Shooters Forum banner

1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
268 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hello from Scotland~

I've been pondering adding a flat shooting long action to my collection.

Basically belted magnums are out ! So i really see it as a choice between .25-06/ .270/ .280

Now we all know the .270 is a classic and used on many highland estates and must have culled many thousands of Red deer in Scotland. At present the .25-06 seems to be very "trendy" although to me it seems to make just as much noise and recoil didnt seem reduced by much, so why not carry more lead and go with the .270 ?

Now the .280 is unheard of in Britain i have never seen one, but i believe it carries 7mm bullets that would make it more verstile than the good old .270 ?
AS for noise and recoil i would imagine it would be impossible to tell them apart ??

The .270 has a repution as a meat shredder and the .280 could suffer from similar problems ,so i guess you really need to be loading with the likes of Noslers,Mag-tips,Grandslams,etc ??

Would be intersting to hear from an owner of both .270 and .280 as to how they compare in the field on Deer............

Regards Englander:rolleyes:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
554 Posts
Englander,

You've got the picture pretty well painted. Only at the larger end of the spectrum of bullet weights does anything but the slightest difference occur between the .270 and .280, making the .280 marginally better for moose and elk round (game size better matched by your triple 4!).

A good thing about the .270 is that the components and ammo are readily available, and significantly, nearly all bullets in this caliber are designed specifically for the .270 Win. There are no other production cartridges (other than the low numbers .270 Weatherby), in .277 so all bullets are optimized for the cartridge's velocity. Two-Eighty bullets need to cover 7x57, 7x65, 280Rem, 7mmMag, 7mm-08, 7-30 Waters, etc... For a handloader, this just may be more choices; but, the .270 is stone simple.

The kills I've had with the .270 (deer and hogs) have been spectacular. It really is lightning and it gives you complete confidence in your rifle. It would be the rifle I took, if I absolutely, positively had to nail game down immediately. I can't see why the .280 would be any different.

I've never shot any magnums in anger, but cannot imagine any need for greater range or power on deer-sized animals. (I've retired the .270 from my eastern hunting; it is more than is necessary. Though, in the open west I think it ideal.) It does seem to mess up more meat than other rounds.

Just to throw another option at you, have you considered the .260 Remington? It's a .308 case necked down to .264/6.5mm, so there are plenty of cases and bullets available to you, if you handload. It is a very efficient cartridge and ideally suited for deer. It is claimed to be very accurate, too.

Regards,

Charlie
 

·
Beartooth Regular
Joined
·
5,218 Posts
ENGLANDER,
Basically the 280 is a necked down 30/06 to 7mm. Some folks swear by the 270, some by the 280. There's a .007 inch difference in diameter of the two bullets. I don't think any animal out there would know the difference between one or the other if shot with either. You should have a wide selection of 7mm bullets available to you for use in the 280 (formerly known as the 7mm Express). Basically both cartridges are from the 06 case, the 270 might have a bit of velocity edge, but it will be at far and distant ranges before you find that trajectory difference. The 280 is at home with heavier bullets, but using bullets of the same sectional densities, you will have to walk a country mile to tell any difference. With proper handloading the old 7x57mm can be brought to near the same levels of either, if you have a well built modern rifle to load for. The 280 is kind of the ballistic twin to the European 7x64.

I've shot animals with the 270 and 7x57 at ranges out to about 300 yards and to be perfectly honest, neither the animal nor I could have told you the difference. Use proper bullet placement and good bullets and either will suit you admirally.
 

·
Beartooth Regular
Joined
·
2,163 Posts
A survey several years back on Anticosti Island, where the deer are about as thick as flies and most hunters use a guide to hunt, indicated that of all the calibers hunted with the 270 came in tops in one-shot kills with minimal tracking. The 308 was next! Those guides probably see more deer killed than just about anyone. ID
 

·
Beartooth Regular
Joined
·
1,116 Posts
ENGLANDER,

How are you my friend? How is that 444 coming along? Right now I am computerless due to a recent storm and am using my brother's during somewhat infrequent visits. So if you respond to the following and I don't get back to you in the next week or so, please don't think I'm ignoring you. It's simply that I won't have my new system until the end of the coming week at the earliest. So...

For your game in Scotland, any of these three will do a super job. But if I had to pick one it would probably be the .25-06. I think it will work better in terms of meat damage for your smaller species than the .270/130. For your biggest species, Red deer if I remember correctly from the excellent website to which you provided a link several months back, you can use something like the Barnes 115-grain X-bullet.

