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

Both proven highly effective
Both easy on the shoulder/ears, helping punch vitals
One easier to find full power factory ammo
The other carries the 'Looney' Connotation

Both illustrate that killing game is not as much about Ballistics as much using a 'GOOD BULLET' n 'SHOOT EM GOOD'

Semi custom pre-64 270 WCF with 150 NPT's @2925

Custom '09 DWM 6.5X55MM with 140 NPT's @2751.

Dead heat tie for me, both on coolness and effectiveness.

Gunner

I own both. .270's all right, I guess, but the Swede out-cool-factors it by a mile. Nobody at the range ever says, "Huhhh???" when you tell them you're shooting a .270.

Swede with 130 grain AB's at an even 2700 out of my Sako fits my current style of deer hunting better: just go out and calmly put them to sleep with as little fuss and bother as possible.

People talk about the light recoil of a .270, but every one I've shot has quite a snap to it. We rebarrelled my brother's .270 to .280AI and he was amazed at how "soft" it shoots now. The few 6.5x55s I've shot have had a gentler shove than any .270, and kill critters just as dead.

My 6.5x55s (2 of them) shoot 120 gr bullets at 2900 fps and 130s at 2800 fps. Ballistically, out to 300 yards, the difference between the 270 Win 130 gr Swift Scirocco II at 3060 fps and the 6.5 mm 130 gr Scirocco at 2800 fps is less than 1.5 inches.

Have to say that I'd go with my blued Model 70 that I rebarreled from 270 Win to 6.5x55. My extra Model 70 SS in 270 Win will be a donor rifle for another caliber at some point. If I'm going 270 anything, it will be my WSM. All in left hand.

But that's just my opinion...

Not trying to start an argument here but how is that possible? Unless you are using lighter bullets and less powder with new .280AI I can't see physics would allow the rifle to produce less recoil?

The 6.5 x 55 is a pocket 270, mine will just touch 3000 fps with 120gr Speer SP's While my 270 I use to own would tough a little over 3150 fps with 130 gr Speer SP's You wold be hard pressed to tell the difference either load has on the deer sized game I shot with it. For heavier game just switch to a 120 gr barnes X for the 6.5 and either a Nosler Partition or Barnes X in 130 for the 270. nope 0.013 thousands of an inch dose not make much of a difference, only on paper and in forums like 24 hour Campfire. Both are good hunters cartridges. Thou the 270 has a bit of an edge here in the States due to availability of both rifles so chambered and ammo on the shelf in most Stores. Meaningless for gun looneys!!

[quote=n007)

Not trying to start an argument here but how is that possible? Unless you are using lighter bullets and less powder with new .280AI I can't see physics would allow the rifle to produce less recoil?[/quote]

YEAH - summin ain't right!

I have both. Put me in the Looney camp, I prefer the 6.5x55.

I grew up reading Jack O'Connor's words on the 270 and always wanted one. Somehow that never happened, mostly because circumstances contrived to steer me into the 6.5x55. I am maverick enough that I like the "WTF is a 6.5 Swede??????????" when people see what I shoot. Mine's a Ruger 77 MK II. The older I get the less inclined I become to shoot anything else.

As far as I can see, put a good 140 from a Swede and a good 150 from a 270 in the same place on the same animal at the same range and angle and the results will be the same.

I think it an analogous arguement to the endless 308 vs 30-06 comparisons. Again, same bullet in the same place from the same range on the same animal, and the same result.

Long live both of them.

I have no way to measure recoil, except with my shoulder. And the AI'd rifle feels better than the .270 did. I have a heavier Ruger 77 tang safety .270 that also feels more harsh than the .280AI. Is it a sharper rap that it gives? I don't know. We only know what our shoulders tell us. As always, YMMV.

The "impluse" recoil is different, I suppose. This has been discussed b4.

Gunner, I carried a 270 that was handed down by a gent that had Cancer when he wrote his will. I had used 270s many times before, but wanted to honor him/his life by properly breaking in this rifle so off to Colorado it went...

