|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,447
Campfire Regular
|
OP
Campfire Regular
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,447 |
I always hoped that better .270 bullets would be built. That high end bullet manufactures would pick up the torch, and brass makers would follow.
Has the 6.5 popularity squashed that hope? For a good 10 years? More?
I know there are some longer range .270 shooters out there, but few and far between like the components available for taking it long.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 10,766
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 10,766 |
Dogshooter is a HUGE .270 fan. He seems quite happy with the available bullet choices and the fact that the .270 is considered to be a Pillow Biting cartridge...it just leaves more components available for him. He'll prove its Worth at the next SRM I'm sure. 
The people wringing their hands over Trump's rhetoric don't know what time it is in America.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,796
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,796 |
Not sure which 6.5 you talk of. The 6.5 x 284 is very accurate compared to the old 270 without the improved shoulders.
It is better to be judged by 12 than to be carried by 6.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 14,475
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 14,475 |
Dogshooter is a HUGE .270 fan. He seems quite happy with the available bullet choices and the fact that the .270 is considered to be a Pillow Biting cartridge...it just leaves more components available for him. He'll prove its Worth at the next SRM I'm sure. I believe you're thinking of Prairie_goat 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 28,827
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 28,827 |
Not sure which 6.5 you talk of. The 6.5 x 284 is very accurate compared to the old 270 without the improved shoulders. Are you attributing its accuracy to the sharper shoulder? Or is short fat the reason? Or exactly what makes on cartridge more accurate than another? Maybe this should be another thread.
"Only Christ is the fullness of God's revelation."
Everyday Hunter
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 10,766
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 10,766 |
Dogshooter is a HUGE .270 fan. He seems quite happy with the available bullet choices and the fact that the .270 is considered to be a Pillow Biting cartridge...it just leaves more components available for him. He'll prove its Worth at the next SRM I'm sure. I believe you're thinking of Prairie_goat Prairie_goat really got to Dogshooter. I think he's been "converted". LOL
The people wringing their hands over Trump's rhetoric don't know what time it is in America.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 4,571
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 4,571 |
Can't wait to kick your azz running my .270 WCF/150 Partitions.... but that won't matter. The SRM don't mean schitt when it comes to an actual representation of field shooting ability. LMAO
I am going sub 8lbs and shooting off the pack this weekend.... no bipod, factory sporter .243. I may DQ myself and shoot stage 7 off the SFT, just to see if it can be shot clean with the added support. God knows I ain't cleaning it off sticks...
As it pertains to the OP's question.... the only thing stunting the .270 (and .25's) is factory 1-10" twisted pipes. Nosler bottled some lightning with the .277 150 LRAB, and the apparent .625 BC. Don't know how they got it all to come together, but they did.... we'll see if that moves the needle for any other manufacturers. A .277 140-145 Amax would be sick with a .575-.600 BC.
You better pray to the God of Skinny Punks that this wind doesn't pick up......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 10,766
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 10,766 |
Can't wait to kick your azz running my .270 WCF/150 Partitions.... but that won't matter. The SRM don't mean schitt when it comes to an actual representation of field shooting ability. LMAO
. I know. Hitting ANYTHING past PBR is dumb luck. Just ask some of the expurts...
The people wringing their hands over Trump's rhetoric don't know what time it is in America.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 501
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 501 |
I always hoped that better .270 bullets would be built. That high end bullet manufactures would pick up the torch, and brass makers would follow.
Has the 6.5 popularity squashed that hope? For a good 10 years? More?
I know there are some longer range .270 shooters out there, but few and far between like the components available for taking it long. I'd say yes. The .270 never made it into BR,Long range or any form or International shooting matchs. No doubt for some very good reasons. You will find the odd accurate combo and afficiado, but for ultimate consistant accuracy, it just doesn't cut it compared to too many competitors. There are just more better options.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 19,023
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 19,023 |
The 270 smothered the 270s chance.
Standardized twist 1/10 is just too slow for serious LR bullets.
Not to say you can't get there with the 270, but it will always suffer the limitations of it's twist rate. And there will always be choices in 6.5 or 7mm that will do better way out there.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,578
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,578 |
Good bullets in .264" take the wind out of the sails of both the .277" bore and the .257", at least in terms of LR/target bullets.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 894
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 894 |
Not sure which 6.5 you talk of. The 6.5 x 284 is very accurate compared to the old 270 without the improved shoulders. Are you attributing its accuracy to the sharper shoulder? Or is short fat the reason? Or exactly what makes on cartridge more accurate than another? Maybe this should be another thread. I think these are good questions. I would think the 6.5-284 is not anymore accurate of a cartridge than the 270, but it has a better selection of bullets that result in better accuracy at long range distances. Curious of others thoughts???
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 228
Campfire Member
|
|
Campfire Member
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 228 |
The 270 smothered the 270s chance.
Standardized twist 1/10 is just too slow for serious LR bullets.
Not to say you can't get there with the 270, but it will always suffer the limitations of it's twist rate. And there will always be choices in 6.5 or 7mm that will do better way out there.
Same sad story with 25-06/257 Roy. I have some 25 cal. 125 Wildcats, but they are no more.
You will not make peace with the Blue Coats, you are free to go
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,485
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,485 |
Brian Litz wrote an article about "scaling" to explain why the .264 & .284 bullets were the top choices. I applied his logic and came to the conclusion that .277 is ideal. I wrote him twice but he never replied. If the bullets were made the users would come. There are 1-9 and 1-9.25 twist barrels being made. I have had a Kreiger 1-9, two Bartlien in 1-9.25, and a Douglas 1-9. Matrix makes some VLD's.
Last edited by RinB; 06/30/14. Reason: Spellimh
“Perfection is achieved not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away”.
Antoine de Saint-Exupery. Posted by Brad.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900 |
Brian Litz wrote an article about "scaling" to explain why the .264 & .284 bullets were the top choices. I applied his logic and came to the conclusion that .277 is ideal. I wrote him twice but he never replied. If the bullets were made the users would come. There are 1-9 and 1-9.25 twist barrels being made. I have had a Kreiger 1-9, two Bartlien in 1-9.25, and a Douglas 1-9. Matrix makes some VLD's. Of course, why not? Building a 9 twist .277 is pretty easy. Think I'll order one.....again. (I have only had 3 IIRC).A .277 barrel only has to be a 10 twist if you want it that way.  Still trying to fathom what's wrong with 150 gr with .625 BC at 2900 plus fps. That beats a 140 VLD from a 6.5/06 doesn't it? Can someone run those numbers? I did it a few months ago, but can't remember..... 
The 280 Remington is overbore.
The 7 Rem Mag is over bore.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,896
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,896 |
Been a 6.5 whore all my life never a .277 even on my radar ![[Linked Image]](http://i809.photobucket.com/albums/zz14/Arch48/IMG_2547_zpsef93d988.jpg) Swede,6.5/06AI and 264 Win
You better be afraid of a ghost!!
