Count to 100 using pictures

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

classic33

Leg End Member
278.JPG
 

Mad Doug Biker

I prefer animals to most people.
Location
Craggy Island
.280 Remington Ballistics

History, Details, Ballistics, and Drop for the .280 Remington
2.5-inch.png
.280-remington.png
Cartridge Type: Rifle
Height: 2.54"
Width: 0.473"
Average FPS: 2896
Average Energy: 2793
Average Gr: 150
Recoil: 1.95
Power Rank: 4.34 of 20 [?]



The .280 Remington was designed in 1957 by Remington Arms Company for the 700 series rifles. The parent case is a .30-06 Springfield, and is narrowed down to fit the .284 inch (7.2mm) bullet. The semi- automatic 740 was the first rifle Remington used for the .280 factory loads with a psi of 48,000 to 50,000 for 150 grain bullets. The ballistic performances based off five grain types for velocity are 3,112 ft/s (120 gr), 2,839 ft/s (140 gr), 2,825 ft/s (154 gr), 2,723 ft/s (168 gr), 2,681 ft/s (175 gr).

Remington changed the powder charge of the .280 factory load in 1979 and re-named the .280 Remington to the 7mm Express Remington. After some confusion on the market they reversed the name change back to the .280 Remington. The factory loads consist of 140-150 grain cartridges that are best suited for medium sized game.

The .280 factory loads can be used on medium sized game up to 250 yards before a noticeable drop in wound penetration occurs. Hand loading .280 brass can reach 3,100 ft/s (140 gr), 3,000 ft/s (150 gr). They can be suited to lower powder use for varmint hunting, or custom fit on a 26 inch barrel for maximum velocity in hunting medium sized game. Hand loading rounds can reach upwards of 375 yards before a noticeable drop off in wound penetration occurs.



*Casing image above is an artist rendering and not a real photo of .280 Remington Ballistics cartridge. While we have went to great lengths to make sure that it's as accurate as possible this rendering should not be used to generate specs for casings.


view.gif View Entire Bullet Database ball-report-create.png Create Your Free Custom Ballistic Report
.280-remington-drop.png



[top of page]

Known Rounds
.280 Remington-Federal Nosler Partition, .280 Remington-Remington Core-Lokt Pointed Soft Point, .280 Remington-Federal Hi-Shok Soft Point, .280 Remington-Federal Nosler Ballistic Tip, .280 Remington-Remington AccuTip, .280 Remington-Nosler Partition, .280 Remington-Norma Vulcan, .280 Remington-Federal Trophy Bonded Tip, .280 Remington-Hornady SST InterLock, .280 Remington-Winchester Ballistic Silvertip, .280 Remington-Remington Core-Lokt Pointed Soft Point, .280 Remington-Norma Oryx, .280 Remington-Hornady SST Moly LM InterLock, .280 Remington-Remington Core-Lokt Soft Point, .280 Remington-Federal Nosler AccuBond,

[top of page]

Other Cartridges with Similar Widths (cartridges not bullets)
.404 Dakota, .44 Remington Magnum (Pistol Data), .38 Special (.38 Smith & Wesson Special), .30-06 Springfield, .17 Hornady Magnum Rimfire (HMR), .243 Winchester, .357 Magnum (Rifle Data), .44 Smith & Wesson Special, .300 Remington Short Action Ultra Magnum, .38 Short Colt, .38 Super Auto Colt, .25-06 Remington, .300 Savage, .416 Dakota, .22-250 Remington,

[top of page]

Other Cartridges with Similar Length
.404 Dakota, .303 British, .260 Remington, .308 Winchester (7.62mm NATO), .300 Winchester Magnum, .405 Winchester, 7-30 Waters, .45-70 Government, .416 Weatherby Magnum, .30-30 Winchester, .356 Winchester, 7mm Remington Short Action Ultra Magnum, .500 A-Square, .338 Lapua Magnum, .30-06 Springfield,
 

Attachments

  • upload_2016-7-27_12-18-30.gif
    26 bytes · Views: 17
Last edited:

classic33

Leg End Member
lot 282.jpg
 

Mad Doug Biker

I prefer animals to most people.
Location
Craggy Island
My last train was at 247, almost 40 posts ago, so.....

The one, the only E636 with a rebuilt modern front end after an accident, number 284!

Sorry, but it is preserved now, so is well known in it's native Italy (with enthusiasts anyway).

Refer to '243' (E636.243, also preserved) to see what it would have been like originally (post 415 on page 28). I'm not sure what looks worse, but I have always liked them because they look so odd (although the original design is now almost 80 years old, so it has an excuse):



image.jpg
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom