270 win vs 280 Rem

[meatyrem]

I've never understood this. Why is it that 270 win can out run a 280 rem in same bullet weight and same barrel lengths? Most reloading manuals list the 270 as outstepping the 280 ( with same bullet wt and barrel length ) when the two are compared. I know for technical reasons this is true do to some powders used are more suitable to the round. I've seen powders that are used for the 280, and that just brings out the ( why in the world factor ), no wonder it seems lagging. From what I can tell the 280 has more powder capacity too. They share the same hull diameters but the 280 has a longer hull (of .051" ) longer than the 270. Do they load the 280 more conservatively or what? Maybe you haven't noticed, I'm a 280 fan. Wondering if someone can shed some light on this topic. Thanks

 

[texan79]

I'm Currently building A 280. From the research I've done, the concensus seems to be that the 280 load data is very conservative due to it being offered in a semi auto version first. (I believe a pump came second) In a bolt gun you can get more aggresive with the charge. Search trebark's posts. He has a screamer for the 168 VLD's. I think I found it while googling "280 load data."

 

[TOM H]

I've never understood this. Why is it that 270 win can out run a 280 rem in same bullet weight and same barrel lengths? Most reloading manuals list the 270 as outstepping the 280 ( with same bullet wt and barrel length ) when the two are compared. I know for technical reasons this is true do to some powders used are more suitable to the round. I've seen powders that are used for the 280, and that just brings out the ( why in the world factor ), no wonder it seems lagging. From what I can tell the 280 has more powder capacity too. They share the same hull diameters but the 280 has a longer hull (of .051" ) longer than the 270. Do they load the 280 more conservatively or what? Maybe you haven't noticed, I'm a 280 fan. Wondering if someone can shed some light on this topic. Thanks

SAAMI spec pressure is higher with the 270 65KPSI vs 60KPSI for the 280. If you look at Nolser manual #6 they use custom barrels. In their data the 280 has 26" barrel and 24" for the 270 and the 280 has alittle better velocity.

I think alot goes back to when the 280 was a wildcat rd 7mm/06 and the 30-06 is 60kPSI they just kept it the same pressure level. Speer had loading data for the 7mm/06 in one of their Wildcat manual that they published back in the 50's. I'm just guessing so I could be wrong on the reason.

 

[meatyrem]

I too have that nosler #6 which is the one I favor most. I also have the hodgdon, and the swift manuals too. This is the first time I've seen the 280 outperform the 270, but it's the two inch longer barrel for the 280 is the reason why. Well they are both off of the 30.06 case so why does it list the 270 as higher pressures then. Because they also chamber the 270 in autos and pumps too. Actually, I think I've seen more chambered in the 270 than the 280.

 

[royinidaho]

Hmmmm,

My tho'ts are that the only advantage the 270 would have over the 280 for the same bullet weight and design would be a bit better bc.

The base of the 280 is 0.007" larger, which seems a small difference, but is actually quite a difference. With different expansion ratios, etc they are two quite different cartridges.

I've heard that a "well loaded" 280, especially an Ackley version, will rival the 7 mm Rem Mag. Be careful, cautious and conservative though.lightbulb

 

[backwoods83]

In modern chambers the 270 and 280 have a 2.540 max case length, other than neck size they are twins, and the 280 having a larger area for (push) you can use slightly hotter powders than a 270 and with decent cases a 280 can be run as high as about 66.5k psi, so weight for weight, barrel for barrel the 280 will take the lead.

 

[TOM H]

I too have that nosler #6 which is the one I favor most. I also have the hodgdon, and the swift manuals too. This is the first time I've seen the 280 outperform the 270, but it's the two inch longer barrel for the 280 is the reason why. Well they are both off of the 30.06 case so why does it list the 270 as higher pressures then. Because they also chamber the 270 in autos and pumps too. Actually, I think I've seen more chambered in the 270 than the 280.

I really don't think anyone has the answer your looking for and the SAAMI spec on pressure for the 270 was from the 1920 vs the 280 from the late 50's. If you look at Hodgdon data you will see the 280 is loaded to a lower level than the 270 as to loading the 280 hotter???

When I had my 270 build I never looked at another case or caliber or trying to compare this to that. Same thing happened when I had the 270WSM and 280AI build also I have a 270Wby in the works.

 

[Edd]

In modern chambers the 270 and 280 have a 2.540 max case length, other than neck size they are twins,

This isn't correct. They have the same overall case length but the 280 is longer to the shoulder than a 270 and has a shorter neck than a 270. There is no reason to choose a 270 over a 280 if you hand load. If you want to shoot off the shelf ammo, there is better ammo available for thee 270.

 

[backwoods83]

Yes, .051" more body, less neck, none the less a 270 sucks period, unless it has wby mag or wsm after it.

 

[meatyrem]

I do agree with you on that statement. From what I can conclude is there are pressure differences, from what I see it is usually higher pressures coming from the 270. My whole hangup on this is, why with two cartridges fairly identical( with a couple differences) does one usually come out ahead. Well pressures has a lot to do with it. I was looking earlier today and found that with the same bullet wt barrel length and powder, that the 270 usually ran higher pressures in every comparison. By 2 to 3 tho psi more or cup. The velocities I seen were slightly higher in the 280 but used a couple more grains to do it. I could just imagine in the same situation if the 280 ran the same pressures that there would be a significant difference ( having a couple grains more) with the 280 coming out at a good lead.

 

[Jamie6.5]

Yes, .051" more body, less neck, none the less a 270 sucks period, unless it has wby mag or wsm after it.

I am curious about this line of thinking.
Do people really believe the .280 is great but the .270 sucks?
That .007 of an inch in diameter out of the same parent case must be the most valuable .007" on the planet.
The only reason .284 caliber bullets are as good as they are is due to the 7mmRM, not Remington's pump gun stepchild.

Winchester taught the world about the value of a mid-weight bullet at high velocity with the .270 almost overnight. It took 40 years, Ackley and Nosler to bring the .280 up to where it is today, and even Ackley didn't heap high praise on the .280.

I'll admit .270s could use a world class bullet in the 155-160gr range, but comparisons with the .280AI don't include the .270AI,...

Beyond that, any great advantage perceived in a 280 is just that,...
One's perception.

My $.02, YMMV.

 

[TOM H]

I am curious about this line of thinking.
Do people really believe the .280 is great but the .270 sucks?
That .007 of an inch in diameter out of the same parent case must be the most valuable .007" on the planet.
The only reason .284 caliber bullets are as good as they are is due to the 7mmRM, not Remington's pump gun stepchild.

Winchester taught the world about the value of a mid-weight bullet at high velocity with the .270 almost overnight. It took 40 years, Ackley and Nosler to bring the .280 up to where it is today, and even Ackley didn't heap high praise on the .280.

I'll admit .270s could use a world class bullet in the 155-160gr range, but comparisons with the .280AI don't include the .270AI,...

Beyond that, any great advantage perceived in a 280 is just that,...
One's perception.

My $.02, YMMV.

I think some just get a bad case of tunnel vision in that what ever their shooting is the best. I think I'm like afew shooters in that I have some calibers I have no need for but that doesn't mean that they won't work for someone else.

 

[Edd]

Yes, .051" more body, less neck, none the less a 270 sucks period, unless it has wby mag or wsm after it.

I don't think a 270 sucks. If I could have only one gun and didn't hand load, I might pick a 270.

 

[meatyrem]

It is true that the 280 is shadowed by the longtime popularity of the 270. IMO I don't think the 280 is inferior to the 270. It just hasn't had the attention that the 270 has had. But I see that it is becoming more and more sought after by shooters out there