"Woody you were baptized in prop wash"..crossfireoops
Woody
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 10,766
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 10,766 |
You think they're good now, just try some decent bullets in them soon and you'll really be a believer!
LOL
The people wringing their hands over Trump's rhetoric don't know what time it is in America.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 28,827
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 28,827 |
"Only Christ is the fullness of God's revelation."
Everyday Hunter
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,052
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,052 |
Bob,
The real reason some calibers have higher-BC bullets goes back to the beginnings of smokeless powder in the 1880's. When the transition was made (naturally, at first by various armies), the bullets used were very long-for-caliber round-noses, apparently because that's what most countries used in the black powder cartridges that were replaced by the new "small bores."
Most early smokeless military cartridges were 6.5mm, 7mm, .30 and 8mm. The typical bullet weight in 6.5mm was 155-160 grains, in 7mm 170-175, in .30 215-220 and in 8mm 230+. . With the first, fast-burning powders the muzzle velocities were in the 2100-2200 fps range, so twists had to be pretty fast to stabilize the long bullets.
One basic rule of rifle ballistics is that the smaller the caliber, the faster the twist has to be to stabilize a bullet of the same sectional density. In 6.5mm this turned out to be around 1-8, in 7mm 1-9, and in .30 and 8mm 1-10.
Soon many countries started using lighter pointed bullets, at much higher velocities. It was discovered that the standard 6.5mm twist of about 1-8 stabilized spitzers of around 140 grains, which held their velocity very well, without as much recoil as the heaviest spitzers from 7mm, .30 and 8mm rounds.
Only after that were high-velocity smokeless rounds in caliber such as .25 and .27 developed, and by that time fast, light spitzers were standard. Bullets weren�t very well balanced back then, and too fast a twist could cause accuracy problems. As a result the first hunting cartridges in .25 and .27 had twists JUST fast enough to stabilize their bullets. The .250 Savage had a standard 1-14 twist for 87-grain bullets, and the .270 Winchester a 1-10. Both twists were slower than the standard military twists for heavy round-nosed bullets in 6.5mm and 7mm.
As a result, until very recently ALL the bullets in .25 and .27 caliber were designed around the standard slower twists in those calibers. If military rounds of the 1880�s had started out as .25 or .27 caliber, no doubt they would have used faster twists for long, heavy round-nosed bullets�say a 150-grain .25 or a 180-grain .270.
But none of the military rounds were .25 or .27, and as a result those calibers were developed around the �improved� lighter, faster spitzers that, 100 years later, suddenly were considered too light to keep up with the longer-range shooting made possible by affordable laser rangefinders.
It has nothing to do with the �magic� of 6.5mm and 7mm bullets. Instead it has to do with the sequence in which military and sporting cartridges developed.
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.”
John Steinbeck
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900 |
John I knew about the military origins, long bullets and fast twist of the 6.5's and 7mm's, but never thought about the slower twist due to lesser quality bullets in 270 and 25 cal....interesting and makes sense. There's an historic answer for most everything.  So, today, we build fast twist barrels and better bullets.
The 280 Remington is overbore.
The 7 Rem Mag is over bore.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,052
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,052 |
Actually, today we use faster-twist barrels BECAUSE we make better bullets.
None of the early bullets were as well-balanced as they are today, though some weren't bad. But most of the short, high-velocity spitzers for military rounds were used for barrages at longer ranges, whether with machine guns or mass fire from infantry rifles. Some dispersion wasn't a disadvantage.
But many of the faster-twist rifles sold today wouldn't sell if we also didn't have short, light, well-balanced spritzers in every caliber. Many people also want to shoot 40-grain bullets in their AR-15.
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.”
John Steinbeck
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 4,571
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 4,571 |
Building a 9 twist .277 is pretty easy. Think I'll order one.....again. (I have only had 3 IIRC).A .277 barrel only has to be a 10 twist if you want it that way. Still trying to fathom what's wrong with 150 gr with .625 BC at 2900 plus fps. That beats a 140 VLD from a 6.5/06 doesn't it? Can someone run those numbers? I did it a few months ago, but can't remember..... The .277/150 LRAB numbers look good... in theory. We've yet to see how they perform on game (en mas)... we''ve yet to see if the BC numbers hold up ... and we've yet to see a solid quantity even become available (unless you count the 50,000 'seconds' they sold). For all the hype you and Billy have been talking about the 150 LRAB.... I'm just curios if either of you have actually shot one? Seriously.... I'd like to know if we're talking rubber meets the road.... or we're just ballistically jacking the .270 off? I'd love to see a good, high BC bullet for the .270s.... but it hasn't happened just yet. They're knocking on the door... but don't quite have it solved yet. As for the 6.5s and 7s.... we all know there's a veritable cornucopia of high BC game turfing bullets available.... that's just how it is.
You better pray to the God of Skinny Punks that this wind doesn't pick up......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 10,766
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 10,766 |
Great post. Thanks for more knowledge!
The people wringing their hands over Trump's rhetoric don't know what time it is in America.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 5,792
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 5,792 |
If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land. 2 Chronicles 7:14
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 13,085
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 13,085 |
The 6.5-284 obviously has some intrinsic accuracy advantage over the 270 Winchester judging simply by the number of competitive LR shooters using it and the number of records it held/holds. Never seen a 270 Winchester at a single match, not one. I also perused PS magazine match reports for several years and not a single one showed up. That doesn't mean it isn't accurate just not to the degree that some of the other chamberings are.
There is no reason why someone couldn't make a 9 twist barrel and shoot 160 grain VLD 270s in it if it was so good. Unless the factories switch to a 9 twist we will never see a good selection of 270 bullets for long range work. Who would buy them if they won't shoot in a factory rifle and nobody in their right mind is going to try and compete with one unless trying to prove something.
I will say this, I know gunsmith here in AZ that has chambered a number of 270AI and although it gains little in velocity, they have proven to be quite accurate. Might be something to that!
