31 replies [Last post]
Offline
Location: ALABAMA
Joined: 12/06/2005
Posts: 81
.280

Thanks,everyone! To be honest, I was probably going to buy it anyway, but now I have no argument against it. Slide over .308, you have a new friend.

Offline
Location: Missouri/Arkansas
Joined: 08/21/2003
Posts: 891
.280

Sure, the 280 AI is a great round, provided you pay an arm, leg, and first-born for a rifle, and then stockpile massive quantities of brass for a round that is roughly on par with the 7mm Remington Magnum, and below that of the Ultra Mag, 7mm Weatherby, and 7 STW.

For me, it's one of those rounds that someone buys so they can make everyone go HUH???? WHA?????

Offline
Location: Pennsylvania
Joined: 03/18/2007
Posts: 30
.280
Captain_Obvious wrote:
Sure, the 280 AI is a great round, provided you pay an arm, leg, and first-born for a rifle, and then stockpile massive quantities of brass for a round that is roughly on par with the 7mm Remington Magnum, and below that of the Ultra Mag, 7mm Weatherby, and 7 STW.

For me, it's one of those rounds that someone buys so they can make everyone go HUH???? WHA?????

You can make all the 280 / 7mm Remington Express shells you want by necking up a 270 Winchester or necking down a 30 -06 Govt.

As long as it in a standard caliber in the rifle that you choose - you do not pay anything extra for it.

Remingtons first attempt to market it was a total flop. Mainly due to the fact that there was already a 270 win and a 30-06 already on the market and also due to the fact that after WW II, people associated metric cartridges with foreign countries - such as Germany and Japan and wanted nothing to do with them.

By just changing the name to 280 - it became a overnight success.

It has 3/4 the felt recoil of the 7 mm Remington mag and almost 75% of velocity as the 7mm Remington Mag.

Don Fischer's picture
Offline
Moderator
Location: Antelope, Ore
Joined: 03/24/2005
Posts: 3183
.280

Actually it started out as the 280 and was chambered in pump and semi auto rifle's. So it got down loaded. Them Remington tried to bring it back in the Mod 700 by calling it the 7mm express. Finally at some point they gave up and started calling it the 280 again. Remington never knew where it should have fit in so shot themselves in the foot. But I'd rather a 280 anyday than a 270 or any 7mm mag.

Offline
Location: Southern NH
Joined: 09/13/2006
Posts: 379
.280

I've got one and it's a very nice caliber. It'll do a job on deer and elk. Probably do a moose in, too. There is not a great selection of factory ammo but there's enough to get the job done. Think of it as a 7mm 30-06. As the others have said, it's great for handloaders partly due to the number of 7mm bullets available. Mine is a Remington 700 Mountain Rifle.

Offline
Location: Plymouth, Indiana
Joined: 01/27/2007
Posts: 151
.280

Probably the most popular custom caliber especially for mountain rifles. I prefer it over most calibers excluding the big & nasty or long range elk hunting. It's just now getting the recognition it deserved many years ago. Remington didn't help itself by changing the name a few times & it couldn't compete with the popularity of the 7mm rem mag. Years ago handloaders discovered what a wonderful caliber it is & now we're starting to see more factory loads.

Offline
Location: Missouri/Arkansas
Joined: 08/21/2003
Posts: 891
.280

I believe one of the 280's alternative names was the 7mm-06, since it is simply a 30-06 necked down to .284 caliber. The result is a round that gives similar velocities with bullets that have superior ballistic coefficients and sectional densities.

Offline
Location: Somewhere Up There
Joined: 01/06/2007
Posts: 217
.280

Capt. O,

Can you explain the superior ballistic coefficients and sectional densities of the .280 to all of us? Dying to know, please?

Don Fischer's picture
Offline
Moderator
Location: Antelope, Ore
Joined: 03/24/2005
Posts: 3183
.280
Captain_Obvious wrote:
I believe one of the 280's alternative names was the 7mm-06, since it is simply a 30-06 necked down to .284 caliber. The result is a round that gives similar velocities with bullets that have superior ballistic coefficients and sectional densities.

P.O. Ackley has the 7mm-06 listed in his book's. That was a wildcat designation.

Offline
Location: Missouri/Arkansas
Joined: 08/21/2003
Posts: 891
.280

Sure!

140 grain bullets in .284 perform very much like the 165 grain .308 caliber bullets, those with the best BC's will actually perform a little bit better. The sectional densities for these are identical between calibers (SD-.248). For the sake of argument, this could also be said of the .277 caliber with 130 grain bullets.

150 grain .7mm bullets have a ballistic coefficient of .266, which puts them higher than 170 grain .308 caliber bullets and only five points shy of the .308 caliber 180. The 154 grain bullet has an ever higher SD.

160, 162, and 165 grain .7mm bullets have very high sectional densities (.286 and up) and compare with or exceed 190 grain .308 caliber bullets.

The long 175 grain bullet, (SD-.310) would only be needed in cases where extreme penetration is required, such as on a very large bear. Penetration by this bullet is a tad better than a typical 200 grain .308 caliber bullet.