Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles The .270

Just stick with your original statement:



Someone above said this was all theoretical. But for you, it isn't. You've put this into practice. You wrote, "My experience has been that a heavier bullet will do exactly that [penetrate further], assuming all else is equal." Can you post your load data that you used to draw this conclusion, and your testing method? Unless your loads and testing method meet your own criteria, your conclusion is flawed.

It sounds good, it sounds logical, it sounds intuitive. The problem is, actual studies have shown your conclusion is not necessarily the case, even among the same bullets with different weights and minimal velocity differences.

Take the time to read "Shooting Holes in Wounding Theories: The Mechanics of Terminal Ballistics." It's available online. The author writes that his study "should largely lay to rest the off-quoted generalization that heavy for caliber bullets or bullets of some particular sectional density penetrate deeper and retain more mass. All the bullets used were of conventional construction, meaning lead alloy bullets in drawn copper alloy jackets; no bonded cores, partitions or other special constructions." A lot of counterintuitive findings arise. He even goes on to study controlled expansion and controlled weight loss bullets and the findings there aren't all that intuitive, either. For instance, a 165gr Nosler Partition fired from a .30-06 penetrated deeper than a 180 gr Nosler Partition fired from the same gun, with scarcely a 100fps difference in velocity. That's a realistic comparison. Similar unexpected results arise among other cartridges.

If one were able to conduct testing within the extremely narrow parameters you've set, I suspect you'd me more right than wrong. But given the sheer number of bullet designs out there, I have no doubt a lot of unexpected results would arise.

Please, you won't get the chance. Those blunts and round balls you're shooting are so inefficient, one will likely fly backwards and hit you in the forehead.

All you have shown is that in your contrived scenario, your .270 has certain advantages. I, however, do not share all 8 of your constraints. I hunt regularly and successfully with the 147 ELD-M, despite your pre-conceived notions, and the .270 Win has no bullet analogue for comparison. Further, a PBR of 250-300 meters is plenty for me, since I'm dialing if distance is beyond that. I occasionally get shots at game well beyond your 350 yard limitation, so my set of criteria differs from yours there, too. Finally, by pushing the 147 ELD to ~2700 fps, which is what I actually get in several 6.5 CM rifles (yes, using temp-stable powders, as a matter of fact), it recoils less than the .270 and drifts less in the wind, both of which lend to better shot placement.

Clearly you're entrenched in your position, regardless of the facts, and this back-and-forth is becoming tedious, so I'll just say that if the .270 Win suits your needs and uses, then I'm happy for you. I have no problems with the .270, but when I'm looking for ballistic advantage I lean to other chamberings.

Jordan, on page 19 in reference to the 147 ELD in your 6.5 CM you stated "MV stated to be 2567 fps". Now in the above post you are saying its 2700 fps. The discussion was using similar barrel lengths of 24" in the .270 and 6.5 CM so a comparison could be made. Which is the correct muzzle velocity you are getting, is it 2567 fps or 2700 fps? And with the 2700 fps what powder are you using in that 24" barrel that is temperature stable to get that and what amount of powder?

Fascinating take away,but "max PBR" is never not fhuqking HILARIOUS...you "lucky" kchunt. Hint. Congratulations?!?

What it correlates,is that despite the "benefits" of a Long Action and much greater case capacity and a muzzle velocity headstart,is that due BC alone,the itty-bitty 250 case slaps the 27-06 silly. Read that again. Now one more time. Hint. Fhuqking laughing!

Pardon the itty-bitty 250 case simply chooglin' along,with a full head of steam,as the 27-06 sets on the sidelines literally blowin' in the breeze. What scope are you "shooting" on your Imaginary Pretend 270,which has "max PBR" imprinted betwixt your crossed-eyes? Do tell. Hint. Fhuqking laughing!

Stings,don't it? Hint.



Bless your heart,for doing your best.

Hint.

Fhuqking LAUGHING!..................

LOL! two 270's here, one a pre-64 feather weight with gloss 2-7 leupold saddled in weavers, the other is a standard rifle now wearing a 2.5-8 leupold in dual dovetail bases and rings, seems grandson left rifle leaning on the pickup tire, proceeded to drive off after a range session and broke the factory walnut stock, Gramps paid someone to build a beautiful stock in English walnut, complete with checkered skeleton butt and grip cap, wrap around checkering and ironwood tip, holy damn, whoever built it did a wonderful job i bought the rifle for the stock, 15 bills cash, imho that wouldn't buy the stock.

Both rifles shoot the same load, 150gr Partitions.

And in 10th place is.......


https://www.fieldandstream.com/10-best-long-range-hunting-cartridges/

Jerry,

With all due respect, I think you're missing my point. In the real world do heavier bullets always penetrate further than lighter ones? Well, no. There are many variables that affect penetration, and sometimes variables other than bullet mass dominate in the penetration outcome (expanded frontal surface area, for example).

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Honestly Jordan I don't think I missed your point. "all things being equal" doesn't happen as often as WE'D like.
I am also NOT nitpicking. 10 G quoted you saying something along this line.
"heavier bullets (in the same cal/cartridge) WILL ALWAYS do that. (penetrate further)

That's why I said w/o exception, hardly. I understand "general rules" and that's the reason I gave that 1 example of
exception of bullet path, penetration, etc. that was NOT expected.

We have 'seen' and read about Nos Partition bullets that did NOT perform in the 'general' way. IF NPs can NOT perform
the SAME way every time..... we know many other things are NOT ALWAYS equal.

I agree with you 'in general'. I understand BC and SD <even tho some discredit SD as being useless>
It is a numerical value that's used to COMPARE one bullet to another bullet ****NOT the actual penetrating performance
that we CAN expect.

My only point 'here' was/is exceptions happen frequently.

No Harm No Foul

Jerry

"F & S", now there's a source of ballistical fact.

The Kool Ade has made the rounds.


Jerry

Hahahah just stirring the pot ole buddy!

Just did a quick read, about "long range ballistics". Find it interesting that the 27 Nosler, with the second flattest trajectory of the group, does not even make the Top 10 list. Only managed to snag the last spot on the "Honorable Mentions". Hmmm...

Not on the 6.5 Creedmoor payroll

The .270 is a good " Old Timers" caliber.

Technology has surpassed it. Still kills. Mediocre at best in today's world 🌎

Well. Guess I know where I shake out in the grand scheme of things. 😂

Just did a quick read, about "long range ballistics". Find it interesting that the 27 Nosler, with the second flattest trajectory of the group, does not even make the Top 10 list. Only managed to snag the last spot on the "Honorable Mentions". Hmmm...

-----------------------------

Could we call that, dare I say, CONTRADICTORY ? HOW could that POSSIBLY be accurate ?


AND I ain't ashamed to say "I AM an Old TIMER". I've earned the right.


Jerry

At least you are aware of your standing!

Some refuse to submit to reality.....

And data....

The .270 was "King" for a while. It lost its throne some time ago.....

There, I fixed it for ya.


Jerry

Only because you don't want to believe it!

🙂🙂🙂👍👍👍🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