Question that I think I know the answer to:

I am looking at the reloading data (Barnes in this case) for a 280 vs. a 270 and find that for the same bullet weight with the same barrel length, that the manual suggests 1.0 to 4.0 fewer grains of the same powder in the .280 and gets from 100-200 less fps.
Okay, is this because the 280 is under loaded for fear of damaging a Remington pump or auto? If so and if all other things are more or less equal, since the case is virtually the same size and the pressure with the same bullet weight should be slightly less given there would be less because of less contact area,

Correct. They're loading to SAAMI, which is lower then the 270 Win. Load them equal to each other and the 280 really shines.

They're both great cartridges and with the advent of 160g spitzers for the 270 there's even less difference.

Once upon a time, some idiot manufacturer chambered the .280 in a lever gun, so it's specs has been reduced to be safe in this one rife that no one has.

quote:

Originally posted by Antelope Sniper:
Once upon a time, some idiot manufacturer chambered the .280 in a lever gun, so it's specs has been reduced to be safe in this one rife that no one has.

?? Really? Does the same hold true for other calibers offered in levers? details please

SAAMI set pressure standard to the weakest action in which a cartridge was commonly made.

30-30: 42000 psi
.405 Winchester: 35.5k psi
.450 marlin: 48000 psi
300 savage: 53k psi

Here a related coorelarry:
30-40 Craig was a bolt rifle, with only one locking lug. It has a max of 47k psi


Perhaps one of my favorite example is the 8mm Mauser. Saami set the max at 35k psi becaure they are afraid someone will shoot a .323 bullet through a .318 barrel, despite the fact that most 8x57's were rebarreled to .323 in the 20' and 30's.

The 6.5 Sweed, was originally made in a 1896 action is rated at 55k.
30.06, a slightly newer action is rated at 60k


Compare all these to the WSM's. The WSM's are only made in modern, bolt action rifles, and all their pressure maxed are rated in the 63-65k PSI level.

The .280 is a modern cartridge, quite a bit newer than the 30-06. Just curious why the the .280 was subject to the reduced SAAMI pressures.

The 280 is a fine cartridge. When properly loaded it falls just short of the 7 mm Mag, but with less powder and much less recoil. It also holds one more round in the magazine.
Leo

quote:

Originally posted by Jon Beutler:
The .280 is a modern cartridge, quite a bit newer than the 30-06. Just curious why the the .280 was subject to the reduced SAAMI pressures.

If memory serves correct, it was initially offered in the Remington 740 and the thinking at the time was for reliable cycling. Nothing more sinister than that.

quote:

Originally posted by cobra:

quote:

Originally posted by Jon Beutler:
The .280 is a modern cartridge, quite a bit newer than the 30-06. Just curious why the the .280 was subject to the reduced SAAMI pressures.

If memory serves correct, it was initially offered in the Remington 740 and the thinking at the time was for reliable cycling. Nothing more sinister than that.

Cobra knoweth of what he speak!

quote:

Originally posted by chuck375:
They're both great cartridges and with the advent of 160g spitzers for the 270 there's even less difference.

My typo, I meant 165g BTSPs, the new Matrix .277 caliber 165g VLD Hunting bullets have a B.C. of .73 !

http://www.matrixballistics.co...r-rifle-bullets.html

Way back one gun writer, and I can't remember which one, said it best IMO: "it'd be pointless to trade off your .270 to get a .280 but if you're just starting out, I believe the .280 is a slightly better rig....."

The .270 and the .280 are fantastic cartridges. In fact they are actually almost as good as the 30-06.

25.06
.270
.280
30.06
8mm-06
338.06

Can you really say there is a bad one in the whole lot?

quote:

Originally posted by Antelope Sniper:
25.06
.270
.280
30.06
8mm-06
338.06

Can you really say there is a bad one in the whole lot?

No. But you must include the 9,3x62

M

quote:

Originally posted by metric:

quote:

Originally posted by Antelope Sniper:
25.06
.270
.280
30.06
8mm-06
338.06

Can you really say there is a bad one in the whole lot?

No. But you must include the 9,3x62

M

You can't leave out the .35, .375, and .400 Whelen either.

Its a distinction with out a difference

And more angels can dance on the head of my pin than on yours-----



SSR

You didn't include the 7-08 and the 8x57. The 7-08 is the cartridge the .270 wisht it were.

quote:

Originally posted by wasbeeman:
You didn't include the 7-08 and the 8x57. The 7-08 is the cartridge the .270 wisht it were.

The 7mm-08 is just a 270 with a smaller ...

quote:

Originally posted by chuck375:

quote:

Originally posted by wasbeeman:
You didn't include the 7-08 and the 8x57. The 7-08 is the cartridge the .270 wisht it were.

The 7mm-08 is just a 270 with a smaller ...

The 7mm08 is not as long but thicker! They are equally hard ..... on game I mean!

And they both buck about the same .....

quote:

Originally posted by Jon Beutler:

quote:

Originally posted by chuck375:

quote:

Originally posted by wasbeeman:
You didn't include the 7-08 and the 8x57. The 7-08 is the cartridge the .270 wisht it were.

The 7mm-08 is just a 270 with a smaller ...

quote:

Originally posted by wasbeeman:
The 7-08 is the cartridge the .270 wisht it were.

LOL!

quote:

Originally posted by Eastcoaster:

quote:

Originally posted by wasbeeman:
The 7-08 is the cartridge the .270 wisht it were.

itu
LOL!

Really your laughing at that? Wow, "easter" you should need to get out more. In my lifetime I have yet come across a situation where the 708 is even remotely applicable. Not even sure what the 708 is for other than Remmy has been steam rolled for the past 100 yrs and keeps trying to play catch up? Not to mention your inability to stay on topic. Its Summer time

quote:

Originally posted by Nakihunter:
The 7mm08 is not as long but thicker! They are equally hard ..... on game I mean!

And they both buck about the same .....

Yip, you can fill the tuna can with a 708, but cant touch the bottom. Ever seen one in the mirror?

When in the "Tuna can" I canot see much in the mirror - no idea what caliber. Just know it works real good!

quote:

Originally posted by Jon Beutler:

quote:

Originally posted by Nakihunter:
The 7mm08 is not as long but thicker! They are equally hard ..... on game I mean!

And they both buck about the same .....

Yip, you can fill the tuna can with a 708, but cant touch the bottom. Ever seen one in the mirror?

quote:

Originally posted by chuck375:

quote:

Originally posted by chuck375:
They're both great cartridges and with the advent of 160g spitzers for the 270 there's even less difference.

My typo, I meant 165g BTSPs, the new Matrix .277 caliber 165g VLD Hunting bullets have a B.C. of .73 !

http://www.matrixballistics.co...r-rifle-bullets.html

Probably require 1 in 9" twist to shoot those.

[/QUOTE]

In my lifetime I have yet come across a situation where the 708 is even remotely applicable.[/QUOTE]

I think you're the one that needs to get out more.

Yawn. 7x64. What the pewpew 270 was design to match with anglish bullet size

quote:

Originally posted by Jon Beutler:

quote:

Originally posted by wasbeeman:

In my lifetime I have yet come across a situation where the 708 is even remotely applicable.

I think you're the one that needs to get out more.

And I completely stand by my statement 100%. Especially in a .270 v 280 thread!