270 winchester, Why not?

I have been reloading and shooting for 40 years, I reload and shoot the following.
.222 Rem-.223 Rem-22-250-7x30 Waters-7mm- Rem Mag-308 Win--30-06-300WSM-40-70 Sharps Striaght-45-70 Gov. 38 S&W-.38 Special-45 Colt -.41 Rem Mag.These cartridges are spread over 40 rifles and 8 handguns
Tell me why I need a .270, it does better than what?
It is a fairly small number of people who seek out specifically the .270 Win. It just does not do anything better than other established cartridges.It suffers from a fairly anemic bullet selection and rifles that will exploit it's potential.It would be nice if rifle makers would give the .270 Win. a little push with some different twist barrels and some new bullets,Not unlike what has happened with the .223 Rem.
Seems like every time I get ready to buy a new rifle The .270 Win. never enters my mind as a "I gotta have it" cartridge.:confused:
 
It just does not do anything better than other established cartridges.It suffers from a fairly anemic bullet selection and rifles that will exploit it's potential.
Click to expand...

I haven't found this to be the case. There's overlap in almost all cartridges. What does your 7-30Waters do that your 308 can't? What does your 308 do your 30-06 can't? There are plenty of good 277 bullets around. Most people don't buy custom benchrest bullets. And those are primarily only made in .224, 6mm, and 30cal. I'm referring to high end target bullets like Ronnie Cheek and similar. But for match type production bullets you've got Sierra Matchking, and Berger making some really good .277 bullets. Same as most other calibers.
 
The range of bullet selection for any caliber is a free-market decision by the manufacturers in response to demand. There has been no particularly great demand for target bullets in .277 as compared to other calibers. Simple, really. It's all about making enough profit to stay in business.
 
responding to Brewman and Longranger....

Brewman, your lengthy post was fascinating. However, why was all the testing done at 100 yards? Was there no testing at, say 300, 400, and 500 yards? I've found that one should not presume that any given load that is accurate at 100 yards will still be stable and group well at 300 yards. Accuracy at 100 yards was a good standard for testing 100 years ago. but for at least a couple of generations now there have been a lot of cartridges in common circulation that are considered long range calibers. I think the shooting press has done us a disservice by not adopting a much longer range as a standard for testing rifles for the articles they write. The whole reason for having a .270 is that it shoots a lot flatter than a .30-30 at LONG range. If no one can shoot well beyond 100 yards then we could just as well go back to the black-powder cartridges. Maybe no one needs anything more than a .38-55. My primary rifle is a .270 Winchester. In my experience with it, 100 yard groups mean absolutely nothing at 300 yards. If all the testing was limited to 100 yards I think they proved nothing much. All was not lost, however, if they wrote an article to help sell more magazines or whatever. Longranger: What did you mean by this?:
It is a fairly small number of people who seek out specifically the .270 Win.
Click to expand...
? This statement appears to be false but perhaps you weren't talking about hunting rifles and ammo sales? Maybe you meant .280 Remington? To all .270 owners: Have you tried Nosler 150 grain Partitions? My Winchester really likes them. Happy New Year and good shooting to all.
 
To all .270 owners: Have you tried Nosler 150 grain Partitions? My Winchester really likes them. Happy New Year and good shooting to all.
Click to expand...

I have not tried Partitions. The 150 gr. bullets I use in my .270 Win. are Norma Oryx. The Oryx are about $2 per 100 bullets cheaper than the Partition (very small difference), they're bonded core, and the Oryx aren't quite as spitzer/pointed as the Partition, they're Protected Point, kind of Semi-RN. If I could get the Hornady 150 gr. Interlock RN, I'd definitely have a few hundred, but apparently Hornady doesn't make them anymore.

I have 40 (2 boxes of 20) 150 gr. Barnes MRX, but they're so expensive I wonder why I even bought them. Maybe for Elk if I get the chance...:o...but the Oryx would do just fine for those, too.
 
