Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Why was the 270-08 never made commercial

That guy Steve sure know's his stuff.His website is great.

This?

http://www.stevespages.com/jpg/cd270reddingshortaction.jpg
******************

Neck that one to 25 and you would have a winner. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

I wonder what the .270 Redding or .270-08 would do with 150gr bullets? Has anyone plugged the particulars into one of the ballistic calculators?

No method to my madness but I would expect from 2750 to 2800.

Mark D

The 270/308 would be a commercial cartridge if it had come out at the right time. It may still be one since cartridge proliferation for no good reason seems popular these days. Winchester could have brought it out instead of the 284 and it might have done very well, Probably better than the 284 which was never really a success.
I have built a few 270/308's and they worked out well enough. The owners were able to approach 3000 fps with 130s. Another one I made (christened the 270 Firefly) was essentially a shortened 270 Gibbs to get just a bit more capacity. It managed a bit over 3000 fps. As I recall, this was built on a Ruger short action.
Ackley liked the 270/308 and felt it would make a good cartridge FWIW.
While it's not too likely to become a factory offering, it's a better and more practical cartridge than many which are (the entire WSM lineup comes to mind). GD

If you like the 25 cals, it seems like the 25-308 would be a neat one to have. I believe if it had come first, your .243s, 260s, and 257 Roberts' would all be found on the wildcat list. Then we would all squabble about their useless redundancy.


In fact, I believe that the 25-308, 7mm-08, and 338 Federal could cover all your hunting needs nicely here in the US.

The 284 is the hull I think rifle manufacturers should play in. A 270-284 could be very healthy. 25-284 etc.

Investing $500 in a new barrel is a paltry investment to acheive the 25-08 or the 270-08 and I agree that both would perform admirably as do all its siblings. But if you were in charge of developing new cartridges at a gun/ammo company, investing large amounts in start up cash and then doing market research as to how many units it will sell just to pay for that investment, would you back either of these cartridges? Not me. I do think the .338 federal moves into an area that is underserved (back off .358 lovers) and they have worked out a good marketing program. Hopefully it will bring about some more bullets in the 160-180 grain range for the .338. What would you call the .270-08? The 7-08 nomenclature confuses non-loonies enough...

I like to think of it as the .27-35, rimless, short, improved. I'd like in better in 25 caliber. and who ever thought the .25-35 WCF would come back, highly modified, to be an assault rifle caliber?

Sycamore

I mean this in the nicest possible way, but you all are nuts - or as someone more tactful might say, genuine loonies. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

.30-30, the original short action cartridge <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

But if you took a 9.3x62 and shortened it just a bit and..... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" />

t <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />