270 Win vs. 280 Rem vs. 30-06
- Thread starter JD338
- Start date
Elkman":18bpwywb said:
Your statement proves me correct.
All of the rest of those cartridges were invented, because the old war horse could do the things people wanted out of a rifle cartridge.
Best use of .30-06 brass.... is necking it down to 7mm.
Hell..... we could have built the ‘03 Springfield to chamber 7mm Mauser.... still been Back-toBack World War Champs... and then not had to suffer the .30 War Pony.
- Thread starter
- #23
- Nov 4, 2004
- 25,358
- 8,980
My first rifle was a Remington 700 BDL in 30-06, I bought it new when I was 14 years old. With that rifle I took my first WT deer, Antelope and Black Bear. I also cut my teeth on this rifle with reloading when I was 15. I put 6000 rounds through that rifle and ended up getting it rebarreled. I bought a second 30-06, a new 742 Woodsmaster carbine. Both were tack drivers and capable of handling everything I have ever hunted.
I bought a 700 Classic 280 Remington and really liked the performance on WT deer with the 140 gr PT and BT bullets. That rifle evolved into a 280AI.
My experience with the 270 Win is limited to helping out a couple friends at the bench and limited loading.
My conclusion is that I could hunt everything from mice to moose with any one of them using a PT or AB bullet and proper shot placement. They are all good.
JD338
I bought a 700 Classic 280 Remington and really liked the performance on WT deer with the 140 gr PT and BT bullets. That rifle evolved into a 280AI.
My experience with the 270 Win is limited to helping out a couple friends at the bench and limited loading.
My conclusion is that I could hunt everything from mice to moose with any one of them using a PT or AB bullet and proper shot placement. They are all good.
JD338
Guy Miner
Master Loader
- Apr 6, 2006
- 17,804
- 6,122
Agree! 
Dad and I used to shoot varmints with the old 130 grain Speer hollow point from his two 30-06 rifles, back in the 1970's. Those gaping hollow points would mess up a rockchuck...
Or the rifles would be just fine for bear, moose, elk. And I agree, the 270, 280 or 30-06... Any of them would do just fine.
BTW, 6,000 rounds through a 30-06 is impressive! I put that many rounds through a couple of my 308 barrels when I was competing.
Guy
Dad and I used to shoot varmints with the old 130 grain Speer hollow point from his two 30-06 rifles, back in the 1970's. Those gaping hollow points would mess up a rockchuck...
Or the rifles would be just fine for bear, moose, elk. And I agree, the 270, 280 or 30-06... Any of them would do just fine.
BTW, 6,000 rounds through a 30-06 is impressive! I put that many rounds through a couple of my 308 barrels when I was competing.
Guy
- Thread starter
- #25
- Nov 4, 2004
- 25,358
- 8,980
Guy, I remember those Speer 130 gr HP's. Yes, they did have a huge hole up front.Guy Miner":1384toam said:Agree!
Dad and I used to shoot varmints with the old 130 grain Speer hollow point from his two 30-06 rifles, back in the 1970's. Those gaping hollow points would mess up a rockchuck...
Or the rifles would be just fine for bear, moose, elk. And I agree, the 270, 280 or 30-06... Any of them would do just fine.
BTW, 6,000 rounds through a 30-06 is impressive! I put that many rounds through a couple of my 308 barrels when I was competing.
Guy
I used to shoot high-power competition leagues at the local gun club. Winter and summer leagues plus practice sessions for several years added up to a lot of rounds down the tube. 150 gr SMK with 59.0 grs IMR4350 was my load and it shot very well for me. It was a lot of fun.
JD338
Not sure where I saw it or who to attribute it to, but there's a great quote out there that seems applicable: "Cartridges are more alike than they are different." The fact that they share the same parent case only seems bolster the argument. If I were hunting larger game like moose, I think that the larger 30 caliber bullet sure has merit. I grew up shooting the -06 and it never left me wanting for more. That said, I've killed enough elk with the .270 Win to never question its effectiveness. Its lighter recoil and ability to shoot a touch flatter usually have me leaning that way nowadays and Wayne Van Zwoll's statement that "Dead doesn't come in degrees" makes sense to me after seeing it work firsthand. With all that said, I really love the 280AI and a slick 160 grain pill at 3000 fps. It's got just a bit more weight and sectional density than the 150 in the .270, but I'm guessing there isn't a critter around that would ever be able to tell the difference. Just my thoughts from across the Atlantic and dreaming of the Rocky Mountains.
V/R,
Joe
V/R,
Joe
1100 Remington Man
Handloader
- May 1, 2007
- 1,168
- 334
I think all three are Great.
wvbuckbuster
Handloader
- Nov 5, 2015
- 2,691
- 2,429
Have had several 270 and 30-06s. Like them both just kept the 06. Started my son out on a 270 and a grandson. If I was in the market for another rifle I'd try the 280 just because I never have. My son got a 280AI couple years ago and it is serving him well. All good. Dan.
- Thread starter
- #30
- Nov 4, 2004
- 25,358
- 8,980
The 280AI certainly makes for a great all around cartridge. My wife shot her bull moose with her Nosler M48 Heritage 280AI loaded with 160 gr PT's at 262 yards. He was dead from the first shot but put 2 more in him to make sure he knew it. One bullet was recovered in the off shoulder, the other two exited. That's pretty good performance.
JD338
JD338
Attachments
- Thread starter
- #32
- Nov 4, 2004
- 25,358
- 8,980
Thank you Bill. The 160 gr PT is moving out of the 24" barrel at 3050 fps. It's a potent load, delivered from an '06 case.Elkman":1bht65f7 said:
JD338
- Oct 30, 2004
- 24,344
- 3,186
All are great. The 270 is a little lacking to me.
