Here's something you guys need to know!!

IMG_2854 by .com/photos/61286670@N08/]Sharps Man, on [bleep]

6.8 Creedmoor is faster

The .270 is a great cartridge.

Is it a .270 or a 270?

Almost 100 yrs old and still not much better for the avg. Joe deer hunter.

Never seen a gay thing about a 270 but I know some like to kid about it just like they do about a Creedmoor.
Guess some have to try and bring people down to make themselves feed good about the decisions they have made........lol

Perfect. That’d make Bob smile.

Nice one !
dave

This and some like to make gay accusations toward 270 users to draw attention away from themselves in hopes that their own homosexual tendencies will not be noticed by others.

Meh - it's a joke, not a dick. Don't take it so hard.

For my uses - I don't know what the .270 does the 7-08 doesn't. That is whitetail out to 300 yards.

So while there's likely nothing wrong with choosing a .270 - I can't imagine it being the best choice over something else that's reasonably comparable.

No hard cheese here, Just making a come back to the gay 270 joke. RJ

No big deal to me either. Lots of calibers out there that do almost the exact same thing, just a different name on them. That is what makes a rifle loony like us.

I've got a couple rifles in 270 Win and a couple in 6.5 CM.....I didn't realize it until now, but I'm REALLY gay.

This and some like to make gay accusations toward 270 users to draw attention away from themselves in hopes that their own homosexual tendencies will not be noticed by others.
______________________

Me thinks they protest too much.


Jerry

At least my 270’s aren’t chambered in 6.5 Man Bun

I never cared for “ Almost As Good “ or the “Wannabes” when the real
thing costs no more.

Less is not more.

Jerry

Agreed - why I don't shoot a .270

For deer out to 300yds, what possible advantage would one offer over another? I don't own either, so no skin off my shins.

Reminds me of some of the nomenclature freaks. If I relay the sighting of buffalo/bison in Yellowstone, most, either way, will know what we're discussing, and no corrections will be required. Not seen any mention of bison nickels either.

Way too easy to get some guys riled up over the "gay" 270 ..... personally, I can't recall ever shooting a deer with my 270 and thinking " gee, I wish I had a 7-08, or 6.5 creedmore, or any number of other cartridges that would have done the job just as well"....

As rifle loonies, we tend to be a rough, sarcastic, self righteous bunch, don't we?

A cartridge case is a brass bottle to hold a bullet, powder, and primer. Though there are some complexities with this component, we argue way too much about which one is best. But it keeps life interesting!

A 150 gr Nosler partition at 3000fps out of a 270 solves many problems

Is that an LSU hoodie?

It sure is....I get 3000+ out of a 22" barrel/ RL 26

Yes sir….

No, you got it wrong. Both penalties off-set, repeat 2nd Down.

Yes. 😊

6 x 45 = 270
.270 = rainbows and unicorns

Some people will still have difficulty shooting and killing critters!!

Never had one. Don't really know why. Just never felt the need. I know a lot of folks that have/use them, including my son and my life long hunting partner and they seem to like them alright. At this point I doubt if I'll ever get one.

Funny picture by the OP.

Never cared for the "270 Win is gay". posts on the campfire. I am not pro- or anti- gay. I just think it is stupid.

The 270 Winchester is a great, classic rifle cartridge.

The 6.5 Creedmore is an exceptionally well-designed and effective rifle cartridge. It is a modern classic. If I didn't have have full faith in my 30-06 or 308 Win chambered rifles, I'd get a 6.5 Creedmore. My only negative about it (6.5 Creedmore) is the fast twist. Not so good for cast bullets. A 30-06 or 308 Win with 1-10, 1-11, or better yet a 1 -12" twist is a much better dual purpose jacketed / cast bullet cartridge platform.

I have owned two 270 Winchesters: a Win m70 pre-64 sporter and a Weatherby Vanguard S2.
Both were great. I have been trimming the herd down to a couple of .308 caliber rifles, and sold the others off . I kept two 30-06 rifles, two 308 Win rifles and my Marlin 336A 30-30. Inventory for one caliber is very easy.

I believe I have a good sense of humor. Just never saw the humor in the "270 Win is gay" threads. Gets old very fast.

Whatever.

Yep....

270 is gay I never knew I have 3 model 70 270s

270 is a 280 wannabe.

I have heard a lot of that in the past. I am not really impressed with the 280, I think a lot of people are in the same boat . Their sales reflect it.


FWIW I have owned a few of them. If I want 7mm I go 7mm rem mag.

I tend to agree with what Jack O'Connor said, that the .270 and .280 are equally as good. Use good similar b.c. 140 grain projectiles in either, the .270 marginally better sectional density, the .280 marginally bigger diameter. I don't think there is any significant difference. For slightly better performance than the .270 with slightly more recoil, I'd go for the .280 RCBS Improved or a .277 with a slightly bigger case.

Perfect Deer Rifle

And moose and bear and caribou and sheep rifle.

Have put lots of each in the freezer with 130 gr Partitions and a stomach full of 4831.

Ted

Being a huge 270 fan, I take these threads with a grain of salt.

Been using a 270 since before the 7-08 was released. I really like the 7-08 and consider it nothing more than a 270 short. Have a couple that I never hunted. I can easily match 7-08 ballistics with my 270's but cannot match 270 ballistic with the 7-08's.

The 280 is a wannabe 270 IMO.

Back in the 70's when times were different, a 270 was it. That is what my Dad used. That is what we had reloading components for. We did not have our own reloading setup, as my Dad was frugal. We had to walk over to the neighbors to load ammo. It was fiscally responsible in his eyes..

Over the last 25 years I have been able to own and play with a bunch of different cartridges and rifles. For some reason I keep coming back to the 270.

So you 7mm guys can have your 7-08, and 280, and 7mag. You can keep trying to drag down the classic 270 but it speaks volumes when one is trying to drag something down.

Last year's gay 270 work. 145gr ELD-X, 3076 fps. Snuck into 50 yards on him, but blew him and the doe out. Stopped at about 175 yards.

Beautiful buck, and pic!

+1

...............LOL!.....Same handshake for the new 6.8 Western as well?.....LOL

I think it could be the handshake for 7mm mag guys. Trying to over compensate for something?

In my very limited experience, the full power .270 regardless of bullet weight, is the killingest cartridge I have ever used. I experienced several non lethal shots killing the deer on the spot for no reason that I could determine, but, I'm no veternarian. In my limited world of steep timbered blacktail country and close range it is too much of a good thing. No fault of the .270...I was just using it in the wrong place at the wrong time. At a time in my life when hunting was more for meat than sport, I was blood shotting a lot of meat. I moved to milder velocities of the Swede, the 7x57, 8x57 loaded modestly...and the bucks went another 25 yards before they dropped, but you could eat right up to the bullet hole.

Question for the older 270 shooters. I have my dads 270 Remington pump that I decided to use and for my daughter to use. I had a box of very hornady 150 trainers on hand. It was shooting those really well. Shot a few 2-3 inch 3 shot groups at 300. Ok so I ran out of those and bought some more of those and some speers. Now it’s shooting 2 inches at 100. Any help or knowledge might help.
Was wondering if maybe the old bullets were slightly bigger around and stabilized better. Thanks edk

......LOL.....Well I guess that includes my 28 Nosler then......

What "ballistics" are you talking about?

270 130 is the Iconic Western deer load,

Now that 10” twist is passé, 150s aren’t the top end of this caliber capabilities
That is more for the 6.8s though.

280 / 7 mm Express in a bolt action at 270 Win pressures, Not the same comparison.

Normal hunting ranges. This is the hunting rifle forum, not the long range shooting forum.

I'm not asking about distance, but what aspects of external ballistics you're talking about; muzzle velocity, drop, wind drift, impact velocity, impact energy, muzzle energy, etc.?

velocity

Amen! Much more manly and not so gay then...

The only load I’ve used on game in my 270 was with 130 grain TTSX or TSX - I don’t remember. It worked fine.
I’m not sure why anyone would say it’s better than a 280, unless they never shot a 280. The 280 is just slightly more powerful, that’s all.
The 280 has a slightly larger case and a slightly larger diameter bullet. The 7mm bullets were available heavier than the 270 bullets, still are, I think. I bought my first 280 in the early 70’s. I never had an issue with its killing power. I chose the 280 over the 270 back then because the bullet selection was greater in 7mm at least in my opinion.
The question comes down to what game can either be used successfully. Nothing that I’ve shot could be killed with one and not the other.
I have three 270’s right now. I plan on giving one each to my two sons.
They’ve complained about my favorite 30-06 load 180 grain and IMR4350. They seem to handle the 270 better.

A person can pick up a 270 cheaper than a 280!

At 600 yards the 270 WCF, 7mm-08 Rem and 6.5 Creedmoor with 130 and 140 grain bullets all hunt about the same and have remarkably similar ballistic characteristics down range. No one should lose any sleep over the physics these three chambers display nor their ability in the field. The 7mm-08 Rem and the 6.5 Creedmoor offer less recoil and with specific loadings for long range work will better the 270 WCF way out there past 750 yards, but again nothing to lose any sleep over. All three are top notch on the plains or in the mountains.

The first bolt action centerfire rifle I ever bought was an older model Rem 700 in 270win. I had stopped hunting years before, and used the rifle for target shooting. Often in the summer during hot weather. The stock warped and put pressure on the barrel, walking shots across the paper as it heated up. I purchased a B&C stock for it and took it to a public range to sight in. It shot so well, the range officer thought I had a custom made rifle. I used that rifle to take my first elk with Rem factory cor-lok ammo. Only one I ever hit DRT. I gave that rifle to my Dad in exchange for my Grandfather's circa 1952' Win 70 so he'd have a deer rifle to replace my Grandfather's. He was so impressed with it, he asked me where I got it. I had purchased it used from a good freind of his several years prior. That freind had died of cancer. He's generally an exclusive bow hunter now, but still uses the rifle to put deer in the freezer on occasion. Its a good rifle, and a fine cartridge IMO..

This is the stupid crap that people post that's made coming to the campfire a waste of time.

Blair

The problem is
Stupidity is a bottomless pit.

Jerry

Well said jwall, and quite true..

I really don’t understand the hate for 270.
But it’s cool, I guess I feel the same way about the 7RM crowd.

Dre

That makes me a Cross Shooter

I use

270 W and
7 RM


The 7 picks up where the 270 leaves off.

Anyone who thinks the 270 can do all the
7 RM does, doesn’t know as much as he thinks.

Jerry

They are more similar than different.

We all know this thread is mostly about fun and bandwidth.

I prefer the 270, nothing more, nothing less. Familiarity, experience and a proven track record. Of course there are a host of other cartridges that would have served me just as well over the last 40+ years.

CRS

“More similar than different”.

With the 270 W & 7 RM I’d agree.


150 gr bullet @ 3000 fps in a 270 W is impressive.

160 gr bullet @ 3150 fps in 7 RM is more.
(yes I’ve done it) multiple times in same rifle.

Jerry

Jwall, I shoot 270 and 6.5 so what does that makes me? Lol.
I know enough that I don’t see the benefits of the 7RM for what it’s cost shooting your standard ammo in normal hunting ranges.
Sure if you load your own heavy pills to stretch it out, otherwise you just drank the belted Magnum koolaid

Dre

My first question is, 6.5 - which ? - (there are good ones LOL)


Even I have a 6.5 Swede in a 70 no less.


Now "ifn yourin" is 'the bun', I'd say you are contorted !


Jerry

There might have been a time in my past when I cared what other's thought about what I used. There was never a time when I gave a schit what others used.

Have two early 270s in a M-54 and a M-70. They work OK for deer and antelope.
For larger game, or bigger deer- a 338-06 and a 35 Whelen in early Model 70s. The 30-06 is the rifle caliber standard.
Elmer Keith was right a long time ago.

As has been said many times "it is more about bullet placement that displacement".
That said, a 6.5, 270, 7-08, 7mm Mag, etc. will all work fine if the bullet is of proper construction, and placed where it needs to be.
I am not "Bawanna Jim" by any means but have killed enough with different cal's. to know that a well placed shot is what it is all about, regardless of the head stamp.

It certainly is.

To quote Stick and yes, he's correct "Boolits matter more than headstamps."

I read another good one here, but can't remember who it was: "Joe Average is over-headstamped, over-scoped and under-bulleted."

Stick said that too - I tend to agree.

I'm going to steal this sentiment from someone else but would agree that when looking at all the virtues of the .270 and hunting the lower 48 (power, recoil, reach, accuracy, etc.), it is evident that rifle cartridge development has not progressed much in the past 60 + years.

I think that the 270 and 130 grainers are the great western hunters dream!
now if you want to talk about gayness the 6.5 gaymoor is it.

First part: I agree the 270 has a long and positive track record.

