Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters 270 vs. 6.5x55

Good coyote rifles

Good coyote rifles

Agreed.....kinda like the midwest whitetail hunter guys driving their badboy buggies to access their tree stands. It can't be that far, or difficult of a walk.

If you live/hunt in a place without any mountains, it can still be many miles across the prairie from where you park to where your stand is located, so an ATV just makes the journey quicker and easier. My favorite deer stand is about 75 yards from the closest county road.

Geez....what's a guy supposed to do? Have a heavy rifle for eastern stands and Alberta cut lines....then go get a light one for Wyoming and the west?

As to the 6.5x55 vs the 270 Win, I see them like brothers where the younger brother just grew a bit stronger and bigger. The 7mm Rem Mag bears the same relationship, a bigger brother again.

Seems the 270 straddles the middle ground nicely.

Gunner, Don Zutz talked about this 'phenomenon' as other writers...how the Magical High Rotational Velocity of (yes, not forward speed folks) the 7.5-8" twist can wreck havoc on game/animal tissue vs. a 9-10 in other typical rifles.

Of course this is deviating into Looney talk. The whole topic/thread was for entertainment as I know both rounds well and like both, both 2 peas in a pod like the 260 and 708.

Yes, Orion, I never had a 6.5 let me down, mostly used 120 and 130s on game, which is why I chose a 260/130 Accubond as my main go to round.

25-06, yes, it's what was offered since the 6.5-06 never made it past wildcat status. Surely the metric 'aversion' here in the US.

But Gunner, all bullets are engineered w/regards to the velocity window etc. they typically run. There are many modest sized 6.5 rounds and bullets in 6.5 typically perform very well at the speeds most 6.5s run.

I'd say you might want to compare a 6.5/140PT against the 277/160 PT for a closer comparison. Seldom spoke of, but the 160 PT is likely touted as some to be a 'beast' for it's bore size.

The 140 actually has a better bc/sd than a 150 in 277, so you have to jump to the 160 to get as good an SD....

It'd be interesting to see if a 270 w/an 8 twist would do any different on impact w/the 160 PT than a 10 twist....perhaps not, but I'd be curious.

My purpose of the thread was not which one is best, but simply for those who use either or both, to share their success, as both have an enviable track record, b/c they are A) shootable B) they work...and well. You could add both have a decent trajectory, very accurate, and maintain good ballistics downrange.

I hate "versus" threads

Yup. Remind me of a bunch of Grandpas sitting around whipping out pictures of their grandbabies. Not much chance of rational discourse!

After messing around with ---the odd rim size,--- various throat lengths, ---differing twists,--- pressures.

I came to my Looney senses and realized I was messing with all the 6.5 oddities when I already had a perfectly good cartridge in my safe.

I can easily load my 270 to achieve the soft recoil of the Swede with matching ballistics

Here is my take on this old thread having owned and shot both.

After messing around with the odd rim size, various throat lengths, differing twists, pressures. I came to my Looney senses and realized I was messing with all the 6.5 oddities when I already had a perfectly good cartridge in my safe.

I can easily load my 270 to achieve the soft recoil of the Swede with matching ballistics.

The only time I can see a benefit to the Swede is when using a true intermediate length action... or for looneyism/nostalgia.