Now for the Loony types who have kept up w/my thread here on the Opportunity for Winchester to go head to head against Remington's 7mm-08.

We can crunch numbers all day long w/bullet weights but let's stick to common weights deer hunters use in the 270 - the 130, and 7/08 users run - the 140.

I ran some numbers w/various bullets per someone's proposal on ammo choices that I agreed with on loads to intro a new round in 270-08.

130 ~ 2950 mv
110 ~ 3200 mv
85 ~ 3400-3500

Granted Speed sells and if one wanted to use the lighter two bullets to impress in Muzzle Velocity, it may be great for marketing, here is how I see pitting a 270-08 against the 7/08 Real World comparison.

A 270 is a known killer on deer, and in a package wrapped up Short like the famous 308 Winchester, yet w/o Magnum recoil. Hence the 270-08.

We can call it any of the below, OR whatever the marketing guru's decide:

270 WPE Winchester Pony Express (yeah, just use your rider on a horse logo)
270 SS Pony Express (Super Special " ")
270-08 Winchester Express

Yada Yada Yada

Now you Loony types here, let's assume how I see Real World Use.

Guy grabs a 7mm-08 for deer hunting, plans to run factory ammo, and says to his self, "140 grain is THE bullet weight - perfect on deer, and the Corelokt is proven - THE way to go."

Ok, let's also consider the 270/130 is THE standard load that made the 270 Winchester popular.

Let's Compare what a NEW round like a 270 Pony Express would look like, directly against a 7mm-08 Remington 140 Corelokt load. Assume both 24" test barrels.

270-08 with 130 gr. Nosler Accbond at 2950 fps. This is Speed/Energy/Drop w/200 yds Zero. Ballistic Coefficient is .435 and Sectional Density .242 for load.

270/130 Accbond/ 2950fps: (Winchester 270-08 130 gr. Ballistic Silvertip!)

Muzzle 2950 2512
100 1.6 -6 2736 2161
200 0.0 0 2533 1852
300 -7.0 9 2339 1579
400 -20.4 19 2154 1340
500 -41.3 32 1977 1129

Now take the 7mm-08 Rem w/140 Corelokt at Factory Specs. B.C. is right from Remington catalog online - .390 and S.D. is .248. Published specs are:

Velocity (ft/sec)
Cartridge Type Bullet Muzzle 100 200 300 400 500

Remington� Express� 140 2860 2625 2402 2189 1988 1798

Energy (ft-lbs)
Cartridge_Type Bullet Muzzle 100 200 300 400 500
Remington� Express� 140 2542 2142 1793 1490 1228 1005

Long-Range Trajectory
Cartridge Type Bullet 100 150 200 250 300 400 500

Remington� Express� 1.8 1.6 zero -3.1 -7.8 -22.9 -46.8

Ballistic Calculator used for first example above shows the 7/08:

7mm/140 Corelokt/2860 fps

Muzzle 2860 2543
100 1.8 -7 2627 2145
200 0.0 0 2407 1800
300 -7.8 10 2198 1501
400 -22.8 22 1999 1242
500 -46.6 36 1811 1019

So what I see is a round that offers BETTER ballistics than Rem's 7-08 baby w/hallmark 140 Corelokt ammo, with LIGHTER recoil. One might give up 100 fps in the 'Pony Express' 270-08 vs. a 270 Winchester, both in 130gr loads, BUT gains a handier short action rifle

In addition, a 110 Accubond and/or Barnes can run around 3200 mv to impress speed freaks, AND flatten deer, with less recoil yet.

AND you can go one step further for lighter recoil and use an 85 TSX Barnes at 3400-3500 (max) or less, and kill deer all day long to a good 300 yds or so, which MOST beginners likely won't shoot 1/2 or 1/3 that far as their mentor's will set them up on closer shots often times starting out.

Lastly, a Sierra 90 gr. HP can be factory loaded to Devastate varmints like coyotes at 3400-3500 fps.

SO gang, HERE you have it.

A round that from inception will DELIVER the goods unlike the 260 that was spec'd at 2750 w/140 and upon introduction, ran about 2550 mv w/first ammo production, getting the 260 off to a horrible launch, besides which USA hunters/buying public as a whole never has been much interested in the 6.5mm/264s though it's slowly turning.

There is NO arguing the fact that the 270 is known as a great flat light recoiling deer round. Many view the 243 as a flat varmint and crossover dual purpose deer round, and IT IS, and a great one on deer WITH proper bullets. Yet History shows the reputation for MANY, or Perception of the 243 on deer is lackluster.

The 308 Winchester - it stands on it's own for killing, yet it has MORE recoil than a 243/100gr load, 260/130-140 load, 7-08/140 load as it typically drives 150-168gr bullets for loads commonly chosen by deer hunters, and it even kicks more than a 270 Winchester 130 grain if not mistaken.

YET, if Winchester were So inclined to come out with a PRACTICAL SENSIBLE NON MAGNUM light recoiling flat shooting deer killing cartridge, I honestly believe a 270-08 makes ALOT of sense compared to the above rounds.

Recall Remington long ago comparing the 7/08 to the 280? Or how about the 260 to the 270 Winchester?

Well I think a campaign to compare the 270 in a short action 308 case sized platform is long overdue.

What say you Winchester? Wanna play to win?

OR do you want to see Rem spin off the 6.8 SPC and do a NEW round like their 6.5 and 7mm version on YOUR 308 Winchester baby?

Remington would likely go with the name 6.8mm -08 to keep the 6.8 name in the limelight pushing the SPC round for AR/M-16 platform, while positioning a 6.8mm -08 in bolts/levers, single shots, and Non-AR semi-auto's.

From one Loony, I can say I won't buy or use a 6.8mm ANYTHING (just don't like the name personally), but if a 270-08 WINCHESTER hits the market, then I will be using. In fact, I am sure Winchester will send my the first prototype/production along w/ammo for a thorough testing, and send me off to some exotic hunts to prove it's worth!

The future will be interesting to see if Winchester OR Remington will do a 270-08!

Now here comes my 'Shellacking' LOL

BTW, if Winchester Management wants to hire me to run Marketing, send me a PM. Seriously! Otherwise, I will send you a bill for my INNOVATION in Profitable Product Design complete with full Marketing Campaign Contact me and we will hammer out the final details of my employment contract and my current and future marketing ideas.

I just dont see enough of a difference between the 2.

Angels dancing on the head of a pin...

Coreloss vs. AB IS apples to oranges

I'd rather see them offer a 1:8" twist 223 and 22-250, or, figure a way to have their SA magazine accept a loaded round of 2.95". How about an action designed around the .473 or .378 case head, IE much smaller diameter and much lighter.

Toad agreed- but I will bet ALOT of hunters grab the less expensive corelokt shells to drop their deer.

Just how I see it. Agreed not apples to apples, but we can run numbers on the 130 corelokt, and it will stand well, but again, I am pushing for WINCHESTER to intro this round, and don't think they have plans to run a Corelokt

WTF, exactly - not in ballistics, but in rifle choices and ammo, NOW we can have a debate.

85 Barnes - deer/etc.
90 Sierra - varmint load
110 Accubond - light recoiling flat deer killer
130 " - set the standard for the 270, and less recoil than a 140gr 7-08 (and better performance than a 140 corelokt 7/08).

More like fecal matter vs. nasal discharge.

Shhhh, that's my NEXT push for Winchester I have been pushing QT's awhile for factory rifles/ammo.

223, 22-250 AND 243 QUICK TWISTED (QT)in 1 in 8" has no downsides and ALOT of upsides.

No doubt would give shooters/hunters ALOT better options IMHO as I personally would not shoot anything BUT QT barrels given a choice.

People give me crap about my post total. You used as many words in the original post as I have in 1000 posts.

Just buy a .260 Rem and either a .308 or .30-06 and you have your bases covered, with better performance than the .270-08 could give in the various applications. Or, split the difference and just go with a .270 Win that you can load down to .270-08 levels if so desired.

Ugh, Steelhead no like.

Steelhead, I am an analytical thinking man. Just making a scientific case - no pun, for why a place exist for a sensible modest recoiling short action deer killing round, that has yet to be commercialized.

Concise?

I would surely bet a write up on the then new 6.5 Creedmoor or Grendel would be as COMPLETE.

Perhaps my OP is a better read in Rifle Shooter vs. Outdoor Life. Different audience.

Doesn't fill much of a void IMO..apples and apples..too many overlapping good calibers right in there bunched up at present...A dead critter ain't gonna know the difference!!!! FLEM

This

We have WAY too many cartridges. We could rationalize them down to no more than 2-3 dozen ceterfire rifle cartridges in the world with little impact on the sporting rifleman.

uh, uh, uh, uh, but, but, but, what about my 9 shooter niche in the market?

But if that statement and it's true - CORRELATED to sales, EVERY deer hunter would just get a light fluff recoiling 223 and shoot Barnes

You are correct on 'ballistic void'...I was referring to a marketing opportunity.

Which is precisely why I'm making a commitment in my arsenal to have a .260 rifle, .260 Encore barrel (MGM 17") and my .30-06. I also have a 6PPC 26" Encore barrel that is my pure fun and varmint gun. I have come to the conclusion that I don't NEED anything else, I have a .308 Win FN PBR XP that shoots lights out, but I'm considering selling it and putting some of the money into a custom tube for the .260 and .30-06, although the .30-06 is M70 Classic FWT walnut/SS. I've already bedded it though, so the originality is out the window. I just don't see a legitimate reason for Winchester to tool up for a new cartridge that will most likely fail in an epic way. Let's see, .22 CHeetah, .243 Win, .260 Rem, 7mm-08, .308 Win, .338 Fed., .358 Win. We're only "missing" a couple calibers there in the .308 family, .25, .270, 8mm, and 9.3mm? I know the first three have been done by wildcatters and someone has probably done the 9.3 thing. The .270 is unnecessary, but why would necessary be a requirement! Speculate away 65BR, have fun!

BOOORING

The differences between the 7/08 and the .308 are already pretty hard for the below average to average rifle shooter/owner/hunter to discern. Your .270/08 would be even harder.

I think it's all about individual likes and dislikes.Personally I've been a 6.5 fan going way back/always liked the super performance of my 264 but I was smart enough to build a GOOD rifle around it for obvious reasons..glad to see interest in the 26 caliber finally returning.My future builds may include a 6.5 Creedmore/6.5-284 or possibly a 260AI,, not so much because they're any better than 7mm offerings but because I've been a 26 fan from the get go!!!

Not much of an opportunity, looks like a good way for the company to lose money. Shoot the two calibers side by side in the field in identical rifles, who could tell the difference, certainly no game animal, and I doubt any rifleman could either,what one will do the other will do. The only demonstrable difference I can see exists on paper only.

10 grains difference in bullet weight and a whopping 90 fps velocity difference.

There are a few issues. Remington won't load for it unless it makes some real progress and grouped in with the 7mm-08,308 and 260 there isn't much room for it.

So it will be loaded only by Winchester, unless federal sees some benefit. Its not going to be on the 14.99 shelf at dicks with 308 and 30.06, heck most of the time 270win can't make that cut.

If its loaded by just winchester, what are the odds that a Barnes bullet will be among the offerings.. pretty low I would guess.

Winchester has a fairly small footprint in the rifle market these days. Judging by what I see, remington, ruger and savage all considerably out sell winchester. Ruger might at somepoint make a run of 270-08 but I wouldn't hold my breath for savage and count Remington out. No 700's and no Model 7's.. that's a big blow for a new round.

338F is a nice round, it offers something different from 308 and it had some support in terms of chambering from ruger,kimber etc and had good ammo availible ( accubond/TSX) and its pretty much still born from a comercial standpoint.