Second part: Bullshit.

come on now don't get too worked up, us 270 lovers have had to read a how gay the 270 was. now it's time we move the crown to the royal gayness to the great 6.5 gaymoor!

I have to agree..............one of my hunting friends has a 6.5 Gaymoor he has it printed on his rifle and ammo box's.

I never go hunting alone with him !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It is always humorous to see how so many on this site equate gun cartridges with their sexual fantasies....

I've said the 270 is gay stuff came from some 7x57 fanciers projecting their insecurities.

You have it wrong, it's the opposite of fantasy......

now where going here, this is some funny stuff it's all in fun!

I have noticed that several on here, when they can not deal with fact about something often start with the name calling and the sexual persuasions and the like.

Fact is, there are several good deer cartilages out on the market. Shoot what you like, and I will do the same. I don't care if it is a 223 or a 50 BMG if it works for you so be it.

its all in fun nothing serous, it's just a joke have some fun!

I've said the 270 is gay stuff came from some 7x57 fanciers projecting their insecurities.
—————————


There is NO doubt.

After all, the 7X57 is a 270 Wannabe.

Jerry

The 270 is easy to shoot accurate.
But the 6.5 CM is really easy to shoot accurately.
They are both fa*ulous !

AFAIC... you are the joke.


jwall !!!

This^^

I've never heard a deer complain that I shot it with a ,270 rather than anything else. Deer don't care what you shoot them with. All you gotta do is shoot straight, putting the bullet into the right space. Doesn't matter what you do it with.

Waaay back in the day, I owned one hunting rifle.

It was a Browning A-Bolt (The fire's favorite) .270, and one centerfire revolver, a .44 Mag Super Blackhawk. I grew up using an old Salvage 110 in .270. Everything I shot fell over dead. Deer elk, whatever.

That Browning put a few critters on the ground

The 270 is just a bad copy of the better 7x64 Brenneke.

The 270 has always been a hunting cartridge and it has a great track record. With my Supergrade, I have the 110 TTSX averaging 3536 fps and the 130 TBT averaging 3223 fps, both book loads with Hunter and RL26. I haven't worked up any 150s yet, but no doubt they'll be north of 3K with RL26. All with fairly light recoil and great hunting accuracy. Is it better than any number of others? No, but it's a great cartridge and it's easy for the eunuchs to hate greatness

LOL. Quote of the month award nominee!

Seconded

How did you manage to kill anything ?

abso freakin lutely !!!

I tell ya - I’ve had outstanding success with my .270’s - I know it has a reputation here but if one stops & thinks it’s was the 6.5 Creedmoor of it’s day. Actually, after typing that & thinking about deleting it - I decided to leave it & see what happened.

Cheers boys - have a great one

^^^ g a y

You should know. bubby

Hahaha

It's like a Creedmoor, but with the wrong twist so it can only shoot light for caliber or horribly un-aerodynamic bullets. And in a long action so you can have a heavier, less capable rifle. And the wrong shoulder angle so you can get the joys of brass stretch and poor efficiency. And too much taper since clearly you're going to shoot it in a machine gun.


The .270 is the poster girl for cartridge design failure. It combines the numerous mistakes of the .30-06 with the additional mistake of the wrong twist rate.

Idiot.

Do tell Bob… tell us what the intent of the designer(s) were and how they failed to achieve them. Additionally, provide the mistakes that were made with the 30-06 where they had specific design parameters and specifications yet failed to achieve them. Be specific about the design inputs and how they failed to achieve them since you know.
I am pretty confident that most cartridges were designed without your input or approval.

I feel incredibly lucky to kill so many critters with such a design failure 😂😂

BWAAAAHAHA........... that’s hilarious!

Those 110 TTSX's are amazing out of a 24" 270 with Hunter behind 'em. Several elk. Several mule deer. Makes my 270 think it's a 257 Weatherby

Lame Brain just keeps on giving.

Who said, “open mouth and remove all doubt?”

For all the reasons you say it is a failure I can flip it around to be a positive.
Actually a 1/10 twist handles bullets that are heavy enough to get through heavy bone and muscle on Elk and Moose.
A longer action often facilitates smoother cycling than many of the newer short / fats.
Brass lasts a long time, 10 or more uses for the handloader is common.
Cartridge case taper is a good thing( and a gentle shoulder) in my book, it easier to extract a sticky case.
Oh yeah, and it has a properly long neck to ensure a better, more square ( less run out) bullet seating.
Works well with a 22" barrel.( so does the equally good 30/06 and .280 Rem)
My little old point of view, folks

lol.....good one.....

Good to see .270 fangirls are as sensitive as ever

😂

[quote=elkhunternm]


I gotcha Elks but sometimes STUPIDITY just has to be called out.
I promise to try to do better, not guaranteed but try.

Jerry

Damn, I thought I had you blocked. take care of that now

DO you somehow think this is 3rd grade ? That is your maturity level.

It's throwing out stupid stuff to get a reaction, nothing more, nothing less.

Ok, I'll keep an eye on you though.

I am pretty sure the 270 is not the offspring of the 30-06. They are brothers
out of the 30-03. And both have killed an immense amount of game.

If your 270 brass does not last long, you are probably overloading or have a sloppy chamber.

If you shoot deer with a 270 using 130 gr Nosler Partitions, you will never need another caliber.

You’ll go Cross eyed !! LOL

Jerry

Probably!

I was just a kid back then who couldn’t afford a haircut, before the internet really had taken hold, and didn’t know the .270 was as bad as it was.

I think the neighbor used a .30-06 on the middle buck, .270 surely wouldn’t have been 3 for 3.

150 grain bullet out of 308 Win, 24” barrel @ 2,950 fps.
140 grain bullet out of 7-08 Rem, 24” barrel @ 2,950 fps.
130 grain bullet out of 270 Win, 24” barrel @ 3,150 fps.
130 grain bullet out of 6.5 CM, 24” barrel @ 2,850 fps.
150 grain bullet out of 30-06, 24” barrel @ 3,100 fps.

I see no short comings taking any into the field, they all are well beyond capable at 400 yards. Any conversation beyond that is superfluous. I’d have no sleepless nights using any of the above.

The 270 Winchester is a classic, great cartridge!

Thanks for posting those!!! Everyone has an opinion, I didn't think the 308 was higher than the 6.5 CM. I do know my shoulder appreciates the 6.5 CM recoil though!!!

They shoot good and kill deer like a bolt of lightning.

I completely agree. They all work great and I’ve killed deer with everyone of them with total satisfaction!

The .264 bullets have great BC, however they also have small bores with significant bullet surface bearing due to bullet length. That equates to greater friction down the barrel and slightly less velocity. Barnes and others now groove band their bullets, especially copper mono types to reduce friction and down barrel pressure on all calibers these days. This is some of the reason the 264 Win obtains somewhat lower velocity with 140 grain bullets in a belted magnum hull, especially with late 50s and early 60s bullet technology in 24” barrels. The 6.5 CM doesn’t require high velocity to compete at long range, it has the advantage of sweet spot BC that does its thing way out there at high impact velocity in lieu of its slightly lower muzzle velocity.

The .270 case design is 96 years old now. It was state of the art when it was brought out.
Scopes were just becoming popular and "long range" was maybe 300 yards...
Bullet design could barely keep up with the new velocity envelopes being pushed.

The old girl made her reputation killing game of all sorts and sizes, at short range and long - and doing it very well. It's still doing it today. It's always among the top sellers of rifle and dies. Year after year - decade after decade. There's reasons for that. Light recoil, adequate killing power, flat trajectory, a rifle of reasonable weight and plenty of support from the ammo industry.

The .270 is better today than it ever was and is still a viable choice for the majority of us.

The .270 Win was already 8 years late compared to the 7x64 Brenneke
Most likely Winchester didn't want to pay royalties to Brenneke, so they "made their own cartridge".
Just make the caliber a tiny bit smaller, so people just can't recut the chamber to the superior 7x64 Brenneke.


"Invent"... then spend a god awful amount on advertisement.
Just like the 6.5 Creedmore did with the 6,5x47 Lapua.


7x64 Brenneke



270 Win

270 has been put down since WWII the way I see it as the war heros I hunted with as a kid loved the 06 as it won the war and the 308 was no good as well, in their world. My buddy wanted to borrow a rifle to hunt in upstate NY so I offered him my 270 mountain rifle, "I can't show up there with a 270, my uncles all hunt with 742s in 30'06, give me your .35, that'll work, that shoots 200s." I told him the 270 will drop a deer in it's tracks with a 130 grain handload. Nope my uncles use 220s and they will laugh at me. Years later he did bring the 270 and knocked a deer over backwards and the elders were blown away with the damage when they dressed it. Granted the old timers shot at any angle and the 220s got thru the deer every time and that's all they knew. A 270, no way for them. My mentor ran a landing craft during WWII and was another 30'06 only man. We all hunted with Browning BARs after the 742 and Win 100s proved unreliable and when I bought a 308 BAR I was scorned, thank God it wasn't a 270, lol.

This is probably big news to the JOC nostalgia crowd

That 7 x 64 looks like a good cartridge. The same case in 6.5 would also be good. Perhaps mid-way between 6.5 and 7mm would get the best of both and be even better. No...there would be no point in that, as we already have the .270.

Yeah, I 'd happily give up the good bullets of the 6.5 or 7

Yup!

270?

Hell, the 7Rem and 300Win are almost 60.
The shortmags were an attempt to slightly shorten the gun and duplicate others..

The Creed was an attempt to fix the 260, which is just a pup trying to
be a Sweet.

No, not much has been gained in 60 years in chambering.

Now as to precision in rifle and bullet manufacturing, and
powder tech and burn rates? Things have changed.

It's iconic for a reason. Flat-shooting, mild recoil, and still carries plenty of energy even at 500 yards. The only full-power rifle I own is a .270 and I'm tickled to death with it.

Now I just need to pick up a die set and start tinkering with loads!

No need to not use good bullets in the .270. The .277 140 grain Accubond, 140 Sierra Tipped GameKing for example have good b.c.'s without being excessively long, good sectional density, good accuracy, ideal cross-sectional area, good performance on game. In a relatively light hunting rifle at realistic distances such as up to about 350 yards its ideal. Once you get much beyond that, you really need to start thinking of longer barrels of heavier profile, more magnification and bigger heavier scopes, bipods, possibly even different stocks. Townsend Whelen advocated it as the ideal big game cartridge.

They are awesome. Ever catch one in an elk or all pass throughs?

If you're happy, I'm happy

Riflehunter said,

" No need to not use good bullets in the .270. The .277 140 grain Accubond, 140 Sierra Tipped GameKing for example have good b.c.'s without being excessively long, good sectional density, good accuracy, ideal cross-sectional area, good performance on game.

None are so deaf than those who will not hear !

I'll take a Good bullet + velocity over a Good bullet with - velocity. My preference......49 yrs hunting experience.

Jerry

I'm thinking there's a bunch of other animals you could add to that list..

dave

That's why you love your 7Mag. Seems you finally "heard"

A Man can have more than 1 love.

Jerry

I suppose if you want more velocity with the good .270 bullets there's nothing wrong with the .270 Weatherby.

RH

I was referring to the new hot trend of
long heavy SLOWER speed vs
the 270s 130 @ 3100.

It’s been a couple three years in a discussion
“They said the 6.5 C would pass the 270
+/- 600 yds. “

I’ll take a 600 yd advantage EVERY time.

Jerry

edit add: the 7 RM is ‘like’ a 270 on steroids.

I like a 30-06 for deer and hogs.

Last year winter I acquired my first 270win so I've not gotten any game down yet. I got a smoking deal on Federal premium ammo and snatch a good amount up as well as some Federal blue box 130gr soft point.

Those others were the Federal Trophy Copper 130gr ammo. Does anyone have any time with these? I've never used the Trophy Copper before. After that I have a bunch of Nosler partition, Speer Hot Core and Hornady SST bullets to fill those empty cases.

I suppose a lot of the more experienced hunters are more likely to reload and re-barrel their .270's and .257's rather than buy new rifles. The gun and ammunition companies have to have some gimmick to sell their new rifles and loaded ammunition otherwise they'll go out of business. It's inevitable that they convince new shooters that they'll be killing game at 600 or 700 yards when 150 yds is more likely. If I was shooting game as opposed to paper at those distances, I'd still want a .270 on a bigger case and use 165-170 grain projectiles in a heavy rifle with a 27" barrel.

The 270 is a great cartridge and has been around for quite some time. For heavy game a 280 for me with 140TSX works for me. My 6 Creedmoors with a 90 or 100 gr bullet kills game just as dead. Just a thought from all posters on this thread...... what is the average distance of most shots taken? My guess is 250 yards or less which is basically point and shoot with a 200/220 yard zero that nearly every centerfire will accomplish with ease. There are some very good points of view on this thread, but...... this is dead nuts here:


150 grain bullet out of 308 Win, 24” barrel @ 2,950 fps.
140 grain bullet out of 7-08 Rem, 24” barrel @ 2,950 fps.
130 grain bullet out of 270 Win, 24” barrel @ 3,150 fps.
130 grain bullet out of 6.5 CM, 24” barrel @ 2,850 fps.
150 grain bullet out of 30-06, 24” barrel @ 3,100 fps.

New product development ie. "new calibers" is merely a sales gimmick for the guns and ammo manufacturers to collect our cash!
Look how many deer have been taken with the 30-30 and other lever guns?

Then the gun manufacturers come up with "new rifles" such as Senderos, Bean Field Rifles, Long Range this, Long Range that and we donate our hard earned money chasing the new flavor of the day.

6.5 Creedmoor was a marketing genius form Hornady. Is it any better than the other calibers mentioned here? Nope. But they sure as hell sold the shiitt out of it and money exchanged hands from the Hunter/ Shooters to the manufacturers just as they planeed it!


Several other calibers could be added to this list. Potato vs Potatoe. Pick your caliber and master it.

Just for shiitts and giggles I googled this:

What distance are most deer shot?
Mostly, whitetails are killed at 100 yards or less and mule deer at 200 and under, but every once in a while, you will want to take a shot at truly long range–300 and 400 yards.Aug 1, 2004



Interesting read.....
https://backfire.tv/flat-shooting-cartridges/

Pass throughs so far but I haven't put them through two shoulders.

puah, we are friends and I'm not shooting at you. grin

I do understand averages but I'm not concerned about the average for all hunters/shooters. I prep for myself.
Most of my deer have been killed less than 200 yds and some less than 100. I have also kilt plenty 200-300 yds and
a few @ 400 yds.

I was an UNabused Boy Scout so 'be prepared' is ingrained in me. Early in my deer hunting I was disappointed to
be reminded that I was NOT prepared for longer shots. Lesson LEARNED.
That theme is appropriate for many things beside hunting. DON'T go to deer lease W/O liquid, snacks, or first aid.

I 'could' have killed nearly all my deer with a 270/280/30-06 class rifle (include 25-06). A few times I've been glad to have a 7 RM or 300 WM in my hands.

I KNOW a 7 RM isn't needed for deer hunting in the South, it's comforting in really open desert , prairie ,bean field
or large cutover landscape.

I'd rather have 'too much' and not need it THAN to have too little and need more. That applies to more than hunting.
Make of that what you will. LOL

Bottom line for ME is:

Hunt/shoot what pleases YOU and that's what I do. It doesn't matter to me and I don't lose a minutes sleep over anyone
hunting a handgun or short range rifle. BTW I have killed deer with a Rooger (lol) SBHK 44 mag.

I don't go for, "almost as good as". I get the real thing.

Jerry

All good JW....

Most people buy into the sales pitch from gun manufacturers for all the new calibers which are being touted as the "latest and greatest" for their own sales dollars. IE... 6.5 Creedmoor, 6.5PRC .224 Valkyrie, and all the new Nosler calibers etc....
More times than not, hunters / shooters are very gullible and chase the propaganda instead of working on their overall marksmanship.

By this list, if people wanted a truly "long range point and shoot" (depending on what the definition of long range is) they should opt for one of the top 3 and call it a day.

6.5-300 Weatherby Magnum -32.00 -200.80
.26 Nosler -34.00 -210.70
.28 Nosler -37.00 -225.10

By the way..... the 280 best the 270..

.280 Remington -45.00 -287.40

.270 Winchester -46.00 -314.00


https://backfire.tv/flat-shooting-cartridges/


The good thing about this sport is we have plenty of calibers to choose form and debate about which is best on gun forums!
Buy what suits you, get the most accurate / highest BC hunting bullet that your rifle likes, gather your dope, practice, and put your skills to a successful hunt.

Exactly

I think we all go thru phases as were age and mature. Some start big and slow others start smaller and fast. I have gone both ways and it’s all good. My latest unnecessary purchase was a 270 Weatherby and it’s pushes 150 Berger’s at 3295 average. 200 yard groups are inch and a quarter or less.
My purchase just before that was a Ruger no 1 in 405 winchester. It’s all good.
Have fun guys. Edk

puah

"All good JW....

Most people buy into the sales pitch from gun manufacturers for all the new calibers which are being touted as the "latest and greatest" for their own sales dollars. IE... 6.5 Creedmoor, 6.5PRC .224 Valkyrie, and all the new Nosler calibers etc....
More times than not, hunters / shooters are very gullible and chase the propaganda instead of working on their overall marksmanship.

By this list, if people wanted a truly "long range point and shoot" (depending on what the definition of long range is) they should opt for one of the top 3 and call it a day.

6.5-300 Weatherby Magnum -32.00 -200.80
.26 Nosler -34.00 -210.70
.28 Nosler -37.00 -225.10

By the way..... the 280 best the 270.."


All Good here too.

My personal limit is 400 yd. I'm confident at that range.
At that range the 280 / 270 is a wash.

I have picked the 7 RM as MY 1 for ALL N. A. big game.
The 7 RM picks up where the 270 / 280 leaves off (for me)

Jerry

I think with the improvements with the .270 bullets in terms of b.c, you can't really say that the .280 is better than the .270. I'd rather just a few good bullets with good b.c's rather than lots on the basis that there's more chance of the ones you want being stocked than some other one that might have a different point of impact and powder charge and seating depth. I'd rather have the better sectional density of a 140 grain bullet with a good b.c. out of a .270 than a 140 grain bullet out of a .280. If you blow out the .280 case and put a 30 degree shoulder on it and use 150 grain projectiles at say additional 50 fps over the .280...that might be marginally better than the .270 in some respects, marginally more recoil and muzzle blast, but not enough to detract from being relatively easy to shoot well at distance (300 -350 yds). Feeding would still be good and you don't lose magazine capacity.

It doesn’t make a lot of sense to talk about .270 BC advancements and then compare with a 140 from the .280.

Agreed Jordan

Even tho 140 gr is 140 gr the bore dia changes the
width and length.

From the SAME maker...
A 140 gr .277. Has a higher BC than
A 140 gr .284

A 150 gr .284 has a very similar BC to
A 140 gr .277

Jerry

The point I'm making is that to get an improvement over the 140 grain .277 bullet, in a .280 you need to go to the 150 grain .280 bullet but drive it a bit faster than what the .280 does.

Have we debated the .270 enough?

New thread , new caliber for discussion?

Nope, I saw a twitch. Keep hammerin….

Holy. That was good.

How about the .300 Springfield?

The .300 Whelen is better.

Jerry

Well played!

Junk…. It won’t make it.

Who want to start the conversation off?

.300 Whelen vs .300 Springfield

Funny y’all don’t B..... about 6.5 Queermore!

Jerry. I said that.

Agreed.

I like both the 270 and 280. For the average fella shooting bucks and bulls out to 500’ish I don’t see enough difference to matter myself. I think Lapua said get good with your chosen one. I think that’s pretty good advice.

I’ve got a 7.5 twist Krieger in my basement and some 27 Nosler dies. Pretty soon that one will get made up. I have no illusions that a 28 Nosler or anything 7mm won’t whip it but I’m pretty sure with anything decent around a .650 BC at around 3k or so I’ll be okay. I’m doing it just for the helluva it and know all of the things against it but I’m still a 270 guy and since I have my beloved Mashburn I’m pretty well covered but it’s still fun figuring something else out. Barrels are cheaper than any number of other bad habits I could have.

300 Whelen, if ya just gotta do a 308….

The only thing I can say good about the 6.5 Queermore is it made the manufacturers very wealthy.

I am a huge fan of the 6 Creedmoor though.

Same.. I got one of them cheap Howas, put it in a McM and man, it’s quite easy to please.

Now, how about this........

Just for conversation purposes ONLY.....

I assume most of us have at least 2 rifles (wink, wink) If you could only have one rifle, what caliber would it be and what action?

Bolt, semi, lever, single shot, etc.

Lets stick to centerfire only. .22LR is a given.

If push came to shove I’d do away with everything but my 7 Mashburn Super. It’s a P64 action.

But God why do you gotta stress a fella out with tough stuff.

Because I just had spinal fusion on my neck and will have lots of time to discuss guns. Which I like so well....

Why the 7 Mashburn Super? Educate me on this please.

Well, don’t hold me to sensible thoughts on this.

1. I loved reading Bob Hagel as a kid and he was a maniac for them. Being as I thought the 7 Rem was great I always thought of the Mashburn as a 7 Rem Improved.

2. BobinNH hooked me up with what I needed for my first one and it was great. Accurate, made easy speed and piled up elk for me.

3. I make it with 300 Win brass. Great brass makes for less horseschidt to do. I can always get 300 Win brass in some form or fashion so it’s reasonable to not have to chase boutique brass to get excellent quality.

4. It makes an easy 3050 with 175/180 grain Bullets of decent BC and doesn’t belt me hard like a 300 Mag would have to In order to match it. So I can run a lighter rifle that is easier to pack.


And I hope your recovery is going well brother.

The .300 Springfield is much better cause it has ammo for it worldwide, the .300 Whelen not so much.

Plus the Springfield has that "ring" to its name. Not only that it has "Panache."

Sounds like a damn fine cartridge. Just found these old threads. Thanks for the well wishes. Surgery Lucky 7 on the spine. Old Pro at it....

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbt...-the-heck-is-a-7mm-mashburn-super-magnum

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/12229362/7mm-mashburn

Yup. It’s really smart money to make a 7-300 and save yourself the headache but I’m invested in dies so it’s no big thing now.

Roger that

The 22-250 was my favorite caliber for many years. Killed everything from prairie dogs to hogs, deer and everything in between.

Now it is the 6mm Creedmoor due to the superior 6mm bullets and low recoil. This would be my only caliber if I had to have just one.

I’d never slight a man carrying a 270, especially if he was a hunter…

So is the 6.5 version.

The problem w/ the .270 Win is... some people seem to feel that they need more.

... and game does not.




GR

I see you said 'some' so...

Having killed deer with a 44 handgun and even the Anemic 30-30 I know it doesn't take a canon to kill deer.

Speaking for myself only, I like FLAT shooters -- NOT for the power -- for the trajectory. Since '95 at least I've hunted
leases and private land that have cutovers or pastures so.... I refuse to limit myself to short ranged cartridges.

Even at that - I'm NOT being smart - More power does not kill deer MORE dead. Flat trajectories make hitting your
target easier at distance.

Jerry

Agree mostly with this, but there are some exceptions. For example if you are hunting in thick woods for very large game where shots are not going to be more than 150 yds, then a bigger bore such as .338 or .358 with say a 250 grain projectile and a shorter barrel say 20-22" and maybe a short action weighing no more than 8lbs with scope with manageable recoil will be better than say a .270 with 130 grain projectiles...this means a cartridge that isn't very flat shooting e.g .338-06, .358 Whelen, .338 RCM, .358 WSM (wildcat) . Also, if hunting heavy dangerous game such as buffalo a .45 caliber using a 500 grain projectile at 2200-2300 fps is ideal, but certainly not flat shooting.

.280 Remington for the WIN

Sell em all and get a .300 Savage.

Absolutely!

What are the advantages of the .300 Savage over the .308 Win?


And for those who advocate the .280, what are the advantages of the .280 over the .270...what bullet weight in the .280?

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbt...46279/all/270_Winchester_versus_280_Remi

https://thebiggamehuntingblog.com/270-vs-280-remington-vs-280-ackley-improved-vs-7mm-mag/

https://www.americanhunter.org/articles/2018/5/18/head-to-head-270-winchester-vs-280-remington/

Why would the .338 or .358 with a 250 grain bullet be better at under 150 yards than the 270 with a 130 grain bullet??

I will take flat shooting even in the brush. The closer to line of sight a bullet stays the less chance of deflection from unseen obstructions.

The unpopular 280 Remington (ever seen or shot one?) can out-perform the highly respected 270 Winchester, the historic 7x57mm Mauser, the modern-Mauser-replacement 7mm-08 Remington, the 30-06 Springfield, the sparkling 25-06 Remington, and even that trendy of trendiness (dare I say it?), the 6.5 Creedmoor.

Matches or beats trajectory and energy of 270 Win. and 30-06 Springfield
Shoots bullets from 100-grains to 195-grains
Effective for game from groundhogs to moose


https://www.ronspomeroutdoors.com/blog/280-remington-amazing-history-performance

If the shots are at any angle at large running game partly covered by foliage, when you can't get perfect bullet placement, the bigger diameter and heavier bullet at close range will perform better a greater percentage of the time. If this wasn't so, then I don't see how a 7mm Rem Mag would outperform a .270 Win at medium distances on larger game. You'd sight your .270 close to 3" high at 100 yards for open country and your .338-06 or .35 Whelen about 2" at 100 yards for the woods and only use it in the woods. The .270 isn't going to have a sighting advantage at close range.

What bullet weight in the .280 would you use most of the time, or would you keep changing the bullet weight and have to keep resighting it in due to probably the different elevation and windage for each time you change bullet weights?

If you shoot factory ammo, this will do just fine

https://www.hornady.com/ammunition/rifle/280-remington-150-gr-eld-x-precision-hunter#!/

https://www.midwayusa.com/product/1018230924?pid=989919

I never said the 270 was best for every situation. You bring in exceptions. I have other, heavier cal/cartridges for diff
applications.

Mr. Phil (458 Win here) professional guide and hunter in Ak says the 30-06 is entirely adequate for Brown Bear in Ak.
He didn't mention any of the rounds of our "dissenters" here.

These guys are not interested in the 270 discussion and could be called "haters"










They don't WANT to talk 270 and are trying to distract and ruin a thread they are not interested in.

However 10 ga gives an answer to one of your questions. I agree with him.




I & 10 ga. have tried to answer your ??

To YOU 'other' guys....If you don't like this thread or the 270....GO find another thread you like or start your own, OR
find someone else's thread to disrupt and K M B

Jerry, and I said that.

What realistic speed for your accurate load using what temperature stable powder do you get in the .280 with a 24" barrel with the 150 grain projectle mentioned in the hyperlink?

Bullets Trump Head stamp. .284 bullets have better BC. Period.

I think to properly debate the merits of the .270, other cartridges in normal and exceptional circumstances should be discussed. I'm a .270 fan, but recognize that it has some limitations in some situations or some cartridges may be better in some situations.

Whatever your rifle likes best

Which bullet in the .280 do you recommend over the .270 140 grain bullet? If its the 140 grain in the .280 then its sectional density won't be as good as the .277 140 grain bullet, and its b.c. may not be better. If its the 150 grain bullet in the .280 what speed in a 24" barrel using a temperature stable powder is your accurate load getting?

You are seeing the proportional likeness/differences
between the two.

In Factory ammo the 270 has the advantage MOST of the time.
The 280 is not loaded to its potiential.

To an informed handloader the 270 - 280 is a
Wash.

Jerry

This the argument that the .280 is “superior” is minutia at best - this is what people really have to discuss? Give me a .270, .280, .30-06 or thereabouts and I won’t have an issue taking any game animal in NA.

PennDog

P D

You got it.


Jerry

Never knew there was an argument? Just a discussion of actual data....

I kinda like data driven cartridge discussions. Otherwise, why bother to talk about it at all.

Maybe resistance to that reinforces the OP's original post?

Fact base / data driven. Without it, it is nothing but opinion and we all know what they're like...... Bungholes!


Have a good evening gentlemen

And for all those metric caliber lovers...perhaps start looking at 6.8mm.

Maybe my next purchase. In 28 Nosler

Man, you won’t want for much with the big 28. That sucker is a beast with 175/180’s.

Data is pretty impressive on it

OK my bad - the “actual” data still shows minutia between the three (and all like them) at normal “hunting” distances. However, if this is what interests you by all means enjoy.

PennDog

I'm an unbashful .270Win fan. That said, there's really nothing it does or doesn't do that can't be did or not-did by a dozen other cartridges with similar capacity and the same or very close projectile diameters and weights.

I have a pair of M70 SS Classic Fwt's that shoot 140gn TSX's @ 3030fps better than I'm capable of most days. I've taken game w/both of them out past 500yds. They shoot the same ammo so I'm able to grab a box of 50, both rifles, and it's a coin-flip for which is the primary and which is the backup. I can load ammo for them relatively quickly as I'm using Ramshot Hunter powder and have a tool-head set up to run them through a Dillon 550. Assuming I'm starting from prepped brass, I can prime/charge/seat a bullet on 100 rounds in ~15Min.

The 270 case feeds very smoothly through nearly any action brand/style. There's enough variety in projectile weight and construction to make it viable in pretty much any/every NA big-game situation. A 22" bbl is plenty to get anything/everything one wants/needs from a big game rifle and I find 22" to be very handy without being so short as to be also obscenely loud. In most 7.5-9# factory rifle configurations, the .270Win's recoil is very manageable as well.

Would you happen to know how much those featherweights weigh (just the bare rifle)? As you would probably know, J. O'C had two Model 70's in .270 with 22" barrels, one a featherweight which he replaced the alloy bottom metal with steel and the other a trimmed down Model 70. He said they were both 8 lbs scoped, but if he replaced the bottom metal on the featherweight with steel, I'm not sure how he got it to 8 lbs instead of say 8 1/4 lbs...unless the scope was extremely light.

If you're going to get a 27 or 28 Nosler, then you'll be using perhaps 70-80 grains of powder with a heavy projectile. To get the benefit of that, you need to be shooting game past 400 yards. To control the recoil through the shot, you need a heavy rifle...otherwise you won't be able to shoot it accurately at 500 yards when using a field rest or bipod. If you are thinking of a muzzle brake, you will need ear muffs otherwise your hearing will eventually suffer. I shoot the equivalent of a 27 Nosler with a 27" barrel and the rifle weighs 11 3/4 pounds...no brake.

I don’t agree you have to have a heavy rifle to shoot a 27 or 28 Nosler to shoot it accurately. My 7 Mashburn uses about 82 grains of 570 for 3075 with a 175 ABLR. It weighs 8 3/4lbs, scoped and with a couple rounds in it. No muzzle brake. It does fine off a pack or front rest out to 800 for me. Been shooting it for years.

I do agree that heavy Bullets are a dandy combo in the big cases though.

I’m thinking a 27 Nosler won’t be too different and it’ll probably be from a Legend stocked M70 so it’ll likely be fine.

The Ultralights in the video weigh 6 lb with 24" barrel in 28 Nosler, that's around 7lb with scope and mounts. That's a fair bit less than 8 3/4 pounds. It needs at least a 26" barrel because of the slow burning powder on the heavy projectile.

Comparing the 27 or 28 Nosler to the .270 is like comparing a Ferrari to a broken down Yugo where some punk poured sugar in the gas tank

Agreed there. A 7lb scoped 28 would be quite jumpy. I thought you were saying they needed to be belly guns to be shootable. And while. 26 doesn’t hurt the couple with 24 and 25” barrels worked fine as well. We use a random 25” on our rifles most of the time and it doesn’t seem to make a bit of difference.

Yes. Gunnut, I had the same thought. I love my 270’s. It just took the 06 19 years to get worked out properly. Like good whiskey, it takes a bit of time to get right

Bingo! I hunt the west slope of the Rockies for Bighorns, Goats , Mulies and Bull Elk. These are steep, timbered slopes, and fairly open basins.
One of my 270 wcf's sports a 19" barrel, the other a 22" and the 3rd is a single shot/ Browning B78 that will soon get a shortened 22" barrel.
In these mountains a long barrel is a hindrance, especially for senior hunters. These new " super" chamberings have obvious downsides, specifically barrel length and additional rifle weight.
I don't need them in my arsenal, nor any of the Weatherby's.
I do not hunt long range, simply not interested.
For me, the .270, .280 and 30/06 have all bases covered, providing the have a shorter tube

Yeh, but sometimes its nice to sit up high on a hill and shoot more than the usual distance. It varies the hunting a bit.

Hey Guys

I didn’t bail on ya. I’ve been gone all day.
I’m behind and I’ll try to catch up tonight.

I interrupted a would be Thief at 3:20 AM
This AM. Not sure what tonight willl bring.

“I’ll be back”, not sure when.

Jerry

Have that .270 ready for action JW.

Puah

The only charge would have been trespassing.

I should have given him time to get something but
I didn’t think about it at the moment.

Just scared the CRAP out of him.

I won’t shoot a trespasser. BTW I had my
40 in hand.

Jerry

Did you give him a warning shot?

With the 130gr Barnes TTSX out there for the 308 Win, I've kind of lost interest in the 6.5 Creedmoor. I mean I doubt I will ever shoot anything past 300 yards, so a 130 grain bullet at 3000 FPS...even 2900...yeah thats about the kick of a Creedmoor. 1 ft/lb more maybe?

You can load hotter if you want to.

I'm not going to get into the caliber vs caliber debate because at the end of the day, did the dead deer really care?

But I LOVE the 130grn TTSX in my 30-06 in front of Varget. I'm getting 3100 fps. With the ballistics of that short fat bullet, I'd probably never hunt past 300 yards but again does the dead deer really care?

I'd hope just about anything that decides to stand in front of that bullet within those 300 yards is not long for the world

This was entertaining thus far
The 270 has got bashed on for many many years
I remember the big debates as a youngster almost 50 years ago
I was a 30-06 guy funny it all started really before I even ever killed my first deer. Later on becoming a kinda ballistic junky I read loading manuals like some read hot rod magazine
Years later after pokin holes in deer and testing bullets and and many dif chambering I got a pretty good handle on what works
Although I actually to date have never one time dropped the hammer on a deer with a 270. There is no doubt if I did it very well may be the best whitetail carteradge ever
Now I have a delema I scored a sako l61R with a McMillan stock long length of pull 30 mm leupold vx3 in leupold rings
This rifle fits and points so nice weighs 8 lbs all set up
Problem is it’s a 270. Had it all sighted in and ready but it sits in the safe last 10 years. I always choos something different
What to do???

Rainier!!!

Choot da .270! It’s so much more betterer than the dirty 06!

Please note humour font.

As others have said there are often cartridges that can be better than the .270 for certain things but short of the great bears there “ain’t nothin’ wrong with the .270”. In my broke 20s a .270 was the only decent rifle I had, it did everything from gophers on up.

I’m on my second .270, on older junker push feed M70 I brought back from the junk heap, just loving that rifle. Great cartridge for what most of us use a rifle for.

Best wishes to y’all.

If I was a deer, and knew that one day I would be shot, I would prefer it to be from a .270 than anything else.

But I hear those 130 s just bounce off??

Not at all...it would be a most honorable death from the classic deer cartridge (and bullet weight) if I were a deer.

puah, I'm not being smart or sarcastic. I've looked thru THIS thread and don't see 'data' < unless it's in the other threads
you posted. I don't have time to go thru all those.
It appears PennDog did. Ok.




FIRST of all. I have never bought 1 box of boutique bullets and I don't have need for them.
For the last DECADE +, 400 yds is my REALISTIC hunting/shooting range.

I stated early in this thread that the 270 - 280 is a wash.
^above P D "actual data still show minutia between the three...at normal hunting ranges."
NORMAL hunting ranges is ALL I'm talking about and use.

You said above, "284 bullets have better BC Period"

In normal hunting bullets for normal ranges I have not found that.

My loading books are dated (old). My newest is the Nosler #7.

277, 140 gr ---- .496 BC........,261 SD
284, 150 gr ---- .493 BC........,266 SD

Nos. doesn't have a 130 .284 to compare to 140 .277 .. SO.

I like and use H 162 BTSP in the 7 RM BUT nothing to compare BC & SD.

I'm NOT cherry picking.

If you push the 277 140 .496 BC at 3000, which I can/do AND
If you push the 284 150 .493 BC at 3100, which I HAVE done

the diff is minitua, The trajectory diff is a wash. Yes the 10 xtra grs 150 of the 284 shows up in KE but we understand the
effect of KE.

I know there are more and heavier bullets in the 284 bore but 160 grs is the heaviest I need.
(I have a 7 RM & 300 WM & 8 RM for heavier)


I have said many Xs over the years if you have a 270....you have a 280 and vice versa.

For Me, the 280 offers no advantage, I don't DISLIKE it.

I wrote a lot more THEN deleted it. I'm not writing a book LOL This states my take on the 270 - 280 discussion.

Jerry

Rainier: for sure the 130 .277 bounces right off! (But the .308 130 drill on through) but us .270 shooters use that to our advantage.

Hit the deer in the head with a130 grain bullet the concussion kills the deer, the bullet bounces off giving a chance at a second deer. A good .270 shooter can judges angles well like a pool player and we can get two to three deer with a single 130 grainer. 😃👍. It’s the truth 😃

Now those 140s, they over penetrate, buts that’s a different set of problems

Rainier thanks for asking those key questions allowing to share my knowledge and experience with the fire 😄

Here’s hoping y’all have a great day.

Quite a bit of hairsplitting going on in this thread. How about throwing in a few other standards and magnums.

243 Win
6mm Rem
240 Wby
257 Roberts
25-06 Rem
257 Wby Mag
6.5x55 SE
6.5-284 Norma
264 Win Mag
270 Wby Mag
284 Win
7mm Wby Mag

Along with many others mentioned in this thread. It’s nice to have so many choices, there’s no shortage in finding a cartridge that works for you in the field, the only real limitation is the human one in hunting skills and field shooting.

