Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Yay- .270 vs .280, again

And now by 500 yard energy!

Moral of the story? 162's are phuqqin king. Everything else a pawn. Soooooo......a pawn is a pawn.


Checkmate.

Fun for the Thursday doldrums.....

How would a 270 win pushing a 150 gr at 2925 with a g7 bc of .317 compare to the 162 amax.

Can it be added to your chart it would be interesting to see how close the two would be.


From what I can find the 150 will beat the 162 if both are given 2925 fps for a velocity with the same zero and same scope height. The next jump in bc for the 280 would be in the 168 gr bullets. Where I have found that velocity becomes a strong factor. In this class /weight of projectile in the 280, given some rifles will run significant velocity in the 168+ grn bullets. it's rare in a 24 inch barrel. Given the bullet manufacturers daily trumping the day before's technology in bullet design i.e. BC and SD not to mention the powder advancements. I would find it hard to pick a 2moa 280 over a 1/2 moa 270 and vise versa.

270 Win ?

isn't that for the lipstick boys that wanna pee in the little girls room ?

No........it's what you shoot when you get tired of playing with rocket launchers and figure out what really kills BG animals.

At the risk of getting scolded - how do the 162 Amax's hold up to elk/moose? I've shot them before and they are accurate but I've always been a bit skeptical when elk/moose are involved. They are not an interlock design bullet.

The 160 NAB drops 2.1" more and drifts 2.6" more at 500 yards but is bonded. I'd think it would be a better choice when elk are involved, especially if one shows up at 50 yards. As an example, the bull I shot 2 years ago was shot quartering to me at 50 yards. I ran a 180 Partition into the near shoulder - DRT.

Plus I can't hold within 2-2.5" at 500 yards so the extra advantage over a NAB is lost on me.

Thoughts?

I've had the same sentiment. I'm pretty excited to see the new ELD-X in action. VERY close BC with the interlock ring under the jacket.

I tweaked my post just before you finished to add an example. Bullets on bone at less than 100 yards require a bit of integrity. I'm not saying the Amax wouldn't work because I've not used them. I'm hoping some will chime in.

If you support Nathan Foster and all his findings (some here dont), he speaks VERY highly of the Amax in a 7mm-08. Based on what he has seen, since impact velocity is below 2600 (that's basically MV), they behave pretty much like a cup N core.

I had slight reservations, and once they discontinued the Amax, I decided to look at other alternatives. I plan to load up the 145 LRX for most uses, esp when meat hunting. I'll also load up a 150 LRAB for more on the trophy hunting end since this will be my MTN rifle as well.

FredIII- it's practically identical, except for about 150 FPE @500.


When I said "162 is King" that's strictly based on flight characteristics. Lotsa dead stuff and threads about if its great on game. Not even going there, especially since I've not spilled blood with one.

If you look across the top you see that they all average out to about what a 280 is with 140's. Even funnier because of the subject matter of this thread.

Unfortunately I monkey with a lot of numbers and starting farting around with this stuff about 5 years ago. Curiousity I suppose. Fun if your an Excel guru. Not so much if you think your setting the world on fire because you get another 50 FPS or your BC is a little higher.

Hence my lack of give a schit for chasing my ass with this stuff anymore.


Doesn't really matter.


But damn if I wouldn't love to see a .277 ELD-X!

Add: or it averages a 270 with 140 NAB's.

The .280 running 162s is better than anything the .270 can put out..... that is not debatable.... look at the numbers (and the pile of dead schitt pics.... one of which I included in this post).

The debate is whether it's ENOUGH better..... 20% more energy and 20% less drift.... for the same powder charge..... seems a pretty good gain to me. And, I've seen the real-world difference..... though it typically takes 1/4 mile plus for the differences to become evident. "Normal hunting ranges" don't tent to divulge much by way of external ballistic advantages.....

By the way.... if you're one of those guys who think 20% is no big deal...... I'll gladly accept 20% of your next paycheck.....

I'd be curious what a matrix or new 175 vld do for the 270. Granted, that would require a custom tube and sort of defeats the original intent.

Sure. But look at the difference between a .486 and .625 and a 2 mph missed wind call at 500. The .486 is 3.6", the .625 is 2.7". So a 1" "gain" at 500.

Under 500 it all means very little and 99% of the threads about this stuff come from 99 difference situations and perspectives none of which really matter to the other 98.

The ass chewings come from guys that like to make gravel at 1200 yards and tell Joe that he's phuqqed because he's without turrets and some improved chamber with target bullets. But Joe never has/will shot past 200 yards and doesn't care. But Joe is sucking hind tit.

Poor Joe.

That ELD would be a dandy let's keep our fingers crossed.

Does the .277 150lra not have a similar BC than the 162. As well as being able to out pace a 162 in most 280. Granted it's new the dead chit is no were = but the LRA is new and will no doubt begin mounting kills.

No based on testing, even dropping a new 1:7 twist tube, it only tested at .569.

http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f19/nosler-lr-accubonds-bc-testing-results-137554/

Are the g7 not similar I have not seen Brian date on the LRAB or The ELD.
Just read the link never mind.

I don't think so. I'm pretty sure the published BC on the LRAB are pretty well inflated. I'm going from memory, but I'm pretty sure the ELD checked out pretty close. They were developed with Doplar, so it makes sense for them to be spot on. I'll dig and see if I can find where I saved the ELD tests.

The phone number is the only number Nosler can get correct.



The Accubond LR is shown as "LITZ" on the table, 2,850 FPS was a solid number and all the 4831 I could get in the case, IIRC. The .543 was his call in a 1:10.

Damn accurate too.

Give me a .543 ELD-X and I'd be happy. Hell, I think the 140 BTSP at .486 could be a sneaky little devil.