NRA Benefactor Member
Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900 |
Building a 9 twist .277 is pretty easy. Think I'll order one.....again. (I have only had 3 IIRC).A .277 barrel only has to be a 10 twist if you want it that way. Still trying to fathom what's wrong with 150 gr with .625 BC at 2900 plus fps. That beats a 140 VLD from a 6.5/06 doesn't it? Can someone run those numbers? I did it a few months ago, but can't remember..... The .277/150 LRAB numbers look good... in theory. We've yet to see how they perform on game (en mas)... we''ve yet to see if the BC numbers hold up ... and we've yet to see a solid quantity even become available (unless you count the 50,000 'seconds' they sold). For all the hype you and Billy have been talking about the 150 LRAB.... I'm just curios if either of you have actually shot one? Seriously.... I'd like to know if we're talking rubber meets the road.... or we're just ballistically jacking the .270 off? I'd love to see a good, high BC bullet for the .270s.... but it hasn't happened just yet. They're knocking on the door... but don't quite have it solved yet. As for the 6.5s and 7s.... we all know there's a veritable cornucopia of high BC game turfing bullets available.... that's just how it is. Dogshooter...You assume that becase I get on here and discuss these things that I really care about your views on the 270 Winchester....trust me I don't.  I have not fired a single LRAB and to be honest could really care less abut the bullet; I am simply pointing out that they are "there",as are the Matrix bullets,and the published BC's are what they are. I have not seen anybody who has shot them,say that the BC's DON'T hold up....I think 16 bore on here has shot them and said the numbers match up to real world;as I recall you participated in that thread. As for me, I would not load either one for my hunting in the 270; I don't like that type of bullet for general BG hunting and prefer tougher stuff,since i know there are more important attributes than BC when it comes to choosing bullets for general BG hunting...I learned this from killing animals and seeing a great many more of them shot.I have a few decades of killing game animals with the 270,and prefer other types of bullets because I know exactly what they do, and what the cartridge does at 700-1000 yards is of utterly no interest at all to me. Here's a "hint"....BC numbers take a back seat to other bullet construction criteria when it comes to effectively killing a wide range of game animals under a wide range of hunting conditions,and for solid on game performance.When I see people choose bullets based solely on BC numbers and without regard to other bullet construction characteristics, I suspect they have not really done much BG hunting...with anything. There are exceptions of course...one or two post here. Despite the lecturing, you sure aren't telling me anything about the 7mm's I don't already know...if it's a 7mm I have loaded, shot, hunted, and killed game animals with it....from the 7/08 and 7x57 to the Mashburn....maybe more than with the 270(not sure anymore).I have two 7mm Rem Mags and a Mashburn here now, They are pretty new; I have worn out a few others. I am curious about a lot of things ,too....namely the hunting experience and numbers of animals in different places and conditions under which a lot of 270 critics on here have actually killed game animals....or with anything else for that matter. But what I think is funnier than anything are target shooters, with little wide spread hunting experience getting on here and bad mouthing a cartridge that has killed BG animals for decades from Zambia to Alaska;(based on the fact that its BC numbers are fractionally lower than something similar),and telling me the cartridge is a punk cartridge for killing game animals because it doesn't do well on gongs at 700 to 1000 yards. It's really too funny.
The 280 Remington is overbore.
The 7 Rem Mag is over bore.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 11,273
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 11,273 |
He never said it was a punk cartridge... He said that .277" bullets are still largely unproven and mostly lacking behind everything .264" and .284". That's the gist I got, anyways....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 11,350
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 11,350 |
At the end of the day it is still more about the indian than the arrow. For me, in field positions, it is still more about me than any of the rifles or cartridges I use.
That said I of course shoot a 6.5-06 due to the uberness of it. Carry on.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 11,273
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 11,273 |
The Uberness is strong in that one.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 4,571
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 4,571 |
So no.... you've not shot them. I figured....
16bore did shoot them.... and they looked like the BC held pretty close... but 6 rounds, at paper, doesn't mean much to me. One guy posts a couple groups.... and all of a sudden the 150 LRAB is the panacea for all things .270. Not yet my friend.... not quite yet.
Obviously you didn't look at the link..... as Litz found that the 1-10" twist had a tough time getting full BC value. In fact.... he found the BC to be about .550.... which is right where I guessed it would be from the get go. Even in 1-7" it still only made .575.... which ain't bad.... but it's not .625. Other bullets (Matrix) are the same way.... just cause they appear to be stable... doesn't mean you'll get full BC either......
I never said they won't kill.... they just suck hind tit.... feel free to regale me with some actual experience with the bullets in question. Jury is still out on the 150 LRAB.... so to put it up against proven high BC game pounding bullets like the 6.5/7mm VLD and Amax is a bit presumptuous and premature.
Uber on....
You better pray to the God of Skinny Punks that this wind doesn't pick up......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 45,993
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 45,993 |
If he was super-uber, it'd be AI'd.
A wise man is frequently humbled.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 24,616
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 24,616 |
You can have �BER.
I went home early with the fat chick. A 243AI.......
We are killin schit and smoking Marlboros.
Not �BERing them and phoning a Winch for discovery & recovery.
Have Dog
Will Travel
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,052
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,052 |
Dennis,
Claiming that since .270's aren't used for target shooting 6.5's obviously have some intrinsic accuracy advantage is faulty logic.
The reason 6.5's are used for target shooting and .270's aren't goes back, again, to the history of the calibers. If the .270 had appeared first, in a shorter military cartridge with a sharper shoulder and faster-twist rifling, it probably would have been a top target caliber.
First, most early smokeless target shooting was done with military cartridges. Second, the .270 didn't appear for 31 years after the 6.5x55, the first commonly used 6.5 target/long-range cartridge. Third, the .270 had a relatively slow twist, so nobody developed longer, higher-BC bullets, which happened very early on in 6.5.
Fourth, all indications of any "inherent" accuracy revolve around the case itself, not the caliber. They normally involve a short, relatively fat case, with a shoulder angle of around 30 degrees, give or take a few degrees. This fits the 6.5x55 case far closer than the .270 Winchester case--and no other .270 cartridge appeared until 50 years after the 6.5x55.
When 140-grain 6.5mm spitzers were being widely used as both match and long-range military bullets in 6.5x55, the factory 150-grain .270 load used a ROUND-NOSED bullet, because that's what everybody believed was needed for "woods" hunting.
And the primary 130-grain .270 load was designed for flat shooting to 400 yards and not much farther, because that's all hunters could take advantage of back then, since very few rifles even had scopes. They didn't care how much a 130-grain bullet would drift in the wind at 1000 yards. Instead they wanted a bullet that shot flat enough so they could hold on hair at 300 yards. And a 130-grain .270 bullet at 3100 shoots much flatter out to 300-400 than a 140-grain 6.5x55 bullet at 2700.
The two cartridges were developed for totally different purposes, which influenced their bullet designs. Nobody but a hobbyist would go to the trouble of developing, say, the 6.8x55 or 6.8mm Creedmoor just to prove (or even test) if .277 bullets were more intrinsically accurate. Why would they be? But there's also no reason they'd be less accurate than 6.5mm or 7mm bullets.
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.”
John Steinbeck
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 10,766
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 10,766 |
Dennis,
Claiming that since .270's aren't used for target shooting 6.5's obviously have some intrinsic accuracy advantage is faulty logic.
Whoa there John! I completely disagree with this part of your post. Long Range target shooters are constantly searching for anything to give them an edge to make more hits than the next competitor. If anything chambered in .277 would accomplish that, you bet your ass there'd be widespread use. If bullets and barrels were designed today for the .270 that would out-perform anything else, guys would be all over them. You are correct about "inherent accuracy" as probably not mattering; long range is all about the wind. The same considerations for choosing a cartridge to increase the probability of making first round impacts on long range steel should be used for choosing a long range hunting cartridge.
The people wringing their hands over Trump's rhetoric don't know what time it is in America.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 16,123
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 16,123 |
That's the tactical point of view, but from a 1000 or 600 yard Benchrest view, it's still a valid point for making little groups at distance.
If the 270 could hang, there'd be a wagon to hop on.....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,052
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,052 |
Rick,
You completely missed my point:
The reason 6.5 bullets have an advantage over .270 bullets is the way both evolved. With the multitude of good 6.5 (and 7mm) target bullets that have been out there for decades, plus more recent models, there's been zero reason to develop either .270 bullets or cartridges for long-range target shooting.
If you don't believe me, please provide ONE examples of somebody who developed an entire line of heavy .270 target bullets, plus new cartridges to fire them in fast-twist rifles. You can't, because it's far easier (and more practical) to use what's already been available for a long, long time.
Like Dennis, you're assuming the availability of 6.5mm and 7mm target bullets means there's some sort of magic in 6.5mm and 7mm, and the few hundredths of an inch of bullet diameter between 6.5mm and 7mm is somehow bereft of that magic. That assumption defies logic and the laws of physics.
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.”
John Steinbeck
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 4,571
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 4,571 |
.270 Allen Mag..... designed by Kirby Allen to run the old Wildcat 160-170s..... it really caught on.
.270 Arnold.... same thing... tits-up before it got off the ground.
Chicken then egg...... Egg then chicken.... whatever....
Nobody will step up and mass produce a real, high BC bullet for them.... because the .270s and .25s will always be hamstrung by the millions of 1-10" twisted factory pipes. Why the hell someone would build a quick twist .270 to 'take advantage' of the one maybe two decent LR bullets that are occasionally available.... is beyond me. Especially when properly twisted factory sticks are available a dime a dozen in any 6.5 or 7mm flavor of the month.... and kick ass LR Hunting bullets are already available en mas.
The only real advantages the .270 has over anything... are the zero recoil (apparently 2-year olds can shoot them).... in Montana.... when shooting off hand... at a running whitetail.... that you stalked to within 12 yards. Which apparently covers all hunting situations.... everywhere, unless you're an unethical azz hole....
You better pray to the God of Skinny Punks that this wind doesn't pick up......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 10,766
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 10,766 |
If bullets and barrels were designed today for the .270 that would out-perform anything else, guys would be all over them.
No, I didn't miss the point you made about their evolution, and I agree. As you can see from the above, I don't think there's any magic with a specific diameter bullet. Again, if .277 caliber bullets were manufactured today with huge BC numbers and there were barrels twisted to stabilize them, they would be used for many long range applications. Since they are not and there are many better wind-cheating choices in just about every other caliber, no one who cares about winning a match or making a first round long range kill does... ...and I'm not bashing the 270 as a killing cartridge. I'm sure it has wacked them and stacked them along with every other. Most game is shot under 200 yards. A buddy of mine has killed 30 bull elk with the .270 Winchester and the 130 grain Game King. That's the tactical point of view, but from a 1000 or 600 yard view, it's still a valid point for making little groups at distance.
If the 270 could hang, there'd be a wagon to hop on..... Why do you believe it can't hang?
The people wringing their hands over Trump's rhetoric don't know what time it is in America.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,052
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,052 |
Dogshooter,
I remembered the Arnold but didn't know about the Allen--though both kind of prove my point: Why would anybody bother? Plus, both were primarily designed as hunting cartridges, not target rounds.
I'm not defending the .270 caliber. I wouldn't buy one for real long-range shooting myself, again because there aren't any real long-range bullets. But the reason isn't because there's something inherently defective about .277. Instead it's all those 1-10 twists!
To a certain extent the same thing happened to the .35 caliber, though it was never meant to be a long-range or target round. The original 1-16 twist doesn't stabilize lead-cored spritzers over 250 grains, or monolithics over 225. As a result there are far more .338's and .375's, because they can handle heavier bullets. Yeah, there are .35 bullets heavier than 250, but not many, and not real spitzers, so the .33's and .375's are far more practical choices.
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.”
John Steinbeck
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 17,527
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 17,527 |
People on here always forget that we are not the majority. Everyone that hunts has heard of a 270. Hardly anyone I have talked to has even heard of a 6.5x55, never mind its over 100 years old.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 8,649
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 8,649 |
People on here always forget that we are not the majority. Everyone that hunts has heard of a 270. Hardly anyone I have talked to has even heard of a 6.5x55, never mind its over 100 years old. Guess it depends where you live... John -- in Sweden
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 14,680
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 14,680 |
Even birds know not to land downwind!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 17,527
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 17,527 |
People on here always forget that we are not the majority. Everyone that hunts has heard of a 270. Hardly anyone I have talked to has even heard of a 6.5x55, never mind its over 100 years old. Guess it depends where you live... John -- in Sweden Great point! Dumb question, is the 6.5x55 still really popular over there? I have read in the past that it was being pushed aside for the 30.06. Didn't know if there were any truth to that.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 8,649
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 8,649 |
dogcatcher,
True, the 30-06 (and .308) are very popular, likely ahead of the 6.5 x 55 in the forest now.
However, the 6.5 x 55 and the 9.3 x 62 are still very popular too -- and the 9.3 is growing in popularity.
Heck, you can even buy .270 Win ammo quite readily -- it is more common in Europe than many would expect.
John
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 10,766
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 10,766 |
The people wringing their hands over Trump's rhetoric don't know what time it is in America.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 13,085
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 13,085 |
Rick,
You completely missed my point:
The reason 6.5 bullets have an advantage over .270 bullets is the way both evolved. With the multitude of good 6.5 (and 7mm) target bullets that have been out there for decades, plus more recent models, there's been zero reason to develop either .270 bullets or cartridges for long-range target shooting.
If you don't believe me, please provide ONE examples of somebody who developed an entire line of heavy .270 target bullets, plus new cartridges to fire them in fast-twist rifles. You can't, because it's far easier (and more practical) to use what's already been available for a long, long time.
Like Dennis, you're assuming the availability of 6.5mm and 7mm target bullets means there's some sort of magic in 6.5mm and 7mm, and the few hundredths of an inch of bullet diameter between 6.5mm and 7mm is somehow bereft of that magic. That assumption defies logic and the laws of physics.
NO I think you missed my point completely. I said that the 270 Winchester is not as inherently accurate as the 6.5-284 (I believe this is true in any discipline). I also said that it is languishing from whatever accuracy achievement it may have been able to reach because of lack of suitable bullets. I believe there are few good LR bullets because the market isn't there for them because of the slow twist almost all 270 Winchesters are stuck with.
I will stick with my statement about the intrinsic accuracy of the 6.5-284 not the .264 caliber in general. It is crazy to think that some diameter is somehow better than another; physics show that isn't the case. I have shot a lot of 270s [certainly not as many as you] and a lot of 6.5-284s [probably a lot more than you] and I have found it easier to get stellar accuracy from the 6.5-284 than from the 270 Winchester. I have shot ONE 270 WSM and it is pretty accurate. I have shot a lot of .2" groups with 108 Lapuas out of 6.5-284s and that is hardly a long range high BC bullet but it is a dandy. I only say this to show that it isn't just the 140 match bullets that shoot good.