WRONG THREAD ... note Title

Good morning my friend..... hope all is well with you. Me.... not so good. spitting up bloody shiitt from surgery.

Lets make this simple:

280 case capacity - 67.9 gr

.284 150gr eldx bc .574 BC

https://www.hornady.com/bullets/rifle/7mm-.284-150-gr-eld-x#!/


270 case capacity - 67 gr

.270 145 eldx .536 BC

https://www.hornady.com/ammunition/rifle/270-win-145-gr-eld-x-precision-hunter#!/


Kind of like my friends who are twin brothers - James and Gino. James is older by 5 min. He will always be the older brother.
The .280 has a greater case capacity and higher BC bullet. Like James, the .280 is the older brother.
However marginal, the numbers don't lie my friend....

Nice rifle, details?

The 270 Win is the standard which all others are measured against!

Your are right..

"However marginal, the numbers don't lie my friend...."

270---280 Wash

My Friend too

Jerry

Amen brother. Godspeed.

,257 The original statement was by Col. Townsend and it was the .30-06!!

I still like my 6mm Creedmoor better than any other caliber I have ever had.

Finn Aagaard. "the general purpose big-game cartridges used in this country come in but two calibers, 30 and 7mm (the .270 Win. is merely a slightly aberrant 7mm whose bullets are .007 undersize."

I've come to expect the shocking and absolute ballistic ignorance of the .270 shooters - after all, if they knew even a little about ballistics, they wouldn't be .270 shooters. The inferior BC of .277 projectiles is caused by the need to support the incorrectly chosen 1:10" twist rate. For light projectiles, it makes no difference and .277 and .284 will be the same. So if you're hunting deer the size of a small dog in a 20y clearing back east, congratulations - the .270 is for you. For the rest of us, it sucks. For heavy projectiles, using the wrong twist rate means medium to heavy .277 bullets must either use high-drag short profiles, or aren't possible at all. For example, here at the BCs of the .277 and .284 partitions. The 160gr .277 is forced to be a semi-roundnose, and there is no .277 equivalent of the 175gr .284 partition because it wouldn't stabilize in the slower twist .270.



You'll see the exact same pattern in other .277 projectiles unless they're for for fast-twist rifles like the 27 Nosler and 6.8 Western. Those both fix the issues with the .270 and are reasonable cartridges, albeit with limited bullet selections which still makes them practically inferior to the 28 Nosler and 7mm WSM, although that's not the cartridge designer's fault for once.

If only Winchester has been worldly enough to copy the twist rate of the 7x57, the .270 win would be merely a poor cartridge instead of one of the worst ever designed

And you see it with the Army trying to get a new 6.8mm caliber round...

6.8mm... .277... An "American caliber"... which is in fact a Chinese caliber.

6.8x57 Chinese Mauser, 270 Win, 270 Weatherby where the only .277 caliber cartridges for a looooong time.


The "other" myth is that Winchester were left with a boatload of 6.8mm bullets after a Chinese Military contract went south.
And as a result they "invented" the .270 Win by necking down the other cheap brass was available. 30.06.


Just "a fluke" it basically copied the 7x64 Brenneke.

If Winchester had given us a full pressure 7x64 with the standard 220mm twist, they would have moved US hunting rifle technology forward by decades. But they were ignorant of what was possible, and instead we got the crappy .270.

That’s funny, the 270 Wby among others were advertised to counter and better the 270 Win. The 284 Win which has similar ballistics as the 280 Rem was in fact Winchester’s answer and marketing ploy as better than the 270 Win in a SA. Intention wasn’t a thread high jack, but just to broaden the discussion, which appears to be quite broad already.

I always love to tease .270 users out here, but then I tell them, I have owned/shot/played with more .270s than any other caliber in last 50yrs! And I've played with just some,ha Funny, I've only killed one jackrabbit and finished off a spanish goat my Godson wounded ( oakbrush deflected his shot) I had to crawl into that jungle and pop him..last time I hunted w/o my pistol! I've "hunted" with the .270 many times but it seemed the game heard I was out there with a .270 and fled for its life! ha Out to 500yds at targets, I could never tell the difference between it and several other fast movers. The RUMs were a "tad" flatter, but lots more boom/blast to get there.

My experience with the .270 is long and rather thin. However, any animal I shot at with the .270 dies, none moving more that a few feet after being hit. Last one was an antelope in 2009. One shot, ran in a30 foot half circle and expired. What's not to like?
Paul B.

So since the 130s bounce off seems with the components shortage this is a huge advantage for the 270. Me I’m afraid my rifle skills nor pool skills may be up to reliable bullet recovery so probbly try those 140 s and just live with the over penetration
On a serious note I wonder how many 270 bashers like me have ever actually used it me never even a rabbit
On paper is on thing one of my favorites is 257 rob jus not that impressive on paper same with the 7x57 and many others.
There are only 3 I never cared for for deer
243
6-284
7 rem mag

It's just the opposite for me.

Beginning in the 90s...after a few years and getting NEW rifles it is UNcanny how many times I killed a deer with
a new rifle -to me- on the FIRST hunt. Whether a brand new rifle or a PRE owned rifle, the first time I hunted it I
killed deer with it.

On another note, my son can verify, My Rem M Six 270 was named by ME as "Meat In The Pot" after several years.

Jerry

Actually, .270 is the true 7mm as that is the size of the bullets to one decimal place .277 = 7.0mm. Finn got his conversions wrong...no calculators back then


Townsend Whelen's favorite cartridge was the .270 not the .30-06! He moved from the .30-06 to the .270.

"and there is no .277 equivalent of the 175gr .284 partition because it wouldn't stabilize in the slower twist .270." There's the 180 grain Woodleigh that will stabilise in a 10 twist barrel.

These are just a few of the mis-truths quoted by those individuals who for some ridiculous reason have a grudge against the excellent .270.

ADDENDUM illustration.

In 2008 our deer season started on Sat. That afternoon I went by a local Pawn Shop. I found a like NIB Win 70
Black Shadow in 300 WM. It followed me home. I went to W W and bought WW 180 gr P P.

On Monday afternoon, I checked the grouping and sighted in a scope.

**Tuesday AM - first day to hunt it , 3 days after purchase, This guys comes out of a THICKET.





FIRST and ONLY 1 shot at any game/deer. 10 pt. 194 lb buck .

I like getting new rifles. That has been repeated several times.

Jerry

That’s a great buck buddy. I’d have a new one every year if it worked like that!

That's a nice deer! This thread's getting a bit too long, so I thought I could summarize some of the alternatives to the .270 and perhaps we leave it at that.

6.5 Creedmore - needs a bit more capacity to push those very long 140 grain projectiles a bit faster for hunting
6.5 PRC - better than the Creedmore, but really needs a long action, probably better to neck down to .257 and use 110-120 grain bullets in a short action
.270 Win - ideal cross sectional area, good trajectory and velocity, excellent sectional density and good b.c. especially with 140 grain bullets, mild recoil and muzzle blast , easy to shoot well, works best with 130 and 140 grain projectiles, kills superbly
.280 Rem - 140 grain bullet not as good as .277 140 grain bullet, doesn't push the 150 grain bullet fast enough
.280 Improved - a little better than .280, RCBS version may sometimes feed better than Ackley version
.284 Win - heavier bullets eat into powder capacity when used in short action, rebated rim
7mm Rem Mag - slightly better performance than .270 on larger game at the cost of more recoil, muzzle blast, less magazine capacity
.30-06 - excellent for larger game especially with 180 grain bullets, not as mild to shoot as .270, harder to shoot as accurately as the .270 at longer distances

Only 265 posts, this will go for quite a few more.

May even hang around for a few years.

Rainier; lots of bashers tend not use that which they bash. I’ve had a life long dislike for the .30-06, despite only have fired a few at the range. Never hunted with one, or any other .308 for decades, despite having multiple cartridges in .277, .284, .311, .323.

Bracketing the .30-06 in size and velocity, never using it. Knowing full well that my dislike of the .30-06 was completely irrational.

Then one day a land owner in RSA had a sick kudu cow he wanted put down. He gave me his old Musgrave (Mauser clone) in .30-06 with an ancient scope with yellowed glass and ancient unknown soft point ammo with a nice new shiny suppressor (that was cool as suppressors are banned in Canada since the 1920s IIRC). At the shot, betwixt the eyes as requested by the land owner the cow got “Popeyes” and fell over dead.

Hot damn the .30-06 worked!

A year or two later I was given an old JC Higgins model 51 (?) with the HVA action in .30-06. The gun was never abused but very heavily used and needed work far in excess of the value of the rifle. Keeping rifles out of the junk heap is thing of mine.

Hundreds of dollars and many many hours later the gun was ready.

Shock of shocks with 150 grain federal blue box ammunition it dropped dear real fast! That hated .30-06 sure works. 😃

There are definitely pure facts operating against the .270 as mentioned above, which is why I also own; .243, .260, 6.5 PRC, 7-08, .30-06, .303 British, 8x57, a .325 WSM to spin onto the 6.5 PRC should the urge stroke me, a .375 H&H and a .45-70 just to fill in any shortcomings the .270 may have.

Thanks to all who are joining the conversation, it’s been informative, fun and reasonable.

.270 Chinese American.

I can agree with that.

R H

Who asked you to shorten the discussion?

The queermoor discussions ran on and on and on
for a few years.

We are doing OKAY.

Jerry

NONE of which is based on factual ‘data’ !!


Jerry

That bullet is not reliably stable in the 1:10" twist 270win. It'll do better in the magnums, and of course in low pressure (hot or high) air it will do better.

But marginally stable bullets like that can become inaccurate or outright tumble at distance, sometimes without much of an understandable pattern. They also experience extra drag due to wobble in flight. There are reason long range rifles are adequately twisted to fully stabilize the bullet used.

It has a lot of potential as a 27 Nosler bullet though, which is interesting since it predates the 27 Nosler.

Only the Chinese used 6.8 or .277 bullets before Winchester.
Several years before Winchester.

So.. the .277 is a Chinese caliber. But claimed as an American caliber...
But alas, .270 Chinese American.


Instead of using a 6,5mm European or 7mm European caliber, they "invented"/copied the 6.8mm Chinese caliber.

Again, this doesn't seem to be true. Winchester were working on the .277 diameter bore before there was knowledge or contact with those who had the Chinese .277. It's understandable that in two different parts of the world, the same diameter bore could be developed at around the same time...especially when .277 equates to a true 7mm bullet diameter. Its not unreasonable that two separate countries could independently arrive at the conclusion that a true 7mm bullet diameter was perfect.

Mauser where developing the 6.8mm for China in 1906.
6,8x57 and 6,8x60.

But where is the evidence that shows Winchester were influenced by the Chinese or Mauser to develop their .277 round?

Some people are handicapped by the smallest things. My heart hurts for them.

If you are a complete stumble fart and fall down you will have problems. I get it. But there is not a single big game animal this continent offers that will not comply handily to the 270 inside of 600 yards.

If you're going to fantasize about shooting heavy for caliber bullets to get the advantage of high b.c. at long range such as 800 yards at game, then you're not going to be shooting a lightweight sporter with trim 22-24" barrel, light optics and light stock. You have a different rifle with a longer heavier barrel and faster twist rate, and probably a bigger cartridge such as 27 Nosler. The .270 is perfect to 350 yards without having to hold above the back-bone of say a deer with optimal bullet weights of 130-140 grains. The 1 in 10 twist is not a disadvantage for the medium weight optimal bullet weights of 130-140 grains.

Oh so I didn’t know my 7 lb 300 wby shooting 200 AB at 3150 was no good
It shoots ragged holes like a varmint rifle. So do I need a bull barrel????

Don't know , we're on the internet not out in the field, can't say what you and your rifle can really do. You might be Warren Page, hunter and national benchrest champion...resurrected from the dead.

😆

I think I should keep this thread going.
As usual, it is peppered with nonsense, folks that have not used in the .270 wcf in the field , data without real life experience is pretty much useless.
It will always been my default chambering, not because of any hype but what it has proven to me.
In hunting conditions, and specifically in the Western mountains it meets all challenges, especially these days with what is available to enhance it.
Also, it will chamber and extract well, provide the real stuff down range and can be put into a short , light, carbine style rifle. Ideal for Sheep hunting and can proficiently tip a Bull Elk over when needed.
I have been at this for decades .
Hey you can fast twist it if you like but long range hunting doesn't wash well with the sheep hunter, he will evaluate the ram and this done best a closer ranges.
If a ram is 1/8" short , and you ground check him ,this will result in a fine and your name in the paper.
We hunt sheep in the general open season and therefore no secrets, folks ( there are horn restrictions). Get close enough to know what your shooting at. This is reality here.