One of the reasons 338F was stillborn was Winchester had the 358 and 325 and Remington had the 350rm so two of the largest rifle and ammo makers were already unlikely to jump in on a larger bore SA

Most here know I am a 6.5 fan, and built a 6.5-308 win before the Saami Asquare/ala 260 Rem came out. It's a good one, yet I find MOST of my shooting is going to be using a 130 Accubond on deer.

Personally I'd rather have something w/o the Remmy name on it, a 6.5x47 Lapua may yet be in my future, we shall see. I like the Creedmoor, but don't like the name, and if I am going to run a round that has proprietary brass, I will run a 47 Lapua.

WTM45 - exactly, all my 'Gack' in my first post is good commentary to SUPPORT the Basic Simple Concept.

It is this guys:

A 270 Winchester - proven since 1925 - STANDING THE TEST OF TIME - for 85 years, ALL rolled up in a short action, w/no more than about 100 fps sacrifice, if that, using modern powders/loads in a 270-08 vs. what loads the 270 built it's reputation on.

MANY factory loads for the 270 bought at 'Mart-Mart' are econo priced loads, simple cup/core that have been doing their stuff for decades.

YET, who offers/uses/buys/builds a 270 Winchester, a long action round, in a compact Short Action Carbine? NOBODY.

The 7/08 found it's niche in a Model 7. The round built it's brand/reputation upon one load, a 140 Corelokt that at inception, and up until more recently, was actually a 139 Hornady for you guru's, and it was actually loaded initially w/IIRC 49 gr of what appeared to be W760, later production showed 1-2 gr less per Layne Simpson. That was 1981. Typical Factory 140 gr 7/08 speeds are around 2800, maybe a little less in carbines, and original M7's were 18.5", unlike the factory test barrels being 24", so there are TWO KNOWN facts here:

1) 270 success since 1925, proven w/130 grain
2) Hunters/buying consumers seeing a 'need' for a compact efficient, effective carbine w/light recoil that youth, women and adults alike can maneuver in tight corners whether thick woods, climbing up a deer stand, or in a deer blind where a long barrel is difficult to get out a window.

Combine the 270 in a short action carbine, which is done best by making into a 270-08, and you have a deer hunting package great for all.

A 270-08 in a M70 Featherweight 22" bbl, and some SS/Syn carbines at 20" to rival Rem's M7, yet with a thicker less 'whippy' barrel, and you have a recipe for a Great handling mild recoiling flat shooting deer slayer EQUAL to my 260 w/130 Accubond.

The 6.5-308 has few flies on it, a BALANCED deer cartridge, yet I doubt the 260 will EVER supplant the success of the 270. YET, to get a non magnum 270, one has to get a long action rifle.

The 270-08 SOLVES that very dilema.

If speed alone sold, every deer hunter would use a 240 or 257 Weatherby round. They don't, not even the swift.

If power alone, the 416 mag's......

I think seeing the long term lackluster sales of the WSM and WSSM shows the 'MASSES' don't feel the NEED for Warp Speed.

The 338 Federal, a great round, yet not setting record sales.

The 270 ALWAYS has been a top choice for deer hunters. It's bore size is known. I believe when it comes to deer hunters in the USA, 3 bore sizes are considered 'Best'....

the 270, 7mm and 30 cal as most feel anything larger is 'TOO big' and kicks too much.......and anything smaller are better suited for kids/women, etc.

Steelhead, as a 'Loony' I WANT a 250 one day, yet we KNOW a 6mmBR with proper bullets will equal and better it downrange and I know a 243 Fast twisted will beat a 250AI Downrange, yet I still want to use one. WHY? It STILL gets the job done, with little blast or recoil, not to mention it's not what every Tom Dick and Harry use.

That same thought process is why many use a 260, low recoil/blast, flat accurate deadly and hey, it's different than the boring '06 and old 270 Winchester, and besides, it's all rolled up in a handy short action package, a nicety to have if you desire.

The concept of a 270-08 may not capture the lion's share of the Loony market as why not a 260 or 7/08, or Creedmoor, etc.

Yet I can imagine a dad telling his son, "How about we get YOU a new rifle in 270, just like Dad's, but in a short light rifle YOU can carry and handle? And w/a little less recoil?

What is NOT to like? Truly if NEED had anything to do w/what we all here use, we'd all be stuck using a 30-06 and I never enjoyed shooting one.........besides, every deer hit w/lesser cartridges died fine when I did my part.

Ballistics and paper comparisons, apples to apples, OR oranges don't kill game.

We all now that. Shot placement w/good bullets DOES - every time.

What the 270-08 offers Joe Blow the deer hunter, is a round he can identify with in caliber size and ballistic performance, in a handy short action rifle.

THAT is what the round offers, and where it would best make sense and what platform would like sell best.

But Winchester doesn't really sell a short light rifle. The Winchester all weathers are closer to everyones normal sporters about 6.5 lbs is as light as they go and they don't do barrels shorter than 22. and to get that light you have a $1100 list price. The rest of the line is even heavier.

No Knees, I think that when a guy thinks 'I need a 338' or medium bore, I want POWER on big game AND reach.

The 338F to my thinking is a real thinking man's practical round, and I would like to try one, yet it's no doubt - still born.

I think the bulk of rifles sold are to deer hunters. Most feel a 338 of any kind is just too big and 'WHY do I need a 338?'

The 325 IMO failed to be more successful NOT due to lacking in ballistics (ironic so many giving me a shellacking for seeing little difference in ballistics) BUT it's a caliber not many KNOW. FEW USA shooters know or want an '8mm' much less heard of a '325' though as John Barsness stated recently:

The industry makes it's bread and butter on the OLDER rounds that are popular already. ANY newbie is just that, a 'NEW' idea to make a fast quick buck and if it starts to fail, 'We bail' NOT putting future advertising dollars into it.

The 270 has nothing to fail.

NO 270 round to date has 'failed' though the WSM series was perhaps a disappointment as a SERIES as the WSSMs. Was it that they 'lacked ballistic differentiation?' NOPE.

Funny NOBODY says anything bad about a 308, and IT was the offspring of the 30-06. BOTH have been very popular. Think LONG ACTION - then go w/'06, if you want a compact short action - a hunter will choose a 308.

REALLY that simple guys, that last paragraph. BOTH 30s are popular. Many 30 owners WANT bigger than 270, 243, and 260, BUT they don't want the recoil of a 338, nor feel the need for the power. WHY? The 30s are PROVEN on game, inc. and especially deer.

Jack O'Connor LONG ago proved the merit and value of a 270.

LIGHTER recoil and flatter trajectory is what differentiated the 270 over the 30-06.

So it is with the 6.5s.....light recoil, flat shooting, deadly power.

ALL that is READILY available in the 270, yet currently not in a non magnum short action round. The 6.8 SPC is 300-500 fps BEHIND the 270-08 and 270 Winchester and I NEVER expect to see it be a popular short action bolt rifle choice.

Just how I see it.

I agree, the .264, .277, and .284 ALL are about THREE PEAS IN A POD when talking 130-140 grain deer loads and stuffed in a 308 case.

TOO close to spit for the difference in trajectory for most sane ranges hunters shoot, nor in recoil, nor in killing power.

I firmly believe ANY of the 3 calibers, in a 308 case w/quality 130-140 gr is very tough to beat for a handy deer rifle in a portable package w/20-22" barrel.

Will it sell? The few here won't decide the fate if it does come out.

If it were launched, it won't fail due to lacking in trajectory, harsh recoil/or perception of (like the 338 F perhaps) or killing power.

The 7/08 took 30 years of being a Saami, the 270, 85 years, etc.

The 270-08 IS a cartridge worthy of consideration as I have NO need, nor want in ANY cartridge of ANY bore size as there is no other VOID left to my thinking. Seeing THIS bore, in a new short action non magnum round, being the one 'void left' in what has been a VERY popular series of cartrides - all based on the 308 Winchester, and capitalizing upon the LONG popular 270 Winchester franchise.

Just how I see it and respect other's opinions on 'need and ballistic gack.

Mine is purely 'a marketing niche/opportunity' if a mfg. wants to give it a go. Time has shown one thing, NEW products will always be tried in the marketplace.

Can anyone think of anything better from a practical standpoint in a bore size PROVEN, save the OOPS....yes the 25-06 WAS mfg. by Remmy, and why not a 25-08?

BUT, we ALL know the 25-06 never sold like the 270...so again.

WHY Not a 270-08? As surely, SOME rifle/ammo mfg. WILL bring something NEW this coming year and years beyond. What will that be?

noknees, I toted a 20" synthetic stocked matte finished M70, factory mfg. in 7mm-08 all over Colorado after Elk and Mule Deer about 15 years ago. They were mfg. in 257 Roberts and 250 Savage ALSO, albeit short runs, the latter also had 1 in 14" twist IIRC.

NOPE, Winchester has ALLOWED Rem to sell their Whimpy Whippy barreled M7s to no end, in a Rem named round on their baby, the 7-08.

Winchester IIRC is owned by the same Co. as Browning, the latter did a good number of Abolt's in Micro Medallion and Micro Hunters IIRC in 7-08 and others.

YES, ironic Winchester was known for the handy '94 30-30 and yet NOT mass produced a carbine in say 20" w/short action.

I say it's time.

Its not been commercialized but wildcatters call it the 270 Redding...Ive thought about it a few time. Maybe my 243 will end up one someday with me being the 270 slut I am. If one of the big companies started chambering it, I would have one for sure.

Killing deer is easy, getting folks to understand that headstamp don't mean much (avoiding the extremes) is apparently difficult.

Never seen deer killed or shots made analytically. Doing trumps all

You make some very good points, but I don't see it happening any time soon. I'm sure it's already been talked about numerous times. The 270-08, the 7mm-08, and the 260 rem as much alike as three buzzards sitting on a tree together, the performance is almost identical. The only possible reason I can think of to go the 270-08 route is to have something different. I have gone that route before, I am the owner of a 7 SAUM, and it prolly serves me no better than a 280 or a 270 would. The common guy doesn't think like us loonies do, they want something that goes bang kills stuff,and be able to find ammo. That is 243,270 win, 308, and 30-06 country. I don't see Winchester chambering the round or people kicking the gun store doors down to get one.

I can appreciate your gacking. I've gone through the exact thing in regard to the round 15-20 years ago. Then I began to ponder a 270 Savage instead, perhaps an even mo-better deal in terms of light, handy, plenty. Had I done that, it would have involved a Model Seven I still have which would have meant a new barrel, of course, and it would have gotten a "proper" stock, the prices of which would have easily turned the whole thing into a $1500 rifle. And for what? As it is, that rifle, just as it arrived to me in 7mm-08, has popped more caribou than I can recount, as well as moose, wolf and countless other beasts when called on. It's actually pretty rare when I use a rifle that I would be able to buy ammo for in any place other than a decent gun shop. (I don't buy much ammo. ) In my view your gacking makes about as much sense as putting a raft of crazy glue-bound fibers onto rifles for handles. TEHO

I know that Winchester had made compact models them in years past but has no current offerings.

There may be some places where lots of Micro Medialions are sold but it sure isn't in the northeast.

Back when the Model seven had those short light barrels, they were a popular gun around here as most of us are woods hunters and carry our rifles some distance. The model 7 has grown heavy and slow (and pretty dam expensive) and I rarely see them in the hands of run of the mill hunters. It seems most I do see at the range are the looney types.

Heck I think that the best bolt woods carbine might be a remington youth 700 with a $50 ebay adult stock on it. (or better yet a Mickey edge, but thats getting looneyish)

Seems like a whole lot of effort to re-create a 60 year-old design......the .270 Titus. This was a "wildcat" made by necking the .300 Savage down to .277" to get (basically) .270 Winchester performance out of the Savage 99 rifle.....and it WORKED very well.