Pathfinder45,

In answer to your question “Why was all the testing done at 100 yards?” well you would need to ask the authors that question not me. I can only assume that when the general discussion of accuracy comes up it is often talked in MOA which is based on 100 yards, that’s what most people think of and that is an industry standard in bragging terms, how many advertisements do you see that guarantee 1” or less MOA out the box? People can relate to it I guess.

I do agree with you, a long range study would be very interesting but I suppose the further out you get the more variables come in to play as well and I’m sure there would be no shortage of people ready to tear shreds off of any such study and its findings. You can never please all the armchair critics…..

Cheers.
 
As a teenager a buddy said my ole mans 270 will out shoot your 30.06 any day of the week so off we went 100 yds I had more in the 10 ring so he says well it's a long range gun any way so we commence firing at 200 yds and again I had more in the 10 ring. Boy was he POed but I was on the rifle team at school and shot rimfire postal league twice a week and I knew my old Springfield was a shooter so no matter what he had I knew I could out shoot him that was my first exposure to a 270. Last year I walked into the local pawn shop and an old winchester model 70 in .270 with a heavy 1.25" Douglas barrel was there for $150 and I told Momma it followed me home. I mounted a scope and my son and I went to sight it in at 100 yds he was spotting and I fired 3 shots and he says only one was on the paper high and right so I dial it in and fire 3 more and he starts laughing low and left and only one on the paper so I dial it in again and fire 3 more and he laughs and says its on but only one in the bull so we walk across the gravel pit so I could look at the target, now I'm not a competition shooter but that sucker was making cloverleafs I could cover with a dime. I'm a hunter and that 270 gave me a hernia just taking it out of the truck so I sold it to some range rat minus the scope and tripled my money. What a hoot. He says with the right loads he shoots sub 1" groups at 500 yds. How many BR shooters doe it take to change a light bulb? What !!!!! Change!!!!!
 
Only the 270 and 30-30 earned the respect of the world
the hard way.
Click to expand...

The .223, .308 and 30-06 all earned their respect the hard way. Last I checked deer don't return fire. :rolleyes:
 
I was never a 270 fan, but 12 years ago I had a hunting trip to South Africa planned, and one of my buddies there wanted a stainless Ruger in 270. I tried to convince him to get a 30/06, but he would not budge. Just so happen a big chain was closing it's doors, and I walked out with a brand new rifle for $325, and a couple of boxes of Federal 130 grainers for about $7 a box. Did not want to take it to SA without making sure it would at least fire, so I mounted a scope on it, and proceeded to shoot a 5 shot group into less than 3/4 inch at 100 yards. Thinking it was a fluke, I shot another one, and tried to especially concentrate, and came up with a real 1/2 inch group. And I did it twice again in a row. And the groups were nice and round, the kind of groups I always strive for.

I had a devil of a time getting my Winchester 30/06 to shoot a 3/4 inch group with my best handloads, and decided there and then that NO WAY am I parting with that rifle. Went back and bought another one. It too shot good, not quite as good as the first one, but still way less than an inch. My friend was ecstatic with it, even after paying import duties he got it for about 60% of what he would have paid for it new in SA, and I saw him make a neckshot on a springbuck 350 yards away. And mine also loved the Failsafe bullets, shot them even better than the Federals, none of this 2 inch groups. Actually, I never saw a group over 3/4 inch group with it, no matter what I tried.

I have not shot it much since 2002, my wife used it for Elk hunting but she never got a decent shot. I moved from AZ to SC in 2003, 3 years ago my brother in law shot a bobcat with it at over 200 yards, so I guess it still shoots good!

One reason it never became a popular target cartridge was because it was never a military cartridge. Let one sucker win the Wimbledon or the F class tryouts with a 270 Winchester, and it will be the next new hot cartridge.;)
 
guns

i have a choice of gun to use but the 270 remane the best of the best i have 270 wsm that will group 5 shots under 3/4 inch 270win. gun that will group 1in or better then a savage that will group 1/2 in with reloads of 130 gr bullets with match primmers and a load of powder 55 gr can't ask much more then that as for game pull off some shots at over 400 yards with the savage . closing i will keep all 8 of my 270s and get rit of the rest but i like guns all kinds all kinds of cal
 
Hey Rudy, I'm sure we all appreciate your input, but please please use some punctuation and capitalization. Your posts are almost impossible to read.
 