MY loads safe in that rifle using IMR4350 only yielded 150 NP @2850...using 52.0, vs. IIRC 52.5 Book Max. I know there are better powders - but it's what I had and shot fine.

Mulie, 275 yds, went from Neck to JUST under the hide in the rear ham, 99.9% penetration....

No, a few fps either way won't matter. As to recoil, I noticed cheap 130 CL factory were mild, and I am sure under spec if you clocked them.

BOTH work well, I like both - but partial to the Swede being a 6.5 nut/slut.

Well this topic should start a "looney" feeding frenzy....
As a kid I read all of JOC's articles and books and wanted a 270 WCF more than anything; I got to use my dad's pre-64 "Featherweight" 270 WCF when we went out west and it accounted for deer and elk.
At 16 when it came time to pony up my own hard earned money I bought a 30-06 as my dad said that it was a better all round caliber (you had to muck out lots of stalls and split/stack lots firewood to buy a BDL back then).
I've had 270's come and go in the 35 years since then but none stayed.
I bought a Tikka 6.5x55 (as I couldn't find a Sako) back in 2004/05 added a Swarovski AV 3-9x36mm and haven't looked back.
And while I haven't thumped an elk with my 6.5 yet, they seem to be two peas in a pod for deer, pigs and varmits.
The irony is that last weekend, my local enabler (LGS owner)called me with a pre-64 "Featherweight" in 270 WCF; after looking it over, I've done nothing but think about how to pay/trade for it and what to cull from the herd (no, no I cannot buy another safe).
Looks as if I'll have another 270 after all these years.
The trials and tribulations of a "looney".
Steve

Total recoil energy is related to bullet energy, so the 270 kicks harder than the 6.5x55. But there is more to recoil than just energy. Recoil speed is a factor that is related to bullet speed. The slower the bullet speed, the slower recoil speed, and the slower recoil feels more like a p-u-s-h, whereas faster recoil feels more like a SLAP!, and the p-u-s-h is easier to take than a SLAP! Since the 270 shoots faster than the 6.5x55, it's recoil feels more like a SLAP! I experience a similar difference in recoil sensation between my 375 H&H and my 416 Rigby. The recoil of my 375 with a 270gr bullet at 2700 fips feels more like a SLAP!, while the recoil of my 416 with a 400gr bullet at 2300 fips feels more like a p-u-s-h. I'm sure the total recoil energy of the 416 is greater than that of the 375, but IMO the 416 feels easier to handle. Of course, the difference in weight between the two rifles makes a difference in the feel of the recoil too, the 416 being heavier.

Some confusion here, we were talking about the same rifle converted from a .270 to a .280AI.

The thread title is "270 vs. 6.5x55", not "270 vs. 280AI." Correct me if I'm wrong.

They'll both do the same job, given proper bullets and loads.

EDIT TO ADD: I had about a 325 wt steer calf get between two juvenile bulls cuttin up and vet says he received some internal injuries and would not survive, so I had the vet put him to sleep.

Went and got my tractor w/ loader, a chain and strung the calf up and let him have it with the 6.5X55 Swede and 140 NPT's and my old 270 WCF and 150 NPT's.

I could tell very little difference in penetration between the two rounds, with the 270 making a bit more of a mess.

I just got the 6.5X55MM completed last month and of course have not had the chance to use it in the woods.

Just wanted to post this clarification to the reasoning behind my [meaningless ] opinion of these two fine cartridges.

Gunner

You can get the mild recoil of the 6.5x55 while using the .270 just by switching powders. Here's an example from the online Hodgdon Reloading Manual: in a .270, 43.7gr of Varget with give you 2700+fps with a 140gr bullet.

The 6.5x55 will also do close to 2700fps with a 140gr bullet and 40+gr of powder. The recoil should be too close to tell the difference, and the resulting trajectory (if you use similarly designed bullets) will be within an inch or two to 400-500 yards.

Score: +1 for the .270 because of versatility, +1 to the 6.5x55 because of "coolness". It's a tie!