Home Main Category General Firearms

Whats the difference between a .280 and a .270?.........

124

Replies

  • shushshush Senior Member Posts: 6,259 Senior Member
    Wambli Ska wrote: »
    Shhhhhhh, their history books have a completely different story in them...


    'What is history, but a fable agreed upon?”
    Napoleon.

    Speaking of which, we were just a bit busy at the time, saving the world from the mad frogs, no small thing in itself. smiley-flag013.gif
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,495 Senior Member
    jbohio wrote: »
    Anybody ever notice how .270 fanatics overuse emoticons, and punctuation?
    Well, we don't let them use crayons for the computer so they have to channel their artistic urges somehow. Beats smearing poo on the wall.

    Note for .270 fans: the preceding statements were what's called a joke. A humorous jab at the supposed lower intellect of such fanatics utilizing stereotypes and exaggeration. If you feel bad, we have a therapist waiting for you.
    Overkill is underrated.
  • NNNN Senior Member Posts: 24,717 Senior Member
    :chill:
    I'm======= knot
    a .270 fan!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :deadhorse::troll:
    Shut up-----KAREN; OK Cynthia
  • JerryBobCoJerryBobCo Senior Member Posts: 7,958 Senior Member
    JerryBobCo wrote: »
    I have to admit that it's been so long since I messed with it, I can't remember which bullet. I think it's Speer 200 grain round nose, but will need to check. I'll do that and get back to you later.

    I have found it also very difficult to find new brass.

    For now, I have some old Winchester factory 200 grain silvertips, and used some of them. I had some already and then found 2 more boxes. It's like buying gold, though.

    The good news is that they shoot pretty well, but I need to work on it more. Mostly I just need to get off my backside and get after it.

    Let use know how your 358 shoots.

    It's not Speer bullets, but red box Hornady 200 grain Interlocks. They shoot pretty well.

    I'm aware that I can neck .308 bullets up. I neck .284 brass up to .338 for my 338x284, as that's the only option I have. I'd prefer not to have to do that for my .358, though.

    For now, I'll just shoot the factory Winchester ammo. At worst, I'll get once fired brass that I can reload, get good enough accuracy, and shoot bullets that probably are as good as anything now on the market.
    Jerry

    Gun control laws make about as much sense as taking ex-lax to cure a cough.
  • jaywaptijaywapti Senior Member Posts: 4,960 Senior Member
    cpj wrote: »
    Since hijacking threads is what we do, what bullets you loadng for your 358? I have Mauser scout rifle in the build stage that will be in 358 Winchetser.

    I've been shooting my .358 since 1960, tried all the different makes, when Sierra came out with the 225gr. GK, I starting using it and never looked back, deer, elk, black bear it has never let me down.

    JAY
    THE DEFINITION OF GUN CONTROL IS HITTING THE TARGET WITH YOUR FIRST SHOT
  • shushshush Senior Member Posts: 6,259 Senior Member
    cpj wrote: »
    He got his answers. And sarcasm. It's what we do. What we've done. For years. You'd THINK people would catch on.

    Sarcasm, you use sarcasm?

    Dam I missed that, generally pretty quick on the uptake too.

    jaywapti wrote: »
    I've been shooting my .358 since 1960, tried all the different makes, when Sierra came out with the 225gr. GK, I starting using it and never looked back, deer, elk, black bear it has never let me down.

    JAY

    Bullet weight of choice for the old .350 Rigby also.
  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 32,995 Senior Member
    Off a bench, which is more accurate? Any difference of what can be obtained if similar guns or same makes/models in both calibers are used? Same or close as you can get in bullet weight/design too.

    @100 yards.
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 27,400 Senior Member
    Big Chief wrote: »
    Off a bench, which is more accurate? Any difference of what can be obtained if similar guns or same makes/models in both calibers are used? Same or close as you can get in bullet weight/design too.

    @100 yards.

    Lots of factors to take in as to action, barrel, barrel contour, and barrel quality. But, given the bullet selection of the .280, it has the better chance of being the most accurate due to the wide variety of target specific bullets available. The .270 has some catching up to do in respect to bullet selection.
      I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don't know the answer”
    ― Douglas Adams
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,798 Senior Member
    shush wrote: »
    ...Speaking of which, we were just a bit busy at the time, saving the world from the mad frogs, no small thing in itself. smiley-flag013.gif

    Yes, Ben Franklin has never really received due credit for engineering that. It was at least as big a diplomatic coupe as Churchill getting the Yanks to 'go up the middle' on D-Day. :wink: :usa:

    :yesno:
  • shushshush Senior Member Posts: 6,259 Senior Member
    Yes, and not long after we got you all that land out of The Treaty of Paris.