At the time (1940-early 1950's) the Savage 99 was a bit shorter than after the .308 came out and that's why the .300 Savage was the parent cartridge. Since the mid 1950's the Savage was "lengthened" to handle the .308 (and .243 and .358) making the conversion even more attractive. Why this "wildcat" never caught on is a puzzle.

How can anyone argue with a .277" 130 grain bullet at 2850 fps (original) or 2950 (.308 version) in a rifle as "perfect" for a deer weapon as the Savage 99???? Even in a short-action bolt rifle this would be hard to beat.....and I, for one, have always wondered why the "powers that be" chose to go with the 7mm or 6.5mm (.260) instead of the proven .270 Titus as a commercial round.

If we used logic, there would be only about 5 centerfire cartridges made. Logic has nothing to do with it.

We develop a desire for a certain cartridge, then try to find logical justification for the desire.

Don't try to justify it as "needed." "Wanted" is a good enough reason.

Bruce

65BR you have some of the longest posts that I have every seen on "how to pick fly [bleep] out of pepper". Really pointless BS

Your posts are of "Biblical" proportions

65Br,
In comparison, there is no reason for the 270/08 to have been ignored this long.

And what reason would there be for its existance?

You should consider a 6.5 Remington Mag AI or a 257 Weatherby/6.5 AI for a walk on the wild side....just for grins.

I had a Reamer made for the 6.5 Rem MagAI made 20 years ago, with a 29" barrel was shooting the Sierra 90's at 3900 fps into very tiny groups. Rifle shot so well my hunting parnter bought the whole kit & kabootle off of me after a month(he loved blowing up yotes).

Friend Gunsmith in Ga by the name of Bob Sutton(died of a heart attach while quail hunting) had his own wild cat following which was the 257Weatherby/6.5 AI and they slaughtered the deer with the 120g Sierra Match Kings at 3550-3650(26" barrels).

I personally would not screw around with the 270/308 case...waste of time even talking about it. A 25/308AI would interest me much more shooting the 80g Tipped tripple shocks.
The best improvement on a 308 case is the 7/08AI, one whale of a round.

I want the 5 minutes of my life back that I just wasted reading this thread.

he says ".270-08" again, someone slap him in the sack.

The comparison is rigged in favor of the 270.

Your comparing a bullet with a good BC in the 270, to different style bullet with a relatively low BC in the 7mm.

If you want to do a reasonably fair comparison, put a .277" 130gr Corlokt (BC .336) against a .284" 140gr Corlokt (BC .390) and see how they stack up.

Or A .277" 130gr NBT (BC .433) vs a .284" 140gr NBT (BC .485) and compare ballistics.




That said, the newer lightweight monometal bullets for the 6.8 SPC would surely make the 270-08 a fast stepper.

You must be one hell of a speed reader, it takes a week to read 65BR's posts much less the thread

65BR,

If it alright with you, I'll have an orange.

Your (bad) choice. The solution is easier than the effort and angst involved in bitching. There are sites where no one says anything that isn't worthwhile. You should be cautioned that your query back in November may have only one response however.

Oh come on guys�this is good stuff. This is the essence of a rifle loony. Look at all them words�it�s gotta be true!!

Actually 65, you do make a good case; bout as good as a case for a .280 over a .270 (or by your logic, a .270 over a .280)�I mean, there are guys who will go to their grave actually BELIEVING there is a difference. I have nothing against �em�but don�t try to convince me.

Smack �em in the right spot, and cartridge rarely matters. Sometimes bullets matters, but much less than rifle loony�s would have you believe.

65BR,
Don't bother trying to convince me ... I'm planning to build one at some stage. You can load for it with 7mm-08 dies with the expander plug removed by the way. In Victoria, Australia ... deer hunting for Red and Sambar deer requires a 277" minimum, 130gr minimum and 2" case or longer. Thus the legalities assist it, though the steep/heavy terrain tends not to.

Here's why it wont be done ... your domestic manufacturers are now inclined to release ammunition with 'premium' on it ... ammunition cost will kill it when it comes to the average shooter/hunter. If you can market it with a dirt cheap load, it will take off amongst non-reloader types. A positive is that a regular 130gr cup/core designed for the 270Win will most likely do exceptionally well anyway in this cartridge. Keep price of ammunition down, it will get bought. I'd be inclined to have its ammunition production outsourced entirely to say PPU who make both a cup/core 130gr 277" plus 308 sized bras in 243Win, 7mm-08 and 308Win. And you know how much Americans like out of country sourced products.

Reloaders will not buy a plethora of hedastamped brass, they'll neck up 243Win/260Win or neck down 308Win/7mm-08 ... this was evident in Australia with 338Federal and 358Win ... I don't know anyone with a quantity of headstamped 338Federal or 358Win brass

In a Model 7 or Winchester Featherweight with light contour 22" barrel, or a Tikka T3 ... I'd be all over one like a rash.
Cheers...
Con
PS: The 338Federal whilst 'still-born' to some degree is an amazingly efficient performer. I correspond with a few local shooters that use it and all report favourable outcomes despite the lack of recoil and blast ... even in lightweights like the T3. Animals taken have included scrub cattle, camels, small, medium and large deer, pigs, goats etc... When you get over the 'awe' at being pushed by a 338WinMag and having your ears hammered to see 4 feet of your victim in the air when you've recover from the recoil ... the virtues of the 338Federal start coming out when the very same animals are being killed just as well without the fuss at the gun end. The 358Win is exactly the same ... i know of three family members hunting the same animals over hounds with 358Win, 35Whelen and 338WinMag ... the 358Win in a BLR with 200gr Hornady spirepoints is the kids starter rifle, but over the course of time its equally as effective as the larger cartridges but there's no shock and awe and bravado in shooting a pea-shooter like a 358Win.

Or better yet, the .277 130 Accubond vs. the .284 140 Accubond (since Federal loads both)...

6BR,
Between 6.5 and 7mm lie copious versions of commericial chamberings that are ideal for deer-sized game, but that still won't stop the creation of more wildcats - guys love to tinker.

The flip side is that they don't necessarily create profit-making opportunities for gun companies.

Two different realities.

what's this thread about?,,,

The .270 Savage?

For those who desire to hunt with 130 gr .277 bullets in a short action gun that's not a magnum. Pretty simple.

There, fixed that for you..

The term WSM tripping you up?

And that too.....+1

Jim 62: I do not disagree. I happen to be partial to 7mm's.

Jwp475: I happen to like WSM's as well. I bought my son-in-law a 7 & mine is a 300. Really like it. It is my primary hunter.

THe 260 Rem is a relatively new commercial offering. I thought it unnecessary myself since the 6.5 x 55 is so proven. Evidently there are those who liked it enough to move Rem to make it.

I think this suggested cartridge is one of those where, if you stumble across a good rifle in the caliber, at a good price, it will work nicely - but you wouldn't really go out of your way to obtain one. Sorta like a drilling I saw today, with the rifle barrel in 9.3x72R, and a very reasonable price. A 9.3x72R isn't something I'd build in a new rifle, but it in a drilling it would do the job on deer.

I have a good light rifle in .308. If I wanted something faster/flatter shooting in a light rifle, I'd probably look for a .270 WSM, or belly up to the bar for a .270 Win, Roy, or 7mm mag.

The 9.3X74R will do the job on Cape Buffalo

Loaded with W760 or H414?

Jack used IMR 4064 in his 9.3 and Shawn used IMR-4350 in his and they both took Capes without a hitch

Now that's funny right there, that is:


JWALL

JWP apparently didn't catch it.

your whole rant about winchester having "missed" on the 7-08 is flawed logic...

they have produced untold thousands of rifles chambered to that cartridge...
it was a particular boon to the classic featherweight rifle...

Reloder28 did. Hardee-hardee-har.

Go back and read the post that you were responding to carefully..

If you look back at P.O. Ackley's books, this has been done many years ago.

65br, sorry to be the one to point it out to you. 270-08?If you go anywhere and buy a regular 270 Win with a 22" barrel(most are) and whatever mart ammo 2950 is about all you get if not less . Not only that but a LA and 22" barrel will be shorter than a SA and a 24" barrel to boot. Folks been a killing animals long time with LA 22" barrel 270 W's at 2900-3000 fps versus your idea of a SA and 24" barrel to spend more money on for the same results . You need to move on and think about winning the lottery or partially clad women or something else besides reinventing the wheel. MAGNUM MAN

I have looked at the 270-08 numerous times, but since I have a safe full of plain old 270 Winchesters, I could never justify it. Even as a looney.

I have a couple of FWT's, titanium, and even a faux Sendero chambered in 270 Win. I have successful loaded that cartridge down with starting powder charges and H4895 reduced loads.

So I do not need a 270-08. I cannot imagine that a SA rifle is going to make that big of a difference.

But if I ever burn the barrel out on a 7mm-08 that I have, I may look at it again. Never say never.

John, sure they made rifles and ammo w/Remington's headstamp.

Something alot of readers missed here, inc. Steelhead.

Above I said we would all be using 223s w/Barnes if all that mattered was using something that killed. I never said headstamp killed better.

What I have been talking about is WINCHESTER mfg. a new round, in a bore size that will be successful, in a non magnum platform housed in a short action.

Deertracker - the Redding is a 270-08 AI, that's different.

No Knees- personally I like a Howa more, build quality and action design, safer trigger and a one piece bolt/handle assembly.

Keith, what in the field can your 7/08AI DO on game, that cannot be done by a 260, 270-08, or a 7/08 using suitable bullets?

I find it ironic Ruger for a VERY long time was not making the 7/08. It sure seemed they did not want to acknowledge the round and lose sales in their rifles in other chamberings. No doubt, now Ruger is ALL but dropping the 260 Rem, while pushing the joint collaboration of Hornady's ballistic twin, a newbie on the block - the 6.5 Creedmoor.

MM - sure put some #s up and show me where the 130 corelokt 270 is vastly inferior, or that a 140 AB in 7mm is vastly superior. They all work. Never heard of a deer lost b/c it was hit w/a corelokt or Accubond hit thru vitals.

YET, again, MM, as I said, Why would Winchester load ammo for a new round THEY introduce, by using Rem Corelokts - a competitor? They would NOT. Regardless, BC in any of the 130-140s in 6.5, .277, or 7mm are all close enough for use on the bulk of deer shots/ranges. They all work fine, and kill fine, when put thru vitals, period.

Kevin, the Gack is just that, but it's simply the fact that of all the rounds that have come out and failed, I see the 270 done on a 308 as a very USEFUL practical round for the average deer hunter allowing shooters of any size to handle the recoil and housed in handy carbines. The gack is not to SELL the round, but to show it's not going to fail for lack of ballistic performance on deer sized game at most common sane ranges.

Con - good post. The 338F was/is a great concept, yet I think deer hunters THINK 270, 7mms, and 30 Cal's for 90% of the time save for youth, where they typically use 243s, but sometimes would really go for a larger round, yet larger w/tolerable recoil. Some youngsters really would do better w/less than 7mm-08 recoil. No doubt it does not take more than a good bullet from 223 to 243 if shot well, but the 338F was a practical idea yet not a big seller.

Keith you talk about 26-29" bbls in rounds that will do a deer in at half a mile. Not what I am talking about accomplishing here. Not many youth/kids will tote let alone shoot a 257 Mag or 6.5RM AI - again Factory ammo, easy recoil/blast, handy rifle.

Jim62, sure a 140 in a good bullet will do as well as a 270 or 6.5 of same, ALL work, never said they would not. If one wants to get Apples to Apples, let's RUN the 270/08 against a 7/08 BOTH with 140 Accubonds.........not much difference to spit.

