I can' t add much or praise it any more. I use the 120-140 grains for deer and the 160-162 grain for anything bigger. I have had several 280' s and 7MM mags. A good 280 will come very close to matching 7MMag velocities with less powder and less recoil. I once had a model 70 in 7 Mag that would not match the velocity of the 700 BDL remington that I had at the time in 289 with 140 grain bullets. I have talked with other reloaders who have expierenced the same thing.

In all honesty some are tryin to split hairs by comparin the 270 to the 280 to the 30/06. I' ve killed deer with 270s and have both the 280 and a 30/06. With the right bullets for the conditions, EITHER of them will do what the other will do. Now personally I would recommend more bulletweight than 150grains for elk or larger sized game (in the 270s case thats the most you will get in a commercial load), but every year MANY elk and even moose fall to that 270/150 load. If shots are kept under 250yds a 270/150 will perform awfully similar to a 30/06-180. And the 280/160 will do likewise. The key I believe is' nt necessarily in going with the heaviest bullet available, but in choosing a premium performance bullet like a Barnes Xbullet, Winchester Failsafe, Trophy bonded, Nosler Parts etc... I personally dont consider the 280 as having enough case to push the 175 grainers to any appreciable difference over that of a 160 of like design. Its kind of like the 30/06 with 200s and 180s. Many highperformance 180s will outpenetrate the 200s when fired from an 06. You simply need more velocity to justify the heaviest bullets use.

For deer I personally use in my 280 the Federal Premium 140 Trophy Bonded load as I like as much penetration as possible without sacrificing velocity by having to use a heavier bullet. The season before last I switched to the 139 SST Hornady Light Mag (my 280 is a custom with a 24" barrel and should be able to maximize such loads) and shot a big Missouri buck that was quarterin towards me at 50 yds. The bullet entered between the shoulder and his neck but didnt completely penetrate the lungs. He only ran 40 yds or so and piled up, but I know from experience on other deer and similar shotangles that the 140 Trophy Bonded would' ve exited behind the off shoulder and probably dropped him in his tracks. I also have a 7Rem Mag and for deersized game at distances of 300yds or less, there is essentially no difference between the 7mag and 280 if you are' nt talking about full length " raking shots, aka Texas heartshots" ! In that case, the extra velocity of the 7mag helps in spades.

I simply love rifles and have several calibers, much of which are very comparable on effectiveness for deer. IMO only when you get into long ranges (over 300yds) and/or move up to large magnums (like my Lazzeroni Warbird) do you noticable any appreciable difference on performance and " killing power" . Personally I really like the trends toward the shortmags. The guns are smaller, lighter, typically more accurate and you are' nt giving up any power or ballistics to gain such. The various 7mm shortmags are worthy of investigation. BUT make sure you understand that you need to procure ammo for them from various sources and BEFORE season as they are' nt yet commonly stocked by the old country stores out near deercamp!

From a

The 280 is a fine choice, even though I have never owned owned one. In my 50+ years, I have owned several 270' s, three 30-06' s, a 7mm Remington Magnum, and a 7mm Weatherby Magnum. From what I have seen and read, I would choose a 280 in a good bolt action over all of them. Get yourself a good reloading manual and start comparing ballistics. Pay particular attention to velocities, bullet drop, and ballistic coefficients for all the calibers I have mentioned here. I think you will be surprised. For a fellow with objectivity, the truth is plain to be seen. There is very little to be gained by going to a magnum caliber. The 280 (7mm) has more versatilty than the 270 because there are more available bullet weights for it.

Hope I don' t offend the 270 and ' 06 crowd too much!

Clint

A friend bought one and ever since the .280 has been on my list of calibers to buy.
I was really impressed.

My wishlist of guns includes a .280 Ackley Improved by Kenny Jarrett. That is if money grew on trees! I don' t think you could go wrong with a .280 of any kind though.

The supply of factory ammo for the .280 is the only negative for it.

If you' re a handloader, the .280 is one of the finest rounds ever manufactured. It' s everything the .270 wish it was and a little more. It' ll stand up to the 7MM magnums and do so in a featherweight fashon.

It' ll handle elk, moose, caribou, sheep, and african plains game....but it' s best if you' re a handloader.

Hey, Thanks for all the opinions. I am going to start reloading for all of my other calibers. I' m just getting started though. Everything I' ve read so far about the 280 has me leaning towards that cal.

Now, one final question. Which manufacture? I' m not made of money, so within the $500-$700 dollar range. Any one really stand out more than the others?

There are many good makes available. It' s really up to personal preference and needs. For the type of hunting I do, I chose the Remington 700 Mountain Rifle. I' ve had it 17 years and woudn' t trade it for the world. Go look at some different models and see which one fits you best.

I have been using the 280 for about ten years. It' s a great cartridge. It' s even better if you are a handloader. If you do not handload there are a great number of loads available today. I like the Winchester 140 gr. Ballistic silvertip for deer and I have used the 160 gr Speer Nitrex Grand Slam load on Elk. My usual elk load is a 175 gr. Partition Handload. As to ammo being plentiful at the local Wal Mart it will not be. Cabelas, Natchez shooters supply and a host of others offer all available ammo on the web.

[Deleted by Admins]