    Absolute bounders!!!!!
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,798 Senior Member
    shush wrote: »
    Yes, and not long after we got you all that land out of The Treaty of Paris.

    Absolute bounders!!!!!

    Yeah, well, we were going to 'annex' it eventually, anyway - Manifest Destiny, don'tcha know - ask the Red Indians.
  • shushshush Senior Member Posts: 6,259 Senior Member
    bisley wrote: »
    Yeah, well, we were going to 'annex' it eventually, anyway - Manifest Destiny, don'tcha know - ask the Red Indians.


    You paid for the rest.............
  • will-jwill-j Member Posts: 50 Member
    SNAKE: Around that time period ('78-'79), some dumbass chambered a 7mm Express round in a 7mm Rem. Mag. with not-to-pleasant results. He was lucky to keep all 10 digits and his eyesight....Remington hastily changed the 7mm Express back to .280 Rem.

    WILL.
    :confused:
    [email protected]; I need my meds.
    THE WINDS OF TYRANNY ARE BLOWING FROM OUR OWN CAPITOL.
  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 32,995 Senior Member
    I know there used to be some confusion between .303 Savage ammo and .303 British here in the states occasionally. Not sure if you could chamber either in the wrong rifle? I own and reload fer a .303 British and have used .311.3105/.312 diameter bullets.
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
  • JerryBobCoJerryBobCo Senior Member Posts: 7,958 Senior Member
    jaywapti wrote: »
    I've been shooting my .358 since 1960, tried all the different makes, when Sierra came out with the 225gr. GK, I starting using it and never looked back, deer, elk, black bear it has never let me down.

    JAY

    Jay, when I started to work up a load for my .358, the only bullet I was able to get was the Interlock. I was hoping to find Grand Slams, but Speer doesn't make that bullet in 35 caliber. One of these days I'll get back to it.
    Jerry

    Gun control laws make about as much sense as taking ex-lax to cure a cough.
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 22,394 Senior Member
    will-j wrote: »
    SNAKE: Around that time period ('78-'79), some dumbass chambered a .280 in a 7mm Rem. Mag. with not-to-pleasant results. He was lucky to keep all 10 digits and his eyesight....Remington hastily changed the 7mm Express back to .280 Rem.

    WILL.

    Yes but it was originally the .280 is what I'm saying. I have an early 70s Speer book and a Hornady manual from the 60s that both list the .280 Remington.

    What did you think I had said???
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • JasonMPDJasonMPD Senior Member Posts: 6,557 Senior Member
    This is pure curiosity, no argumentation meant...

    What spurred on the .277 caliber? It's got no real "family" of calibers, save the anemic by comparison 6.8SPC and maybe a couple of wildcats (.277 Wolverine, I think?).

    Post WW1, there were 6.5mm, 7mm, 7.5mm, 7.62mm and 8mm bullets all over the place. The .277 isn't a war time caliber in any regard that I know of. It seems to have a curious inception...? It's parent being the .30-03 instead of the .30-06 is a bit interesting too.
    “There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves.” – Will Rogers
  • JasonMPDJasonMPD Senior Member Posts: 6,557 Senior Member
    And then to be entirely inflammatory...

    Wikipedia...

    While it is true that a .270 Winchester case can be formed from a 30-06 Springfield case, the case length of a 30-06 is 63.3 millimetres (2.494 in) while the case length of a .270 is 64.5 millimetres (2.540 in), the same as a .30-03 Springfield. It is recommended that .270 Winchester brass be formed from .35 Whelen or .280 Remington cases.
    “There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves.” – Will Rogers
  • orchidmanorchidman Senior Member Posts: 8,112 Senior Member
    JasonMPD wrote: »
    And then to be entirely inflammatory...

    Its a thread about the 270................Inflammatory is a requirement.
    Still enjoying the trip of a lifetime and making the best of what I have.....
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 22,394 Senior Member
    JasonMPD wrote: »
    This is pure curiosity, no argumentation meant...

    What spurred on the .277 caliber? It's got no real "family" of calibers, save the anemic by comparison 6.8SPC and maybe a couple of wildcats (.277 Wolverine, I think?).

