Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Why is .264 higher BC than .277 and then why is .284 higher than .277 too?

I did not miss the "field performance" part of your statement, and I agree with you that field performance is practically equal for all intents and purposes. You'll get no argument from me about that. My point was that people who love and prefer the 270, who number not a few, will always claim their choice is better because of that few fps more velocity, and few grains more weight, and few thousandths more diameter. That is why they/we continue to argue the point. It's what people with preferences do. Everybody tends to defend their personal choices. The neighbor kid never ever misses a chance to tell me how his choice of broadhead is better than mine and everyone else's, even though I have outright stated to him on more than one occasion that I don't like his frickin' broadheads. I do this because the boy needs to start thinking for himself a bit instead of following the old lines of BS that typify the opinions of his misguided forbearers. But it's a losing battle because he continually chooses the false security of the old-line BS to that of real life experience and critical thought.

Berger intentionally made the 277 bullets with lower bc's because they did not want to offend those who love the 6.5 & 7 MM's. Just imagine the impact that having the 270 dominate the target world. There would only be one type of dies, fewer powders, fewer barrel makers, few bullet makers, and only one type of brass. Loading manuals would be thinner. The world would come to an end. Rifle makers would go broke etc.

Maybe Jack will chime in -

Meanwhile, off to shoot my Tiger Striped 260

Fair enough, and I did say it depended on bullet choice and particulars of the intended use etc. FWIW I ran a quick ballistic calc with default assumptions and those two bullets / muzzle velocities, and they showed the the 270 was still faster even out at 1000 yards. I'm not denying that appropriate game would be taken by either of those with decent placement. However, that still doesn't amount to 'equal' field performance, which includes factors such as drop, wind etc. You're still talking about a lighter slower bullet.

Thanks for the additional info. That's the key point, even with with same 'design', the bullet shape can be 'tweaked' for different calibres, giving differing weighting to different factors.

Have you submitted your 'design' in the other thread?

Ah, but deadkenny, what did your fancy ballistic calc say about wind-drift? I think that people here are saying that wind-drift will be MUCH higher for the 270 than for the 260.

Will it?

Windage is actually slightly higher for the .264 125 grain NP than for the .277 130 grain NP out to 1000 yards, according to the calc. The 250 fps advantage at the muzzle takes quite a bit to overcome.

While some are better no doubt, some studies indicate published BC's are exagerrated:

http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0705/0705.0389.pdf

I have to wonder if they're more so in target calibers.

The threads bashing the 270 Win remind me of the haters of the good sports teams...they hate them because their team isn't as consistenly good so they bash them in an effort to make themselves feel better about their teams inadequacies...

M1Garand,

How old is that article? No doubt some of the BCs published by manufacturers are still inflated, but Berger has re-evaluated all of their published BCs over the past few years. Bryan Litz, who did BC testing for Berger, has also written a book in which he published field tested values for BCs for 236 long range bullets. My impression is that Litz's book covers the most popular target bullets (at least the long-range target bullets), so you don't have to just believe what manufacturers publish.

Based on what I've read, I would tend to trust the current BC values published by Berger. However, as I'm sure you know, BC varies some with velocity, so one value doesn't necessarily give you enough data, depending on the individual bullet.

I believe it's from '06 or '07. I think Berger did change their BCs, I don't know about the others, but I thought the results were interesting how much variation there is.

Fellows - I have a verbal agreement to buy a 6.5X55 BUT I'm telling you all this DRIVEL about their superiority is about to make me CHANGE MY MIND.

After a few knowledgable sources posted y'all left the 6.5 for hunting thread and started this one on BC. ? Wonder Why ?

Even You Ramblin Razorback said "that the 260 catches the 270 Win at 650 YARDS". Well it takes it long enough.

I intend to go thru with the purchase AND next yr. I will post some REAL hunting scenario COMPARISONS. I'm hunting now and will be prepping to move in the Spring and don't have time even to use my Pressure Trace equip.

There are TWO known facts ALREADY. The 270 generates more energy thru realistic hunting ranges. What PERCENTAGE of hunters shoot & kill game past 400-500 yds? A very few do and if they're competent, I have no problem. The VAST MAJORITY of hunters don't and don't attempt.

The 277 HAS a larger wound channel than a 264. It starts larger and with HUNTING (not target) bullets of comparable construction it expands larger. I'm NOT saying the 6.5s are inadequate at all BUT I'm convinced they are NOT superior.
..
..
..
..
..
BTW I like cheese on my bergers!

C'mon jwall. Now you're just baitin' the zealots. We already know the 6.5mm bullets are superior.

I like the .270. If it weren't for that cartridge we'd have hardly no humor around here at all. It Kills me I tell ya!