So Will the .270 Win Overtake the CM's and PRC's?

[montana west]

270 winchester will never die.. the best 6.5 ever was the 6.5 remington mag.. it needed a standard action and a long bbl. with this it will smoke all 6.5s except the 264 win mag. but it too did not make the cut.. Remington 7mm mag put them to rest.. a 270 winchester case with it long neck in the 6.5 will put all commerical 6.5s away. with the exception of the European 6.5 x 68 and their new 6.5 x65 which is a 6.5/06. one has to understand the 270 is a magnum without a belt and you cannot improve the 270. the longer neck allows for pressure in the magnum range.. If remington had loaded their 280 to 270 pressure there would be no 7 mm remington mag. but all this is good because they sell more rifles and we shooters have something to talk about. my go to long ranger is a 25" bbl remington 700 E R Shaw magnum bbl in 6.5/06 using 270brass trimed to 63mm.

 

[Privi457]

There are several 6.5s superior to the long dead Remington.

 

[budlight]

Yup, I'm selling off 2/3rds of my gunsafe to build one. 28" fast twist, Nitrided, that will destroy all the current paid off gun writers pets. One gun for anything in the lower 48.

I was always the under dog at 600 F class shooting. 29 inch 1:9 8.5 pound heavy varmint. I shot everything from 169.5 vlds out to 190 gr vld. Retumbo, and r-26 are the best because of about 60 grains is the max load. Later on I made a 270 AI which had 68 grains max.

Some barrels like Krieger would make a 30 inch palma contour which would be lighter than my 8.5 pound. I've one shot buffalo. My biggest was 1500 pounds probably. Elk in 3 different states. bunch of mule deer. 30 years ago I had it barreled to my action. I made the stock from a zebra multi wood blank.

 

[VLD Pilot]

Explain efficiency. In my opinion this is a buzzword and as such is a pet peeve of mine.

The cartridge produces results without waste. I say this particularly about the 284 case. Uses less powder to produce equal or better results than a 270 case. Better ballistically efficient bullets( higher bc to weight ratio). The 6.5 and 7 mm bullets offer that form of efficiency. Other words may define this better than efficiency but ultimately the 270 is ballistically inferior to most of the 6.5/7s of equal cartridge size simply due to the lower ballistic coefficient numbers. Assuming LR hunting/shooting is the what the subject is about.

 

[Privi457]

My smith will build you any length you want. Savage Gunsmithing Driggs ID.

 

[Privi457]

The cartridge produces results without waste. I say this particularly about the 284 case. Uses less powder to produce equal or better results than a 270 case. Better ballistically efficient bullets( higher bc to weight ratio). The 6.5 and 7 mm bullets offer that form of efficiency. Other words may define this better than efficiency but ultimately the 270 is ballistically inferior to most of the 6.5/7s of equal cartridge size simply due to the lower ballistic coefficient numbers. Assuming LR hunting/shooting is the what the subject is about.

Inefficient eh ? Like the 277 Fury ? (asking for friend)

 

[Ronald W Schaefer]

There is some work being done on a new barn burner .277, I think its called the SIG Fury and works at 80psi using some steel components to the "brass"...I'm sure that will not be cheap. The article I read said they were getting like 3000 with a 140 or 150 bullet? Also, Nosler is developing the 27 Nosler...so there is some potential in the .277 caliber--faster twist barrels and a 140 gr Nosler ABLR would help the old school .270 Win. Maybe create a .270 AI since everybody loves the AI moniker.

 

[VLD Pilot]

Inefficient eh ? Like the 277 Fury ? (asking for friend)

Never heard of it

 

[DJ Fergus]

Nosler has throwed out the bone for all the 277 cal lovers. Now its time for the 277 guys to ante up and show they are serious when they say they want long range high bc 277 options. The 27 nosler looks to be the king of mass produced saami long range 277 cal cartridges with factory ammo ready to go. I've almost talked my self into one just by trying to bait the 277 folks as I type. LOL. Seriously though, I would look long& hard at the 27 nosler if I ever go to a 277 cal again.