Since when has a thread on any cartridge had so
many attempts to derail or misdirect to
OTHER cartridges.

I think I’ll sit on the sidlines and be prepared to
disrupt threads on the new ‘gayboy’ Cartridge.

I remind you NO ONE requested to summarize
and attempt to shorten or end this discussion.

Goose.....Gander.

Jerry

+1

puah
Just for clarity and accuracy,

you said, "Kind of like my friends who are twin brothers - James and Gino. James is older by 5 min. He will always be the older brother.
The .280 has a greater case capacity and higher BC bullet. Like James, the .280 is the older brother."

The Remington 280, aka 7mm=06 was 'introduced' in 1957... goggle it

The 270 Winchester was unveiled in 1925... goggle it too

Do you have trouble with math?


Just saying. Your Friend

Jerry

The problem here is BC doesn't kill and we ain't banging steel at 1000 yards. There's plenty of weight for anything anyone needs to hunt with it at ranges 99% of hunters are killing stuff.

Bullets matter more than headstamps and due that,the 270 simply sucks ass. Fhuqktards will never savvy,which never ain't not funnier than fhuqk. Hint.

Pardon BC mattering more than a wee bit. Hint.

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

Here's Laughing At You TWIG.....

jsquall,

I am VERY "surprised",that despite professing Imaginary Pretend Ignore,you wish to yet again reiterate that besides being a CLUELESS Drooling Dumbfhuqk,that you just also "happen" to be a Lying Piece Of Fhuqking Schit to boot...you "lucky" kchunt. Hint. Congratulations?!?

Ain't it a hoot,that even someone as fhuqking STUPID as you,knows better than to even try and talk anything The Rifle?!? Gals who "know" and "do" as "much" as you,will always be best served by asking questions,rather than giving "answers". Fortunately for you,Imagination and Pretend are free,so you can "afford" to "contribute". Hint.

Bless your heart for trying.

P.S. and by the way,do not forget,that Imitation is THE most Sincere form of Flattery you Magnificently STUPID Fhuqk.

Hint.

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

I reckon some fellas can’t go cry to their wife, their dad or their brothers cause they were told by said relatives to STFU and go on…

I reckon he’ll have to go pout to mom again about how he can’t cipher out how a .270 works.

Nor could he strike a match with a flame thrower.

I reckon a fella that can’t use a .270, he’d say it’s a failure.

I reckon a fella that can however use a .270, Well…He’s too busy hauling meat out to fuss about BC’s to his momma or the deaf guy at the bar…

I reckon we could all find weaknesses in something.

I reckon some fellas find it in themselves.

Carry on gentleman..

No, it determines wind deflection and retained velocity which are both critical to A) how far one can shoot accurately in unknown wind and B) what bullet terminal performance looks like when it gets there

Accurate shots and terminal performance are what kill. So while BC doesn't directly kill, it determines both things that do.

The difference between a .270 and a superior cartridge is obvious to any competent western hunter.

And .270 fangirls continue to be super sensitive about their inferior cartridge

REDUX

[quote=gunnut308]

+1 Jerry might tell you that he didn't give you permission to say that.

How wide is the inside spread on that dude. Looks darn near 20-22" at least.

Well I’m a Western hunter who has managed to put Bambi in the freezer every year hunting all the major biomes of Alberta including the slightly breezy SE Alberta, think north central Montana for those who know the area.

Yes sleek bullets REALLY matter past a certain distance, no one with even a modicum of knowledge on ballistics would dispute the fact. I do not shoot at game at distances where the super high BC is critical. I don’t have the inclination nor do I think I have developed the skills.

Selecting the perfect projectile / cartridge combination is a significantly different event than picking something; fun, meaningful, interesting or new.

JWall (a reasonable polite gentleman from what I have seen) related his story of the .300 WM.

I have related the story of two old rifles I kept from the junk heap that I hunted with, one of which was hunted with the original partially yellowed bushnell command post scope from the early 70s as way of honouring the former owner. It launched the “ping pong ball” 150 grain .30-06 blue box federal. It groups at best 1.5 moa, 1.8 is more the norm. It still killed deer on the SE Alberta plains.

My brother one year again on the SE Alberta plains hunted with our fathers early 50s vintage 94 Winchester with iron sights. Bambi died with one shot.

The .270 and any other legal cartridge / arrow within its limitations and those of the hunter is fine for hunting.

One more time for me to make my point is clear within the limitations of the device and the user any legal device is just fine, not perfect or ideal.

This is an online chat where we can have some fun, share our knowledge, experiences, stories and perspectives. I hunt with all kinds of stuff, some of it crap by modern standards, I ain’t asking you to and I didn’t see anyone else suggesting one must hunt the .270.

Thanks to all y’all who kept this interesting and fun.

To reply to the deleted post about putting a fast twist barrel on a .270 and using the heavy high b.c. bullets, the SAAMI throat is too long to be able to seat near the lands and stay within magazine length (unless you have a long magazine)...a short throat reamer is needed.

Fascinating,that Fhuqktards swoon a freezer load of Freezer Burned Dog Schit and "think" that Stupidity is a fhuqking "choice"...the "lucky" kchunt. Hint. Congratulations?!?

I simply shoot it all and then some,to an extent that very few can even begin to fathom. If only to the chagrin of Crying Karens everywhere,bullets matter wayyyyyyyy more than headstamps. Now as headstamps go,the 270 is a heaping pile of schitty concession,due the fact there are no good bullets for the bore size. None of which is subjective. Read that again. Now one more time. Hint.

270 "performance" is simply bested in chamberings of less case capacity,that reap rewards less concession(s). I realize that is a rather bitter pill to Drooling Fhuqktards and that oblivious humor never wanes in it's grandeur. Hint.

I rather enjoy how the mere mention of "BC" will paralyze a Crying Karen,mid tear. That despite EVERY fhuqking projectile having a BC value and the fact that the spectrum is rather large and certainly not "equal" nor close. Read that again. Now one more time. Hint.

BC starts to work before the projectile even leaves the muzzle. That constant,reliably confounds you Drooling Fhuqktards and is never not funnier than fhuqk. Starting velocity,assuredly is NOT impact velocity,but BC is that which contributes to same. The higher the BC,the less velocity is lost at 10yds,100yds and/or 1000yds++. One need'nt trade anything away,to reap same and that too confounds Melting Snowflakes. BC kills like a Dirty Rotten Bastard,as it guides Terminal Effects. All projectiles setting on the counter top,have like lethality(none),get them moving and things change(drastically). BC in and of itself,is the glue that retains said movement. Read that again. Now one more time. Hint.

Here's to the "unfair" "advantage" you Drooling Fhuqktards have,in not being forced to "act" STUPID,but in just doing your very fhuqking BEST. Hint.

Bless your hearts.

Did I mention jsquall was/is a Lying Piece Of Fhuqking Schit?!?

Hint.

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

Wondered about that.

If the bullet has a secant ogive, the seating depth may be critical, if a tangent or hybrid ogive it may still work.

1000 words on throating,via Squared Smooch in same chamber(8" RPM Krieger),with different projectiles. Hint.



22BR no-turn,Lapooey hulls,.224" Hornie 75 ELD M and 69gr RMR BTHP. Hint.

Just saying and the BC's ain't equal either. Hint.

.224" 69gr Sugar on left,the aforementioned 69gr RMR on right. Hint.



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

If minutia is to be compared and to make it even more simple at least pick common weights (Nosler’s LRAB .277 150 grain has a G1 of 0.591 while the .284’s is 0.546)…and case capacity varies fairly wide across brands and within lots…….these are the facts not really sure how the “actual” data is pointing to any “superiority” for one over the other but what the hell do I know……I’ll just use dead animals for my “actual data”.

PennDog

These work well also...

.650 bc

https://patriotvalleyarms.com/flm-7mm-151gr-cayuga-hunting-bullets-50ct/

.770 bc

https://patriotvalleyarms.com/flm-7mm-170gr-cayuga-hunting-bullets-50ct/

You are a walking commercial for the 27 Nosler, because that 150gr ABLR is designed to require the 1:8.5" twist of that cartridge. It can't be reliably used in a factory .270.

There are no magic bore diameters, but there are twist rates that allow better performance. The .270, in Winchester's ignorance, got the wrong twist and sucks if any sort of distance is on the agenda. Of course the fangirls can't hear this about their crush, but it's true.

i have to wonder how they use to kill all those buffalo back in the day when they didnt have scopes and superior bullets....must be a myth I guess or maybe they new how to use their guns

I doubt anybody was worried about fast twist rate with common bullet weights/designs and what we now consider "long range" in 1925.

The same can be said of most cartridges out there if that's the case.

You Drooling CLUELESS Fhuqktards are a hoot! "Mass" is largely meaningless. Hint.

The 147 .264" ELD M has a BC of .697. That aero profile difference is farrrrr from "meaningless". Fhuqking hint.




The .284" 180 ELD M has a .796 BC. Hint.



The .284" 190 Beer Cans have a .838 BC. Hint.




Pardon my simply shooting it all and then some,as you Fhuqktards "get" to Google it all. Hint.

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

Lapua 6547 not really sure of your point there as I didn’t see a similar weighted .277 bullet that you were comparing (I get the standard .270 Win can’t go there at those weights) and Llama Bob I have had no trouble using the 150 ABLR in two of my .270s - I have heard of some having issues though.

But my real point is with similar weight bullets - at normal hunting ranges - there is not enough difference between the two to justify a “superiority” claim and if “actual data” is used then the dead animals that I’ve taken and seen taken over the last 50 years (with both) supports they are equally effective when the bullets reach the vitals. I do like and have several of both along with plenty of.30-06s, 7X64s, and 7mm mags.

PennDog

Ahhh see Little Stix has joined the fray so this clueless (whatever adjective LS is using) is out👍

Never claimed superiority one time..... We are just merely debating cartridges and bullets. Just sharing info with fellow shooters.
Only statement I made was the .280 has more case capacity than the .270 and has a higher bullet BC choice. Then as usual, it got twisted by others.

I personally could give 270 shiitts what anyone hunts or shoots.... As long as you're doing one or the other, or both, life is good.
But, while doing one or both, why not use and / all components in your favor??

Hell..... that freezer picture has been duplicated many times with the .22 caliber.

PentDont,

You were REALLY doing "great" there for a bit...you "lucky" kchunt. Hint. Congratulations?!?

Here's to the fhuqking HILARITY of your being such a slllooowwwwwwwww fhuqking "Learner" and "thinking" that you were EVER "in". Hint. Fhuqking LAUGHING!

Here's to how exceptionally WELL founded your countless Insecurities are. Hint.

Bless your heart for TRYING though!

Hint.

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

That is fair enough and point taken.

PennDog

R hunter

Just joining us this month and having 60 posts, I don't think you've been around long enuff to know that
"TWIG" is vertically challenged along with an Inferiority complex longing for acceptance.

I call him Twig because IF he stands up TWICE, he casts 1/2 a shadow. Hang around long enuff and you'll
see what I mean. Many, many of us either ignore him or insult him and he doesn't understand it.

On another point, no one including me has the right to Condense or Compare and "leave it at that".

I hope you hang around and join the fun and simply ignore the "TROLLS". There are more than one.

Jerry

GRF

Isn't it amazing that the 270 W with such a Miserable Failure in concept and design has maintained it success rate and
popularity since 1925. Let's see here, 2021 -1925,..... uhh that's 96 years ? I believe ?

In another thread let's discuss other cartridges that haven't succeeded in even 25 yrs.

Wonder Of Wonders, ain't it. LOL

Jerry

With due respect puah, I humbly disagree with your first statement here.

Tell me what's wrong with my math ? I count 7 Xs and I quit looking.

BACK to my original position and has been many years. 270 Win > < 280 Rem is a Wash.

Jerry

They got from A to B via horse-and-buggy, too, but that doesn't mean that the modern combustion engine isn't an advantage.

Lapua: thanks for those links to those two very interesting bullets.

The abundance of first rate product that are produced now is amazing.

You're welcome. Josh who owns PVA makes some very good products. His prefit barrels are outstanding along with his bullets.

With the technological advances in shooting over the past few years , none of us should ever miss our intended target!

jsquall,

For a gal "claiming" Imaginary Pretend Ignore,you sure as fhuqk read ALL my Posts,you Lying Piece Of Fhuqking Schit and ain't that a hoot...you "lucky" kchunt. Hint. Congratulations?!?

Your version(s) of "knowledge","experience" and "results" are fhuqking hilarious! Same goes your "honesty","integrity" and "reality". Hint. Fhuqking LAUGHING!

The ONLY thing you "shoot" is your mouth and Imagination,you Whining CLUELESS Brokedick Fhuqktard. Hint.

Pardon a mag fed 280 simply scooting a .838 BC Smooch at 2700fps. Google as you MUST. Hint.




