Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Long Range Hunting .270 Win vs. 6.5-284 shootout

Ok guys, I am not a long range hunter (most of the game I've shot has been inside 350 yards), but do an extensive amount of long range metallic target shooting. These days you don't hear much about the old .270 win cartridge as a long range caliber for long range hunting for deer & pronghorn size game. Why is this? Here are some figures for the most typical loads in each caliber limited to a distance of 500 yards. This is taken from Hornady's ballistics calculator after inputting the data.

.270 Win - 130 gr Hornady SST @ 3100 fps - 200 yard sight in
.460 BC, SD .242
Trajectory - 300 yds (-6.1"), 400 yds (-17.8"), 500 yds (-36.0")
Wind Drift 10 mph - 300 yds (5.8"), 400 yds (10.7"), 500 yds (17.4")

6.5-284 Norma - 140 gr Berger VLD @2850 fps - 200 yrd sight in
.612 BC, SD apprx .287
Trajectory - 300 yds (-6.9"), 400 yds (-19.8"), 500 yds (-39.5")
Wind Drift 10 mph - 300 yds (4.7"), 400 yds (8.7"), 500 yds (14.0")

Of course, there are other factors that aren't considered here, but the old .270 seems to be a pretty decent contender. It's very flat shooting, good BC, high sectional density, tolerable recoil, readily available, etc. The 6.5-284 is also an amazing cartridge for many reasons (high BC, low wind drift, high SD for lots of penetration, etc). But out to 500 yards, these two seem pretty close in a lot of areas. I suppose the 6.5 may start to really shine beyond that distance, but am not sure.

In the end, my question is - why isn't the old .270 win talked about more in long range shooting discussions - Any thoughts?

Yea, the bullets for 270 do not have as high of BC as do the 6mms, 6.5's. 7mms, 30 cal, 338's

Long range begins at/or past 600 yards, the BC of .612 for the 6.5 will really start to walk away from the .462 BC of the 270 as the distance increases

Curtis..comparing the tried and true 270 to other calibers has been an ongoing topic for many moons.I have never owned one personally but one of my long time hunting buddies was a 270 fanatic! His 270 was the reason I built my 264 Mag just to prove that there was something out there much better..how much better?.. probably not much at average shooting ranges.We killed alot of deer and goats together over the years and at ranges out 350-400 yds he did just as well as I did with a much lighter gun and shorter barrel.IMO the 6.5's do have the edge but only at extreme ranges because of BC/SD .I think another reason is most everyone knows the 270 as a legend and just want something different..at least I did.....FLEM

So inside 500 or 600 yards, there isn't as much of a difference, but when you go beyond 600 yards, the 6.5mm bullets really have an advantage in a lot of ways. 600 yards is quite a long distance, so for most hunters, it seems that a .277 bullet would be adequate along with the 6.5mm bullets.

I guess my 500 yard minimum really isn't "long range" these days. It's not until you get out to 1000 yards that you are really shooting "long range."

As said, long range begins around 600. Hell, for all practical purposes, a flat base runs neck and neck with a boatail out to 400 or so. The bigger BC's take charge after that. Run your charts to 1K and compare again.

aalf - your right, I used a conservative number. According to Nosler's 6th Edition reloading manual, the fastest they have a 140 gr bullet going is 2953 from a 26" barrel. So I'm about 100 fps slower in my comparison chart. With 2953 fps, I'm sure the performance with the 6.5 would be that much better.

The main differences I'm seeing is the wind drift at extremely long ranges. The 6.5 certainly has the distinct edge on the .270 but the trajectory between the two is almost the same. Here are the numbers at 1000 yards using the data I initially used above.

.270 Win @ 1000 yards
drop -274.2"
wind drift (10mph) 86.3"
557 ft lb energy

6.5-284 @ 1000 yard
drop -273.6"
wind drift (10mph) 66.3"
752 ft lb energy

I'm not trying to suggest the .270 win is "better" than the 6.5-284 - it's not. I'm just trying to compare the two based on factual numbers to see where the real advantages are. I intend on bulding a 6.5-284 (or .264 win mag) in the near future. Nonetheless, the old .270 win, seems to be quite good out to fairly long distances.

Curtis,when you shoot the barrel out of the 270, go to the 280. The std 162g HOrnady a Max has a bc of about .650.

Use the same brass, anneal it and neck it up.

I shot the 160's at 2900-2950 out of my 280, std nosler accuracy load.

i have shot the 139 scenar around 3080 out of my 6.5-284. your question is a good one though. you should ask on longrangehunting.com . i shoot a lot of F-class matches and have never shot against a .270 that i know of. i would like to though. roninflag

JMHO but it seems to me that over the years,6mm, 6.5 and 7mm have gotten the bullet development attention for target work that the 270 has not.Also 6.5 and 7mm(.284 that is; the 270 Winchester IS a true 7mm) have traditionally been built and offered with longer bullets and faster twists to accomodate the heavier bullets for which they are noted.It would do no good for a manufacturer to build a 270 bullet with a BC over .600 if no one has the barrels to shoot it.

Given the military pedigree of the 6.5 and 7mm bore sizes,and the use of long heavy bullets, faster twists were standard in those bore sizes;the 270, OTOH,was conceieved solely as a hunting cartridge,and with the bullets of the day,its' 10 twist was fine.I personally think anyone building a 270 today would be well served building it with a faster twist.

Since it sits squarely in the middle between 6.5 and 7mm,(and we know those two calibers are very good) I see no reason why someone who put their mind to it, could not build a 270 bullet of great accuracy and high enough BC to at least stay in the ball park past 600 yards.

I think the cartridge is capable;it's likely more the bullets, barrels, and shooters attitudes that hold it back in the LR endeavors,far as I can tell.

Dan Lilja managed to use the [bleep] out of the .270 and lowly 150gr ballistic tip for longe range hunting,before the practice became all of the rage it is today..

The .270 has never really been considered by the longe range benchrest shooters.For decades .30 cal was required by regulation and when that was amended,shooters moved right into the 7mm and 6.5mm.one of the founding fathers of the 6.5x.284 still competes nationally.The .270 has never had much following outside of hunting and america for that matter.

a fairer comparison for 6.5 mm vs 270 bore would be the 120 grain and 123 grain Match bullets in 6.5 when comparing a `30 in 270 caliber..

if I wanted a long range caliber, I think I'd look at the 6.5 x 280 Improved...

however just the old plain 280 case would probably be fine..

Targets, true enough....as a hunting cartridge I believe it is widely used in other countries or continents, Africa for instance.

BobinNH, very good response. I hadn't thought about some of those issues you mentioned. It makes sense. Thanks for the post. I've just always wondered why the .277 bullets aren't used or talked about much. Now I've got a better perspective.

I think the best thing to do would be to have one of each calibers and use them both . . .

Curtis it's all speculation on my part....

The 270 just started life as a hunting cartridge and it appears that is the way it will stay, I guess.....(?)

But,there is this......

"........When testing bullets in the new case(6.8SPC),it became obvious that while those of 6.5mm were a bit more accurate than 7mm bullets, the latter did more damage to targets at 500 meters and beyond.Then its' developers discovered that 270 bullets shot about as flat and with about as much accuracy as 6.5 bullets and delivered about as much downrange punch as 7mm bullets...."

November/December Rifle Shooter article by Layne Simpson reporting on the development of the 6.8 SPC Project headed up by Master Sargeant Steve Holland of the 5th Special Forces Group, Chris Murray of the US Army Marksmanship Unit,and Chief Ballstic Technician Troy Lawton.......

Mmmmm..........

Might be goring some sacred cows here.......

I left LE for 7 months 6/05-1/06 to work for BFMI. That November my oldest son shot two whitetail bucks with a 12.5-in. Barrett M468 at under 60 yards using the initial slow run of Remington 115-gr. OTM. Not 500 meters, but those bucks died quickly and had tissue damage similar to whitetail I've killed with .270 Winchester 130s at less than 100 yards.

5.56mm is fine, but 6.8mm is final. My inner loony lusts for a 6.5-284, but a .270 will kill anything that needs shooting in Tennessee.

Thats funny right there.

go on down to 100-110 gn bullet in that 270 if you really want to what it will do at long range. 270 is a great long range caliber.

What do you call long range?

You MV will certainly be higher but the lightweight, low BC bullet will shed velocity fast.

Personally, I would never use a 100-110 grain bullet for LR hunting or shooting.

+1, Ernie

Lighter bullets may fly flatter for a ways, but once you start getting past 500 yds. they are not the ticket. I know this from experience. My buddy had a Lazzeroni Scramjet built up that shot a 100 grn bullet at 3800 fps. It was great out to 500 yds. but then the wind ate it up. I built up a 270 WSM shooting 140 grn. Accubonds at 3200 fps and was pretty good out to 600 yds. Now I have a 6.5-284 shooting 140 grn. Bergers and a 338 Edge shooting 3000 grn Bergers. Neither of these shoot over 2900 fps. But hits out to 1000 yds. and a little beyond are becoming routine. If you shoot where the wind never blows, you are ok shooting light and fast. But if the wind blows at all, you are better off with higher BC. The 270 is my favorite caliber, but until someone starts building higher BC bullets, it won't be my go to caliber for long range.

I've been using 135 gr. Match Kings in my .270 this year for marmots. My shooting has all been over 12,000' elevation. I shot 7 'hogs this year at ranges from 600 to 749 yards. Next year I expect little trouble breaking the 800 yard mark. I'm not sure how far I can push this, but I'll keep trying to extend my range until shots become more a matter of luck that skill. I was out the other day and fired a couple groups using 130 gr. TSX's getting ready for elk next week. These are shooting nice little .5" three shot groups at 100 yds off the bench. I love getting this kind of accuracy from an 8 lb. hunting rifle. The BC of the MK's is published at .488, the TSX at .431. I used to shoot a .243 pushing 58 gr. v'max's at 3700 fps, but they were easily blown around in a breeze, and past 500 yard they were getting tough to hit with reliably. No such problem this year with the 27.

Pronghorn hunt with a buddy last August in N.E. New Mexico. Two killed at slightly under 400 yds. I was shooting a 6.5-284 with 140 gr. SST's at 2,950 fps, he a Model 700 Sendaro in .270, 130 gr. factory ammo. Not much difference. Very similar performance. Both antelope DRT. But, they're that not hard to kill, just got to hit them.

Dirtfarmer

Try a 150 berger at 2950 vs a 140 berger at 2950 there is not that much difference. .531 vs .612 BC with the advantage to the 6.5. I have shot the 150 berger out to 1k in the 270 and it does pretty well.

BTW I was never able to get 2950 out of any 6.5x284 I have ever owned while using 140 bergers and lapua brass. I have only owned 3 and now only own one but that is just my experiance maybe being at 200 feet above salt water has something to do with it.

I've noticed in these comparisons most default to the 130gr bullet for the 270. Why not a 140 or 150 gr? Longer bullets buck wind better right? I am no long range shooter just askin'.

raybass,

Good question on the .270. Seems that the 130 gr. has been the classic all the way back to Jack O"Connor. Good velocity, flat shooting with good knock down power. One would think that the longer, heavier bullets with higher S.D.'s might be interesting. Just haven't seen that much written about the heavier bullets. Most people think 130 gr. when they talk about the .270.

Dirtfarmer

EddyBo,

Try Vv 165 with the 6.5-284 and 140 gr. bullets. In my experience, the best accuracy, but sensitive to the "sweet spot" regarding the exact charge for max accuracy. Took a while to find what my gun liked best, but once found, it was consistent. One can get very consistent 3,000 fps loads with RL-17 and 140 gr. bullets with the 6.5-284.