MY point of a 140 Corelokt- that's what the 7/08 built it's reputation on, b/c it WORKED. The 130 AB in a 270-08 will do the same and then some, giving up nothing, so there is Nothing it's giving up to the 7/08 corelokt, and in reality EITHER with ANY deer bullet WILL kill fine all day long, when used properly.

Not running a horse race or pissing contest on ballistics here.

It seems ONE responder read my entire posts as he complained of a headache - sorry it was over the top for you. Yet other's must have skipped reading it as they somehow in error believe my premise of a 270-08 lies in some 'Magic Mystery Round' w/Pixie Dust killing far superior b/c of it's ballistic advantage.

NOT, re-read this and other posts of mine, inc. all other threads in my past. Headstamp does not kill as Steelhead says, as if I said that - NEVER implied.

The headstamp on the ammo, and rifle DOES however sell products.

That is what I am talking about. And seeing Winchester produce s sibling to it's 308 Pet, smack dab in the middle more or less, of it and the 243. Hmmm, add 243 + 308 = .551/2 = .2755. WOW, cannot think of ANYTHING more right IN the middle of the highly popular 243 and 308, one side seen more a varmint supreme by many hunters while the other more a sniper/military/tactical round, both crossing over on deer.

What OTHER caliber is closer to the .2755 number? Anyone? Anything closer than .0015?

The .277 - yes, that is THE closest to being DIRECTLY in between the 243 and 308.

But I digress, again...The headstamp on the ammo, and rifle DOES not kill, BUT it will sell products.

Do I need to repeat myself? LOL.

IF rifles are produced w/quality and affordability, as well as ammo, I think it will do fine. Even Hornady is smart enough to price their new 6.5 at a price that won't scare those considering on testing the waters.

Personally I'd rather use a 270-08 than nearly all of what's come out in last decade. Same proven bore size as the 85 yr old original, at about 95% the speed, all wrapped up in a short action package. With as many 243 and 308 fans, it seems that being directly in the middle, cannot be a bad place to be, a balanced round w/Pro's of each.

You ALL may disagree, but I think purely from a sales and marketing standpoint, for deer hunters who use factory ammo/rifles, this round has more potential than ALOT/MOST of what's been introduced in the past few years. Fact is, 95% of potential market is not made up of Loony's like us here.

Guys use what you want, I am sure ANY, EVERY, and ALL future new rounds many of you will say boring, as you have already picked your favorites and that's fine. I have no stake in this, but it WILL be interested if a mfg. does bring this round out how it fares.

I realize alot of folks here are not open to new ideas (even if PO Ackley had it DECADES ago), and it's ok if you see things differently.

Glad you pointed that out sir, and you also know MOST 7mm-08s sold/used that have slayed alot of deer had 18.5 or 20" bbls at best, NOT getting what Remington or other ammo factories spec their ammo at 24 inches. SO yes, neither are most 270 Winchesters using a 24", the one I have DOES have a 24" bbl just so you know. Ballistically it's great. I don't use factory ammo.

Those that do, certainly, the 130 corelokt in Remmy ammo, often in 22" bbls in the past, killed LOTS of deer. THAT factory ammo Chronographed did not measure up to specs, but closer to what a top loaded 270-08 will do.

Just as many a 7/08 loads, in SAME length barrels shoot right with alot of 280 loads, SAME bullet weight. PRESSURE. That's the difference. I seem to recall talk about semi-auto's in 270s and 280s while 7/08s were mfg. from the get go with a bolt in mind.

Now I never talked about housing this round in a 24" short action, no interest in that, just as I have no interest in a Ruger 6.5 Creedmoor in 26", not my cup of tea.

What I SAID, if you READ my post, SPEC the ammo in a 24" test bbl as MOST ALL rounds are done. Specs are often done in lab bbls that are longer than typical hunting rifles. The reality is, it's moot. A bullet never 'failed to kill' because it produced 5% less velocity than published specs. I ALSO SAID, put this round in a carbine, 20", no more than a 22" Featherweight, NEVER said put it in a 24" length barrel.

Magnum Man, you like Magnum's that's fine. I don't like the action's, having a bolt that nearly reaches back to your eye when cycling. You may be different, and that's fine. Shoot what you want.

If you want to read something interesting about 'Gack' go look up Ed Matuna's work on how 270 Winchester's fall short of published speeds, many factory loads, many rifles of various length barrels. Read his story LONG ago, and still have it.

That said, it's there, a shortfall, yet the 270 has always killed, and so will a 270-08 so tell me something I did not know.

You guys can re-analyze all the gack - but that never killed game, the animals cannot read, nor reason, nor analyze barrel lengths, recoil, blast, bullet drop, accuracy, what scope you use, nor do they know if your bullet came out of a Remington, Winchester, or whatever it may be. They don't even know if it said Magnum on it, and they die just the same - so Magnum Man, again, tell me something new.

I am not re-inventing the wheel, the 270-08 has NOT been done commercially - Fact. Fact - Jim Carmichael did not invent the 260 - despite his implying so.......

Fact - Magnum Man assumes what I know, and don't. Perhaps those who are quick to comment, should stop assuming....

Your original comparison was rigged (by your choice of bullets) to get your desired result. It didn't fool anyone with a lick of ballistic knowledge. That's my only point.

Not rigged, not deceiving, but for a reason, as stated.

1) 7/08 BUILT it's reputation using ONE load - a 140 Corelokt - actually the 139 Hornady, often loaded now in 7/08, 280, and 7mag.

2) The 130 gr is THE bullet the 270 Winchester made it's reputation, and the company WINCHESTER loads Noslers, but not Corelokts.

But for interest to satisfy the apples to apples debate.

Accubond 140 in each, 7mm = 1.290 oal, .277 1.31 oal.

7mm-08/140 Accubond .485 B.C./2860mv - original factory spec

Muzzle 2860 2543
100 1.7 2676 2226
200 0.0 2499 1942
300 -7.3 2330 1688
400 -20.9 2168 1461
500 -42.0 2012 1258

Now...270-08/140 Accubond .496 B.C. ~ 2850 fps

Muzzle 2850 2525
100 1.7 2666 2210
200 0.0 2490 1927
300 -7.3 2322 1675
400 -21.1 2160 1450
500 -42.3 2004 1248

I spotted the 7mm 10fps+ of MV so...

Like I said in an earlier post, not enough difference to spit..literally.

So, again, MY gack is not to impress or win a pissing contest, just to show a 270-08 stands on it's own VERY well.

Ummm, Jim62, what were you saying about GOOD 7mm Boolits? Same/Same w/GOOD .277 bullets sir.

So............you guys have a good evening.

you type alot but say very little

A 270-08 would go over like a lead balloon with the buying public. A total waste of time and resources

You type little and say nothing.

With midweight hunting bullets of similar design they would do the same work.

What would set the 270-08 apart would be it's ability to send the 85-95gr 6.8 projo's at warp speed, for close range devastation.

What sets the 7-08 apart is it's ability to go long with the 162-180gr stuff with BCs in the .6+ range.

A 270-08 would go over like a lead balloon with the buying public. A total waste of time and resources.

+1 What a long winded pile of horse pucky on a totally unwanted round.

The time it would take to read that I wouldn't spend with a friend contemplating suicide.

Unfortunately you type a hell of a lot and say nothing of importance

Fortunately I have the ability to get to the point without writing a novel, you on the other hand not so much

Proud to say I didn't read any post over 3 sentences...

But, given the amount of words, I'm going to guess the OP wants one?

Go for it. Spend your money. It's fun to learn the hard way sometimes. Kill a big animal with it and come rub our noses in it..

He wants Winchester to bring it out as a factory round. He wrote 2 novels and that is the extent of the thread

Winchester really needs to pimp this ware where they do all others......in Browning A-Bolts.

Ka-ching!

65BR, you oughta do just what Calvin suggests. But who cares if the cartridge makes simple sense?

I've seen deer killed with 6.8mm SPC that had exits that looked like they were made with .270WCF. It's a light recoiling cartridge that would suffice for 90 percent of game and varmint killing.

And they still ain't lighting any sales charts on fire.

In your defense, I'll bet cartridges that make less sense than a 6.8x51mm will be introduced this year!

I have a lights out accurate .308, but that doesn't stop my inner loony from contemplating a .260AI.

It might even surpass the 243 WSSM in sales..........

Wait one damn minute, a 270 WSSM would FLY off the shelves.

What they really need to do is base this 270 off the 307 case; IN a Winchester 94 BigBore. Winchester gun, Winchester case; Win./Win for a sales mantra...

I'd buy one to blow up....

Thanks for summing it up in 2 sentences, I knew somebody would save me all that reading.

A 270-08 would be retarded as a factory round.

270 Billy Norris?

Reeks of Campfire ingenuity...

Nothing a case full of HS6 couldn't fix.

270 Billy Norris, I like it!

I use WC540; accuracy sucks with HS-6......

If you do the comparison with appropriate bullets, the more efficient 7-08 will "win".

Perhaps if he used a piss ants scalpel he could split and even finer hair

Hodgdon's Cheapshot even mo'better.

The OP may have gotten into Gus' stash, though it doesn't seem to have quite the same effect.

The pondered cartridge sounds (ballistically) a lot like the 6.8SPC (now THERE'S a round that set the sales world on fire).

Winchester would be far better served by making rifles that shooters/hunters actually want than rolling the dice on gimmicky schit and new cartridges that do nothing (effectively) that existing cartridges haven't already been doing for a good, long while. I.e., they should have learned their lesson from the WSSMs, .225Win, .307Win, .356Win, etc., experiments.

where's the babe pics ?

this is really dumb, who would buy one ?

9.3x72R

A fist full of Varget is not recommended.

To hell with a 270-08..

Winchester would deserve "manufacturer of the year" status if they just started putting 1-9" twists in their .223,.22-250 and .243WIN chambered rifles!

Starting with a real featherweight.

LOL, this is really funny. Alot of naysayers.

6.8 SPC = 270-08 - FAR from it - 300-500 fps.

Guys, you REALLY should READ before you post.

Drinking and posting, no sorry, leave that up to others.

Montana Marine, I agree, but also say that you comment on 7mm bullets, although correct is largely not applicable for MOST 7/08 users, as MOST use 140s, some even 120s, as they WORK for most common ranges that most hunters kill and hunt. The bulk of hunters are not LR hunters/snipers. Those that are often chose a 280 or WSM, SAUM, or RM to push those high B.C. 162s faster yet.

Again, you guys are trying to make a horse race out of what I was discussing, a NICHE round - for deer hunters in compact short actioned rifles.

If you don't have any interest, that's fine. That does not represent 95% of the buying public. THOSE guys do not handload. To say it would fail is failed logic, is has not been introduced, so we shall see.

Other rounds w/far inferior ballistics, and others with SUPERIOR ballistics have largely failed, when you look at the plethora of rounds intro'd in the past decade.

If you want to propose YOUR idea as to what WOULD be a commercial success - POST IT.

Everyone wants to give a thumbs down and jump on the bandwagon and say, "I think I will join everone else on here and be a DICK"

Well speak up and tell me what you WANT the industry to make, in the way of a new round that YOU would buy? One that YOU think WOULD sell to the masses.

Come on, waiting......................

Problem is everyone wants to spew [bleep] on someone, and NOT even read their posts.

If you don't have the intellect to follow my thread, don't read it. If you have nothing positive to say, and only want to [bleep] one someone's idea, then fine.

You guys have NOTHING positive to contribute on this forum IMHO.

I am tired of all the DICKHEAD's with attitudes that think they know it all and can speak for the masses of hunters out there who do not reload, do not care for Ballistic Coefficients etc.