The 270 Winchester has been around a lot longer than the 6.5-284 and it's papa, the 284 Winchester. I still don't see it ever being embraced as a target round whereas the 30-06 has. As German Salazar so succinctly stated; the 30-06 is never a bad choice... It has the same shoulder angle as the 270 I believe.
I don't believe for a minute that Berger puts more tender loving care into their 6.5 bullets than they do into there 270 bullets. I think the ones they make are marginally stable in factory 270 rifles so we will never know how good they are unless we rebarrel with a faster twist. I have gotten some pretty dang good 500 yard groups out of them but there is quite often a flyer which I think might be a result of the lack of stability.
You keep referring to the development of these cartridges from military times and I don't think that makes a bit of difference today. We have consummate tinkerers that will try to make any mousetrap better. They order barrels in whatever twist and rifling profile they think will give them the edge.I think if the 270 Win was all that we would see some use in a matches. On paper it has all the attributes except the short fat case.
I may just have to neck a 6.5-284 up to .277 just to see if it shoots as good!
NRA Benefactor Member
Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 794
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 794 |
Is the 270 WSM not a better match for the 6.5 284? Is it more inherently accurate than the 270 Win?
Pieter
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 17,527
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 17,527 |
dogcatcher,
True, the 30-06 (and .308) are very popular, likely ahead of the 6.5 x 55 in the forest now.
Thanks for the reply. Ironically, I cashed in my 30-06 for a 6.5x55. Love that round so far.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 13,085
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 13,085 |
Is the 270 WSM not a better match for the 6.5 284? Is it more inherently accurate than the 270 Win?
Pieter Case capacity of the 270 Win and the 6.5-284 are pretty much the same. That's why I am comparing those too. I have no idea how the 270WSM fares as I have only ever shot one and it is a Tikka t3 light or whatever they are called. It seems pretty accurate to me with the Berger loads we have used.
NRA Benefactor Member
Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 799
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 799 |
I've shot a 270 for around 35 years. Lately I've switched over to a 260. I live in central Texas and the deer really aren't very big, and I keep deer shots inside 300 to 350. Coyote and pig shots will range to a max of 500 (where the field stops and the woods start). For deer hunting purposes, the only difference in the two calibers is that one pushes a 130 gr Nosler
Ballistic tip at about 3000 fps (in my rifle) and the 260 pushes a 120 gr Nosler BT at about 2800 (in that rifle). BC doesn't matter at that range. What matters is that the 270 is just a bigger hammer than the 260 is. So why do I mostly hunt with the 260 these days? Well, it's a Tikka T3 Lite SS and it's an absolute tackdriver and I now shoot the 100 gr Nosler BT for an all around gun for pigs, coyote, and deer.
If I moved back to eastern Louisiana, where a big buck is 250 pounds or more, I'd go back to the 270. And I don't care a whit about BC, but the faster I drop them, the less tracking I have to do through briars and palmetto and icy water that's always just over the top of my Lacrosse boots.
It's all about what you need the caliber to do for you. If somebody challenged me to a 600 yard shoot for the beer. I'd grab the 260. I really love that little Tikka. Man, that thing will shoot.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,796
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,796 |
Not sure which 6.5 you talk of. The 6.5 x 284 is very accurate compared to the old 270 without the improved shoulders. Are you attributing its accuracy to the sharper shoulder? Or is short fat the reason? Or exactly what makes on cartridge more accurate than another? Maybe this should be another thread. Mule deer explained it probably better than I could in a life time of studying the matter.
It is better to be judged by 12 than to be carried by 6.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 28,827
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 28,827 |
About thirty years ago the gunsmith worked with me on a short fat seven. Long before short fat was in, except for some of our wives. Anyway I purchased a short action Remington and had the bolt opened up to accept a .378 Weatherby. I had Dave Manson, who has his own place now, make a reamer shortening the .378 to 2 1/4" with a 1/4" neck and a 40* shoulder. It held the same amount of powder as my buddies 7mm Coyle wildcat, which later became the 7STW.
Mine had an after market barrel and his was with a factory Remington barrel. Their velocities were about the same, but mine was more accurate. I did the shooting with both rifles and attributed the accuracy of the short fat seven to the after market barrel, not the shape of the cartridges.
"Only Christ is the fullness of God's revelation."
Everyday Hunter
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 14,680
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 14,680 |
You should know that the 270 guys have made provisions within their Wills that their rifles shall be included in their caskets!
Even birds know not to land downwind!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 10,766
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 10,766 |
... It held the same amount of powder as my buddies 7mm Coyle wildcatx, which later became the 7STW.... Are you saying your buddy is Layne Simpson, or are you saying your buddy wildcatted the STW before Layne did?
The people wringing their hands over Trump's rhetoric don't know what time it is in America.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 6,065
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 6,065 |
Am quite sure the 8mm RM case was being wildcatted the day after it was introduced by a whole lot of guys...
Defend the Constitution
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 28,827
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 28,827 |
Are you saying your buddy is Layne Simpson, or are you saying your buddy wildcatted the STW before Layne did? My buddy, a veterinarian, and I were laying in a tent in the Cascades waiting for the next day. He asked, "If you could have any caliber you wanted, what would it be?" "I have a reamer that is an 8 Remington Magnum necked to 7mm. I used it before I made this short fat seven. It could clean up the chamber in your 7mm Remington Magnum." "After we go hunting let's take my rifle back to town and get it rechambered then." So he used my reamer. The 'smith didn't know what to call it so he put my name on it. The first gunsmith called it a 7-8 Mag for me.
"Only Christ is the fullness of God's revelation."
Everyday Hunter
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 28,710
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 28,710 |
John,
Is the 1-10 twist the reason the 160 grain .277 NPs are semi-spitzers instead being a bit more pointy (and therefore longer and harder to stabilize)?
You did a fine job of explaining the backgrounds of the various cartridges under discussion here. The problem is the guys you're talking to are in a place where they will never hear you.
What fresh Hell is this?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,879
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,879 |
Yes the 10 twist is too slow for a long pointed 160 grain spitter in the .277 bore.
I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,336
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,336 |
Why waste time and energy trying to push the river...
It ain't all burritos and strippers my friends...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900 |
No matter what you dream up in the way of a wildcat,someone else has likely done it. The 8 Rem Mag is nothing more than a full length and blown out 375H&H case,and people like Art Mashburn necked that case to 7mm years before the STW was given a single thought....likewise the Dubiel 7mm magnums that Elmer was shooting in the 30's. I would say the 270 has been smothered for target work by the 7mm's and 6.5's but not for BG hunting,since the cartridge kills more BG here and world wide than all the 7mm's and 6.5's all put together. I've used the cartridge on a few head of game out to about 400 yards or so,and seen it used a few more times.It was all pretty uneventful if the shooter knew what he was doing. Using thousand yard performance to judge the worth of a BG cartridge is silly....most of the people who advocate this view have never killed anything beyond 500...or maybe once. If you specialize in that sort of thing(or imagine that you do),go get a 6.5 or 7mm and rock on. You aren't going to convince too many 270 fans....they've already killed too many BG animals to listen.
