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

[VLD Pilot]

Times change. Not that many years ago the 7mm magnum was the go too LR hunting rig. Today for me the 284s have replaced them and to step up to a real magnum, the 28 Nosler or 7 RUM is the big kid on the block( In 7mm). Bullets and powder quality made that happen. Lots of wildcats in the 7mm that are much better also. It just doesn't stop. In our future well see bullets getting heavier and slipperier. Twist rates for barrel will need to speed up also. Where and when will it end ? Who knows. We just can't get enough speed and range as shooters or hunters. I personally like it. Always new products to keep the fires stoked.

 

[DJ Fergus]

It used to be cool to say "two seventy" now its cool to say "six point five" and it hasn't been cool since the 80s to say "seven millimetre". Its still cool to say "three hundred". Its all sort of funny to me. I've took game with all of them. I mostly focus on particular bullets I like, not always necessarily what caliber they are. If I like the weight and bc of the bullet and it happens to be a .277, .264, .284, or whatever. I'm fine with that. Then I proceed to pick a case for the bullet I want to shoot.

 

[VLD Pilot]

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.

Sure like to see more heavy for caliber bullets showing up for the .277. Berger's is decent but there is alot of room for longer and heavier in the .277 to bring the 270 into the same arena as the heavy 6.5 and 7s.

 

[Lionel Boyd Johnson]

First marketed in 1925, the .270 Winchester has maintained popularity as a medium game cartridge for 95 years. Why? It gets the job done without a lot of fuss, or recoil. It's use as a "long range" round was limited by lack of appropriate bullets.

 

[rustyshackleford]

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.

So 53 gr load of a double based energy dense powder vs 60 something grains of temple stable single base powder isn't much of a comparison. Again with your loads I'd wager the pressure for the 284 load greatly exceeds the 7 mag load since 7 mag goes up to ~72 gr in the Sierra manual and the 284 is at or close to max. Not really a comparison of cartridge efficiency. Kind of like how if the 277 fury takes off its likely to be "the most efficient" since it operates at 15-20 ksi above other cartridges. I'm not trying to be argumentative but you can't claim one is more efficient when in fact one is just loaded hotter

 

[nicholasjohn]

Yep makes you wonder why companies beside custom rifle makers don't make the 7s or 30s with faster barrels even today. With the bigger 230/240/245 and 250s for the 30s and the 183/184/190/195s for the 7s and still nobody putting barrels on that compliment those bullets. Seems like there missing the boat. Factory barrels don't shoot all that bad really if a guy wanted to run one on his hunting rifle with heavies for either caliber.

I think that what is being overlooked is the fact that the long range shooters comprise a narrow slice of the total market for bullets, scopes, and rifles. There are still way more guys shooting their animals at 300 yards and under than there are shooting them out there where the high-BC bullets become necessary. The rifle manufacturers recognize that the long range shooters & hunters are a specialty market, and it is not the first market segment that is going to be offered new products. When they think that the 6.5 crowd has been satisfied, they may start offering some fast-twist barrel options to the guys who shoot 270's - and 257's. The new bullets that have appeared recently may spark some interest, and they are probably paying attention to how well they sell. They also watch what's going on with barrel manufacturers, and we may see one or more of the bigger companies send up a test balloon or two, by offering a limited number of long-range models. While I think that it's entirely possible that everybody will eventually go to fast-twist barrels, an overwhelming percentage of the market will be perfectly satisfied with a 270 that has the standard-twist barrel, sales of 130- & 150-grain soft point bullets will continue to be strong, and the heavies will be a novelty for a while longer.

 

[JMW67]

I think the big gun makers are kind of like harley davidson they watch and see what people are doing to customize the products or what custom builders are doing and then they may follow suit

 

[DJ Fergus]

So 53 gr load of a double based energy dense powder vs 60 something grains of temple stable single base powder isn't much of a comparison. Again with your loads I'd wager the pressure for the 284 load greatly exceeds the 7 mag load since 7 mag goes up to ~72 gr in the Sierra manual and the 284 is at or close to max. Not really a comparison of cartridge efficiency. Kind of like how if the 277 fury takes off its likely to be "the most efficient" since it operates at 15-20 ksi above other cartridges. I'm not trying to be argumentative but you can't claim one is more efficient when in fact one is just loaded hotter

I haven't found a 7mm cartridge yet that I wouldn't love to own so I really hate to get into the argument of how much better one is than the other. When we talk about one cartridge being more efficient than another: to me, all that means is a particular powder or powders matched up well in burn rate and case fill to that particular cartridge for nice velocities. So to me, its not always an apples to apples comparison. And its hard to quantify when one is running 65-70kpsi and the other is at 55kpsi. So in a nutshell, I tend to agree with your thoughts on the topic of cartridge efficiency.

 

[Eric Alexander]

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!

I think there is something to be said about your notion. With the new high BC bullets like the 165 Nosler ABLR and others from Hammer, The

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!

I think there is something to be said for your notion. With the new high high BC bullets like Noslers 165 ABLRs and Hammers and others, it gives this caliber with its weight range new life. Same could also be said for the 25-06 with the 131 Ace and Hsmmers 121/128s. The idea of easy loading, easy feeding -06 cartridges is appealing. Not likely that they'll replace the 6.5 Creedmore/PRC crowd but that is more due to marketing than efficacy.
I have 3 builds that are following your line of thinking: A 26", 1/8 twist .270 on a 700 action, a.270 Wby 24" 1/8 twist on a FN Mauser, and a 25-06 26" 1/7.25 twist on a pre 64 M70 action. Picked up the 165 ABLRs already.
How is your accuracy with the 150 ABLRs?