    Post WW1, there were 6.5mm, 7mm, 7.5mm, 7.62mm and 8mm bullets all over the place. The .277 isn't a war time caliber in any regard that I know of. It seems to have a curious inception...? It's parent being the .30-03 instead of the .30-06 is a bit interesting too.

    OK Jason, this is strictly my theory here. But I know for a fact after WWI Anything European and especially German were bad ju ju in the eyes of the tipical American. My mother's mother's family landed as its port of entry right here on Matagorda bay at what was then a seaport city named Indianola TX from Germany in 1848. This county was full of square heads. My family spoke German in their home up until WWI. At that point all things German became about as popular as the plague. This feeling lasted a while. The .270 was first chambered in the Winchester Model 54 rifle, which was the forerunner to the Model 70, when it first came out, in 1925. Winchester, looking for a success in sales, didn't want anything to do with a rifle cartridge named anything MM. So they went with something very close in size and performance, but named in an inch measurement caliber, the .270 Winchester, which was I think a 6.8 or 6.9 MM. Those calibers you named were only popular in Europe back then. I don't think there was anything made in America by a major gun maker named anything MM.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • JasonMPDJasonMPD Senior Member Posts: 6,557 Senior Member
    snake284 wrote: »
    OK Jason, this is strictly my theory here. But I know for a fact after WWI Anything European and especially German were bad ju ju in the eyes of the tipical American. My mother's mother's family landed as its port of entry right here on Matagorda bay at what was then a seaport city named Indianola TX. This county was full of square heads. My family spoke German in their home up until WWI. At that point all things German were as popular as the plague. This feeling lasted a while. The .270 was first chambered in the Winchester Model 54 rifle, which was the forerunner to the Model 70, when it first came out, in 1925. Winchester, looking for a success in sales, didn't want anything to do with a rifle cartridge named anything MM. So they went with something very close in size and peformance, but named in an inch measurement caliber, the .270 Winchester, which was I think a 6.8 or 6.9 MM. Those calibers you named were only popular in Europe back then. I don't think there was anything made in America by a major gun maker named MM.

    I just meant those bullets existed, not necessarily by those designations. The .30-03 existed at that time....same as the .30-06.
    “There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves.” – Will Rogers
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 22,394 Senior Member
    JasonMPD wrote: »
    I just meant those bullets existed, not necessarily by those designations. The .30-03 existed at that time....same as the .30-06.

    Oh yeah, all those 6.5s, 7s and 8mms existed, but they weren't real big here in the homeland. Do a search and read the history of the Shiner Brewery in Shiner Texas. People of German decent tried to disassociate themselves from their culture after WWI. One big reason was the U boats sinking American and other Civilian ships.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • will-jwill-j Member Posts: 50 Member
    NN wrote: »
    :chill:
    I'm======= knot
    a .270 fan!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :deadhorse::troll:

    Hmmm: Methinks perhaps he who doth protesteth too much may in the closet doth he resideth?:uhm:
    :confused:
    [email protected]; I need my meds.
    THE WINDS OF TYRANNY ARE BLOWING FROM OUR OWN CAPITOL.
  • will-jwill-j Member Posts: 50 Member
    snake284 wrote: »
    Yes but it was originally the .280 is what I'm saying. I have an early 70s Speer book and a Hornady manual from the 60s that both list the .280 Remington.

    What did you think I had said???

    I'm assuming (and I fully understand the ramifications of "assuming" something; The ass-out of-u-and-me crap) that you were referring to the 7MM Express/.280 Rem back-and-forth crap. The incident to which I was referring, concerned an idiot who fired a 7MM Express [cartridge] in a 7MM Rem Mag's [chamber] and [that] stupid stunt may probably have played some part in Remington dropping the [7MM Express] nomenclature and returning to the .280 Rem loading.
    Any more confused, now?

    WILL
    :confused:
    [email protected]; I need my meds.
    THE WINDS OF TYRANNY ARE BLOWING FROM OUR OWN CAPITOL.
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 22,394 Senior Member
    will-j wrote: »
    I'm assuming (and I fully understand the ramifications of "assuming" something; The ass-out of-u-and-me crap) that you were referring to the 7MM Express/.280 Rem back-and-forth crap. The incident to which I was referring, concerned an idiot who fired a 7MM Express [cartridge] in a 7MM Rem Mag's [chamber] and [that] stupid stunt may probably have played some part in Remington dropping the [7MM Express] nomenclature and returning to the .280 Rem loading.
    Any more confused, now?