The 280 Remington is overbore.
The 7 Rem Mag is over bore.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 6,065
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 6,065 |
I would say the 270 has been smothered for target work by the 7mm's and 6.5's but not for BG hunting,since the cartridge kills more BG here and world wide than all the 7mm's and 6.5's all put together. you may want to give that kill record claim a little more thought...
Defend the Constitution
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900 |
Yeah possibly.....Maybe regionally in some places...no 6.5 or 7mm comes close here.
I don't have numbers so maybe should not have shot my mouth...but I still think no 7mm or 6.5 comes close,worldwide.
I bet only the 30/06 beats it world wide.....well maybe the 308 too.
I googled this stuff...the only 7mm making any top ten list is the 7 Rem Mag.There were no 6.5's on any list. The 270,30/06 and 308 were always in the top 5.The 270 was always ahead of the 7 rem mag.
Last edited by BobinNH; 07/10/14.
The 280 Remington is overbore.
The 7 Rem Mag is over bore.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 17,927
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 17,927 |
Dang. Lotsa 270 chatter this week. I did monkey with 150 ABLR's, but never shot at anything that's going to be food or past 500 for that matter. Have another 200 en route only because I got them cheaper than SMK's. Barnes for meals, leads for steels.
But that's a whole nuther weeks worth of threads....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900 |
16bore keep shooting!
The 280 Remington is overbore.
The 7 Rem Mag is over bore.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 17,927
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 17,927 |
I'd like to see someone run the piss out of ABLR's, for [bleep]. A .277 Scenar would be on my wish.....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 878
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 878 |
I have been killing stuff with a 270 for 40+ years! I have owned 2, 6.5's for the past year (grin) I have fun shooting the 6.5x47L and might even hunt with it a few days this years. But the 270 has being yeoman's work without fail all of these years.
Randy
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,796
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,796 |
My first big game rifle was a 270, wasn't impressed when I had to shoot a moose 5 times through willow brush. I think in open fields could have done it better but what the hell I was only 17 years old at the time. The choices were limited for me at that time since I hadn't started reloading and had to buy my ammo. If I remember correctly the 270 box of 20 silvertips were 10 dollars while he 30-06 was near 11 dollars. Economics chose for me.
It is better to be judged by 12 than to be carried by 6.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 4,016
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 4,016 |
I'd like to see someone run the piss out of ABLR's, for [bleep]. A .277 Scenar would be on my wish..... The matrix 165gr is a wicked bullet! Should try some.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 17,927
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 17,927 |
Be interesting to see, but I'd prolly be skunked out the gate with a 1:10. How far have you run them?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 16,512
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 16,512 |
378, what bullet type/weight, placement - range?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 16,512
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 16,512 |
378, what bullet type/weight, placement - range?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,796
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,796 |
Hey 65BR that was 35+ years ago. bullets were crappy in them days. I shot at about 150 yds with a cheap scope. Don't get me wrong I think the 270 is a great caliber, more so now with better bullets.
It is better to be judged by 12 than to be carried by 6.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 10
New Member
|
|
New Member
Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 10 |
have no trouble hitting game at sane ranges with either 270wcf, or 6.5 creedmoor. Would like to try Nosler LRAB in 270, they sound fantastic,
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 15,565
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 15,565 |
The 270 smothered the 270s chance.
Standardized twist 1/10 is just too slow for serious LR bullets.
Not to say you can't get there with the 270, but it will always suffer the limitations of it's twist rate. And there will always be choices in 6.5 or 7mm that will do better way out there.
This^^^. Add to that, you can't change physics. There are no "magic" calibers/cartridges. Just simple physics. The 6.5mm and 7mm will ALWAYS be better at LR than the .277. That's just the way it is, regardless of personal preferences/biases. I'm no .270 fan, nor a hater. The .277 142gr SMK was fun to play with for a while: ![[Linked Image]](http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p32/2muchgun/100_0399.jpg)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 16,512
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 16,512 |
I cannot agree that the 6.5/7mm will ALWAYS be better than what lies in the middle.
That is assuming no changes in twist and bullets in .277.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900 |
I don't even know what this conversation is about...smothered the 270's chances to do "what"? Become popular? Kill more BG animals here than all the 6.5's in existence combined? It's always been a hunter's cartridge,to use with hunting bullets...not a target cartridge for match shooting with target bullets or reaching to 1000 yards.There's better stuff for that. If you are one of the tiny minority of shooters who think they are long range specialists,or want to shoot BG animals with target bullets,get something else. The 6.5's don't make any one's top ten list of "most popular cartridges"but the advocates sure do make a lot of noise. They remind me of the guys 30 years ago who preached that you couldn't kill an elk without a 338 Win Mag. Thankfully not too many listened and kept rolling elk with a 270 Winchester.
Last edited by BobinNH; 07/20/14.
The 280 Remington is overbore.
The 7 Rem Mag is over bore.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 4,571
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 4,571 |
Nice post.... now go read the question and try again. The question ain't "will .270s kill schitt"....
The 6.5s and 7s only helped folks realize now nice higher BC is. If anything, they increased the demand for an LR projectile in .277. The fault is the .270s.... it was hamstrung from the start by the 1-10" twist.
Why is everyone who carries a round with a bullet having a BC higher than .500 a "long range specialist"? Or, "trying to shoot Big Game at long range"? Maybe... they're just prepared.
Saying someone shooting high BC billets is 'looking to shoot BG at long range'.... is like saying everybody who carries a pistol, is looking for a gunfight. It just ain't true.
You and Frenchie are quite the team these days..... like Pelosi and Reid...
You better pray to the God of Skinny Punks that this wind doesn't pick up......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900 |
DS: Last time I checked, this was the "Long Range Hunting" forum, not the "Long Range Gong Shooting" forum.Implicit in "hunting" is "killing".So mentioning killing in the context of cartridge and bullet performance, is a legitimate exercise.
Long range, being a pretty subjective standard, is also open to debate.
Based on what little I can decipher from everything you post,you seem to be rich in experience with one, short on experience with the other. I will leave to your own imagination which is which.
Correct me if I am mistaken, but I suspect that Billy has killed more BG animals than you,has guided more hunters,and seen more shooters,cartridges and bullets in action on animals and done more hunting as well;I can tell by what he posts that he has vastly more hunting experience than you do.
I know I have,except for the guiding part,but I have been around a lot of hunters while they killed animals.
I have a funny feeling (again correct me if I am mistaken) that the amount of BG animals you have killed at over 300 yards might fit in the back of a Subaru.Again I apologize if I am mistaken in this
I also assume from what you post, that you do no official,competitive match shooting (if I am mistaken in this I apologize),other than an occasional jaunt to Raton to shoot there(how many times?).So I will ask....do you do any competitive match shooting on any teams? Or are you more like the rest of us and shoot a lot of targets?
