Conference vmsnet::hunting$note:hunting

    
    	I have read in Reloading manuals that the 308 is perhaps the
    most accurate .30 caliber ever designed.  Many shoots have been
    won with the 308, and it's performance (speed, etc...) is just shy
    of the 30-06.  Also, as you said, there are lots of factory loads
    for it.  If I can remember, the 280 is a necked-down 30-06.  I've
    never shot one though, but in the case of longer shots, I think
    the 280 would be somewhat flatter and more stable with a lighter
    bullet, thus better for something like antelope.  I wouldn't have
    bought a 308 if I was going to hunt antelope.  I'm wondering if
    the 280 takes the same bullet as a 7mm??  
    
    my .02          
    			- Rob
    

    I have a Model 4 labeled 7MM EXP. REM.  It shoots ammo labled either
    .280 REM or 7MM EXP. REM., they are interchangeable.  The bullets are
    7MM or .284 caliber and there is a large selection of bullets available
    for reloaders.  I prefer the 120 gr. spire point for White-tailed deer.
    
    Mike

    The .280 is right between the .270 and the 30-06 (.308's
    bigger brother)
    
    With handloads, the .280 approaches the 7mm Magnum. 
    With handloads, the .308 approaches the 30-06.
    
    If you reload, the .280 is probably a tad superior for
    long-range. If you shoot factory only, the .308 has
    more loadings available. 
    
    I'd buy both (!) but, then, I'm a pig :-) 
    Seriously, I could be perfectly happy with either. 
    
    Dana

    BTW, to convert metric caliber designations, multiply
    by 4
    
    6mm x4 = .240  (.243 or .244 actually)
    7mm x4 = .280  (.288 bullet in a .280 bore)
    8mm x4 = .32   (.323)
    9mm x4 = .36   (actually .355)
    10mm   = .40 caliber
    

    None of these metrics are exact, some refer to bore
    diameter, others to groove diameter. 
    
    Then again, 38's ain't 38 :-)

    I happen to have a 280 and perhaps I am somewhat biased, but, to me the
    clear choice would be the 280... It shoots about 300 fps slower than
    the 7mm Rem Mag and the recoil is very similar to the 270. My rifle is
    the most accurate hunting (out of the box) rifle I have ever fired.
    	I've sighted my rifle in to shoot 4" high at 100 yds, 5" high at
    200 yds, zero about 300 yds, and 5" low about 370 yds... thus, I can
    hold the sights on the vital area of a deer and be assured of a good
    hit to almost 400 yds.
    
    Lowell
    
    

    I would think that the .308 would be easier to sell and therefore
    hold resale value better.
    
    Since you'll want to reload, brass will be easier to come by.
    
    A lot of people would probably tell you that the .280 caliber would be
    better than the .308 round for long distance shots of 200+ yards.  If
    you plan to hunt the mid-west and the west, this is something you may
    want to consider.  If you are only planning to hunt Maine etc, then the
    .308 round has the above advantages.
    
    I agree, buy them both.  
    
    /brett 

    re .6 Your .280 shoots 300 fps slower than a 7mm Mag because
    the round is loaded at moderate pressures dictated by its'
    use in older semi-auto and pump rifles. Handloaded in a strong
    bolt action is another story.
    
    re. .7 brass for a .280 is easy to come by - use 30-'06, 
    .270 Win., 25-'06, neck up or down, and fire-form to push
    the shoulder forward. Just don't mix them with *real* 
    cartridges bearing the same headstamp. (I use .308's to
    make 7-08's all the time. No fireforming needed, but that's
    no biggie.)
    
    Now back to our regularly scheduled program :-)
    
    Dana

    Ya learn something everyday.
    
    Thank you.

    a .308 with a 150 gr. bullet and 53grs.(max) of powder has a muzzle
    velocity of 2790 and out at 200 yrds it traveling at 2330fps.
    
    a. 280 with a 150gr. bullet and 66grs(max) of powder has a muzzle
    velocity of 2800 and at 200 yards is 2380.

    re: -1
    	Yep and the .280  will have LESS recoil!!! I don't know why but it
    does...
    
    Lowell
    

    re.11 In two guns of identical weight, the .308 load
    mentioned in .10 would have less recoil, not the .280.
    
    This stems from the short, efficient .308 cartridge
    needing 13 grains less powder to achieve the same
    ballistics. (Recoil is a function of the weight of
    the gun, bullet mass and velocity, and powder charge
    mass and velocity. Less powder, less recoil, all else
    being equal.)
    
    I suspect you are comparing factory loads in guns of
    different weights.

    To me the recoil is LESS. I'm going to stick to my guns on this one 
    (pun fully intended). I've fired both and to me the recoil on the
    .280 is less than the .308. Physics can't always prevail in a 
    subjective analysis.
    