 

[rustyshackleford]

The cartridge produces results without waste. I say this particularly about the 284 case. Uses less powder to produce equal or better results than a 270 case. Better ballistically efficient bullets( higher bc to weight ratio). The 6.5 and 7 mm bullets offer that form of efficiency. Other words may define this better than efficiency but ultimately the 270 is ballistically inferior to most of the 6.5/7s of equal cartridge size simply due to the lower ballistic coefficient numbers. Assuming LR hunting/shooting is the what the subject is about.

My thinking is there is no such thing as more efficient or less efficient solely derived from case geometry. A case with greater capacity, potential energy, will almost always if not always yield higher kinetic energy at the muzzle. The easy exception to this is the operating pressure must be equal. Once it leaves the muzzle it's the design of the bullet that carries that energy more or less efficiently. I have seen efficiency tossed around so much it's only noted when it supports a claim and usually the comparison isn't honest. Case in point I just consulted the Sierra app. 284 win pushing a 150 SBT is a little faster than a 280 rem. The top level load in the 284 holds about an extra grain of powder. No discernible advantage to case design in that instance just more powder. 270 is just a hair faster than the 284 pushing a 150 with a little bit more capacity in its favor. In this comparison if accuracy was equal the 270 would have slightly more energy at the muzzle, carry it better down range, and have a little more recoil just due to physics but probably not enough to tell the 3 apart. It's just a loaded number and I really don't think it can be used to describe a cartridge. A particular projectile definitely but not a cartridge.

 

[budlight]

I used to moly coat coat all my rounds. The center is a 150 gr spbt and the outer two are 169.5 gr Wildcat bullets. They are no longer around. I used 1000's of Matrix 175's

 

[Savage 22-243 AI]

So what do we have? A Long action, 26"+ barrels, faster twist barrels, high BC heavy bullets, low recoil, brass CHEAP, brass neck is wonderful for longer higher BC bullets, RL26 pixie dust, every manufacturer has a .270 in current configuration of 1:10 BUT with advent of the higher BC bullets, heavier and need for faster twist barrels, is this the next NEW caliber to win over everybody?

Heck, my 24" sporter barrel is shooting 150 ABLR at 3075 fps with RL26 with absolutely no pressure so what will a 26"+ do with faster twist for heavier higher BC bullets? Recoil is actually pleasant and can shoot all day for probably anyone. The downrange ballistics are pretty darn good with the higher velocity, higher BC, heavier bullets that the .270 Win can actually do with faster twist and RL26 pixie dust.

So what do you think? Does the old girl have a chance? I do. Then again, Hornady has not branded it as a CM or PRC so probably no chance at all.

This is my next build!

No!

 

[VLD Pilot]

My thinking is there is no such thing as more efficient or less efficient solely derived from case geometry. A case with greater capacity, potential energy, will almost always if not always yield higher kinetic energy at the muzzle. The easy exception to this is the operating pressure must be equal. Once it leaves the muzzle it's the design of the bullet that carries that energy more or less efficiently. I have seen efficiency tossed around so much it's only noted when it supports a claim and usually the comparison isn't honest. Case in point I just consulted the Sierra app. 284 win pushing a 150 SBT is a little faster than a 280 rem. The top level load in the 284 holds about an extra grain of powder. No discernible advantage to case design in that instance just more powder. 270 is just a hair faster than the 284 pushing a 150 with a little bit more capacity in its favor. In this comparison if accuracy was equal the 270 would have slightly more energy at the muzzle, carry it better down range, and have a little more recoil just due to physics but probably not enough to tell the 3 apart. It's just a loaded number and I really don't think it can be used to describe a cartridge. A particular projectile definitely but not a cartridge.

Let's look at the 7mm mag. It pushes the 162 around 2950 fps with over 60 grains of powder. My 284 pushes the same bullet 3000 fps with 53 grains. Different powders if course BUT the don't run the same powders for the best performance. H1000 in the 7mag vs RL17 in the 284. Both top powders for the cartridge. Over 12 grains more powder in the 7mag. I do not shoot the 7mag as the 284 replaced it. Call it efficiency or plain old common sense. Less recoil, less powder, less cost for equal or better performance. I'm not trying to dispute a word, just stating some cartridges do better with equal or less powder and same bullet weight. BC plays a huge part as well. Obviously why the 6.5/7s are at the top of the list.

 

[javman]

The 6.5RM was ideal and as stated with a bit longer action and the right twist it would have made a bigger splash IMHO!