 

[thwatson2]

Seems like cartridges are like cars. 30-06,270,280, 308,260,7-08, 243 were the utilitarian, muscle-esk rounds that we all grew up hunting with. Many animals around the world were harvested with these and you really want your son or daughter learning on one. But today efficient, sexy looking and names that role off your tongue are the new. RUM, creedmoor, edge, magnum everything and anything. I have friends that have bought a creedmoor for hunting without knowing why they bought the gun. The young guy at the store told them to buy it, so they did. I refuse to own a 6.5 creedmoor, like I refuse to own an electric car. I'm not into the caliber someone else thinks I should own. I got sick of hearing about 6.5 so I got a 6.5-300. All this stuff is about popularity. 300WM is still my favorite round and I own a 300 PRC and a 300RuM. It might not be cool anymore but so be it. 270 just doesn't roll off the tongue so it just isn't the new thing. By way most guys i hunt with own one but I don't, I prefer the 30-06 to it. Bottom line it's a popularity contest

 

[JMW67]

I dont think the 6.5 creed would be what it is without lapua, peterson and a few other brass makers stepping in the hornady brass has always left some thing to be desired in my opinion

 

[Buck Fever]

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.

You're not going to see much difference between such similar cartridges.

In my mind it's a matter of some cartridges being too overbore.

If you look at .308 and 6.5 Creedmoor, both have similar case capacity and both can shoot 147 grain bullets and velocity will be pretty close too. Neither is particularly overbore.

The practical difference between them is the accuracy life of .308 is longer and the Ballistics of a 147 grain 6.5mm bullet blow away the .308.

If you put the same 147 grain 6.5mm bullet in to a 6.5x284, you get a bit more velocity but you have to burn significantly more powder and accuracy life suffers.

If efficiency is constant, powder burned should scale with kinetic energy so the evaluation should be (muzzle velocity²)÷powder charge. Run those numbers and the 6.5 Creedmoor is more efficient than 6.5x284. The math is a bit more complicated if bullet mass isn't the same.

I built a straight 284 Winchester because it seems to be closer to that 6.5 Creedmoor efficiency with higher B.C. bullets and the shorter powder column is theoretically an advantage for ignition consistency. It also can be formed from Lapua brass and has recently been winning some competitions. If 280AI had better brass and some recent wins, my choice would have been more difficult.

For similar reasons I am building a 338 RUM instead of a 300 RUM. I think the 338 is going to be more efficient and the accuracy life should be longer. The brass choices aren't as good but it fits my magazine better so 338.

I'm hoping my 284 Winchester will shoot a mile+. A 280AI should do about as well. There are hunting bullets available. I don't see .270 doing anything better with heavy bullets. It is probably better with light bullets but .270 already does that.

I don't see the point in trying to make the .270 a fast twist heavy bullet shooter, even if it's great it probably will be no better than a 280AI which you can get fairly easy today with a much better selection of bullets.

 

[rustyshackleford]

I haven't found a 7mm cartridge yet that I wouldn't love to own so I really hate to get into the argument of how much better one is than the other. When we talk about one cartridge being more efficient than another: to me, all that means is a particular powder or powders matched up well in burn rate and case fill to that particular cartridge for nice velocities. So to me, its not always an apples to apples comparison. And its hard to quantify when one is running 65-70kpsi and the other is at 55kpsi. So in a nutshell, I tend to agree with your thoughts on the topic of cartridge efficiency.

It's just not practical to compare across calibers. I was looking at more numbers for fun and a 308 launches a 180 gr SBT at 2670 ft/sec with 2900 ft/lbs atop 44 gr of RL-15 while a 284, in the best case, needs 51.9 to launch a 150 to 2800 ft/sec and 2785 ft/lbs. I could say the 308 is more efficient because it makes ~100 more ft/lbs with 8-10 gr less. Just a nonsense metric that I see thrown around as a buzzword and it's never in context.

 

[VLD Pilot]

So 53 gr load of a double based energy dense powder vs 60 something grains of temple stable single base powder isn't much of a comparison. Again with your loads I'd wager the pressure for the 284 load greatly exceeds the 7 mag load since 7 mag goes up to ~72 gr in the Sierra manual and the 284 is at or close to max. Not really a comparison of cartridge efficiency. Kind of like how if the 277 fury takes off its likely to be "the most efficient" since it operates at 15-20 ksi above other cartridges. I'm not trying to be argumentative but you can't claim one is more efficient when in fact one is just loaded hotter

I load my 7mm in the upper end as I do the 284. Roughly equal load capacity for the case in terms of percentage. The biggest difference is the powder. The powder I use in the 284 just offers better performance than powders offered for the bigger magnum 7mm. Sure the 7mm mag can out run the 284 when maxed out but waaay more powder to do it. I was also speaking of a short action 284 not the traditional LA that is used much more often in competitions to get the most from the case with heavy bullets. I shoot the short action version almost exclusively because it equals the 7mag performance with the bullets I load. I've loaded the 7mm for years and can only say unless you compress the case, it's not enough difference to run 12 grains more powder. I call it case efficiency. Pet peeve or not, I don't know how to label the scenario. It just is a better performer based on less powder use regardless. If you run RL17 in the 7mag, it's an underperformer. I ran H1000 or Retumbo for the fast powders and they still do not really outperform my 284s unless you compress powder. Then in actuality, if you load for accuracy, that's where the difference is zero. Accuracy is most important so why run alot more powder to get same performance and same accuracy ?