Nobody slams John Barsness for talking about his short action 6.5 Creedmoor he enjoys, all with a 26" barrel.

Why is that? Does that Creedmoor REALLY kill better than a similar loaded 270-08 at common ranges?

If you BELIEVE that, then you are all really stupid.

As to all the naysayer's, on the 270-08, not one has said anything bad about the 7-08, yet they are IDENTICAL.

Jeff O - I DID post a DIRECT head to head 'like bullet' ballistic comparison just a few posts UP, yet you like SOOOOO many do not read a thread before posting, and don't blame me for your laziness in not doing so.

Here it is for you Jeff.

#4751846 - Yesterday at 08:34 PM Re: Why the 270-08 Winchester BEATS a 7mm-08 140 Corelokt [Re: MontanaMarine]
65BR
Campfire Tracker

Registered: 02/22/07
Posts: 6524
Loc: NW Louisiana Not rigged, not deceiving, but for a reason, as stated.

1) 7/08 BUILT it's reputation using ONE load - a 140 Corelokt - actually the 139 Hornady, often loaded now in 7/08, 280, and 7mag.

2) The 130 gr is THE bullet the 270 Winchester made it's reputation, and the company WINCHESTER loads Noslers, but not Corelokts.

But for interest to satisfy the apples to apples debate.

Accubond 140 in each, 7mm = 1.290 oal, .277 1.31 oal.

7mm-08/140 Accubond .485 B.C./2860mv - original factory spec

Muzzle 2860 2543
100 1.7 2676 2226
200 0.0 2499 1942
300 -7.3 2330 1688
400 -20.9 2168 1461
500 -42.0 2012 1258

Now...270-08/140 Accubond .496 B.C. ~ 2850 fps

Muzzle 2850 2525
100 1.7 2666 2210
200 0.0 2490 1927
300 -7.3 2322 1675
400 -21.1 2160 1450
500 -42.3 2004 1248

I spotted the 7mm 10fps+ of MV so...

Like I said in an earlier post, not enough difference to spit..literally.

So, again, MY gack is not to impress or win a pissing contest, just to show a 270-08 stands on it's own VERY well.

Ummm, Jim62, what were you saying about GOOD 7mm Boolits? Same/Same w/GOOD .277 bullets sir.

So............you guys have a good evening.



I will refrain now from speaking my mind.

At least the Holiday Season has been good to you....

800-945-5237

For after that call: 800-273-8255

Lets get everyone involved: Hornady can make a flatpoint 130 gr. .277 bullet for the 270 Billy Norris and a Leverevolution 130, fill it with ultramodern Leverevolution powder....

Bettin' "Life is a Highway" is playing in the backround....

Another novel, about nothing

Betting it is, too funny

Boils down to:

"WAAAAAAAA.... I think I know something, but no one agrees with my idea to reinvent the wheel so I'm going to throw a fit and write super-long whines until someone/anyone agrees with me .... WWWWAAAAAAAAAAAA......"

Scary thing is, Winchester has a history of stupidity high enough to actually do it, and lose their azz (again) in the attempt.

Prezactly.
I would rather have the rifle I want in the good ol 308, 270, Ought-Six, or 300/338 Win mag than all these odd-ball cartridges.

I don't see any of you guys that are at the helm of Remington, Winchester, or Hornady making successful product ideas profitable.

Until you come up w/something better, you can keep talking how much better your opinion is......and how someone else's idea will not succeed, when you have nothing to base that on. It's an unknown. All opinion.

It amazes me how many of you talk about something you don't know, b/c your replies prove you want to aSSuME things and comment, w/o reading and understanding.

Reading and Comprehension may not be your forte, and I accept that.

VA, I am sure you know alot, but you are not alone my friend.

Those with closed minds stop learning, perhaps you all have done so.

Better change your username - 340 is an oddball.

Oh... Oh....

I know, I have a GREAT idea!

Let's take a company that has produced one of the most succesful hunting cartridges in history on a long-action platform....

And, who recently produced a new cartridge in the same caliber, but slightly more powerful, on a short-action platform....

But, that new cartridge is only slightly more than marginally successful...

And, the new cartridge had to cut into the sales of the original cartridge to manage even that...

Yep, let's get them to introduce ANOTHER new cartridge in the same caliber, again on a short-action platform, but this time slightly LESS powerful than the original, thereby further cutting into the sales of the original AND into the already not-overly-impressive sales of the other new SA cartridge.

Oh, and not only does this new theorized cartridge not do anything that our original or the recently introduced cartridge won't do equally well or better, but it also is going to go head-to-head with not one but TWO well-established rounds offered by our major competitor, either of which equal or best it in any category, from ballistics to load data to bullet selection to BC of the bullets...

Yep, that's just freakin' brilliant.

Fixed it for you.

Lee?

I've read through the entire thread (yes, even all the long posts) and thought I'd offer my $0.02 (for whatever it's worth).

Each of us has our own experiences and preferences and our own idea of what the market will accept or ignore. I think that most here have expressed skepticism that the mass public would pay much, if any, attention to the new round. I would have to agree. The 7mm-08 is a success, but only moderately so and only after a slow gain over 30 years. The .308 was designed as a military round and thus had an advantage at being widely adopted. The .243 filled a niche that hunters were already asking for. The improperly twisted .244 Rem has was found to be unsuitable as a dual purpose cartridge and the .243 happily swooped in and met the hunters demands. That's the key. The market was ready for a dual-purpose varmint / medium game cartridge in a 24 caliber rifle. Winchester recognized this and capitalized on it. There is no demand for a .270-08 whether or not the round has merit. That alone tells me it will be the next .358 Win, .338 Federal, .260 Remington... Worthwhile rounds that are largely ignored.

The 7mm Remington Magnum established the 7mm caliber to the minds of american hunters. The 7mm-08 was able to feed off that success as the "non-magnum" american 7mm. The .270 Winchester already is the non-magnum .277 caliber round. And it's hugely popular. That's the biggest problem the .270-08 faces. The .270 owns the .277 caliber space. It has near 100% mindshare. It already has the "non-magnum" round in .277 caliber covered. What does the .270-08 offer over it? What does it have that would set the market "on fire"? A short action? I'd be willing to wager that 75% or more of non-loony's couldn't even tell you what the difference between short action and long action cartridges are, let alone name the two most popular ones.

I believe it to be a potentially worthwhile cartridge that would appeal to a very narrow (loony) market. Developing a new caliber for a small niche market isn't very profitable. I think Winchester probably has learned that from most of the WSM/WSSM's already.

Lots of passion wrapped up in something that has a next-to-none chance commercially.

With the 308, 7mm-08, 260, and 243 already here and established, you're splitting hairs to say that you can offer something in 130 grain (WOW! That's it's only real "difference" ), when I can get 120, 125, 129, 140, etc bullets in other chamberings that surround it in weight and/or size on all sides.

True, that.
lolol.

Nope, the sand in his mangina is from "having" to use something with the "blasphemous" Remington name on the cartridge for a "non-magnum" in a short-action, or use the "holy" Winchester name and be saddled with the "burden" of either a long-action or the apostacy of the word "magnum" on the cartridge.

Oh, the horrors...

Well, there IS that I guess, looking back through some of it.

Myself, I'll gladly shoot my Remington rifles chambered in 243 Winchester or 308 Winchester (which bracket the 270 caliber quite nicely), 264 Win Mag, 300 Win Mag, or any of the others likewise named, and be quite content with both names involved. It also doesn't bother me a bit to run Remington ammo through my old Win Model 12 either. I guess I'm an equal opportunity employer between the two.

I wonder if Remington took off on the idea, and actually produced a 270-08, if he would still be so enamored of the wonder-round?

Mathman, agreed.

VA, give me YOUR ideas sir.

Winchester has lots out on LOTS of sales to Rem M7 carbines, in 7/08.

Is there ANY reason WHY a M70 Carbine in a 270-08 cannot do ANYTHING and EVERTHING that a Rem mfg. M7 7/08 can?

So you are telling me that there IS no market for a tolerable recoiling rifle, that is light/handy and kills as well as what YOU guys already say are top choices in cartridges?

So if true - how many guys buy a rifle in 270 Winchester, chop the barrel off at 18.5 or 20" and call it good for a kids/youth/ladies rifle?

Steelhead, sir, I know you have had some deep rooted pains from personal issues that gnaw on you, and I am happy that I can provide a punching bag for you to vent. I hope it is good therapy and your mental health improves. I do wish you a better future.

In fact, my whole post was generated to help you and VA and others.

JWP, obviously one cannot learn who knows it all. You apparently do. You should stop coming to the campfire to read others comments sir.

Azar- nice points, yet how does one Accurately assess demand, when there has been NO 270-08 as an OPTION to chose from in the marketplace? One cannot, as their is no sales history and I have yet to see any 'Market Research' to back up that statement.

Your question about what DOES a 270-08 offer, a round suited for a short action carbine. Any reason why someone would buy a 7/08, applies to the 270-08.

None the less, you guys all have your bases covered w/what YOU need so you don't really need a new rifle so it's pointless for me to discuss a new round of any kind at all.

I do agree what one poster said, a 6.8 SPC likely will do for 90% of all hunting needs. No doubt it and alot will using good bullets. But, I don't believe the 6.8 will have any big fan base outside AR platforms.

I also agree and have pushed a long time for mfg. to bring out fast twisted bolt actions (1 in 8") 223, 22-250, and 243s.

Surely that won't be considered profitable either, or a mfg. would have already done it.

Nope - anything new from here on in any product design is re-inventing the wheel so we should all save ourselves time and not waste time reading other's threads about potential future ideas

Coldbore - indeed we all here - Loony's who gravitate towards what works best for them, get opinionated. And MY opinion is as much as I like and use the 6.5-308 Winchester, have no expectations for it to ever become a staple round among the masses - when talking deer hunters.

The 243 has a niche for that large market - often as a round used for beginners/kids, etc. YET, how often do they want to 'graduate' to something larger, as if they feel the need to use a larger caliber? OFTEN. Most grown men would rather use a Larger than 24 bore, if anything for ego, let alone confidence. Granted the industry will sell 2 rifles this way, start them on a 243 and go to something larger, later.

Your talk about bullet choices in other calibers, great for handloaders, is I believe a non-issue for factory ammo guys. They don't need nor care to shoot 3 dozen different bullet weights and types, and will not. They want a round that has 2-3 bullets that do a darned good job at what they are hunting, IMHO.

I like, use, and have used alot of rounds regardless of headstamp. Being far more 'thinking' than the average deer hunter, the headstamp is meaningless to me. Not that I am smarter, but I am an 'enthusiast' where as most deer hunters just want to kill deer, they simply do not get into rifles and ballistics as we do and don't care to, as they just want to use something that works in a rifle that they like, that fits them well, and does the job.

Rem has the 260 and 7/08 and will see no reason to do a 27-08, NOR acknowledge any success to Winchester's 270. WHY do you suppose Rem named their SPC, '6.8mm' - just to be metric for the military? I am not so sure.

Winchester created the 270, (bore size) and the 243/308 Win rounds - both at either side of a 270-08, the 308 as you all know being the parent case.

Again, if the 270-08 does come out - I could care less if anyone uses it, but I view it as a viable round both ballistically and from a market niche standpoint.

NOBODY dared challenged John Barsness from speaking to why industries bring out new rounds, and drop them later after making a quick dollar, NOR anything else he says........I find that interesting. Not that I disagree, but it's funny why that is.

John Barsness clearly said, new rounds come out to occupy niches. And so it is MY idea of what niche a 270-08 would be in. Yet everyone here wants to change the meaning of everything I have said. Either lacking in reading, comprehension, or simply wanting to quickly jump on the bandwagon of 'lets slam this idea' - why? 'Just because others are, and I don't like it, and I don't want it' ignoring you guys here represent a minutia of consumers in the marketplace.