Since I have been hanging out with a LOT of match shooters who compete, officially at registered matches nation wide,and internationally as well,for about 40 years, I am used to talking with people with experience who know what they are talking about.Some of these guys also hunt....many use 270s and think they are just great.So how DO we reconcile these "differences" of opinions?
Experience killing animals. You can't learn this shooting gongs,which is fodder for anybody and cheaply available. Hunting experience,OTOH, takes time,money,years,and effort to accumulate.
In short,I pay about as much attention to your ankle biting non sense as the monitor over on the Nosler site did. I'm sure they were impressed as hell with your notions about the 243 AI being as good a BG cartridge as the 270 Winchester. You numbers guys will believe anything.
I always said I can spot a phony hunter a mile away by how fast he reaches for a ballistics table.....I ain't been wrong yet.
Please go back over there.
The 280 Remington is overbore.
The 7 Rem Mag is over bore.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 17,927
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 17,927 |
the amount of BG animals you have killed at over 300 yards might fit in the back of a Subaru
Holy chit thats funny. Mine would fit in a Vespa.....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 4,571
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 4,571 |
Again Bob .... read the f'n question..... and quit with provincialism.
I don't give a schitt how much game you've killed.... or how much guiding you've done... or whatever.
Telling people how/where/why to hunt is quite condescending... period. You don't know me.... how I hunt... or where. I don't know you.... but I don't tell you how to do it. Anyone who does.... is phuggin stupid.
Keep it up Nancy.....
You better pray to the God of Skinny Punks that this wind doesn't pick up......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 17,094
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 17,094 |
The 270 smothered the 270s chance.
Standardized twist 1/10 is just too slow for serious LR bullets.
Not to say you can't get there with the 270, but it will always suffer the limitations of it's twist rate. And there will always be choices in 6.5 or 7mm that will do better way out there.
This^^^. Add to that, you can't change physics. There are no "magic" calibers/cartridges. Just simple physics. The 6.5mm and 7mm will ALWAYS be better at LR than the .277. That's just the way it is, regardless of personal preferences/biases. Sort of a contradiction isn't? There is no [/i]inherent[i] superiority in any caliber. In cartridges,bullets, and barrels, yes, but they are manufactured. Within a large span of "mms" or "inches" of bore diameter, a cartridge/bullet/twist combination can be put together that is every bit as good as that of any 6.5 or a 7mm. So your second sentence, especially emphasized with, "ALWAYS", is not true. All it would take is a manufacturer to offer or a barrel maker to twist a longer-than-usual barrel a little faster and a well made 550-.650 BC .277 pill to appear and, voila, the 270 Win would be in the running at 1k. Edited to add: IMO, the 6.5s and 7's as good as they may be will never smother the 270's chances. Aside from the fact that it was a good hunting cartridge as it was with the bullets of two generations ago, probably more important is, it's achieved icon status in the NA hunting culture; so, it will always be around. Because of that, it's component parts will continually be tweaked.
Last edited by George_De_Vries_3rd; 07/20/14.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 8,733
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 8,733 |
Hi Bob.
I do aliitle bit of both.
1000 yard BR and big game hunting.
I watched a guy shooting 270 WCF at one of our matches last summer.A bolt gun with a can on the end.He didnt win but he shot well.
It was impressive to see the 270 on the line.150g ballistic tips shoot very well at 850 to 1000 yards with a 1-10 twist.
If you were to ask me what is the most accurate round to get for 0 to 300 yards.Thats easy.
Its a 6mm PPC.
Nothing has been able to equal it since 1974.
The situation at 1000 yards is much different.
There really is no dominate round or caliber at 1000 yards.
And saying high BC bullets dominate at 1000 yards is pretty much BS to.
One of the most winning rounds on our range is the 6x47 Lapua.
Most that run it, run the 105g Berger hybrid.
Lots of bullets with higher BCs around that it.
I have two matches under my belt running the 105g Berger hybrid,,but from a 6mm Dasher instead of the 6x47.
Time will tell.
Two guys showed up at our last match and shot on our bench on the later relays.Both were running 338 Lapuas.With 300 matchkings.I think one guy got 4 and the other guy got 6 ,out of 40.That high BC didnt seem to help them at all.
I shoot 6mm, 6.5 and 30 cal at 1000.
I'd skip all 3 of them and pick up my 270 and go back to Alberta without hesitation.
dave
![[Linked Image]](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ea/Logo_Schmidt_%26_Bender.jpg) Only accurate rifles are interesting.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,637
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,637 |
Looking at match bullets designed without the constraints of factory twists the 270 cannot compare to 6.5 and 7mm bullets of similar weight.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 16,123
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 16,123 |
There really is no dominate round or caliber at 1000 yards. The 6 Dasher by a landslide at 600 or 1K BR.....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 17,094
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 17,094 |
Looking at match bullets designed without the constraints of factory twists the 270 cannot compare to 6.5 and 7mm bullets of similar weight. Yes, but I did mention twist can be changed for the 270 cartridge just like for any other. And then match bullets could be.. [/i]matched[i]."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 8,733
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 8,733 |
There really is no dominate round or caliber at 1000 yards. The 6 Dasher by a landslide at 600 or 1K BR..... My testing at 500 with the Dasher has been unreal.I've never seen accuracy like that.But the Dasher has never won at Ridgway.At least not yet.In the two matches I've shot mine in ,it shot ok.First match I had a 20 last one I had a 18. Had no problems taking 55 pound coyotes down but I was blowing cases.Now that I have all that taken care of will see how it does the rest of the season.. The Williamsport boys shoot Dashers in good conditions. When the conditions take a crap....like they are all the time at Ridgway....they dig out the 300 WSMs.
Only accurate rifles are interesting.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 8,733
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 8,733 |
Looking at match bullets designed without the constraints of factory twists the 270 cannot compare to 6.5 and 7mm bullets of similar weight. You could say that about the 6mm Berger hybrid as well.Its BC does not come close to whats offered in 6,5 and 7mm.But its winning. dave
Only accurate rifles are interesting.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 17,094
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 17,094 |
What do you attribute to some bullets doing well "in spite" of their BC?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 16,123
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 16,123 |
You only shoot at Ridgeway. In IBS 600 or 1K Benchrest, the Dasher rules...period. They hold the majority of the single target and agg records, and at the Deep Creek, Mt range, which shoots by Williamsport rules, is dominated by Dashers.
I've kicked many a boomer's ass to the the curb with my Dashers....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 8,733
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 8,733 |
You only shoot at Ridgeway. In IBS 600 or 1K Benchrest, the Dasher rules...period. They hold the majority of the single target and agg records, and at the Deep Creek, Mt range, which shoots by Williamsport rules, is dominated by Dashers.
I've kicked many a boomer's ass to the the curb with my Dashers.... Im not disagreeing. All of the 6.5-284 1000 yard records fell very fast to the Dasher. Right now at Ridgway the record is tied at 36 out of a possible 40.One was a 7mm WSM running a 162g AMAX.The other is a 300 WSM running a 200 Berger Hybrid.The typical winning score is 28. Every once and awhile someone will get into the 30s but it doesnt happen very often. kinda looking forward to what I can do with my Dasher. dave
Only accurate rifles are interesting.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 8,733
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 8,733 |
What do you attribute to some bullets doing well "in spite" of their BC?
