New Cartridge 6.8 Western

[25WSM]

I use a swaging die to reduce the diameter of my muzzleloader bullets. The manufacturer of the die calls it a swaging die and it only makes bullets smaller. Next time I order one I'll ask for a drawing die. I'm sure he will ask me why I want a drawing of his die.
Shep

 

[bigngreen]

A bunch of us went down this road years ago trying to get a completed 7mm bullet to 270 and it works but not to the level we need for long range hunting or precision. Taking the raw jacket is no issue and building the whole bullet but that's a whole other ball of wax which is all fun but in the long run just buy a 170 EOL complete on the same J4 jacket you'd use to make your own but without buying the dies, press and components to basically gain nothing except being able to add body and go up to 180+gr on a 270 cal.

 

[25WSM]

Ntsgd I've literally found a 1000 ways not to shoot a winning group. You think I would have learned something by now.
Shep

 

[Deleted member 115654]

What cartridge is winning the 1000 yd matches ? jus sayin.

 

[del2les]

Just because no one has done it doesn't mean that it can't be done and done well. All that it does mean is that enough people have told those who thought about doing it that it couldn't be done that they were believed. Edison is quoted (likely erroneously) as saying that he found 1000 ways to NOT build a light bulb. So far we know how NOT to do this, we just haven't found out how TO do it.

I've no horse in the race, I won't be trying it because I have no need. If I did I'd be looking into it. If I did and based on what has been said here I'd be looking at drawing to below size and then swaging up to size as my starting point.

Over the decades, MANY have tried various drawing techniques, but there are some things done in much better ways. You cannot re-swage the core into a jacket when the bullet is in final form. See above pic. The jacket has to be open to accept the swage punch that is the size of the ID of the jacket. Best thing is to swage the bullet you desire from the beginning of manufacture.

 

[del2les]

I use a swaging die to reduce the diameter of my muzzleloader bullets. The manufacturer of the die calls it a swaging die and it only makes bullets smaller. Next time I order one I'll ask for a drawing die. I'm sure he will ask me why I want a drawing of his die.
Shep

I do agree, as I have several so-called swaging dies for cast bullets, but the nomenclature is "technically" wrong. However, marketing is often based on misused and in common usage terms. It's like many people call a loaded cartridge a "bullet", but we know the difference.

 

[skipglo]

FYI, Winchester just got saami approval and there's things submitted in for trade marking. Looks like they're fixing the 270 WSM.

Hard to fix something....that isn't broken!

 

[Another Casual]

To the gentleman saying you can only use one bullet at a time so why need variety:
Nothing worse than building your rifle around a bullet and then you can't get it to shoot. Variety is the spice of life, the .277 bore diameter doesn't have enough to draw me away from 6.5 and 7.

There are those on this forum who dislike Hornady and say their rounds don't do anything new. Unlike other companies (think remington with the 260), they support their rounds. The round, chamber, twist rate, and sometimes new bullets are all designed together to work and the factory offerings shoot very well. The bullet designs are modern and purpose built as well. Sure you can build a fast twist 22-250, 243 or 270, but most people are shooting factory rifles with factory ammo. For them the 22 creedmoor, 6mm creedmoor, etc are much more realistic choices.

If this round is a revised 270 WSM with the right twist rate, it seems like a day late and a dollar short to me.

 

[ntsqd]

Ntsgd I've literally found a 1000 ways not to shoot a winning group. You think I would have learned something by now.
Shep

You've learned how to not shoot small groups, that counts for something. I think all information is worth the trouble even if it doesn't solve the problem because it makes identifying what does work easier.

I once read a quote attributed to Kent Duckworth, the "Worth" of Cosworth Engineering & Cosworth racing engines, who said "Don't read, you become misinformed." I think what he was saying is that you don't know the particulars of someone else's test of an idea unless it was conducted and reported in a rigorous scientific manner. Even then you may not know everything and it is best to test it yourself.
So when I'm told that lots of people have tried something and have not succeeded it tells me that it isn't an easy thing, but it doesn't tell me that it is impossible.

The obvious solution is for the bullet mfg's to make the HFC bullets in the desired caliber(s), but that is kind of a chicken and egg problem. Until there is a volume mfg of tight twist .257 and .277 chamberings it's going to be hard to convince the bullet mfg's to tool up to make bullets for them. So maybe this new .277 chamber is the first step in that direction. Those of us who've been around long enough can recall that 6.5 bullets used to be few and far between, and most were low performance designs. Now look at what is available in that bore size.

When I worked in the store between ourselves we jokingly called them "bullet-shell-heads" because it seemed that the correct term was never used by anyone......

 

[ZAK13]

Just found this on the web...interesting, using a 175 gr bullet.

 

[Bob Wright]

6.5saum blows away the 6mm and 243ai. Where does it end? Most 6mms have a crappy twist rate and can't shoot heavies. Most 243s only have a 9 and still can't shoot a 105 hybrid or vld. Heck the 6creed beats the 6mm and 243 easily. The proper twist can make all the difference between 2 cartridges. Doesn't matter what cartridge can beat what. But each cartridge can be optimized with the correct twist for modern bullets. That's why the 243 lived and the 6mm collected dust. Today's world the heavier high bc bullets rule for long range and if you don't have the twist needed you can't reap the benefits of these new bullets. Ballistically a 22-250 with a fast twist shooting 90 gr bullets will eat a regular 6mm and 243ais lunch at 1000 yards. Put an 8 twist on the 6s and things change in a hurry.
Shep

This ☝☝☝
It killed the original 6mm Remington, denied us a heavier 277, limited the 22 cals...
What's sad too is many faster twist guns will shoot the the lighter bullets very well. It was short sighted and a mistake for gun manufacturers to not put the higher twists out there early on in development. Something in their thinking, either for the "wow" speed factors they could print on their ammo boxes of 3600 fps for a 40 grainer just to sell underweight and under performing ammo to shoot mice with.
I'm glad we can order barrels at a cost we can swallow to multiply the performance with.
We just need the 277 class to step up....
And by the way, 22 cal bullets are deadly on deer with the right shot; even with my junior deer hunters shooting 223 Barnes 55 grainers out of noodle barrels.
Just saying.

 

[ntg]

Just found this on the web...interesting, using a 175 gr bullet.

I saw that, wondered if Winchester is going to produce their own 175 gr pill...

 

[Bob Wright]

I saw that, wondered if Winchester is going to produce their own 175 gr pill...

I dont own a 270wsm. But if the twist is wrong in those legacy rifles, there's a problem. I think that was 25WSM's point (?).

 

[ntg]

Right, I'm with you there. I'm just saying they don't make a 175, and haven't really been in the business of making long, sleek bullets. I wonder if they're going to make their own, or source it outside.