I am STILL waiting for you masterminds to come up with a proposed idea of a NEW RIFLE ROUND that WILL GUARANTEE a success in the marketplace.

Who wants to go first? LOL.

OH, VA, that's right, you spoke - sure it's no secret that Remington is not my favorite rifle action and I think that's a thorn in your side. Sorry you take it personally.

JWP, let's see here:

Remington has the 280 and still makes and sells it. It comes in a long action rifle. The 280 came out in 1957. The 270 came out in 1925.

You want to tell me WHY Remington is able to sell 280s? WHAT ballistically CAN and DOES a 280 do, KILLING, better than a 270?

I won't hold my breath. They are BOTH the same ballistically.

It's a headstamp issue. You keep focusing on functional aspects/dimensions of one round vs. the other.

ALL work, we have agreed upon that, yet you want to disagree with my idea and that's fine, your point is made.

The fact is in ANY business, a certain segment of consumers Look, WANT, and BUY, 'New Products' because they are the trend setters and thought leaders.

I think you are very closed minded to anything new.

Again, Give me YOUR new rifle cartridge proposal of something that deer hunters will buy.

Waiting..........anyone else. Give me your ideas. Let's put them all out here in the open.

What? No ideas? NO creative intellect here?

OH, perhaps nobody with the Balls to speak up and risk a shellacking

Anyone with Better ideas, I am ALL ears, love to hear the idea, in full - complete w/ballistic comparisons supporting it's value, and a marketing strategy guaranteeing success in how you are going to market and SELL this to the MASS buying public. SO bulletproof, not even the likes of a JWP, VA, or anyone else can ridicule.

TFF.

I tend to think that for now we are in the time of the 7mm and it will be a good while before we see anything with a .277 bore introduced and truly take off commercially.

You may be correct sir, the 30's market is saturated, the 6.5s not much wanted in the USA but slowly growing among Loony's and non-loony's alike, and apparently nobody 'wants' any new 270 rounds if we consider the feedback here any indication of the masses.

Perhpas the catalyst to NEW 270 rounds would be NEW higher B.C. .277 Bullets, yet those must be accompanied by faster twist barrels to work. THEN perhaps the 277 bore size would have a re-newed vigor of interest....esp. paper punchers. Perhaps - we may never know. We have seen some interest in the '6.8s' though mostly in the AR platforms.

What sir - and I am not posing a trick question, but what do you 'envision' as a new 7mm round for bolt rifles? If any?

Thanks for your post.

No doubt the marketplace is crowded and saturated, but I still anticipate seeing new additions, whether a success or failure commercially.

I do think the industry found some success w/20 caliber rounds i.e. 204 and others, many wildcats. Great Varmint rounds.

Since the 25 caliber market place is 'not as crowded' would you suppose there may be room in that bore size? No doubt it's been less popular, yet unlike the Euro originating 6.5mm's, the quarter bore does IIRC have roots here, and perhaps that would help, I am not sure.

I know there are 25 caliber fans here, perhaps they would feel a 25-08 or something else, might be viable.

Anyone? I am open minded and listening........

I would like to see a commercialized 6.5-06.
I would have one of those!

No ballistic comparison will validate any new cartridge. It will have to be the package. The Ruger Hawkeye rifles for example have garnered a lot of interest.
There is so much over lap in cartridge already as to offer little to no room. A 27-08 offers nothing that a 260 rem or 7-08 doesn't already offer. Personally I prefer the 7X57 because it is loaded to lower pressure than the 708 and in a lightweight short barreled rifle is a joy to shoot

You call it ridicule, the rest of the free world calls it reality

The 280 was brought out in the Remington semi auto to approach 270 trajectories. At the time the semi would not take the pressure of the 270 and that is the niche that the 280 filled
Even so the 280 is a very slow mover

The is no niche to fill with a 270-08

I think it might sell to a few, it has had a following fan base for a long time, since perhaps the 256 Newton IIRC, the 25-06 Neidner has done well.

I was thinking the very round Might just be something Ruger might do, they are treading new waters pushing the 6.5C for it's short action, heck, if you want to run a 26" bolt, you might just run a 24-25" 6.5-06.

I think if standardized/Saami'd it would be a good round. MY experience has only been knowing a gent who owned a wildcat long ago, by a reputable smith. The owner got me started into handloaded, and he had some serious pressure issues in it and sold it. I believe he needed to get handle on neck turning brass- something he never did to his brass.

I believe the smith was Womack, on a '98, he said it was a very accurate rifle.

The 6.5 x 64 Brenneke has created some interest.

Its been oft mentioned as well: Twist.

Ruger and Kimber have already hedged their bets on those packages.

Did someone mention the 264 cal. Hawkeye on the 375 Ruger case, spun 1-8? It might even be a 7mm. The .277 caliber is right where it will always be, in a 270 Winchester.

A SA/ "lighter recoiling" 277 has no market, period.

Yep, looks like a lot of Rem vs Win going on in your mind.

You like the round if it's referred to as a 6.5-308 Winchester, but not as a 260 Rem.



Nope, no anti-Remington here either....

Do you ever question whether Winchester acknowledges the success of the hugely popular 7mm REMINGTON Magnum?



There are very few "guarantees" in life, and even less in the overcrowded cartridge-creating arena. With an overabundance of more than adequate, and very much overlapping and redundant, chamberings available, there is very little room left for reinventing the wheel in the sporting rounds world.



No thorn here. Remington happens to be my first choice, although there are a few Winchesters ( ), Rugers, Marlins, and others in the safe. As a matter of fact, my competition target rifle is built on a M70 action, one of four old M70's leaning there. My shelves are loaded with Remington, Winchester, and Federal ammo, with all kinds of headstamps from both camps. My handloads may use Rem brass holding Win primers (I wonder if they have little fights inside the boxes at night when nobody's around?). I freely support whichever one produces the best of what I need in that item.

I think that you're obsessed over something that is not going to happen, by any major manufacturer. If it's a slam dunk, get a reamer cut to your specs, build something, develop the ammo, and pitch the idea to the big boys. If successful, you can bask in the glory, and come back here to rub everybody's nose in it. My bet is that you won't get so much as a return phone call...

JWP, agree, ballistics alone will never make a round successfully and the package I proposed was in a handy short actioned carbine. Know a fella who put a surplus 7x57 bbl on a Ruger, turned down the steps, chopped at 19 or 20" at spits 140s at 3k, pressure unknown, but in a handy light stock. Works.

No doubt, the 280 is a slower mover, the 7/08 better, both same bore size, yet the 7/08 is in a package that has a niche demand.

What do you do for a living (rhetorical question, no need to actually answer).

In YOUR business, how well is the idea of "any idea, even if a commercial failure", received?

Have you ever once, for even a moment, thought that the major makers are in this to make a PROFIT, and not to constantly float new experiments to keep a tiny portion of their audience amused, at their expense?

Seriously?

I guess a lot of us are waiting to hear YOUR foolproof marketing strategy here as well....

Hawk, no doubt, there CAN be no market for something that does not exist.

Coldbore, I had Pac-Nor do a 6.5-308 for me in 1995. Asquare as you may know applied for Saami, yet somehow things did not play out for Asquare even though they were first. Makes no difference to me, I OWN a Custom FULL BLOWN 260 Rem so Stamped on the bbl. I also have some RP brass.

I have said and agree the market is saturated. In 308 siblings, the 25 and 27 bore have yet to be standardized. Who knows if/when and who may do it.

As to my 'aspirations' to make a buck in the industry, I truly have none. I enjoy this OUTSIDE the commercial aspect. Being 'Inside' would take some fun factor out for me.

65 I think what you have here is a two fold problem..First so many of these wildcat conversions only get the attention of rifle loonies like us...and secondly its gonna take a marketing genius to talk average joe hunter out of his 243/270/7mag and 30/06...I think if you took a national poll and asked these people what do you think of the 260/..7/08 or winchester shorts they wouldn't have a clue..there lies your answer IMO...Flem

Sometimes a cartridge fins its own niche, even when that niche is different than the one the designer had in mind.

For instance, Jack Huntington designed the 500 JRH in order to fit a 50 caliber cartridge into the FA-83. FA seemed interested in the cartridge and asked Jack for spec's on chambering and for cases. Jack thought that FA intended to produce the FA-83 in 500 JRH, but they did not. FA brought out a near ballistic twin but with a belt instead of a rim to chamber in the FA-83.

Here comes the amazing part. BFR started chambering the 500 JRH in the BFR's from the custom shop. The BFR doesn't need the small rim to fit in there cylinder the way that the FA-83 does. BFR is going to announce at this years shot show that the 500 JRH will now be offered in the across the counter BFR's and Grizzly ammo is making the factory ammo for the cartridge.

I know this because Grizzly is using my 500 JRH to test and evaluate their factory ammo.

Not as big of a fool as you think there hotshot

There must be an interest to develop a cartridge that doesn't exist, no interest =s no development

I think the niche is glutted and until there is a major new development in cases or propellents you will not see a new cartridge the will have a significant impact of the market. I think right now though most shooters are more attracted to the .284 bore than the .277 diameter. One advantage is the wider choice of bullets for the 7mm.

The results are inconsequential since I see the difference in performance is as important as two beautiful twins except one is more willing to be versatile in her preferences.

Have not read the thread...

A couple buddies bought 270 WSM's because it's a (debateably) tangible upgrade over ol' Faithful the .270, of which they were intimatly acquainted.

With the .270/08 being a downgrade in performance it's hard to see the appeal of it.

Just my impression.

I chron'ed a 270 WSM at the range for a guy a while back and with Winchester factory ammo his rifle got 3225 FPS. That is moving in a user friendly package

I agree with Jeff_O why would a down grade in performance in .277 bore be appealing to the general shooting public?

Marlin 1895 ... in the standard 22" barrelled rifle, the 18.5" Guide Guns and the CB models ... chamber to 50Alaskan or a derivative in 0.500" bore to get around 50cal restrictions. Also market a synthetic/ matte stainless Marlin with LimbSaver pads specifically as a 'new Guide Gun'. There's one suggestion on my drool list!

Again, for what it's worth ... I looked at a Ruger Hawkeye Ultralight a few days back, nice and light with a 20" barrel. Great price too!! But chambered to 270Win, I could see no reason to put up with the muzzle blast, so let it go despite being at a $200 discount. I must be a gun loony though as I'm considering a 338RCM instead.

Again, for interests sake ... how many would buy a 25Souper if commercialized?
Cheers...
Con

I think? a 25 WSM could garner some interest amongst the general shooting/hunting market.
Sort of a 257 Roy with less expensive brass.

I don't think it has to do so much with the downgrade of an equivalent caliber as it does with it being compatible with a short action...then if that's the case there's no need for the 7mm/08 with the 280..260 with the 264 or 308 with the 30/06.It's about puttin something tried and true in a more compact package...

Lets get some more my puzzy hurts threads about a scratch on a rifle also.

How's the job search going?

How did you know I got the clap from a NW Louisiana skank?

The last thing we (shooters/hunters) need is another cartridge. If you can't get it done with the cartridges available, you've got FAR bigger problems than anything a "new cartridge" is going to solve.

How about just better utilization of the cartridges available?

How about making fast twist as a standard for smaller bore calibers, for one recommendation; 1-8", 1-9" for .224", .243", .257", minimum, as the new standard?

How about smaller, lighter platforms for many of the otherwise available rounds? Something like a mini-Mauser action with a 16.5"-20" tube (a la the Mark X MZ CZ/Interarms rifles) in a lightweight synthetic stock, with better rings/bases options so the whole thing comes in WELL under 6#, and in something like the 6mmPPCUSA round, and/or the 6.5Grendel, etc.?

