Building a 9 twist .277 is pretty easy. Think I'll order one.....again. (I have only had 3 IIRC).A .277 barrel only has to be a 10 twist if you want it that way.
Still trying to fathom what's wrong with 150 gr with .625 BC at 2900 plus fps. That beats a 140 VLD from a 6.5/06 doesn't it?
Can someone run those numbers? I did it a few months ago, but can't remember.....
The .277/150 LRAB numbers look good... in theory. We've yet to see how they perform on game (en mas)... we''ve yet to see if the BC numbers hold up ... and we've yet to see a solid quantity even become available (unless you count the 50,000 'seconds' they sold).
For all the hype you and Billy have been talking about the 150 LRAB.... I'm just curios if either of you have actually shot one? Seriously.... I'd like to know if we're talking rubber meets the road.... or we're just ballistically jacking the .270 off?
I'd love to see a good, high BC bullet for the .270s.... but it hasn't happened just yet. They're knocking on the door... but don't quite have it solved yet.
As for the 6.5s and 7s.... we all know there's a veritable cornucopia of high BC game turfing bullets available.... that's just how it is.
Dogshooter...You assume that becase I get on here and discuss these things that I really care about your views on the 270 Winchester....trust me I don't.
I have not fired a single LRAB and to be honest could really care less abut the bullet; I am simply pointing out that they are "there",as are the Matrix bullets,and the published BC's are what they are. I have not seen anybody who has shot them,say that the BC's DON'T hold up....I think 16 bore on here has shot them and said the numbers match up to real world;as I recall you participated in that thread.
As for me, I would not load either one for my hunting in the 270; I don't like that type of bullet for general BG hunting and prefer tougher stuff,since i know there are more important attributes than BC when it comes to choosing bullets for general BG hunting...I learned this from killing animals and seeing a great many more of them shot.I have a few decades of killing game animals with the 270,and prefer other types of bullets because I know exactly what they do, and what the cartridge does at 700-1000 yards is of utterly no interest at all to me.
Here's a "hint"....BC numbers take a back seat to other bullet construction criteria when it comes to effectively killing a wide range of game animals under a wide range of hunting conditions,and for solid on game performance.When I see people choose bullets based solely on BC numbers and without regard to other bullet construction characteristics, I suspect they have not really done much BG hunting...with anything. There are exceptions of course...one or two post here.
Despite the lecturing, you sure aren't telling me anything about the 7mm's I don't already know...if it's a 7mm I have loaded, shot, hunted, and killed game animals with it....from the 7/08 and 7x57 to the Mashburn....maybe more than with the 270(not sure anymore).I have two 7mm Rem Mags and a Mashburn here now, They are pretty new; I have worn out a few others.
I am curious about a lot of things ,too....namely the hunting experience and numbers of animals in different places and conditions under which a lot of 270 critics on here have actually killed game animals....or with anything else for that matter.
But what I think is funnier than anything are target shooters, with little wide spread hunting experience getting on here and bad mouthing a cartridge that has killed BG animals for decades from Zambia to Alaska;(based on the fact that its BC numbers are fractionally lower than something similar),and telling me the cartridge is a punk cartridge for killing game animals because it doesn't do well on gongs at 700 to 1000 yards. It's really too funny.
