Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Parent case for .270 win.???

I think it is unlikely Winchester necked down the 30/03. There are just too many sources stating the 30/06 was necked down to produce the 270. All of the people involved are dead so it's unlikely we'll get a first hand answer!
I did actually get to handle the first 270 to leave the Winchester plant. A Model 54 with a serial number of 21, this rifle was sent to Ashley Haines who resided in Salmon Arm BC and wrote for Outdoor Life at the time.
The rifle was brought into the shop by Haines' great nephew. He wanted to see about getting it drilled and tapped and a scope mounted. The rifle seemed a bit special with the serial number engraved rather than stamped so I declined the job and recommended he write Winchester for a history. He brought back the letter describing the rifle and it's history. Winchester expressed an interest in purchasing the rifle but, as far as I know, the fellow decided to keep it. A neat bit of history. This occurred about 30 years ago in Kamloops, B.C. GD

greydog-
That's a fascinating story. You have to wonder where the rifle is now.

The very first rifle to be chambered in .270 was a modified P14/M1917 Enfield. There's a picture of it in Handloader #241 on page 10.

In its lab, Winchester apparently was playing with the .270 as a possible military cartridge at least seven years before they introduced the cartridge commercially in 1925.

--Bob

My suspicions are confirmed............ Now what?

greydog -
Like all historical facts, the original witnesses may have passed away, but they documented the facts as they occurred. Jack O'Connor, the Winchester engineers, and others with direct knowledge all said the .270 Winchester was developed from the .30-03, just as the .30-06 was.

Lee-
I'll repeat my above request for the title of the 1964 O'Connor publication and page number wherein he made the statement you aver he made.

Thanks.
--Bob

I am on the road, and have read and own a lot of Jack O'Connor books. IIRC correctly, it is an entire chapter on the early .270s in The Book of the Rifle (1949). I have the 1964 edition. You can find the page yourself.

Also, there are his letters discussing the new rifle with Winchester in his collection of papers, some of which I have read, at
Washington State University Libraries
Manuscripts, Archives, and Special Collections
Pullman, WA 99164-5610 USA
(509) 335-6691

The Last Word on the Subject:

I think God created the 270. It was Imaculate Conception. No idea. No man involved. It just came.

I'm going out in the snow in about an hour for some late season pheaseant hunting and I feel good!

Good thing you aren't going after anything big and dangerous like turkeys. The 270 ought to be big enough for pheasants, not so sure about anything bigger.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.


There! It had to be said.

Bullshooter, you have the right screen name. Why don't you go to the library or do some research on your own. Anyone can sit at home and tell someone who knows the facts, "It ain't so!", without submitting any facts of their own.

Now just look who's talking....the world's greatest Google cowboy.

I also heard somewhere that Lee Harvey Oswald actually used a Mannlicher-Carcano rechambered to .270 winchester, but he used one piece of.30-06 brass that he had necked down, trimmed to length, and neck turned and one piece of .30-03 brass that he just necked down without any other modifications.!

Selmer & MikeNZ-
You should cut Lee some slack. He's away from his home library and is frustrated at not being able to look up his references. If he takes out some of his frustration on me, I guess my shoulders are broad enough to handle it.



Lee-

My doing the library work you suggest is complicated by not having a correct title for O'Connor's 1964 book. As far as I can tell, O'Connor wrote no book titled The Book of the Rifle. Books with that title have been written by Jim Carmichel (O'Connor's successor at Field & Stream), by John Olson, and by A. G. Banks.

I know that O'Connor wrote at least three books specifically on rifles: The Rifle Book, The Big-Game Rifle, and The Hunting Rifle. I have copies of all three in my library. The Hunting Rifle was first published in 1970, and The Big-Game Rifle in 1952. Since neither ran through a second edition, and were not put out in 1964, then they probably aren't the book you're remembering.

The first edition of The Rifle Book was published in 1949, a second edition in 1964, and a third edition in 1978. Is it safe to assume that this is the book to which you referred? I have only the 1978 third edition, and cannot find in it the reference to the .30-03. However, it may be that it is in the second 1964 edition.

I have a copy of this edition on the way, and will seek diligently the .270/.30-03 material. Because I like to read O'Connor, this search will not be a chore. If I find the .30-03 - .270 connection, I'll be pleased to post it to this thread and confirm your memory and knowledge.

If the reference appears in a different O'Connor book, it would help if you would post to that effect here.

Although shoveling b.s. is part of the quadruple pun involved in my screen name, I'm pretty serious and very curious about the history of cartridges. I try to do my homework and contribute documented opinion where possible. You appparently overlooked my quotes from Phil Sharpe, post #1870164 above.

Travel safely.

--Bob

When I first read the real history of the .270, the inventor of Google had not been born. I don't understand why it makes some people sore that they don't know the facts, can't find them on their own, and can't understand them when spoon feed from authorities. Oh well,...

At least Bullshooter has made some effort, but seems to be falling into the logical fallacy of "if I can't find it, that disproves it". No, it just means you still haven't found any facts that prove it to you, and you haven't found any facts to dispute what I have said ( which is just passing on the history from those who were there ).

Well, I don't know the correct parent case for the 270, but I will say this; if you simply neck down a 30-06 in a 270 Win die, the result is a case that is definitely shorter than a true-to-SAAMI-specs 270Win. I know this for a fact, because I just went in and sized a few to check. Those who have said you end up with a case the correct length or (as I believe one post said) even longer than a true 270 Win. are incorrect, according to my tests.

Like I said, I don't know the real history of the 270 because I wasn't there, but I know for a fact that they had to start with a case longer than a 30-06 to end up with the case we now know as the 270 Win. Now, if you want to argue about the correct use of the terminology regarding what constitutes a "parent case," feel free. That's an entirely different issue. Just my .02.

Winchester didn't bring out the 270 until 1925, and by then, it's doubtful there were any 30-03 cases floating around since it was put out of commission in 1906, some 19 years earlier.

And who cares? The 270 is just a 30-06 somebody ruined.

Wayne

Hey! You talking about the 270 Winchester Center Fire?------AKA the 30-06 Improved?..........sheesh


Casey

Hey, new idea for wildcat. Take a 270 case, keep necking it up till it will take a serious big game bullet (180-220 grains) and stop when you get to 308 diameter. Ought to turn that varmint rifle into an elk rifle.

Wayne

I'm a bit apologetic for bringing this thread back from the murky depths, but there are a couple of loose ends that need tying up.



I obtained a copy of the 1964, second edition of O'Connor's The Rifle Book.

Pages 218-229, part of the chapter on "All Around Rifles", give the story of O'Connor's early adventures with the .270. There is nothing on the origin of the .270 in this chapter. O'Connor relates that he first learned about the .270 in a 1925 ad.

On page 17, O'Connor wrote, "The .270 is only a .30/06 case necked down with the same shoulder angle."

On page 94, O'Connor wrote, "The .256 Newton case was a .30/06 case necked to .256, and the .270 Winchester case is simply the .30/06 case necked down to .270 with the same slope of shoulder retained."

There is nothing in the book to indicate that O'Connor thought the 30-03 was the parent case of the 270.




I obtained a 1985 copy of Madis' The Winchester Book. A careful perusal of all 654 pages showed nothing on any aspect of the development of the 270 cartridge.

--Bob

I am going to say that the 30-03 is the 270's grampa and leave it at that.

And I'm going to say that the 30-03 was obsolete, with no rifles made for it in 19 years prior to the introduction of the 270.
I'll leave it to readers to figure out what makes more sense.

Wayne