How about honest-to-goodness "youth" versions of the standard rifles; i.e., a shorter LOP and tighter grip option on at least most if not all the "standard" rifle set-ups?

How about making USEFUL improvements to what we actually have and that can/does work well, instead of more BS cluttering up the background?

As far as the .277" bore on the '08 case, 65, just send what is VERY likely an M70 action in 7-08 to Pac-Nor or any other 'smith/barrelmaker of your choice, have them rebarrel it with a .277" tube, run a .243Win reamer up it's azz, stamp it ".270-08Win", or ".270OCD", or ".270WGAF", or whatever your pleasure, resize .308 or .243 brass to .277" using standard (but set SHORT) .270Win dies and go forth thinking yourself as the only enlightened rifle-soul on the planet? Obviously, any semblance of sense isn't going to percolate through your skull, so just go off into delusion and make the world your own personal puppet by having "the only True Grail", and rock on.

Must have been a transplant from the northern states!!!

As for my "action affection", I'll have to go cajole the Winchesters, Mausers, Springfields, Enfields, CZs, Mausers, pumps, levers, single-shots, FNs, semi-autos, and even Mossbergs, TCs, and Savages in house as to my apparent love affair with the single Remington bolt action in house....

You couldn't have missed by much more, but I'll give you credit for trying, though.

Here is more of dipshitts rants, he ain't right in the head.

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbth..._Pics_of_my_new_custom_actio#Post3958794

JFC................................

I swear, I think I'm going to have to shoot something in the face this weekend...

1. Let's make a SA cartridge that doesn't offer anything at all BC, speed or recoil wise over cartridges that already exist.
2. Let's make it first, then find a market? That, there is doubt about.
3. The .277 Billy Norris was a better idea; at least the market exists for waterheads.

Seems the bore was ignored largely by the Euros too, in the X57 case, prolly outta utter stupidity and lack of foresight...

SC made FN Mod. 70 in 270-08 Winchester....I own the first one.

Least it smells that way...

BTW - St. Matthews, SC, is one UGLY fuggin' town. A slight detour on the way back up from FL didn't take long to discover what is, and what ain't, there.

Chinese knew about it ...
Cheers...
Con

Here ya go 65BR

100% + ten!! Half the chit I kill nowdays which is mostly deer I could kill with my Swift...Stick and Steelie have got it right,"It ain't so much about headstamp but good boolits and shot placement." With all to choose from out there these days any failures must truely be hunter induced!!

That's how I ended up with the 7 SAUM.

IMO the 270-08 already exists, the 7mm08, and the 260 rem. It would take equipment more sensitive than the human ear to discern the difference in muzzle blast, and more sensitive than ones shoulder to tell the difference in recoil. Any difference in trajectory or killing power would be on paper or in someones imagination. All three will fit in the identical rifles. I am sure there would be rifles sold if it was legitimized, but there were a few rifles sold in a few other now almost dead cartridges,like the 7 SAUM which, I own and would not have purchased had I not bought on a closeout and gotten for a very cheep price. You are trying to fill a niche that is already full.

not a bad point. I shoot 130 grain Nos flat base seconds over 44 grains of RL15 a very light load, it shoots well in my rifle, have not killed anything with it yet.

that one bled over to several other forums, too

When is the next chapter in the novel due out? It's interesting that most expound in the virtues of why the 7mm caliber is better than the 270 but 65BR chose the opposite approach

Or vise versa.

Old thread but I saw some Savage 270-08 barrels a few days ago and decided to do some digging.

Just go with a 270 Creedmoor and everyone will want one.

The biggest prohibiting factor I can see to introducing a 270/08 is it doesn't fit the new long range nitch. 6.5 creedmoor sales have proven long range interest is a strong driving force in the market today. Bullets designed to work in 270 10 twist barrels cannot compete with calibers on both sides that offer superior twist rates and bullets. My guess would be the standard 270 sales likely suffered in the last number of years and stand to suffer significantly more in the years to come as the Long range fad continues to build momentum. My personal opinion is if it isn't twisted properly in the future it will become lethargic. Today its all about long range or tactical

Edited to Add: IMO we saw the same thing happen in the 50s when the 243 and the 6 mm Remington were introduced. One offered a twist rate that offered more versatility and we all know how that story played out. It is somewhat surprising that it took nearly 50 years for that concept to come to full fruition.


Trystan

I am convinced that infinitesimal incremental measurements exist solely for ballistic debates.

Bullet construction, bullet placement. Pick any of the 100's of mid range rounds in .224-.300, chamber it in a platform that fits your particular needs, find a properly constructed bullet that's accurate in your particular rifle and practice (shoot your [bleep] gun. Alot)

They exist solely for Rifle/ammo sales

I like rifles in the 6mm-7mm caliber range - this'd be one that'd be fun to try, as well as the 25 Souper. Don't need a long action for this range of bullets. The Creed or '08 based cartridges are more than plenty.

Yeah, it's all gack. Nit-picking, nose-picking, you call it. Won't kill anything deader than anything else, but gives us something about which to jabber.

I firmly believe that every centerfire big game cartridge introduced after the .30 WCF was wasted effort.

Yeah, if you have any manner of true hunting skills.

Watched a hunter drop a Mule Deer from 450 yards with a 7-08 & a 140 Accubond.

270 what now?

I'm anxiously looking forward to a 256 Win Mag AI'd for one! Then a fella could open it up to 6.5mm and then you'd have something.

Or wait a minute... Someone could open it up to the 27.

Nice way to put it.

Maybe for dangerous African game, I'd prefer something with more omph!

I haven't waded through the 8 pages, but maybe someone can answer these questions:

Has it been determined whether the gayness of the 270 rubs off on the 270-08. Is this like a sawed-off Patton Oswalt of hunting rounds to the full-blown Freddy Mercury? Most importantly, can you catch the gay handling .277 bullets, even if they're meant for a 270-08?

270's need to go away.

Won't happen for the next 90yrs either.

If the 270 is truly gay I would bet his boyfriends last name is Creedmoor. And when they leave the wedding chapel together, they are now the apitimy gayness. The 270 Creedmoor

What I carried much of last week.

The AB is a fave of mine in 6.5, .277, and 7 on deer. The 95 BT is too good in the 6 to overlook.
Interesting to see over 130k views on this thread. Lol.

JB is right as always and I’ve said it many times. When you cut thru the # crunching which is good discussion and entertainment, one has many options which serve most well. Since this post the Creedmoor has taken the spotlight. Ironically before this post, top brass at the Hornady booth at the Shot show told me when I asked about a 6.5TC, they were making a “270 on the 30TC that fires a 120 at the same speed as the 270 Win”
Not sure if he misspoke and meant 6.5, or if they settled in the better BC bullets in 6.5.

Back to the Corelokts. IIRC Big Green often had ads that they were the “Deadliest mushroom in the WOODS”....
Bullet technology has improved greatly since the 30 in the pic just above.

Now back to the 270. In America it’s been the closest bore size next to the .264 save the not so common .257. I often say, a 6.5 is a good place to be. The 270 gained the success it did because it’s proven to be highly effective and easy for most shooters to place shots. A 270 like the 7/08 and even 6.5’s have more great bullets than ever before. I proposed a 6 and 22 Creedmoor shortly after the 6.5 launch. Stay tuned....many shooters seem to be noticing the virtues of good bullets in mild short action rounds, spun at proper RPM’s, chambered in affordable accurate rifles fed with like ammo.

One has to admit, Winchester had big hits after the 30-30, with their 270, 308, and 243. They have staying power, and I agree with SuperCub.

In Europe, someone is saying the same about the 6.5x55.

This would be interesting, in light of the current faster twist Bbl's and high BC bullets of late.

Not to mention the U.S. Military adoption of the high-pressure version of this very cartridge, using the low-pressure, brass cased variety for practice.




GR

Although the SIG .277 Fury is now the wheel.





GR

Meh.

Wouldn't do anything a fast-twist .270Win couldn't do better, out of a std. hunting rifle.

But the man-bun crowd do love their short actions.

Not to mention the semi-auto crowd, which actually makes some sense.




GR

SA was popular far before the "man bun".

Who’s the birthday boy?

You are!




P

Not sure exactly. Testing has proven it to be heavy, ammo is heavy. Real world it doesn't actually do a lot more than the 7.62x51. Not a plus in my book.

That is just rhetorical hyperbole.

Guilty as charged.

Hey there, loony types! 😄 Just wanted to chime in with my two cents on the Winchester vs. Remington debate. A 270-08 Winchester sounds like a killer idea! Better ballistics, lighter recoil, and the legendary 270 performance in a compact package. Who wouldn't want that? Winchester, are you listening? Let's see who's up for the challenge! And hey, Winchester management, if you need a marketing guru, I'm your guy! Send me a PM, and let's make magic happen! 🎯💪

<cough> Sig brass cased .277 Fury <cough>

Gee, ya think? Or the form of humor called "irony"?

No insult meant!

You don't need a .270-08. We already have the .270 Redding and .277 Fury - both of which are better designs and give more performance than a straight .270-08. And...way better than a .308. Far better sectional density of a .277 140 v .308 150, better b.c of same, and faster by 100 fps .

This whole thing sounds like and answer in search of a question.

They will probably call it a 6.8 something. If they asked me to name it I'd call is a 270 Win #2, or a 277 Winchester.

But it's odd how things in the gun industry get named.
The .277 inch is the closest thing in the gun world to a true 7MM.

.03937X 7 = .27559"

A true .277 would be 7.06MM

What we call a 7MM is actually 7.21MM

Some cartridges are just names something that sounds cool to the maker I guess. One of those that is an outstanding cartridge and yet is WAY misnamed is the 404 Jeffery. NOTHING on that cartridge measures .404"

Which is why John Lazzeroni named his proprietary "7mm" the 7.21 Firebird....

The 277 sig ammo is on the shelf of a LGS in the lower pressure brass ammo loading.

This cartridge woud be pretty cool in something like a short action Remington 700.

But no factory would be foolish enough to chamber for it because of the 80000 psi hybrid case ammo that would chamber and lead to some sort of catastrophic failure.

I think it's a disaster just waiting to happen

I've said this before but, have always found it strange that the 270-08 and 257-08 (25 Sooper?) never amounted to anything.

I can see why this is so now due to the current infatuation with BC but still...................

Kind of a coastline/shoreline thing.

Back in the day - bore and the rifle, was the important detail, i.e., 7mm Mauser rifle or .30 Springfield rifle.

Today, with cornucopia chamberings for any given rifle, what one feeds it has become important.

Hence the bullet spec.




GR

Cogent point.

IF the high-pressure ammo was accessible to the public.

If so, then alterations would be necessary, like the .280 Rem.




GR

Since I already have an 270win and 308win and 30-06 I don't need another smaller bore rifle. Instead what I would prefer is more opportunity to pursue different animals footwear. That's where it's really at.

Yes I remember the Lazzeroni series of cartridges.
He gave correctly named measurements to all his bore sizes.

Not having any affinity what-so-ever for a short action rifle - the std. .270Win is fine by me, and a faster twist and throated for high BC bullets all the better.

But as an omni-cartridge, especially for the short action fans, it could obsolete a whole handful of cartridges, long and short.




GR

When the .270 and the .30-06 were at their peak, they gave a certain level of performance. Now, that same level of performance can be reached with correctly designed smaller short action cartridges with modern powders and sleeker projectiles in a shorter, lighter rifle.

So you think Winchester needs you for their Marketing guru, not the OP who started this thread in 2010? Lol. Welcome newbie.

