sjvcon Report post Posted January 28, 2015 280 ... You can go to .280 AI down the road pretty easy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
452b264 Report post Posted January 30, 2015 I would use the 280 rem. hands down,I also hand load my own ammo. If you are hunting under 500 yds. try the 150 or 160 gr. Partion, which ever one shoots the best. I had good luck with both, but if like just one bullet for all your hunting the 150 gr. Partion is excellent. If you are hunting beyond 500 yds. I would look at a Berger 168 gr. etc. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
.270 Report post Posted January 30, 2015 .270 for 2 reasons. the .270 is the cartridge of the Gods. can't argue it. it was divinely inspired with personal input from Orion and Nimrod. and you can neck an '06 down and make a .270. can't do that with the brand x knock off. there are probably more .270's by a 10x margin. even in remington rifles. you have a selection of heavier bullets for the 280, but i've always felt if you need a big bullet, get a big gun. there is only 7 thousandths difference in diameter. that's .007". your talkin' less than saran wrap thickness. if you really think you hafta have something in the ,284" diameter, get you a good bolt gun in the .284 Winchester. runs straight away from a .280 with incredible accuracy. the .280 has never, and never will, compete with the .270 in sales. remington even changed the name to 7mm express for awhile trying to boost poor sales. and the need to increase the case length at the shoulder .05" to keep folks from trying to accidently stuff em in a .270 has always been a drawback. any '06 brass you find can be easily resized into a .270. the .244/6mm remington has suffered pretty much the same way. when they developed it they made the case a little longer with less taper so they didn't get stuck into a .243 and they slowed the twist down to where it wouldn't shoot 100 gr bullets accurate. so then they increased the twist and renamed it the 6mm. made it better, but you still can't resize a .308 into a 6mm. both cartridges were an attempt to get in on the success of the .243 and .270. neither ever did well for some real simple reasons. nothing really wrong with either one. other than it's a sure sign of a behaviorial disorder to own either one. Lark. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cosninocanines Report post Posted January 30, 2015 For your needs (not a hand loader) .270 all the way, I love my Tikka T3 and if the .270 was good enough for Jack O'Conner it's gooe enough for me. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
firstcoueswas80 Report post Posted January 30, 2015 Lark, You are completely correct. But, something that has stumped me for years is, to bullet manufacturers, that .007" has made a gin if difference for high quality, high BC bullets. Now, there's not much a 140 Accubond won't kill, but the 7mm 160 accubond just trumps it! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
.270 Report post Posted January 30, 2015 they can make high bc bullets for anything. stretch the copper way out, put most of the weight toward the rear. tapered jacket thickness. that's how the bergers and others get the high bc's in the .264 and .284 diameters. they also call for some really fast twists to stabililze them. i've seen 165 gr .277's that had a decent bc. but, so? i use 140 gr hornady interloks. horibble bc. again, so? killed everything i ever shot with em. and have made some spangtackiler shots too. knowing your rifle and shooting a lot have more to do with it than anything. folks get all twitterpated over numbers. bc, ft lbs, velocity, etc. none of it really matters. if you make a good shot they go down quickly. if you gut shoot em, they run off and die miserable. the animal can't tell if it's hit with a high bc bullet or not. and a lot of high bc bullets aren't very good hunting bullets. Karamojo Bell killed thousands of elephants with a 7x57's and .303 british. think he worried about bc? everbody wants to think they are a sniper. we're hunters. go hunt. i shot 2 big game animals last year. a goat and a coues. one looking at me and one walking dead away. what most of the uneducated novices would call "unethical" shots. shot em both with a .243 and 85 grain hornadys. one about 60 yards and one a little over 400. the coues in the brush at 60 dropped in his tracks. the goat at over 400 across wheat stubble went maybe 10 yards. knowing your rifle and hitting em in a good spot is the trick. all the fancy numbers on paper you can dream of don't matter if you can't apply it to the animal. and nothing has a very pretty trajectory arc after 500. they all drop like a rock. all of em. dozens of feet at a 1000. if you don't have a range finder and a calibrated scope and wind meter and all that stuff you can't hit at that range consistently anyway. with anything. if you take all of the electronics away from a long range guy, a guy with a rifle he really knows is going to do a better job, at all ranges. i use a rangefinder a lot. eyes are getting weaker and can't guesstimate like i used to. but i'm still good enough if i hafta be. for 99%+ of hunting, bc is a non point. flat doesn't matter. using a bullet made for what you're doing and knowing your way around your rifle does. that or use the cartridge of the Gods. the .270. Lark. 4 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
roninflag Report post Posted February 2, 2015 Lark- what rifle do you like in .270? scope? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cosninocanines Report post Posted February 2, 2015 Tikka T3 stainless synthetic stock with a Limbsaver recoil pad. Topped with a Nikon Prostaff 5 3.5x14x40 with BDC reticle. If you choose to go the .270 winchester route Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
.270 Report post Posted February 7, 2015 i own a buncha .270's. mostl are pre 64 model 70 winchesters. have standards and featherweights. have a couple rugers too, the rifle i shoot for 90% of my hunting is a standard model 70 made in the late 40's. 24 inch barrel. it has a 35 year old 3.5x10 leupold vari x III on it. i shoot hornady 140 gr interloks with hodgdon 4350 and a magnum primer. Lark. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
roninflag Report post Posted February 9, 2015 Do you like the model 70 super grade? the remington 700 mtn rifle? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
.270 Report post Posted February 9, 2015 i'd love to have a super grade but i'd never spend that kinda money to buy one. i use rifles to hunt with, not look at. most supers are safe queens that are worth a lot more than a standard, but aren't anymore accurate or dependable. it'd be a sin to beat one up like i usually do. don't know anything about remington mountain rifles. i have a couple 700's, a 788 and mohawk. that's about it for hi power remingtons. my boys have senderos and christensens and stuff. they're ok, but no matter how hard they try, they ain't a model 70. no really good adjustable trigger (that everyone tries to copy and should because there isn't one better), no claw extractor, no 3 position hammer safety, no one piece bolt, no controlled round feed, etc. they're decent and accurate, but they just ain't a model 70 and their triggers are plum scary.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
280REM Report post Posted March 11, 2015 Choice is obvious! Cheers, 280REM Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
