Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Boddington on the .270 Winchester

BS, just get an 06. The 280 filled a need that never existed. Thats just the way it is.

Well said.

I certainly would not sell my 270's to go buy a 6.5 'mooorrrreee.

You are largely correct about this, but there's two factors you're omitting:
1) Shooting off a bipod or ruck reduces group size by about a factor of two vs. prone+sling+coat
2) Wind is the primary enemy, and wind drift goes down as bore goes down and SD and BC goes up. Velocity matters too, but not as much. So there's a lot of loads in various .264 cartridges that can't be matched for wind drift by anything in a factory .277. A shooter with a 6.5-06 would have whipped all your .30-06 shooters quite handily. That's just the way the game works.

Nonetheless, between 500 and 550y is generally the practical limit to guarantee a first round hit in unknown wind in field conditions regardless of equipment. Sleek bullets and lots of powder only overcome the wind to a degree.

I have 4 270's at the moment and love them all. my 6.5 creed however, is the most comfortable and accurate rifle I have ever owned, right out of the box. and I am pretty sure with todays bullets will handle anything I am going to hunt in my advanced years, so enjoy them both, can't go wrong

Amen.

Amen.


Yeah, like a 243 varmint gun loaded with noslers in deer season, huh?

Ha. For sure.

Ha. For sure.

That makes 3.

It’s the people

I haven't seen a post here that would convince me to go to the Creedmoor. A fast twist .270 with a vld bullet would improve long range shooting' -I could care less.
I would rather practice positional shooting any day at 100 yards . This prepares me for hunting .
A far flung thunk at 800 yards on a metal plate seems so uninteresting but a least the plate won't run off a die in the valley bottem- unfound.

I'm a 30-06 slut, but also consider the 308 and 270 to be in the exact same ballpark.
Two of the finest (and most successful) hunters I've ever known used 270's - my uncle, and a neighbor, who was a retired "Government Trapper", in the olden days.
Vic used his old 270 up until just a year before his death on everything - coyotes, cougar, deer, antelope, bear, elk - whatever! He used it 'til it had NO bluing, and the stock resembled an OLD cedar fence post. But he brought home an elk damn near every year. Probably since the late '40's!

The Creedmoor's (LONG range only) ability to ALMOST do as much is pure and simple..................BULLET ballistic coefficient. Period

Compare apples to apples with bullets of similar/same BC and it will be slower, lighter and have less of literally everything than rounds of greater capacity and especially less than those also having a larger bore (no matter how small).
It's pure and simple physics. Numbers dont lie (but load data sure as hell does).

Everyone now thinks they are Andy Oakley and 5-6-7 hundred yards is "sensible" range..........*snort*.......and yes I can shoot that far.............on targets, and shoot well. At wild game...........NOT IN YOUR LIFETIME would I dream of it.

It's people falling for advertising hype from manufactures of literally everything.
They cannot sell you hunting ability..........but they can CONVINCE you that you can buy things so you don't have to learn what hunters have learned and used for eons.

Think they wont be coming up with HIGH BC bullets for them all in time? Sure they will.

It's all in what creates profit.

Under 350....maybe even 300 yards, the Creedmoor has ONLY the advantage over SOME of having less recoil........period. (It seems the hunter of today sure is tender.....??)

We already had several rounds that do that.........and have better NORMAL range ballistics.

But.........go for it. Fall for the hype. For normal and average hunting conditions it will always be "fast.flat and hard" that prevails.
The 6.5s are standing on the pretense of the high BC >>>bullets<<<< being superior.........not the cartridges.

What will happen when the high BC bullets come out in bigger bore rounds? Yep...........NEW HYPE.

More freezers are filled with game shot at MUCH shorter ranges than the CM has any bragging rights within. That won't change. Does the CM "work" at short range? Yep. Better than any others......NOPE.

The CM was designed for and excels at .........long range TARGET situations where lots of caps are busted. A superior hunting round does not automatically follow. To 300 yards with the same bullet, FEW could tell the difference out to 300 yards between the CM, 243 and 6mm Rem.

And none of the animals could.

2 cents (Hey......It's YOUR money. Blow it as you wish.)

and no......I'm not going to debate this. The laws of physics are carved in granite and not debatable.
God Bless
Steve

I have yet to see an advertisement telling me that if I get a 6.5 Creedmoor I’m a great long range Hunter. Where is this marketing hype I keep reading about?

The reason nobody compares inside 300yds, give or take, is that there are probably 50 cartridges that all work equally well. Dead is dead.

If Boddington and anyone else likes the .270, great, go forth and hunt. Ones particular vibe towards a cartridge is really what this is all about. Family history, what writers in the past have written about a cartridge, or whatever else gives you the feeling that a particular cartridge is just right is as good as any reason to choose any one cartridge from a long list of capable cartridges.

True. For every head of game that's taken at long range.....and for the sake of argument I'll use the 300 yard mark.....there are many, many more taken at ranges of less. I'd even go out on a limb and say that for every deer shot at 300 yards or more, there are a 100, and maybe more, shot at less than that.

((chortle))

This coming from a guy who says 100 % of 600 yard shots are "unethical," along with other nonsense. Quite the skill to be able to talk out of both sides of your mouth at once:



You're as FOS as a Christmas turkey.

Steve, I like ALL of this post ! I tried to emphasize the parts that really resonate with me.




hummm, Fast, Flat, & Hard >> where have I heard that ? >


I'd like to point this out ! I've read & HEARD what some of us 'older' guys have said, With age and or physical injuries SHOULDERS can't tolerate recoil as they did. I HEAR THAT !! It is understandable.

For others ? ? ? waa waa waa


Jerry

Due to a large bore diameter I have a very low ballistic coefficient but my wife thinks penetration is just fine.

A 243 loaded with 95 grain Ballistic Tips is a deer slayer, a fair bit more than a varmint gun.

Have you seen how a 260 Remington loaded with 129 grain Interlocks or 125 grain Partitions handles deer? If so I doubt you'd have much negative to say about the ballistic twin 6.5 Creedmoor.