RH - I do not recall the Redding being more than a wildcat?

Yep, the Redding is a wildcat. But what rifle can you buy off the shelf that is right? May as well build it right from the start and use the components you want. And what serious rifleman doesn't reload anyway? Get the .277 Fury if you don't like wildcats.

Oh wow - 65BR creates a whole new cartridge (270/08) to sell the idea that a lighter bullet can go faster and kick less than a heavier bullet in a 7mm-08. Really?

Guess what? I can do it too! A .284 bullet 10gr lighter than your proposed 130gr in a 270-08 can easily go faster and kick less - and I don't have to invent a new cartridge, buy a new rifle or rebarrel anything that I already have. Plus, I already have the advantages that come with a short action.

All I have to do is load a 120gr bullet in my 7mm-08. Ta da!

Please tell Winchester to send all the money they saved by not creating a new cartridge to me!

Steve,

Lazzeroni is still in business--and I got to know him a little back in the era when short-fat-beltless magnums were the BIG DEAL. John claimed his cartridges got super-velocities was the case shape, including shoulder-angle, etc.

But one of my fellow gun writers, who's retired now but at the time was the gun guy for a major magazine, knew a thing or two about interior ballistics. This sounded suspicious to him, so he had Lazzeroni send him a couple test rifles and some of their ammo. The ammo got very close to the claimed velocities--but in strain-gauge testing the pressures were at least 70,000 psi....

John Lazzeroni is a really interesting character in the most positive way. I got to know him at the FNAWS conventions. I believe I introduced him to MD, can’t remember.

His cartridges predated the RUM’s and the short fats. Laz told me he liked to break 100mph on his motorcycles and 150mph in one of his his sports cars every week just to feel fully alive.

He also let me set next to him at the blackjack tables and, for the first time, with his considerable assistance, I actually won more than I lost.

Really great guy.

What’s really needed is a .29 caliber bullet in a blown out 220 Swift case (AI’d of course).

No wait, based on a 225 case. Make sure it has a 1 in 4” twist too.

We’ll call it the 29 Creedmoor.

Hey, everyone knows .29's are the ultimate. I read that somewhere...

Has this thread been resurrected in an attempt for the 'fire to go woke?

.270 anything...gayer than schitt...

270 Titus is cool. I shoot 95 and 110 Barnes ttsx.

I read the whole thing. It is interesting to recall all the good guys that no longer post here (and a few aholes as well). Makes you wonder where they went and why.

Jim

Already have an 7-08 I haven't even shot, and have a couple 270win that I actually use at the present. I just got into the 270win game in 2018-2019, I don't wan to upgrade already.

Patiently waiting for my 7-08 to become a primitive weapon.

Right! I didn't realize how handicapped I've been all these years.

That is one good looking 99!

Well the 270-308 has allready been done was an article on it from some guy in Arizona who did it on a BLR it was in Handloader or rifle magazine years a go. He really talked it up 3000fps out of it with 130's and a 24" barrel. Seems the old BLR was his favorite rifle and back then they didn't make the long action variant. Regular 270 Win works just fine for me..mb

270 Redding, 270-08….

Neither is something I would choose over the great 270 Winchester. YMMV.

Plenty choose the 7-08 over the great .280 and the even greater .280 Improved. The Redding is closer in performance to the .270 than the 7-08 is to the .280. And it's not just the cartridge, it's the cartridge and rifle platform you would be choosing.

If looking specifically for a short action, but if not, I would still stay with the 270 Win.

Also, brass would be easier and faster to deal with than a wildcat.

It's only the fireforming that's an issue, .243 parent brass is just as easy to get and you save time after each firing because of less case stretching and trimming.

I really like the name... .270 Tit-arse

I bet more than a few have died.

I haven't read this whole thread, but I agree the original poster has a point. Apparently, the U.S. Army agrees, as they want a new 6.8x51 to be their new battle rifle cartridge. With an 80,000 psi pressure! Its Nom Civil is .277 Sig Fury with a SAAMI working pressure of 65,000 for brass cases.

I don't think it will ever be a Winchester anything because there is no traditional Winchester that makes guns and ammunition any longer. One company makes the Winchester ammo and one or more other firms make guns with the Winchester name.

Nevertheless, I fully expect the 6.8x51 to become popular for civilian uses in the same way as the 30-06, .308 and .223 have. The military adoption will be much stronger than any possible marketing promotion. Sig has already named it and Winchester will have to get over the fact that Sig beat them to the punch. Winchester may already have been contracted to produce the new military ammo.

CZ......school me, since you think you have something I haven't learned........shot the 7/08 extensively 30 years ago, along with the 270 WCF, and the 6.5x55, and the 6.5/308 - BEFORE the 260 Rem was on the scene.......etc. I dropped more than a few deer and other animals with 243s, 6mmBRs and a 7BR. Yes, the 120 in the 7/08 is a good combo, but I like BC and SD and prefer a 140-150 as a better all arounder. Though I have killed using 130 SSPs in that round. Hard to find something that will not work in the 7/08 when placed, but the TNT would not be a solid choice for hunting, as you may know, nor the 120 V-max, if we are talking use on game. Personally, I would rather use a 6.5 when pushing 120 - 130s.

1) A few of us older folks, spent a bit of time in the past having interesting discussions - as a past time you might say.
2) Did I or do I feel the 270/08 filled any 'need' or void? Not at all. But I did spark many replies, and some thought.

We have plenty rounds to do what is needed in the field and range for that matter, and more powders and bullets as well, so enjoy your flavor.

Interesting development since my OP.

https://www.gunsamerica.com/digest/277-sig-fury-demystified/

If you can't buy factory ammo, it's a non-starter.

Gee, 231 posts (or now, 232) over 13+ years on ballistic minutiae! No wonder even some of us consider others rifle "loonies."

Hah more irony form John! I found a couple of older Guns magazines from 2014 the wife must have stashed while I was out fishing or hunting. The February 2014 magazine had an article by you on safeties and I note no comment on the Remington 700 other than a picture and that it was a trigger blocking safety. I guess the minutia of that one was something you didn't want to discuss. Good article overall. Same for the handloading article on the 30-40. To me that was a good era for shooting magazines and I always looked for yours and Mike Venturino's articles first. Nowadays I don't even get any magazines fishing or hunting.

I have a 270-08 , rechambered factory 270win barrel on a Rem 700SA for sale, targets and load info included.

I have two rifles with 270 Redding chambered barrels on them that are my favorite white-tail woods carry rifles.

Yes, see what I started! LOL. I did not resurrect this thread - but noticed it was....

Btw, that 99 pictured above is a nice looking rifle, surely a mild recoiling sweet shooter.

Ok I give up, I will have my 3 7mm08's re-barreled to 270-308.....lol.

Just make sure that it's the .270 Redding or .277 Fury, both have an "improved" case over the standard .270-08. And it ain't 270-08, it's .270-08. And while we're at it, it ain't really a 7-08, it's a 7.21-08... a .270 anything is the true 7mm.

None of the 270s are .270.

Everyone knows that a .270 uses .277 diameter bullets, but most people think a 7mm has 7mm diameter bullets.

Gee, more insights into bullet-diameter keep coming--even if they've been mentioned before in this thread. But that's understandable, because most haven't read the entire thing.

My experience on considerable big game, not only those I've taken but a few hundred taken by other hunters I've been sitting/standing next to, is that there's zero difference in "killing power'" or trajectory at "normal" hunting ranges (say out to 400+ yards) between the various "mild" 6.5mm rounds such as the 6.5x55, .260 Remington, 6.5 Man-Bun and the similar powder-capacity 7mm rounds such as the 7mm-08, 7x57, etc. That includes wind-drift IF a high-BC bullet is used--and they're available in all three calibers--as in 6.5, .270 and 7mm. I might even throw in the old, boring .308 Winchester.

But will still be checking in to hear about the vast difference in field performance of all those rounds....

Very true. At one time I had twelve Ruger M77 MKII stainless rifles in various calibers. Had to fill all the gaps and cover every base.

Not really, just liked developing loads and tinkering. 90% of the game animals I took were with the .260 Rem, .280 Rem, and .358 Norma.

I’m now down to just five of them. The three previously mentioned, a .25-06 Rem, and a .223 Rem.

Truth be told, if I got rid of two of the three rifles in the middle calibers, my ability to kill game animals would be no more limited.

Or you just buy a .30-06!

But of course that would be completely boring....

Hey, that's kinda what I did. Got a 270win and 30-06 because I'm getting older and want easily obtained factory ammo and reloading components.

My 18 year old son, who enjoys shooting and hunting, but is not a Loony (at least, not yet) has SS Model 70 Classic FWTs in .243 Win & 30-06 Spr, and a SS Model 70 Classic in .338 Win Mag.

Pretty much all a fella needs for North America.

You could kill 100 like animals with either and never see a difference if the bullets are of like construction.

The fact is, if you have done some culling, it is common to seen little to no difference in different cartridges with a lot more variables in design and caliber that the OP states.

If you just want something different ,that`s cool,but it is no better than a 7MM08 or 338 Federal no matter what you do .

Boring is my middle name!



Merkel 141, 30-06 Springfield

Merkel K4 Damaszener, 30-06 Springfield



Blaser R93 Grand Luxe Stutzen, 30-06 Springfield.


ya!


GWB

Very nicely done.

Dude ,you may be 30-06 boring,but are King of the cool guns.

That Blazer is a BEAUTY!!

This ^^^^^^ ... I can accomplish the same velocity/recoil reduction in a .270 Win by simply reducing powder charge and/or swapping powders... Physics is physics... Blindfolded, I doubt 10% of today's hunters could tell the different between a long action and short action rifle, just by handling them.

Nice to see some life breathed into this old thread! Nice Pics Geedubya!

MD - some day, I will have to get a 308, just to add to the challenge....

I must say, I have yet to lose any animal, fairly hit with a bullet constructed to do the task, at the POI that I knew I needed to hit, to harvest cleanly. Taken many deer even with the miniscule 6mmBR.....that little rascal will surprise some folks.

No doubt, the ballistics are often more than adequate with most modern rounds, assuming shot placement and good bullet construction.

LR shots require proper dope, drop and drift as you all know, then taking out vitals takes care of business.

Wow. A Lotta Purdy with the pork. You always have the purdy going on.

GDB saves lots of threads with his purty rifles!!!!

Yes he does, Lol. Makes putting lipstick on a pig, look good

I resemble that remark.






Sauer 404, 308 Win.



Golden Boar




ya!

GWB

I may have stumbled upon your blind.

Probably don't want us 270 guys around smoking all his bucks....

I'm cringing looking at that beautiful rifle resting on that filthy hog!

Nice 404 above!

Skane has his blind posted, must be many JOC fans in his area

i have killed deer with both cartridges ,both are good cartridges and so are many others. i don`t use either of these cartridges anymore just because i wanted just one cartridge for family to hunt with at deer camp with less recoil so i went with 257 Roberts for all 3 ladies , myself and my 2 grandkids . this way there will be no confusion on who has what ammo anymore , believe me different size cartridges and keeping track of who has what can be even dangerous.

On the money , never understood the big hoo blah about 270 bs 30-06 , the drop is minimal difference and the 06 can handle much heavier bullets
Kenneth

i have the 270 and the '06 and i can't see the difference on deer i've killed. the '06 and the 270 stays in the safe and i'm more than happy with the 7x57 and 30-40 Krag. the 270/30'06 debate is boring, to say the least.

In the good old days, you would load your .270 with 130's at 3100 fps for deer size game and load your .30-06 with 180's at 2700 fps for elk, moose, grizzly etc. On an extended trip up north, you would take both, knowing that one could act as a spare for the other should one of them break.