Dont' often see the .270 mentioned

[Guest]

Re: Dont\' often see the .270 mentioned

baldeagle713, are the 300 WSM and a 6.5x 284 easyer to make accurate or was your coyote just not up to par. Not trying to make a fight here just trying to figure out the lack of intrerst in the 270. I wonder how things would look if we had a bullet in the 160-180g range with a bc over .6. The 270x300 rum with a bullet like that should open some eyes. Just dreaming.
Dave King, here are some more #
308 win,m/v-2650,175gMK,.507bc
yards ft/s ft-lbs drop
500 1840 1316 -60
700 1566 953 -147
1000 1235 593 -391

270 win,m/v-2900,150gSST,.525bc
yards ft/s ft-lbs drop
500 2069 1426 -48
700 1780 1056 -117
1000 1407 659 -308

300wm,m/v-2940,190gMK,.533bc
yards ft/s ft-lbs drop
500 2114 1885 -46
700 1825 1404 -113
1000 1448 884 -296
I also don't hold to the 1000 ft-lb rule. 700y is my accuracy limit with my rifle. If I and my gun could do better I would use it farther out. Just havent got there yet. If some better bullets would have come out a few years ago the 270 might be used a bit more for LRH

[ 01-27-2004: Message edited by: Harv ]

 

[1894]

Re: Dont\' often see the .270 mentioned

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><HR>The 303 british has a long military history and I don't see to many loyal fans talking about it <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's because it was established in 1898 or so that the 7x57 was better at long range, the Boers out shot us

I now feel better shooting my 7x57 with 130gr interbond at 2,900fps with a BC of .486 (pessimistic as this is the SST BC, the IB has no cannelure and a slipperier profile)

 

[Darryl Cassel]

Re: Dont\' often see the .270 mentioned

Harv

You wrote---"If some better bullets would have come out a few years ago the 270 might be used a bit more for LRH"

________________________________________

That's the point, they didn't and still haven't, to a higher degree.

One of my favorite carry guns for years was the 270 Win. Killed many deer with it and so did my Dad.

When I got into LR hunting, Most of the LR crowd used heavier or Higher BC bullets and cases with much more powder capacity then the 270 had and still do.

Years ago and to this day, Most chambered the 6.5/300 Weatherby, the 7/300 Weatherby, the straight 300 Weatherby, the 30/378 Weatherby and now the 338/378 Weatherby and the 338/416 Rig. Imp. all with extremely long barrels.
After they started with the 6.5/300 Weatherby at extreme high velocity, some soon found that the 7mm bullets had excellent and better BCs and the big cases could propel them well. Many switched to the 7mm line.
Even if the 270 had more bullet selections, they would be hard pressed to compete with the 7mm line of bullets.
The 180 gr Customs are right at .700 BC and some are even higher then that.
Now add the "bullet selection" you have with the 30 cals and I think you can see why the 270 was passed over.

Years ago I had thought of going with a 270/300 Weatherby but, it would not have been as desirable as the 7/300 Wetherby or even my 6.5/300 Weatherby for that matter.It certainly wouldn't be as desirable as the 30/378 or the 338/416 Rig Imp.

The 270 has decent bullet weights of 130, 135, 140, 150 and 155 gr but, the point of all this is, ballistically they are not as good as the 7mms(175 and 180 gr) , 30 cals (190 to 240 gr or the 338 (250 gr to 300 gr).

This is why the 270 was never very popular with the LR crowd.

Probably the MOST accurate bullet in the 270 is the 135 Gr MK.

I have a friend on this forum that made a deer kill at 700 yards (I think) with his 270 Win Sendaro using the 135 gr MK

Nothing wrong with the 270. Theres just better choices out there.

Later
DC

 

[baldeagle713]

Re: Dont\' often see the .270 mentioned

I Think D.C. said it best.
The Selection of bullets does make the differance.
I like my 270WSM in Coyote BUT it's no Flat bottom gun. It would be interesting to see what it would do in a flat bottom gun BUT I don't have the resorses to take that kind of investment. Not when thre are tryed and true calibers out there.

 

[milanuk]

Re: Dont\' often see the .270 mentioned

What do you guys think of the possibility of more 'long-range' .270 bullets w/ the rumored development of the new 6.8mm (.270) military rounds?

Monte

 

[mphstigerfan]

in my opinion, the .270 win is a little less gun than most on here want to shoot at extreme ranges ( 700 yds and beyond) not that it isnt capable but other magnum calibers do it better. I just bought a 300 wsm. that being said most of the cartridges mentioned here arent much fun to shoot in a 6lb rifle. A .270 would be very managable in such a gun and be more than capable of shots at 500 yds and beyond. I am thinking of buying a smaller gun before long and the 308, 7mm-08, and 270 top my list. all of these in my estimation would make great walking deer rifles.

 

[460or338]

I dont know about the rest of the country but the 270 win is the most popular caliber ever .Beats the 30-06 in sales hell know one can keep the ammo in stock .walmart sold out of 270 ammo in a few hours the same day they got a shipment of it.I dont like the 270 though my brother has one in a rem 710 weighs about 9 lbs **** thing kicks harder than his lite 30-06 or the 7mm mag for that .