An old teacher of mine simply loves the .25-06. He has two actually, virtually identical Remington 700's except for barrel weight and optics. The Varmint Special was used with lightweight bullets and a big scope for woodchucks and the BDL (if I remember correctly) was used with 120's and a fixed 4X for deer and the occasional black bear. He always had lots of venison in the freezer, so I think it works quite well.

Take care and I hope to be able to chit-chat with you soon on a regular basis.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
548 Posts
Englander -

If you are a handloader, you might want to consider the new .270 Winchester Short Magnum (WSM) as an alternative. Unlike your other 3 choices it is available in short action rifles and does fine from a 24 inch barrel.

It is based on the .404 Jeffrey Case (thanks U.K.!) shortened to 2.1 inches and as such is a short, fat, beltless case capable of bench rest accuracy. COL is 2.8 inches, same as the .308 Winchester.

I have a stainless Model 70 in .270 WSM and it shoots 0.5 MOA out of the box with handloads. The WSM case is so efficient that some reduced loads use less powder than the standard .270 loads, and generate less recoil. Reduced .270 WSM varmint loads push the 90 gr Sierra HP along at 3600 fps duplicating the 25-06 with the same propellant weight and the same recoil. To reach a varmint way out yonder, add a grain of powder and jump to a 100 gr spitzer and you are still doing 3600 fps at modest recoil.

You can move up the scale to 110, 120, 130, 140, 150, 160, 170, and 180 gr bullets and play the same game all the way: light loads are equal to the .270 Win and full loads are + 200 to 300 fps.

At the top end, this is an elk and moose round, without debate. My factory 150 gr PSPs chrongraphed 3144 fps for a box of 20 with a std deviaton of 16 fps. The 160 gr Nosler partitions go a shade under 3000 fps, and the Barnes 180s break 2800, all at very safe pressures.

In the field, you will think you are carrying a .243 from the looks and weight of the rifle, and there is no practical limit to what you can hunt with it.

Just a thought...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
268 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Thanks for all the input, of course there is another otion 7x64.

I have found a Voere sporting mauser in 7x64mm 24" hogg backed stock open sights very light ! Mint conditon and a steal at the asking price. Although we have to ask the police for each new calibre we want and why we want it.

Hang on didnt Remington "RE-invent" the wheel with the .280 ? I believe the Germans beat them to it (7x64) by a good many years !!;)

I very tempted to go with this 7x64.................

Englander:)
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
554 Posts
The 7x64 preceeded even the .270 win, which was considered a ballistic copy early in it's life. Can't go wrong with it.
 

·
Beartooth Regular
Joined
·
7,768 Posts
Hi, Gents:
The .270 Winchester looks like a cross between a .256 Newton and a 7x64 and that's a good slot. However, Brenneke introduced the 7x64 in 1917, which means he had time to take a very good look at a .280 Newton. Truth is, there's not much in modern high powered bolt action rifles that can't be traced back to Paul Mauser or the two Charlies, Ross and Newton.

BTW, Ross Seyfried's article on the .256 Newton rifle in this month's Rifle Magazine is right on. I've shot one, and they are a lovely gun.

Bye
Jack
 

·
Beartooth Regular
Joined
·
5,218 Posts
275 H&H Magnum

And then there is the old 275 H&H Mag. Holland and Holland came out with the 275 around 1911 or 12 and it pretty much duplicates 7mm Rem Mag performance. I've long been interested in this cartridge, I guess it was discontinued because of poorly constructed bullets for the 275 velocities. The only real commercial success for the 7mm clan up to that point appears to be the 7x57 (and a grand chambering it is) so I suspect most 7mm bullets were designed for the Mauser velocities and weren't be reliable at the H&H's speed (remember this was before "premium" bullets). I guess Winchester was the only American firm to factory load ammunition for it, but dropped it from their catalog after a few years. I have a strong sneaking suspicion that my next rifle will be chambered for the 275.
 

·
Beartooth Regular
Joined
·
1,116 Posts
Englander & All,

Let's face it, there is virtually nothing new in the sporting arms world. For one reason or another many ground-breaking cartridges never survived. Generally speaking they didn't work any better in the field than other rounds. Witness the .32 Win. Spl. and .303 Savage compared to the .30-30. Not that they're "bad" rounds, it's just they didn't do anything better than a more common, widely accepted and available number in the .30 WCF. Same thing here. Any of the cartridges mentioned so far would do well for the intended game. What's infinitely more important than which round is how a certain rifle feels and handles. I've always wanted to try one of those Bavarian-style rifles like the Voere you're looking into. To me it looks like they may be a bit quicker to shoulder for a snap shot than a traditional straight comb. You should give it a go. Of course we expect a detailed report once you have it! ;)
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top