    WILL

    Nope, I think I'm right with you now. Actually, it's been many years since I read about why Remington went back to calling it a .280. But the way somebody said it, they sounded like it started out as a 7mm Express And i thought you were agreeing. But now I see you said they went BACK to calling it a .280.I think it was ashamed that they cowed and went back to the other name because calling it an express would have jacked up its popularity a lot and besides, the express rounds were expressly for the bolt guns. And I believe they still called the old down loaded ammo .280 because they still had to supply a majority of the pumps and autos out there with ammo and the hotter Express ammo could have caused problems.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • FreezerFreezer Senior Member Posts: 1,756 Senior Member
    Snake, I didn't mean to piss on your Post Toasties I'm not anti anything when it come to firearms. I'm just sitting here enjoying the banter.

    A number of years ago when the enternet was new I was a true broke butt with three children and a wife in school I set out looking for a bolt action rifle. The only deer rifle I had was a 94 Win that I bought when I was 14. An ol gentlemen was kind enough to sell me his elk rifle for $100 figuring correctly I'd give it a good home and take care of it. It just happened to be chambered in 280 Rem. I was new to hand loading but found out quickly what a versitle round it is. A few years later my south paw son need a deer rifle and a friend made me a great deal on a Rem 7400 chambered in 280 Rem. a win win situation.

    We worked up two loads for each rifle, his liking a slightly smaller charge, using 140 and 160 SGKs. Both rifles can shoot sub MOA and fit the bill for anything on the lower 48. That said my twin brother, a lesser man than me, bought a 270 Win. I did a load work up for him and found his likes a lesser load (below max) go figure.

    With all that said I don't hate the lesser 270, I just happen to own a 280.
    I like Elmer Keith; I married his daughter :wink:
  • JerryBobCoJerryBobCo Senior Member Posts: 7,958 Senior Member
    JasonMPD wrote: »
    And then to be entirely inflammatory...

    Wikipedia...

    While it is true that a .270 Winchester case can be formed from a 30-06 Springfield case, the case length of a 30-06 is 63.3 millimetres (2.494 in) while the case length of a .270 is 64.5 millimetres (2.540 in), the same as a .30-03 Springfield. It is recommended that .270 Winchester brass be formed from .35 Whelen or .280 Remington cases.

    Why would anyone reform .280 brass for use in a .270? It's not exactly the case that there's a shortage of .270 brass.
    Jerry

    Gun control laws make about as much sense as taking ex-lax to cure a cough.
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 22,394 Senior Member
    JerryBobCo wrote: »
    Why would anyone reform .280 brass for use in a .270? It's not exactly the case that there's a shortage of .270 brass.

    30-06 is actually a poor substitute for .270 brass because the round made with the 06 brass will be short. This doesn't cause any safety problem or cause any immediate problem, however prolonged shooting with brass formed with the 06 brass can erode the throat closer in and when you try to use normal length .270 rounds they may have a problem chambering. People do this all the time, and I guess if that's the only ammo you shoot in your rifle this won't be a problem. But if you get somewhere and don't have this ammo and need to buy some factory ammo, you may have problems with functioning rounds through the rifle.

    Like was said, there is no shortage of .270 brass and it's not like its rare, so it's not prohibitively expensive. Just stick with the original.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • will-jwill-j Member Posts: 50 Member
    I think you are right on the mark; However, I'll never understand why Rem. under-loaded the .280 keeping the pressures down, and claimed they did so because it was chambered in their auto loaders and slide actions with their respective [weaker] actions but yet they chambered the .270, with its higher pressure in the same guns....Contradictory, to say the least.

    Having a 7 Rem Mag at the time, I saw no need for a .270 and didn't get a .280 until 2000, and even then in a 26" H&R. They, along with a Mar. 336 .30-30 are the three I go for out of all my other rifles when its hunting time. I've had a .280 barrel in the white since '91 for a Savage 110 series that I've not gotten around to fitting...Maybe someday.....
    Have a good one.

    WILL.
    :confused:
    [email protected]; I need my meds.
    THE WINDS OF TYRANNY ARE BLOWING FROM OUR OWN CAPITOL.
  • robert38-55robert38-55 Senior Member Posts: 3,621 Senior Member
    :roll2::applause::applause::applause:...............Holy Crap on a cracker, Folks, gals, and pals!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.... I got more information than I asked for on this thread,,,,,,,,,,,,Thanks FOLKS,,,,, BTW,,, I didn't over use the emotion cons this time!:jester::rotflmao:
    "It is what it is":usa:
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.

Advertisement