 

[270 Sender0]

I started with a 30-30 as a kid, went to a 6.5x55 but my 270 win has seen a lot of the back country during the season. It may not be the longest shooter on the block but when you become comfortable with a rifle you have a tendency to sling it over your shoulder with out any hesitation.

 

[silvertip-co]

I always thought the .270 was the best do it all with one gun calibre. Well maybe except for grizzlies. But with a (previously) limited bullet selection in the past and the refusal of maufacturers to put 26" barrels on standard calibre rifles ( to $ave what, maybe 10 or 20 dollars on the price) I guess that's why its sort of non-popular( notice I didnt say unpopular) for LRH. Ammo sales for the 270 is about third on list of all ammo sales, with 30-06 and 7mm Rem Mag ahead of it on the list. I just bought three .270s in last three yrs and liked them all. I kept the left handed one and sold the other two. But for longer shots it would be soooo much better with a 26" barrel. I made mine to a mtn type gun with everyhting weighing as lil as possible, so my whole .270 rig weighs 7.7# including the sling. One good thing is ammo is cheap and you can get rounds in most general stores. I may go for a pricier scope this year for it, but my bet is I can dump anything on its as_ at 500y. Good luck with your 270, its a great round.

 

[mphstigerfan]

thats just a 710... not a good shooting rifle. Im not exactly sure why but I havent ever seen one that grouped very well either. this is strange to me coming from remington but anyway.. a guy I hunt with has a steyr .270 win. that is incredible sub .5 moa and he knocks em down out past 400 yds with it. I really like the 270 but it is what it is... a great 400 yd and less gun. will reach beyond that but others do it a little better.

 

[Bear2]

I have bigger and smaller calibers, but hands down my go to rifle is a 700 Classic 30-06 with a Leupy 3.5x10 Vari X3. If I can see it I can hit it. Nuff said

 

[liltank]

Been killing deer in PA since 1952 with 270's starting with my dad and still the preferred caliber or the .308 in our family.

Tank

 

[RBrowning]

I have wondered why the 270 Winchester wasn't more popular for LRH too, after all it is very highly revered for pronghorns and mulies on the western plains. My guess is the "we" tend to stretch the envelope past where others are comfortable, and to do that we want to take every "little" advantage we can find. When you compare a 30-06, a 7RM or a 270 Winchester in any deer camp east of the Mississippi, you will find a lot of arguments, but not much envelop stretching. Most of the folks that you meet in the deer woods can't shoot well enough to take advantage of the more consistency of a short powder column, nor would they know what the B.C. of he bullet in the chamber is or why it is important. Within 100-200 yards any thing from a 243 to a 300 Weatherby will kill a deer as dead as can be. When you get out to 600-700 yards some of the guns and most all of the shooters are totally out of their element. A well built rifle in the proper hands chambered in most any of the popular 25-30 calibers will still the get the job done. When you get out past that is where many of our members play and at those differences you want ever advantage you can get. A little BC improvement IS measurable at 1000 yards even if it isn't at 100. The same with the short powder column and the more consistent bullets.

I can't say that there is really any thing wrong with a 270 Winchester, and if you had one customized with the same rigors that you would put into any other LRH gun, and you hand load with the same care, I really doubt you would see a big difference in accuracy between it and a 7RM or 308 or 30-06.

But then that is only my opinion and it didn't cost you anything and you got what you paid for.

 

[Chopaka81]

If the 270 Win is not worthy - neither is ANY 308 or ANY -06 based cartridge.

I have hunted with a 270 Win since 1980. I used the Sierra 130gr SBT then - I use the Sierra 130gr SBT now.

My current 270 Win is a Tikka T-3 Lite, for every 3 shot group the first 2 shots always touch, the third is just a hair out of the group. The velocity delta out of the Tikka barrel is 10 fps. During the 2008 season I took a buck down a 385 yds with it, nothing special, for my 7 lb rifle. All I saw after the shot was antlers and legs flying thru the scope and he tumbled down the side of the mountian. The rifle is topped with a top of the line Leupold Scope. It is a VX1 2-7x33 LR Duplex scope . It is a real beauty of a scope... who "needs" a Night Force?

Reminds me of the Best Sniper tv show I saw on the Military channel this past weekend. It featured a WWII era Army Sniper, he is now over 85yrs old. The AMU at Ft Benning presented him with a fully restored 03-A4 complete with the original sniper scope - the scope tube looked like it was .75". The Army let the old sniper shoot the -A4 rifle on their 500 yd range. All 3 shots were on Target on the same vertical line as he worked them upwards to a near perfect shot. Bare in mind this was the first time this old sniper fired the rifle.

Then that old sniper got to shot a "modern" sniper rifle at 1000 yds, he put in a 5" group at 1000yds, all center mass, and the 2 young snipers (the Army's current top sniper team) stood there gap jawed as the old sniper proceeded to give them a shootin' lesson they will never forget. All the young snipers could say is how they marveled at how the guys of "days gone by" could do what they did with those old sticks.

The point is guys, it ain't about the size of the stick (or the scope) - it is about "the skill" on the trigger and behind the scope. If you wanna shoot 1000 yds or more - better put in the range time. gun)