Bless your heart for trying.

Don't "forget" that you "can't read" this.

Hint.

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

Without mass, you have no ballistic coefficient. Now tell us all again how Mass is "meaningless."

your right the combustion engine is great ....but that doesnt mean its the only way to get from point a to b now is it and just like back then not everybody needed a car to get there work done

round bales are great to but square bales still have a place also... you could go on and on with these comparisons but i bet there are more deer killed with chitty bullets in one year than all the great b.c. bullets in ten years

I sure ain't shooting paper, steel or back in the middle east shooting 1k+. I'm shooting 4-500 max and works just fine; killed a lot of schitt with it.

Is there better extreme range? Yep, but I'm not talking extreme range, I'm talking hunting cartridge at ranges a majority are killing stuff and it does a damn good job.

If we want straight BC, let's just all go with Barrett 82s and 750 Amax's with a G1 of 1.05...

Yes, very true. Nevertheless, the .270 now has some good b.c. hunting bullets for those who want to shoot a bit further. If you're shooting up to 350 yards the medium weight bullets (130-140 grain and some like the 110 grain TTSX) are best by reason of the flatter medium range trajectory gives a better maximum point blank range. A 10 twist is fine to stabilise these good b.c bullets of medium weight. If you want to shoot further, the heavier, higher b.c. bullets are better and you use an 8 twist (or 7.5) with a longer barrel in a rifle that weights either a little more or a lot more (as I prefer) and use 165 to 170 grain projectiles, and its better to have a bigger case too such as the 27 Nosler to again flatten the trajectory.

I am really enjoying this
Thread
As a
Lifelong 270 basher I can’t help but grin at all
The ballistic proof yet the track record and the 270 must not hav got the memo. 😂😂😂
Back a few pages there was a debate about who developed it even claiming to be China. Could be I don’t know
But what hasn’t been discussed was the predessor by none other than Charles Newton his 256. Old hunting stories in the book of the rifle lots of hunters had high praise for it
No doubt Winchester I’m sure was paying attention just made a copy a tad bigger. To call there own

Projectiles of like mass/diameter ALWAYS have IDENTICAL SD(Sectional Density),though BC's vary wildly. Hint.

Thus the fhuqking HILARITY of SD "values",which measures only the schit,that do NOT matter. Hint.

I enjoy the ladies musing 4-500yd "greatness" ala 270,less a mention of the projectile incorporated. 'Course,no mention of the optic either. Hint.

Berger throws mass at the equation,but misses BC by miles. Pardon the 153.5 grainer having a better BC than the 156...though the Hornie 153 A-Tip bests both. Hint.



You CLUELESS Fhuqktards be sure to keep Googling a first fhuqking clue. Hint.

Bless your hearts for trying.

Hint.

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

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

RummageMaid,

Fortunately for you,Imagination and Pretend are free,so you can "afford" to "contribute"...you "lucky" kchunt. Hint. Congratulations?!?

Don't forget the 145gr .703 'burners. Hint.



Pardon my simply shooting it all,as you set on your Couchbound Kchunt and Google your Fantasies. Hint.

Bless your heart.

Hint.

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

It seems that people are using terms .270 Win and the .277 bore interchangeably. There's absolutely no truth that China developed the .270 Win. China was using a .277 bore (so what!) on completely different cases (to the .270 Win.) apparently developed by Mauser which was German, around when Winchester was developing a cartridge on the same diameter bore. But as discussed further back in the thread, no one has any evidence that Winchester copied the use of the same size bore from China or from Mauser. And even if they did (which is not admitted), we are talking about a hole size, not a cartridge. As previously mentioned, .277 (the true 7mm) when converted to metric is 7.0 mm to one decimal place. There was lots of experimenting around the world at the time trying to determine the optimum bore diameter. It would not be unusual for two different countries to independently come up with the same bore diameter as ideal, especially when that bore diameter in metric equates to 7.0 mm. How often in science do two scientists working independently both discover the same thing at around the same time, yet there was no copying? The .256 Newton is effectively a .30-06 necked down to .264 and is even further away from the .270 than the .280. "270 (sic) basher" implies that you were successful in your attempts to "bash" .270 owners. I have not seen any successful attempts at bashing .270 owners....just the same non-sense saying that there are no good b.c. .277 bullets which is false, and propagating the fiction that long heavy bullets with high b.c.'s are better at short to medium range as opposed to medium weight bullets with good b.c.'s for their weight. If those long-range " internet hunters" want to use heavy for caliber high b.c. bullets in .277, then they can, and use 7.5 to 8 twist barrels which are available. Don't mention the 7.5 to 8 twist barrels because that would destroy their other falsehood, that the .277 bore only comes in 10 twist. Now is there any need to repeat all this in 50 postings time?

Jeezus Fhuqk,you Droolers are CLUELESS. Hint.

The Booger .277" 170 EOL only needs a 9" RPM spout. Hint.



Fortunately for you,Imagination and Pretend are free,so you can "afford" to "contribute". Hint.

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

the below link indicates that a 1 in 8 is better for the worst case scenario with a 1.54 stability factor, 1 in 9 for best case scenario for the 170 grain



https://bergerbullets.com/introducing-the-berger-270-caliber-170-grain-eol-elite-hunter/

That was exactly my point. There is more than one way to skin a cat, but it seems reasonable to use the method that offers the greatest advantage.

First of all, heavy, high-BC bullets can certainly be advantageous at short-to-medium range when considering what can be the biggest challenge in field conditions, and that is wind drift. Second, due to the traditional industry standard 1:10" twist, there are few high-BC bullet options because bullet manufacturers chose not to offer bullets that most factory rifles could not stabilize. With the recent trend toward building fast-twist .277" rifles, there are a few high-BC bullet options, but that still pales in comparison to what is available on either side of .277" (6.5 mm and 7 mm) because both 6.5 mm and 7mm have long been produced with relatively fast twist rates.

The wind-drift advantage at short to medium range is certainly there, but it is negligible until you start getting around 300 yds or more when you are comparing it to medium weight bullets with good b.c.'s for their weight e.g. around .5. You have more recoil as you are using bullets approaching 180 grains, meaning not much difference to the .30-06 with 180's. That is why the .270 was considered an advantage, milder recoil and flatter trajectory with 130's than the .30-06 with 180 grain projectiles. Also, the heavy bullets drop more over that short to medium range. Sure that can be easily calculated and allowed for, but it is much easier to hold right on the vital zone in field conditions without making the allowance especially if the game is running or with an imperfect rest or off-hand. You really only need a few of options with the high b.c. bullets, too many options and sometimes the one you want isn't going to be readily available.

Realistically, most critters are killed at less than 300 yards, period. Of what import high BC bullets are, in most situations, I simply do not see. Most modern rifles can do that easily enough, and all kill quite well.


All this BS being hawked on here, in this thread, seem to forget this. Putting frosting on a turd doesn't change the fact that the underlying material is still schitt. WGAF if it's got a high BC or not, get closer, do some real HUNTING. Then, you can use anything you like and kill all you want to kill. All this crap I'm reading here doesn't mean a damned thing to the normal feller who just wants to fill his freezer with a minimum of fuss and crapola I'm reading here.

Wake TFU and get back to some flippin' common sense.

'rat' (grin)

you expressed some of the SAME feelings I've had about 'other' cartridge comparisons.
I have not bought 1 box of long sleek HI bc bullets because 400 yds is the limit of my opportunities and
my confidence. Also it was printed here a few years back, it takes +/- 600 yds for certain boutique cartridges
and bullets to CATCH UP to the 270 W.

I'll take a 400-500 advantage every day. Thank you.

For that reason I never OPEN a thread per certain cartridges OR certain rifles. I Don't Care.

Jerry

Do you realize that SD and Mass are only PARTS of the formula for calculating BC? The formula also takes into consideration drag coefficient and projectile lengths, among other factors.

So, you are comparing Berger's Target Hybrid weighing 153.5 grains that has a slightly higher ballistic coefficient than the EOL hunter weighing 156 grains which has a slightly lower BC and declaring that Berger has no idea what they are talking about and missed the mark completely based on your limited understanding of BC. But try and think for a moment. Certain characteristics of a bullet can offset others such that a slightly lighter bullet CAN have a higher BC than a slightly heavier buller of the exact same diameter IF it is shaped differently to achieve a different drag coefficient and has a different length.

Just about all of Bergers Target Hybrid bullets achieve a slightly higher BC than the next slightly heavier hunting bullets of the same caliber. They do with a different shape and length which serve to offset other elements of the BC formula.

Calculating BC is not as simple as you think. You've self-aggrandized yourself into looking stupid(er).

So, to turn a phrase - bless YOUR little heart for TRYING. You CLUELESS Fhuqktard.

Fhuqking LAUGHING!

I enjoy how you Drooling CLUELESS Fhuqks "get" to Meltdown and Whine,with your Stupidity being no "act"...you "lucky" kchunts. Hint. Congratulations?!?

Perhaps you gals can chant in unison that "you don't care",as you feverishly devour my EVERY word and Splendid Pixel. Did I mention jsquall is a Lying Piece Of Fhuqking Schit? Hint. Fhuqking LAUGHING!

It is rather fhuqking hilarious,how the obvious escapes Crying Karens and their VERY Tender Feelers get bruised sooooooo easily,as they wax eloquent upon their countless,though very WELL founded Insecurities. Funnier than fhuqk,that you Woke Melting Snowflakes cringe at mere mention of BC,which was plainly cited prior. Hint.

I am VERY "surprised" that a Vagenius missed the obvious correlation with Booger's attempt at BC,that even with the addition of much added mass,the attempt falters. Prolly why the 147 ELD M is such a Peach and of course pictured. Hint. Fhuqking LAUGHING!

Hopefully it is heart warming to you CLUELESS Fhuqktards,that the dumber you are and the less you do,the "better" everything is in your crossed-eyes. Read that again. Now one more time. Hint.

Again,the advantages of aero form start inside the muzzle and they never wane. That is obviously upsetting to you CLUELESS Kchunts,but surging Estrogen don't/can't water facts down,if only to your Crying Chagrin. Perhaps one of you Brazen Broads can cite a projectile in particular,if only for extrapolation,rather than espouse Drooltard Dumbfhuqktitude if only for a change of pace. Dare ya'. Hint. Fhuqking LAUGHING!

Now as projectile stability goes,that's a function lineal velocity and twist rate combining for gross rotational. Subsonics will require more RPM than something traipsing along at 4000fps,if only fhuqking obviously. I've a "hunch",that I've oft mused Reserve RPM being a boolits BEST friend,if only because it pads said velocity windows and leaves opportunity open for that which may be unveiled tomorrow. Read that again. Now one more time. Hint.

If only in fairness,I rather like a 223 on Critters,to the distances you gals cite. You Cry Baby Kchunts be sure to combine "forces",if only to keep things "fair" and be sure to grab some of the slack on the rope,because you Crying Kchunts are doing "great!". Hint.

.224" all and BC's just "might" vary along the gamut. Hint.



Bless your hearts for Whining,Trying,Crying and Lying.

Do NOT "forget",that Imitation is THE most Sincere form of Flattery.

Hint.

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

Another bloody vaginal belch from the depths of Big Prick. His pretty pictures don't disguise the fact that he had no idea what he was talking about with respect to BC. LOL. The self aggrandizement syndrome of such people goes into overdrive when they claim an expertise then fail for all to see in the most basic understanding of the subject. No doubt, it will post another picture and call everyone names to stoke its own ego. Self aggrandizement on display for all to see.

Sweetheart,

NOBODY can "make" you appear to be a DUMBER Fhuqk than you can,by simply doing your best...you "lucky" kchunt. Hint. Congratulations?!?

Here's to how very WELL founded your countless Insecurities are and that even a Sniveling STUPID Fhuqk such as yourself,knows better than to cite something as simplistic as a particular projectile. Read that again. Now one more time. Hint. Fhuqking LAUGHING!

"Tell" me "more" about BC. Hint.



Bless your heart,you are doing "great!".

Hint.

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

^^^^ Predictability is the common trait among self-aggrandizers. But saying "I told you so" regarding the above subject would simply be greeted with "we know, we know." LOL. That poor soul.

Guess I am phuqcked??

Super-phuqcked.

Sweetheart,

Ain't it a fhuqking hoot,that a guess is all that you can "do"...you "lucky" kchunt. Hint. Congratulations?!?

Kudos on very nearly almost being able to afford 50rds of fhuqking Dog Schit. Hint. Fhuqking LAUGHING!

.648 BC's here and it's a fair to middlin' blend of attributes. Google as you must and nod your head like you "understand". Hint.



Simply holster 60grs of mass and reap a .838 BC instead of,at a faster pace to boot. Google as you must. Hint.