Some of the best shooters on the line at Ridgway are running them. dave
Only accurate rifles are interesting.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 17,094
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 17,094 |
Yea, but they'd still be one of the best shooters with a higher BC bullet. Are you saying they just like that particular bullet..regardless?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 8,733
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 8,733 |
I dont think so.
The 6x47 seems to have a disproportionate number of wins.Any bullet you could shoot in it, has a lower BC than just about anything else.Theres a quite a few on the line.
You would think that the 284s and 7mm SAUMs with 180g Hybrids and the 300 WSM with the big huge BC hybrids would be kicking azz all the time.And from time to time they turn in a stellar performance.But over all they just dont seem that consistant to me.
I think recoil has alot to do with it.
Remember its 40 rounds for score plus sighters.
A typical match for me is 75 rounds... And thats only one rifle.I shoot both classes...
You be be surprised at the number of times the 12 pound rifle has won a match.Most of theses 12 pounders are 6x47s.And remember, theres 17 pound and unlimited class rifles on the line to.
I see alot of guys looking at ballistic tables and BC values.
They think that higher BC values will give them a edge.
And that that edge will allow them to win.
The guys that are actually winning dont seem to be playing by that rule book.
And its working for them.
dave
Only accurate rifles are interesting.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900 |
Hi Bob.
I do aliitle bit of both.
1000 yard BR and big game hunting.
I watched a guy shooting 270 WCF at one of our matches last summer.A bolt gun with a can on the end.He didnt win but he shot well.
It was impressive to see the 270 on the line.150g ballistic tips shoot very well at 850 to 1000 yards with a 1-10 twist.
If you were to ask me what is the most accurate round to get for 0 to 300 yards.Thats easy.
Its a 6mm PPC.
Nothing has been able to equal it since 1974.
The situation at 1000 yards is much different.
There really is no dominate round or caliber at 1000 yards.
And saying high BC bullets dominate at 1000 yards is pretty much BS to.
One of the most winning rounds on our range is the 6x47 Lapua.
Most that run it, run the 105g Berger hybrid.
Lots of bullets with higher BCs around that it.
I have two matches under my belt running the 105g Berger hybrid,,but from a 6mm Dasher instead of the 6x47.
Time will tell.
Two guys showed up at our last match and shot on our bench on the later relays.Both were running 338 Lapuas.With 300 matchkings.I think one guy got 4 and the other guy got 6 ,out of 40.That high BC didnt seem to help them at all.
I shoot 6mm, 6.5 and 30 cal at 1000.
I'd skip all 3 of them and pick up my 270 and go back to Alberta without hesitation.
dave
Dave as usual nice to hear from someone with high power and match experience. You show up with real world info.I never see a 270 in HP among the guys back here; but many hunt with them.
The 280 Remington is overbore.
The 7 Rem Mag is over bore.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900 |
Guess the Subaru was too big. All you got is the name calling.  I figured right.Come back in 20 years. Coming on here with the "your favorite caliber sucks" attitude may impress your friends who know even less,but doesn't wash with anybody who has BTDT. You'll figure out eventually that's it's the shooter/hunter...not the toy. Your sarcasim, in light of your "experience",is entertaining.
Last edited by BobinNH; 07/21/14.
The 280 Remington is overbore.
The 7 Rem Mag is over bore.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 9,189
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 9,189 |
Dammit, I missed you, Bob. I shouldn't stay away for so long. Way to keep 'em in line!
I belong on eroding granite, among the pines.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 17,094
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 17,094 |
Dave7mm, thanks for your input!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 8,733
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 8,733 |
Only accurate rifles are interesting.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,116
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,116 |
Bob,
Shooting and hunting have a lot in common with racing Dirt Late Models, 410 Winged Sprint Cars, and Open Wheel Modifieds racing on 8" tires.
There are thousands of different products that are a part of the thousands of different setup possibilities one encounters when trying to make a car faster on the stop watch and a winning race car. Of course the driver (just like the guy on the trigger) has a lot to do with it too.
One of the basic tenets of common sense tuning is if you are lost and cannot figure out a way to get the results you want a guy goes back to his notebooks and finds the tried and true setup to get squared away. Similar to shooting and hunting with long range being somewhat arbitrary.
The debate here is has the 6.5 smothered the 270's chances. The answer to that question is obvious to me. Although the .264 diameter bullets are plentiful and yes higher B.C.than the bullets available for the .270 that has not in any way smothered the 270 except possibly among the ranks of those actually good enough or those who concern themselves with hunting and shooting at over 550-600 yards out to 1000 or even as far as 1200 yards.
Again long distance shooting is to one man what it isn't to another. Personally I am not going to take a poke at any animal beyond my self imposed 550-600 yard limit. There are a number of reasons why I have imposed that limit including my lack of ability and confidence in making the shot and as the distance gets stretched out even further in some circles and conversations Time of a Flight becomes a real consideration. Oh and I haven't forgotten about the wind.
Something else to consider regarding the 6.5MM is that Lapua developed the 6.5/47 and for a cartridge that burns less than 40 grains of powder in the right rifle with the right guy driving they will shoot way out there. No recoil, the brass stands pressures hardly anything else will handle and it will still hold the next primer.
In closing the 6.5 is obviously a good caliber and the 6.5/284 as well as the Swede, the 260, 264 WM, and the 6.5/06 are good hunting rounds. In fact I am tuning on a new NULA in 6.5/284 now. The only thing I can tell it has on any of the 270's in the Heritage is that it burns a little less gunpowder and will shoot a 129 grain bullet that recoils less than a 130 in a 270.
Yes the B.C. Is higher on the 129 in 6.5 but it doesn't matter one whip at distances the large majority of folks shoot. I have never scene anything in 6.5 other than a 264 WM in any hunting camp I have ever been in. Here at home in WV there are and have been a lot of animals whacked with (the basic setup) a 270. The 6.5 cartridges have a lot of catching up to do!
BTW I think this is appropriate to this thread. Just like in dirt racing. "it ain't what you got, it's what you do with what you got" The 270's won a lot of races.
Dave
Last edited by RaceTire; 07/21/14.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 17,927
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 17,927 |
.......and they lived happily ever after.
The end.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 878
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 878 |
Bob it does appear that Subaru was a little too big Some folks are all Hat and no cattle! Randy
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 2,337
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 2,337 |
Heck no only maybe but most likely not.grin
|
|
|
|
|
577 members (12344mag, 10ring1, 10gaugemag, 10gaugeman, 160user, 007FJ, 54 invisible),
2,302
guests, and
1,196
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,190,610
Posts18,454,896
Members73,908
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
![[Linked Image]](http://s809.photobucket.com/user/Arch48/media/IMG_2547_zpsef93d988.jpg.html)