Dirtfarmer

My first 6.5x284 was a Kelbly built rifle, built on a grizzly 2 action. 2850 was about as fast as I could push a 142 SMK without wrecking my brass and I tried a dozen powders trying to reach 3 K. I may could get there with RL 17 or vv560 but I was not using those powders at the time. I was using vv n160 and if I recall 165 at that time. The next was built on a BAT action with a kreiger barrel I was able to get 2900 with that barrel, but later re barreled it to 6x47 lapua. I still have one built on a trued 700 in a mcmillan and a kreiger barrel. I have never even tried the 140s in it now that I think about it. I tried some hornady interlocks in it to break it in and the darn thing shot so good I can not recall every trying anything else in it. I kinda decided that the 6.5x284 was not my favorite and moved on to the 6.5-270WSM.

am sure there are guys pushing 140s at 3K with the 284 case, but I guess I just had some slow tubes as I never could no matter what QL predicted.

Ray, my first 270 was in the 80s, a 700 MR, it never shot 130s well. Rem goofed the muzzle/crown, and I had to get that fixed, lap lugs, bed stock, and it was floated when cured. THEN it would shoot, but MUCH better, putting 3 150 BTs into a nickel sized group time after time w/52.0 IMR4350. It would crater primers at book max load of 52.5 so I stopped at 52.

Later, a Ruger 1B showed the SAME preference, 150s over 130s. The 140 Hornady I believe was then the only .277 made, but now, with BTs and NABs, in 140, that would be my 'go to bullet' save perhaps elk/moose sized game or larger, then I might opt for the 150PT.

Currently running 150 BTs in another 270. The original owner had bought some 140 Extended Range IIRC, back in the 90s, and it seemed to shoot fairly well at 200 yds. So, yes, I echo your sentiment's on 140/150s in 270.

No doubt the 130s have and will continue doing a good job for a long time in 270s, but I feel they leave something on the table...so why not utilize the benefits, inc. often better accuracy.

Seen that myself with a marlin XL7, I handloaded several types of 130's and was getting decent accuracy but not exactly what I was looking for. One day while at the range trying loads , (i was about done), I had a box of Winchester Supremes (something like the mrx) in 150gr shot 3 at the target and presto 3/4" group. Its done better since with a clean barrel, sold it to a buddy and hes happy with the little tack driver.

65BR,

I have probably loaded for 15-20 .270's over the years, and most have shown a decided preference for 150's over 130's. There were some rifles that shot about as well with 130's as 150's, but none that shot BETTER with 130's.

How about throwing up the ballistics of the .270-WSM instead of the plain Jane 270 Winchester and see what happens compared to the 6.5-284 shootout!!!

The .270-WSM I saw last week at the gun range was running over 150fps faster than my .270 Winchester or the wife's .270 Winchester with stainless barrel.

JB, thanks, thought I might be seeing a 'trend'..

No doubt the WSM is hotter/faster, but GOSH I really detested the blast my brother's MRC Custom had......really for 150 FPS, it just changes where you hold, not so much how far it will be effective IMHO.

They will ALL kill far more than most anyone can reliably consistently hit vitals IMO.

I chrono'ed a 270 WSM for a guy at the range a few weeks ago with 150 grain Winchester factory loads at 3226 FPS

Jwp-475, now that is close to what those folks at the range had on their .270WSM. They also were shooting some of those Hornady V-Max 110 grn bullets at 3500fps!

I thought the .270WSM was pretty quick using a 150 grain bullet at 3200fps. The wife's .270 Winchester shoots great groups with 150grn bullet but only at 2840fps. It has broken 2900fps but groups were not as tight.

i shot in an f-class match last week. no .270s. i am ready whent they are.

Wow!!
I had heard that some of the factory stuff was loaded hot, but that's screamin'. The best I have seen in mine is about 3050 with 150gr Partitions over 68gr of Magpro. Any hotter and the bolt gets heavy. The fastest I have pushed 140s is the mid 3100s.

In fact 3226 is, according to the loading manuals, fast for the 270 Roy.

This being said, I would call 3226fps an anomaly for comparison purposes.