You are doing "great!". Hint. Fhuqking LAUGHING!

Bless your heart,for doing your best,with what incredibly little you "have" to "work" with.

Hint.

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

It is very clear to me the people who have little or no experience using the .270 wcf( or equivalent) on game.
A big mouth, those who cut and paste their cherry picked data and cannot explain themselves simply are the least likely to know.
B.C. is not a precursor to the downrange effect of a bullet on flesh and bone . It has a miniscule effect.
The real effect is how the bullet performs on these things. That is it.
" A big mouth don't make a big man " has never been truer and very evident . These places just reveal who they are.
There are many good people here with great experience , this too is evident .
These folks just disregard the " puffed up nonsense"
Life is like that

cumrag,

I'm VERY "surprised" that in the duration of your High Pitched Nasal Whining Vagina Monologue,you were unable to cite a single projectile in particular...you "lucky" kchunt. Hint. Congratulations?!?

Pardon the simplistic fact,that I've shot more 270 Win,than folks who like 'em. Read that again. Now one more time. Hint.

I reckon it was too obvious,for you to grasp Terminal Effects 101 in that placement,projectile selection and headstamp are the order in which Lethality is factored. You'll wanna read that again. Now one more time. Hint. Fhuqking LAUGHING!

It'll only come as a "surprise" to a Drooling DUMB Fhuqk such as yourself,that concessions aren't requisite,to fly First Class. You be certain to "justify" your HILARIOUS Stupidity,in the manner which soothes you most and in fairness,you are doing "great!". Hint. Fhuqking LAUGHING!



You VERY Tender Twats are free to brandish STUPIDITY,as if it were a "secret weapon" and I rather enjoy the HILARITY of same. Now wipe that streaming Mascara from your tear stained cheeks and quivering lips,then cite what is "cherry picked data",as per your HILARIOUS version(s) of "knowledge","experience" and "results". Then I will simply rub your nose in your fhuqking STUPIDITY,so even a Melting Snowflake such as yourself can understand. Dare ya'. Hint. Fhuqking LAUGHING!

Here's to your RAGING Estrogen Torrents,you mind numbingly CLUELESS Stupid Fhuqk. Which bullet(s) have I cited,that didn't rate the billing in your "experience". Pretend as you do and Imagine as you MUST,you Crying Karen Woke CLUELESS Kchunt. Read that again. Now one more time. Hint.

Bless your heart for trying though and kudos on not being forced to "act" STUPID,by arranging same as a default,by simply doing your best.

Thanks for sharing how very WELL founded your countless Insecurities are too. That was a NICE touch!

Hint.

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

For sure.

Are those .45/70's?

They are. 405 grain Remington bullets.

Need to find a single shot to shoot em in.

Super Duper Fhuqked. Hint.



You gals are a hoot!

Hint.

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

You don’t need a bullet approaching 180 gr to get a meaningful increase in BC over the mid-weight bullets in .277” with BC of ~0.5. For example, the 6.5 CM 147 gr ELD-M factory load has G1 BC of 0.697 and ~10% less wind drift than the .270 Win 145 gr ELD-X factory load at 300 meters. Said 147 gr load can easily be zeroed for MPBR of over 300 meters, and has even milder recoil than the .270 Win. To be clear, both cartridges obviously work great for 300 yard shots. We’re just discussing slight but real advantages one way or the other. When you get past 300 meters, as can occur quite often in the open terrain of the West, the advantage becomes greater.

Sometimes the bullet you want isn’t readily available, regardless of how many high-BC options exist in the caliber in question. More alternatives means a better chance of finding another option that shoots well in your rifle, and is available.

Gee I was shooting Antelope and deer out to 400 yards with basic 130 and 150 grain cup and core flat base bullets from my 270 with excellent results. Didn't care a whit about BC either. Did the same thing with the 150 grain flat based bullets out of my 30-06. Was just glad to have a bullet with a point on the front end. Seems like you guys have set Sticks man bun on fire.

WHO ?



Jerry

Jordan,

You are going to start a Riot,by reflecting upon actual trigger time. Hint. Laughing!(grin)

It's a real fhuqking bummer to schlep a Long Action based on an '06 case,that gets it's ass handed to it by a Short Action...based on a fhuqking 22-250 hull. Hint. Laughing!

The gals haven't even gathered the courage,to muse scopes yet. Hint.

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








Rickety,

DO cite the projectiles and their velocity,along with the sight system(s),used to arrange these "amazing" deeds...you "lucky" kchunt. Hint. Congratulations?!?

I rather enjoy your Imagination and Pretend,especially being it's soooooooo very "REAL" to you. Hint. Fhuqking LAUGHING!

Pardon a 6BR slapping that schit silly. Hint.



Bless your heart,as NOTHING is fhuqking funnier than The Texas Version of EVERYTHING.

Hint.

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









jsquall,

No need to reiterate that besides being a CLUELESS Fhuqk,that you just "happen" to be a Lying Piece Of Fhuqking Schit to boot...you "lucky" kchunt. Hint. Congratulations?!?

It's unbecoming when you "forget" about your heralded Imaginary Pretend Ignore,again and again. Hint. fhuqking LAUGHING!

Bless your heart for Lying,Trying,Crying and Whining.

Hint.

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

Sierra Tipped Game King, 140 gr each, 270 vs 6.5 CM. Highest velocity listed in Alliant reloading tables , 3050 vs 2820 fps. 200 yd zero. 400 yds: 2339 FPS/1700 ft-lbs/-18” vs 2207 fps/1509 ft-lbs/-20.9”. Good numbers for both out at the limits of practical hunting ranges but clear superiority for the Creedmoor? No data listed for Reloader 26 for this bullet in 270 but it has potential to exceed this velocity.

What's the starting velocity, 100, 200, 300, 350 yard bullet rise or fall with your well-constructed hunting bullet, not your match bullet for killing paper targets?

LarryO!!! Aka bacon throat!!!

Ms.RifleLady,

Here's your .277" 140 Tipped Sugar at 3050fps. Hint.



Pardon a reduction in mass and an increase in BC,ala .264" JLK 130 via Kreedmire at 2900fps. Hint.



You gals keep Googling,as you MUST. Hint. Fhuqking LAUGHING!

In fairness,I've never seen '26. Hint.



Bless your heart for trying though.

Hint.

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







RiffleKchunter,

You are in wayyyyyyyyyyy over your pointy head...you "lucky" kchunt. Hint. Congratulations?!?

Bless your heart for trying though.

Hint.

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

You'll never kill anything with those.

These?

Stick,

As you well know, a lot of folks refuse to accept that there is something out there that has an advantage over Ol’ Faithful, simply because the tried-and-true has always worked in the past. It’s not hard to imagine that we just might make some technological gains over a 100-year span, both in case and bullet design, all of which may lead to some subtle, but real, advantages over what was mainstream in 1925. Not only that, but certain trends over those 100 years, such as common twist rates for a given caliber, just might affect bullet development between then and now, resulting in current advantages for one calibre over another.

I find it works best to check emotional attachment at the door, and evaluate things based on merit. Can a guy kill game with a .270 Win and 150 gr Speer SP? I sure hope so, or he’s got bigger problems than BC to worry about. But do bullets exist now that give a guy an advantage over that .270/150 combo? Sure, they do.

Maybe a Ruger No. 1?

Never feed a narcissist. Self aggrandizing narcissists always derail themselves. Notice how it revealed its botched understanding of BC a few pages ago? The self aggrandizer will continue to defend its hole even after its defenses have been swept away, more aggressively to boot. Notice how it posts pictures that prove nothing (only that someone used a camera), and which are completely out of context. To be thought of as superior, and uniquely so, is the driving force behind the narcist. After all, they live in a world of self-grandeur and delusion. Once identified, they should become objects of pity, since they don't understand their own condition, much like a rabid dog that bites out of reflex, only knowing that it is miserable and must lash out.

Maybe........or a Browning High Wall.

MV stated to be 2567 fps.

The bullet’s vertical trajectory stays within a 12” vital zone.

I’ve killed and seen killed several ‘fleshy targets’, not just paper ones, with the 147 ELD, so that’s the bullet I’ll stick with. It has performed very well for me by creating a substantial wound channel and leaving a ~1.25” exit wound most of the time. I’d be happy to compare it with an ELD-M offering in .277”, for a more fair comparison, but there isn’t one. Which is sort of the point.

Only if you're in slingshot range.

These fuggers are probably on the negative side of B.C. values.

A Browning High Wall would be a good choice!

Berger VLD hunting/Nos Etip 130/Hrn 130 Inter bond or SST 130 in 270 all listed as .460 G1. Highest Alliant velocity listed is 3200 fps: 400 yd results: 2396 fps / 1656 ft-lbs / -16.7” or + 84 fps / + 114 ft-lbs / + 2.2” with respect to Creedmoor shooting boutique 130 gr “JLK” slug at 2900.

10glocks,

Before you dig any deeper, I think Stick was implying that despite a gain in mass, which is proportional to BC, there is no gain in BC (there’s actually a loss, instead) with that particular bullet, which implies that form factor was sacrificed for other design features. Compare with the 147 ELD, which has less mass and a higher BC value.

I’m pretty sure he was not implying that Berger doesn’t know how to calculate BC, as you stated above.

How about wind drift, which can present a greater challenge and be more meaningful at 400 yards than any of the other quantities you mentioned?

If you are comparing the performance of the 6.5CM to the .270 over normal hunting ranges , here are a few points to factor into your calculations:

1. Use a well-constructed hunting bullet that you can shoot through the shoulder of a deer without it blowing up before getting to the vitals, perhaps compare the 140 grain Accubond or TGK in .270 to a similar CM bullet
2. Use a muzzle velocity that a temperature stable powder gives you such as H4350 or H4831sc that will work well at -4 degrees to 100 degrees without significantly affecting your velocity , pressure and point of impact
3. Use the same length barrel 22" to 24"
4. Do not use a 200 yd zero. Sight your .270 in for 3" high at 100 yds and the CM for the same.
5. Use your accurate load of temperature stable powder which gives a moderate pressure, not the exaggerated published loads of factory loaded ammunition, nor maximum load
6. factor in that the .270 has 10 % more cross-sectional area than the 6.5 for a bigger wound channel
7. Give drop figures at 100 (+3"), 200, 300 , 350 yds
8. State what loads, projectile, barrel length you are using

Indeed the wind drift could be significant at 400, but depending on the actual wind conditions and the size of the “vitals box” you’re shooting at, the difference between a 270 slug and a higher g1 6.5mm slug may well be insignificant. The proposition that some have argued here, however, that the 270 is clearly outclassed by new cartridge developments is hard to support. As a rule, the 270 mitigates the higher BC advantages of more efficient case designs in 6 or 6.5mm by taking advantage of its greater case capacity in using newer, slower burning powders, like Reloader 26, IMR 7977 etc, to produce yet more velocity.

.277 vs .264 is only about 5% larger unexpanded, same if you use 1.5x for expanded differences.

Since you have all the answers, why not just present the data instead of asking Jordan to do the work?

I'm sorry, but your explanation doesn't comport with his statements:



Mass is hardly "largely meaningless." It is THE (only) numerator in the BC formula. No mass, no bullet. So it is largely the single most important factor in calculating at a BC, since the rule of thumb is that for a given caliber and given shape (design), a rise in mass always increases BC.



To me, that demonstrates that he doesn't know that other elements of the projectiles design can offset mass to produce a higher BC. It sounds like to me he's under the impression that more mass means high BC under all circumstances and that ain't always the case.



Given his posts and self-congratulating bullshit, yeah, it's easy to conclude that's exactly what he meant.

If that wasn't his intent, perhaps an effort to discuss the subject rationally and state his thoughts clearly would help. That's obviously asking too much.

10.24 % difference in cross-sectional area using formula pi x radius squared...... .0547 square inches for 6.5 (.264") v .0603 square inches for .270 Win (.277")

Use 3030 fps muzzle velocity, 24" barrel, 58 grains 4831sc, 3" at 100 yds, 140 grain TGK for .270. I don't have an accurate load for the CM using a similar single-based powder and a well constructed projectile.

Doesn't Berger use Brian Litz, ex-rocked scientist to calculate their b.c.s?

You got me there. Still not enough to make a real difference in wound channel.

Bullet construction/design would make more of a difference but then it's hard to make an apples to apples comparison on that because 1 make/model can be softer/harder or have different jacket thickness in different calibers.

Accubond in .277 140 may expand more or less easily than .264 140 grain Accubond.

Shoot a deer through the shoulders with any hunting bullet in either cartridge and he will be dead in the shadow where he stood at the shot.

It's all just a pissing match.

.264 lovers won't budge and neither will the .277 lovers. Myself I don't have a rifle chambered in either caliber.

Critters on the other hand can't tell 2 fugging bits difference when hit by either one.