270 win and nosler 150's

I have a rifle that I had built (can it be 25 years ago?) on a Sako action, Douglas air-gauged 26" barrel, 1/4-rib, barrel band and ramp front sight (I love the look of British "express" rifles),all by Allen, with an exhibition-grade french walnut/ebony forend that I hand-selected out of Reinhardt Fajen's bins when he was a custom stockmaker. Talley rings and a Leupold 2.5-8X. 57.1 grs of 7828, and Nosler 150gr Partitions have knocked over more than a dozen caribou at 150-440 yds,one shot,neck or chest. Minimal meat damage with the Partitions, and .75" 5-shot 100 yd groups all day. Newer "shinier" bullets there are, but the Partitions get the job done and shoot straight. Play around with the seating depth and stop when you have a winner.
 
If we divide 140 by .264 we get 530.3, multiply that by .277 and we get 146.8 grains. So to match the 6.5's BC we only need a .277 bullet of 147 grains.
Click to expand...
That will match the sectional density of the 6.5mm bullet, not the ballistic coefficient.

My opinion of why the 270 never made it as a match chambering is the focus on the cartridge as a game cartridge. I think it would be a great match cartridge if match bullets were available.
 
Hey Rudy, I'm sure we all appreciate your input, but please please use some punctuation and capitalization. Your posts are almost impossible to read.
Click to expand...

haha...that's funny.

I have a WinM70 featherweight pre-64 in 270. I have reloaded, SMK's 135gr, Nosler E-Tips 130gr, Hornady GMX 130gr, Barnes TSX 150gr, and Barnes TTSX bullets. I have yet to shoot the TTSX's. The 150gr Barnes won't stablize properly and grouped over 2" at 100. All the other full copper bullets shoot around MOA or a bit more. I'm hoping to to get under a MOA with the TTSX's. The SMK's though are a complete different story. They shot around 3/4 or less sometimes all day long. This is out of a 60 year old rifle. I was consistenly around 3050 through the krono and dropping 36" at 550yds. I could only imagine the capabilites out of a modern build with more match projectiles available. If the military was shooting the 270 cartridge we would have 10x the options. I don't understand why this cartridge never received the attention as the other either. I've heard the story a thousand times that there just isn't a lot of people who want them. I'm just waiting for a serious competition shooter to get the balls and put in the time to avenge this cartridge.
 
I hae a Remington 700 ADL in .270 loaded with a custom mix with a Sierra 110 boat tail that is fitted with a shilen trigger. I would use it for any game, short of dangerious, here in North America. Lets face the reality that it has the power to drop a reasonably size animal at any distance the shooter is comfortable with and it won't give you the "black eye" or bruised shoulder. The .270 will always have a place or two reserved in my safe.
 
Nobody buys a 30-06,308,300WM or any of the 30.cal ,7mm or 6.5 wishing dang I should have bought a .270 just don't happen that way.Nobody buys a .270 thinking hey I'm going to blow all their doors off with my little .270. and the crappy bullet selection.Good deer cartridge that's it,not a long range cartridge for all the reasons all ready stated..270 does nothing better than what has been proven over the past 50 years,sorry realty is what it is.
 
as my member name states, I am a huge fan of the 270 winchester and I wasnt even born when O Connor passed away. But I have shot and reloaded for the 270 alot and have seen one shot holes with cheap and expensive guns. People always mention the 308 being accurate, but overlook the 270. Its low recoil teamed up with a good trigger should work for any gun.
 
Comparative recoil for two equal-weight rifles:

Add the bullet weight to the powder charge and multiply by the muzzle velocity. Compare the two. That will tell you if the percentage difference is enough to matter.

For the .270 and the '06 in common loadings:

50 + 130, x 3,000 for the .270 = 540,000.

50 + 150, x 2,800 for the '06 = 560,000.

So the .270 has about four percent less recoil than an '06 rifle of equal weight. IMO, it's not worth worrying about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top