    Lowell
    

    If you will be strictly using factory loads and have no plans to
    reload, the .308 has better availibility as well as a larger 
    selection, but if you were planning on doing any reloading, i'd 
    opt for the .280
    
    It is an awesome round and is just now starting to come into its
    own. For years it was built in unpopular actions, and never really
    caught on, due in part by the .270
     
    Had the .280 been introduced in a bolt action, the .270 might not be 
    such a big hit. Even Jack O'connor (a .270 fanatic) when told that a
    friend was having a .270 built, said "don't do it, have a .280 made,
    its a better caliber".
         
    wow, I can't believe i'm saying this.... 8^)
    
    Fra

    .14 Fra I believe you had read that in an Outdoor Life with Jim
    Carmichael. Jim C. was having a .280 built but when he was telling
    Jack C. about it he didn't want to hurt his feelings so he fibbed
    and told him it was a .270. Jack C. then made the comment that the
    .280 was a better round. They are both good rounds. But I would
    tend to lean to the .280 if it were me making the choice. That is
    Jack O'Connell when I make mention of Jack C. I remember reading
    the article. I think it was called "270 or 280? Which is the rifle
    for you?"

    bret,
    
    I think it was Outdoor Life, or Sports Afield one or the other.
    Anyways, I have been along admirer of the .270 and the man who made
    it what it is today, Jack O'Connor.  Had timing been different I 
    think he would have been raving about the merits of the .280 or 
    the 7mm mag.
    
    I am currently in the market for a large caliber rifle in the 300
    H&H caliber for a second high power rifle. If I didn't already own
    a .270 I would go with the .280, but where their so close to each
    other balistically it would be a waste to pick it up now.
                                    
    Besides, a .270 can do everything a .280 can, and with more
    style 8^)
               
    Fra
    
    as an aside its Jack O'Connor, not O'Connell

    
    	Have been out a couple days and just got to all the replies. Thanks
    	to everyone for all the information.  I have done a little bit of
    	further looking actually comparing the bullet shell size.  One
    	think that since the 280 takes more powder that it would have more
    	recoil, but almost everyone I talk to says different.  Actually I
    	appreciate responder .5 suggesting buying both and I know responder
    	.7(Helsel) will help with the funding.  I am currently leaning
    	toward the 308 am am planning to revisit the selection this
    	weekend. The 280 is in slightly better condition , it has Williams
    	peep sight and is $50 less.  Gues I'll just have to get both.
    
    	

    .16 Fra- Sorry about the spelling. I was close. Have you thought
    about a 300 Win. Mag.? A bit more power than a 300 H&H. I think
    there is more than a 100 fps difference which could mean 2 or 3
    inches less of a drop in the trajectory. That is if you plan on
    shooting at great distances. The 300 Win Mag is used quite a bit
    at 600 and 1000 yard shoots.
    							Bret

    I do expect most of my shooting to be within 100 yards with perhaps
    a 200 yard shot on occasion.  I am primarily looking for sufficient
    fire accurate easy to carry lightweight fire power for 1- whitetail,
    2 - mule, 3 antelope, and 4 perhaps elk.

    Take a look at the Remington Mountain Rifle and the
    Model 7 carbine. The first comes in long or short
    action with a 22" barrel. The second is short-action
    only, with an 18.5" barrel. You can get either in .308,
    though I have to admit a MR in .280 would be a dandy.
    
    gawd doncha just love shopping !

    
     I can't resist...
    
     I own a .308 and two 7mm Mags.  Love them all dearly, but for out
    west, the 7mm's get my choice.  I had the great fortune to order
    a new addition to the collectionn last Friday, a Rem Mountain rifle
    in .280 w/ 4X40 Nikon scope.  It'll be going to the Bob Marshall
    in a month for Elk and Mule Deer.  Can't hardly wait.
     From what I've read, the .280 is a great shooter and hits hard.
    The Mountain Rifle is light weight and that's very important especially
    when you carry it at high altitude all day.  Hopefully I'll be able
    to give full details of its performance on elk and mulies when I
    get back from Montana.
     As said before, don't sell the .308 short.  It'll handle anything
    you're ever going to face in the US of A, although you'de really
    wish for a personal howitzer if confronted with a hungry grizzly.
    
     good hunting,
    
    	-jro
    

    
    
    	Thanks again to everyone for the advice.  I stopped by Rileys over
        the weekend and picked up a very slightly used Remington Model 7
    	in 308 caliber.  It was in excellent condition and felt very light
    	and well balanced for carrying in the woods.
    
    	I am still very intrigued by the Rem 280 caliber and will be
    	looking to shoot one and perhaps add to my "collection".