One of my sons borrows it during deer season, so I never have it available. Has culled a couple of real big hogs.