405wcf

given the 6.5 rage, this thread needs some air.

And a moment of silence for EddyBo....RIP.....

Eddy was the good schitt for sure.

I've never posted much, but have been reading and learning on here since '05.
I do miss EddyBo's posts and I'm sure those of you that knew him personally felt a great loss with his passing.

It was interesting to read about the .270 WSM factory ammo. Dad has an A-Bolt .270 WSM. I'm loading 130 BT's and NP's to 3150 (chronied) with RL22 for him. Could probably squeeze a bit more out of it, but it shoots very well and he'll never know the difference (the deer, coyotes, and groundhogs have yet to complain as well). He bought a box of 150 grain Power Points just to have "some heavies" and, figuring they'd make cheap brass. We shot a few of them and THEY KICKED. Not detached retina kicked, but way harder than a 150 at 3000fps out of an 8lb rifle oughta kick. Way harder than the 130's at 3150.

He probably bought that box back around '06-'07, I'll have to chrony a couple rounds next time I get a chance.

Some old threads are still enjoyable to read!

Wow! Revived after 8 years. I long ago traded off the .270 for a custom 7 mag and now shooting another custom .270 WSM. Really like the Wizzum.

I didn't realize how old it was at first and mostly noticed the huge disparity on the velocities chosen to make the comparisons. The 270 Win velocities jive with what I have seen but most 6.5-284s will push a 140 at 2975 to 3000 with modern powders pretty easy.

270s don't have the appropriate twist rate to use decent bullets.

Discussion over.

I've found that RL-17, 48.8 gr, with a 140 VLD will give a solid 3K fps out of my 26" Krieger, 6.5-284 and shoots sub MOA.

My tightest groups were with Vv N-165, but 2,950 was the top speed and that powder had definite accuracy nodes. RL-17 doesn't seem to have specific accuracy nodes, shoots about the same until 3,100 fps at which time groups open up. Groups open up before pressure signs. I've read when you see pressure signs with RL-17, you WAY over where you need to be...

I'm wondering if RL-17 with its flatter pressure curve, may be less prone to accuracy nodes. N-165 at an accuracy node, groups slightly tighter than RL-17, but RL-17 shoots almost as tight and shoots faster.

DF

Agreed. As soon as accuracy starts to diminish just a little the .270 WSM will get a faster twist barrel to stabilize the 170 Bergers... or chambered for 7mm WSM.

I have used a LOT of R17 in my 6.5-284s. I am only getting about 500 rounds out of a barrel with it. Won't try it in my new 6x47.

Are you thinking RL-17 burns barrels faster than other powders?

DF

Yipes! Is it getting quite hot? Just wondering. 500 rounds is quite a bit of shooting,but that sounds like pretty short barrel life.

Yes, it is hard on barrels- much harder than H4350, 4831, Retumbo, H1000- I could go on. For a hunter that doesn't shoot more than 40 rounds a year it is wonderful stuff. For a guy who shoots a couple of hundred rounds a year he will be buying barrels.

Yes, it is hard on barrels- much harder than H4350, 4831, Retumbo, H1000- I could go on. For a hunter that doesn't shoot more than 40 rounds a year it is wonderful stuff. For a guy who shoots a couple of hundred rounds a year he will be buying barrels.

I've never owned a 6.5-284, at least not yet, but 500 rounds sounds like incredibly short barrel life! I used to shoot a .300 Jarret before we had ultra mags, and I got a little over 1000 rounds out of that before it started losing accuracy.

Well if you get a 6.5 X 284 make sure the brass, dies and reamer are all the same specs. ! Life,s a lot easier when they are the same.

Based on one rifle, about 800 rounds total if that, on its second barrel, first was set back re chambered, 24" new second barrel anything above lo 2800,s with 140 gr bullets I saw pressure. Fussy compared to the 6.5 Creedmoor. Would not build another.

Bigstick runs a lot of RL-17... Might explain why he goes through lots of barrels.

Yep! Sure miss him.

Yep, another nice read.

Take care