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

Bob, Thank you Sir... I apologize for offering information you have already covered...

Best Regards, Matt.

BobinNH,

I've got three 270s and being interested in stretching the distance a little more I tried some higher BC bullets in the two that shoot the best. While I do understand that 2 is a small sample it was enouph to steer me in a different direction.

This is what I encountered.

I loaded both the accubond LR 150 and The berger 150 to try in both rifles both of which have factory 10 twist barrels. Over the years of reloading I have noted that excellent accuracy usually coincided with matching twist rates with BCs and proper propellant's etc. In any rate what I encountered is though my rifles did stabilize both these bullets accuracy suffered in both instances. While I may have been wrong I attributed the lack in accuracy to twist rates that were less than optimum. There are other High BC bullets that I could have chosen I pretty much figured I'd be pissing into the wind as a 10 twist barrel will not stabilize some of the higher BC bullets. My options were at that point to build me a 270 with a 8 twist barrel or go with something all together different.

With so many 8 twist factory 6.5s to choose from and so many choices in projectiles it for me was the logical step to take.

My conclusion in my findings was my best shooting 270 with a 10 twist barrel was averaging around 9" groups at 600 yds while every once in a while for some reason would shoot around 15". Those kind of groups are unacceptable in my book to start poking that far at game.

So I tried a slightly different route. I bought an 8 twist 6.5 swede Tikka T3. My very first load of 48.5 grains of H4831SC pushed the 143 ELD X at 2790 and proved capable of 4.5" groups at 600. My groups have been more vertical than horizontal so I figure I can probably get a touch more out of it with some minor tweaking.

My 270 T3 is a shooter and it will put 150 partitions into 3" at 500 pretty regular. I've not tried it much but I've had more bad experiences than not trying to push a high BC bullet out of marginal twist barrels. At this point I just stick with what I know has been working for me.

I'm not sure if you noticed in my post I'm not real keen on customs. Probably mostly because I've tried it a couple times now and it never worked out for me. It's not easy finding a gunsmith one can count on it seems and it's a lot of money to spend to get back something that a factory Tikka will shoot circles around. JMO






Shod

Shod: Your move makes sense.

Shod, I'm not ignoring you. I wrote a lengthy response to your post on the previous page. For some reason it got lost between my puter and the 'fire.. Please accept this condensed answer.

I've read the remainder of this thread so I'm up to date.


IME 400 yd MPBR is not to hard to better with a 7mm RM & 139 BTSP at 3300 fps OR 300 WM & 165 BTSP at 3300 fps. I'm not adverse to recoil. The 270, 7 RM & 300 WM are among my favs.

Since this thread is somewhat older, I've finished development of my 6.5 Swede with 120 NBT @ 2975 and I'm satisfied.

400 yds is ALL the range I can hunt and I don't have any place to practice farther SO I am pat.

The kick in the butt is this, I've had 400 yd MPBR since I bought my first 270 W in 1975.

Jerry

Shodd;
Good evening to you sir, I trust this finds you well.

I appreciated you sharing your comments and experiences with the new 6.5 you're trying out.

While I had to do a wee bit of digging to recall where I'd read it, I thought we'd talked about you trying out a new 6.5 cartridge at some point in the past - and as it turns out we had.

For those interested, here's more reading on the subject from a couple of years back.

http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/9248055/4

Anyway in the interim I've been playing with a fast twist .223 a bit and have had the .270 with the 22" slow twist/slow velocity barrel rebarreled into a 21" 6.5x55.

I'd hoped this year to play with some 120gr GMX in it, having successfully tested a 120gr TTSX on a second rack mulie buck last season, but as it stands at present I'll likely be running the Barnes again as the "to do" list exceeds the "would like to do sometime" list.

Thanks again sir, good luck with your rifles whichever ones come along out of the safe and all the best to you folks this summer.

Dwayne

Jerry, you should know that although trajectory is always a factor, it is much less so now than in the past now that we have LRF, BRFs, and accomadating reticles amd turrets.

Jwall,

I hear ya. I've contemplated so many times I can't count just buying a 7 mag. In fact not that long ago I was standing in Cabelas holding one in my hands and almost went home with it too.

I guess I decided to go the non Magnum route mostly because I'll be hunting deer and antilope. All my elk hunting areas always present close shots. If I ever hunt elk where 500 yds is pretty regular a 7 mag or maybe even a 300 win mag will be on my list.



Shod

Dwayne,

I've also acquired a fast twist 223. Last year I used a 55 gr TTSX to take a medium sized Whitetail buck. It's only a sample of 1 animal but I was more than happy with the results. In my 8 twist 223 Tikka the 55 ttsx is exceptionally accurate.

Thank you for your comments and best of luck to you this year also.




Shod

Morning Mr George

Oh yes I'm aware of these tech advantages. I have my 2nd LRF and use it virtually every hunt. However there are 2 reasons I don't have 'dials & turrets'.

