New Cartridge 6.8 Western

[Jud96]

Performance wise it's identical is my point. So what's the need for it? I had a .270 Winchester. Worked great for deer, not so much for long range because there's minimal bullet options and 100% of the factory rifles, including the one I had, have a twist rate too slow for long range bullets. So I rebarreled it to a .284 and got something better

 

[ntsqd]

But it can't be the same performance, it's a .007" smaller bore.





Sarcasm doesn't convey very well on the net..........

 

[Turnbolt53]

It's all about the bullets . . .

 

[Eric Alexander]

Even though "science" and the shooting public is putting a premium on the 6-7mm sweet spot, the twist rate of factory offerings for the 270 Win market is stalling it's advance, which kills other 277 bore offerings.
What is stopping factory gun builders from providing a higher twist rate and 2 or 3 new lines of factory ammo? I don't see a 1:8 twist killing a 277 130 gr bullet's accuracy that we have today. My 7mm 8.5 twist shoots a 140 gr extremely well.
With CNC rifling machines, a simple program change and "maybe", a slightly improved cutter design. The ammo makers would be able to add more products and cash to their bottom line. Seems like a 'bottom up' demand from ammo makers to do this.
Seems like a win-win for all parties.

CNC rifling machines? I have no knowledge of these... I could imagine a pistol barrel perhaps, but the length of a rifle barrel would challenge the throw.
Who is making barrels on a CNC?

 

[Jud96]

CNC rifling machines? I have no knowledge of these... I could imagine a pistol barrel perhaps, but the length of a rifle barrel would challenge the throw.
Who is making barrels on a CNC?

Bartlein, Hart, Proof, Benchmark, Krieger, Criterion. Very common nowadays.

 

[Deleted member 103481]

Bartlein, Hart, Proof, Benchmark, Krieger, Criterion. Very common nowadays.

Interesting, I was under the impression the old Pratt and Whitney's were still used

 

[quigley257]

Along the same lines... I was asked the other day what the 27 Nosler is like. I responded, "It's just like the 28 Nosler, minus all the cool, high B.C. bullets".

 

[JMW67]

Interesting, I was under the impression the old Pratt and Whitney's were still used

I think they are for rifling

 

[quigley257]

We still use several WWI era P&Ws to cut our rifling at H-S Precision.

 

[Deleted member 103481]

I think they are for rifling

Yes, The quote said rifling machines

 

[bearcat2]

I would imagine (without doing all the engineering and geometric math, just a WAG) that a 170 gr. .277 diameter bullet built by Berger (insert your favorite long range bullet here) would have a better BC than a 170 gr. .284 diameter bullet built by Berger. As long as it is designed for a gun with enough throat/freebore and a long enough magazine to seat it out.

That is a limiting factor from the rifle end, custom makers can alleviate that, you could have a regular old 270 Win custom bored with a longer throat and built on a longer action with a full length Magnum magazine, but the big bullet makers aren't going to make too many bullets for a theoritical future custom market. If somebody designs a factory rifle capable of shooting such long range bullets though, probably in conjuction with one or more bullet makers to make some factory loads, the others will jump on the bandwagon because there is profit in it. This is what Hornady did (although somewhat in the reverse, since they are a bullet maker who partnered with rifle manufacturers) to create the 6.5 Creedmoor. Now there are a ton of high BC heavy .264 diameter bullets out there for me to choose from to shoot out of my 260 (which has a fast enough twist to shoot them, unlike the original 260s that Remington screwed the pooch on)

 

[bearcat2]

I love my old Remington pump 270, and don't plan on trading it in on a newfangled rifle in the same diameter. But it isn't a long range rifle (I won't hesitate out to 350 and would stretch it a little farther if I had to, but not to true long range distances). But if I didn't have a custom long range 7mm STW already built and was looking to build a long range rifle I might be interested in the .277 caliber if there was a cartridge and long range bullets available. When I had my STW built I looked at 270 WSM but the ballistics and available bullets just weren't there. To be honest the bullet selection was more limited for the .284 then, but the 180 Bergers were king at the time and there was a couple other options if the gun wouldn't have liked them. From a consumers standpoint more options are always nice. From a manufacturers standpoint, I'm unsure if there will be enough demand to make the 6.8 Western viable profitwise, but I won't complain if they give it a go.

Heck the more .277 diameter guns out there the more bullet choices will be available, and somebody might make a better bullet (or at least cheaper) for brush and timber hunting with the possibility of a 2-300 yard shot than the 140 Grand Slams my old 270 loves so much.

 

[CMP70306]

Not that I have a dog in the fight but my biggest question is who is going to make quality factory rifles for it? Since Winchester only seems to care about the XPR line and let the Model 70 languish I'm not seeing anyone who would be tooling up their flagship rifles to chamber this cartridge.

On the note of Winchester, I still have no idea why they produce a 9 twist .264 WM when they are already making 8 twist barrels for the Creedmoor and PRC.

 

[25WSM]

Would only make too much sense to put the 264 winnie on an 8. Give it some freebore while they are at it. And it would be an easy tool up for the new round if they put it in a current model 70 action that are already made for the shortmags. All they need is what any smith would need. Rougher and finish reamer and set of headspace guages. The barrel would be the harder part.
I still think a 6.5wsm would sell better than this new cartridge. Or just make an 8 twist 270wsm then everyones brass and dies are still usable.
Shep