A. With a 400 yd hunting max range----using 400 yd MPBR eliminates the need.

B. It takes MORE time to range & turn turrets before you shoot. In open territory that's not a problem. I'm not hunting 'bean' fields or anything close to prairie land so the vast majority of time I am not afforded the luxury of using those technological advantages.

Observe ---- tech NOlogical --

Thnx for your interest and participation.

Jerry

An Addendum:

I like my LRF very much so I gave my first one to my longest & best friend. He would not have spent the $$ to buy one but he's happy I gave it to him and he uses it more than he thot he would. He is a brother I never had & I'm glad he has it. BTW I upgraded from the first one <grin>

Rarely have I used the LRF before making a shot but I have a very few times. Mostly, I range FROM the spot BACK to where I was. It's very often that I range to diff objects in the vicinity where I'm hunting. It goes w/me on every hunt.

Jerry

I have read a lot of the Nathan Foster website.

I have to say, he makes what seem to be a LOT of assumptions.

Jwall,

I can definitely understand where you are coming from. In fact for most of my hunting and most of my hunting rifles are set up a lot how you described.

The thing with 30 mm scopes and turrets is though they are tech NO logically advanced they are heavy as hell. When hunting steep terrain or hiking back in a ways a 7 lb rifle can be an object of beauty. Hard to stay in the 7 lb range with a bohemith scope. Also when most hunting situations present a 400 yd shot or less it's much easier to be well versed in how to make a light non turret scope get that done than start twisting turrets.Takes less time. In my opinion in most hunting situations being limited to 400 yds is a hunting advantage. It's an advantage because if you see something further you have to stalk in closer. Stalking IS part of hunting and a big part of the skill required to be successful. It makes for a more complete and interesting hunting adventure.

A few years back I started hunting Eastern Montana and much of this hunting is wide open country. Sometimes it can be a real feat to close the distance to 600 ish yds. That's when I decided to put one of them heavy turret scopes on a rifle and try one of them long range bullets that don't slow down. Honestly the rifle IMO is top heavy as hell and handles like SCHIT compared to my sweet set up mountain rifles.

But, in the end I'll take this rifle to the eastern parts and ultimately my reward will be putting some of the best tasting game I've ever had in my freezer. The game where I go thrive on grain from farmers fields and grow up tender and delicious.

One of the biggest aspects I will be pressing for is I want all one shot kills. IMO it's another aspect of hunting skill that can make a hunt memorable. And while some might think getting within 600 yds requires no skill sometimes it requires making every move count to get that close to a herd of antilope.

Best of luck to you in hunting this year and thanks for sharing.



Shod

I owned a Ruger M77 in a 270. It kicked more than the 3 Ruger 7 mags that I owned. I got rid of it and the 7 mags after a few years. I've had 2 different 6.5x55 rifles that I have enjoyed shooting way more than the 270 I owned. The deer I've shot with the 6.5 did't run any further if they ran at all.

11 more grains of powder, 68 for the 270 and 57 for the Swed, is going to change the game a little.

I like the fact that anybody can buy good 270 ammo over the counter nearly anywhere in the U.S., while 6.5x55 can be harder to source if you fail to plan ahead or forget your ammo when hunting away from home. The only time that my 30-06 loaner was ever used was when a guy from Ohio forgot his 6.5x55 ammo when he traveled to Wray, Colorado, for a high plains deer hunt.

Did he forget his boots?

In doing the math it appears the 270 holds about 18% more powder. The Swede produces only 96% of Velocity that the 270 is capable of with the same size bullet. I figured the 270 at 3150 with a 130 gr and the swede at 3000 The Swede bullet however in an apples to apples comparison will have a slightly better BC and SD perhaps giving a slight edge in this regard to the Swede.

Conclusion, the Swede is 96% + 1% for the sectional density advantage = 97% give or take .5%

Not to bad for 10 grains less. Of course anytime one goes much bigger than a 308 sized case the return for the powder charge always goes noticeably down.


This usually pisses folks of when I bring this up except for them 260 and 6.5 creedmore fellas. Even the 6.5X55 Swede is inefficient when compared to the 260 or the Creedmore.





Shod

My solution is to cover the 6.5mm bore field with 24 260s, 11 Sweds, 6 Creeds, 4 6.5-284s, and 2 256 Newtons. I only have 6 270s, but really like the way that the CLR and Remington 760 shoot 130 and 150 grain factory ammo.

Lol, are you a rifle loony?



Shod

nuthin like facts Shod,

Ive had 270's and the blasty things do the Job but the Swede just does it a bit easy both on the ears and the shoulder. Throw in the nice taper on the case n extraction and feeding gives it the edge of the 270.

Even the 6.5X55 Swede is inefficient when compared to the 260 or the Creedmore.





Shod

Please explain. I've owned 260's also but I don't own a Creedmore yet. The 260's I've had wouldn't keep up with the 6.5x55. They were short by 50 fps. The deer didn't know the difference though.