Is the .270 dying?

Well it ain't dying, but it peaked in popularity many years ago. It will always be around, but in another generation new rifles will be much less common. I suspect ammo sales will continue to be a top seller for a while longer just because there are so many rifles out there.

And yea, the 280 is better. But just by a smidge and the 270 came first. For most folks the difference isn't great enough to justify having the oddball round.
 
IMO .280 is only 'better' with the heaviest for cal bullets. 175-180 grains to take advantage of the higher BC bullets. The .270 has some VLD choices in 165, 170 and 175 grain, but they're not nearly as common as 7mm bullets. Still, the heaviest VLD's in 6.8 tend to have better BC's because of their slightly smaller frontal area assuming you have a fast enough twist to stabilize them.

If you limit yourself to the much more common 150 grain .277 cal bullets, then yes, .280 will pull ahead with heavier bullets, at long range.
280 is a tad less overbore, and slightly more efficient so it'll shoot an equal weight bullet slightly faster than .270 but the smaller diameter bullet's higher BC will soon make up for the slightly lower muzzle velocity.

.270 tends to have a slight edge with lighter bullets. .280 tends to have a slight edge with heavy for cal bullets. In the field it wont make a difference, we'd pretty much be splitting hairs, on paper, with comparable loads.
 
I find that I can explore a variety of different hand loading options with the .270 Winchester.

That, in and of it's self, is why the cartridge is keeper, to me.

That being said, this a mute point on my end, because the little sister has appropriated my Ruger Mk II in .270 as "her's", and it appears that will be the case for some time. :)
 
The .270 will be around long after the WSM, SAUM, etc have run their course. It is a classic American Cartridge capable of taking anything walking on the NA continent, with maybe the exception of the big bears where it would be considered marginal. With the advent of new bullet technology and chemistry of modern powders, I doubt we've seen the full potential of it or many other cartridges.

I've never been a big fan of it but growing up with a dad that loved every 30'06 he could afford to buy, I was somewhat disadvantaged there. Same went for the .308. To this day, I have very little use for the .270 as I'd rather shoot the 30'06 or .280 over it. Really if I'm stepping up from my 7mm08, it goes to the 7mmRM. Personally, I'm more into the SA cartridges these days, less powder, more efficient cases, less recoil and pretty comparable ballistics on any ranges that I find myself hunting.

I think it is fantastic that we have so much to choose from and it gets better every year. However, some things will never die like about any popular modern cartridge based on the venable old standard cases like the .308 and 30'06. Tried and true with so much working data to go off of means they'll be around for a long long time.
 
Not dying, just out of fashion. Jack O'Connor is long gone, and it seems to me with rise of the Internet there aren't as many influential gun writers and "experts" influencing shooters, instead people are deciding for themselves.
And look how CAS revived a number of otherwise moribund cartridges.
 
I'll be entirely honest, I didn't know who Jack O'Connor was until I read "Pale Horse Coming" by Stephen Hunter.

So in a way, Jack O'Connor's legacy was the driving principle in me badgering Dad into buying me a .270 platform.
 
For most folks the difference isn't great enough to justify having the oddball round.
Click to expand...

Right.... and the .270 is the oddball round @ .277 / 6.8 mm. The .280 is .284 / 7.0mm caliber. Nice rounded mm number. That's why everyone should get .280 instead. ;) But seriously, this is true. The 7mm has way more bullets; the .277 does not, so which one is the "oddball"?
 
Oddball? Depends on where you're coming from....

The 270 Winchester is essentially American. The 280 Remington/7mm Express? Umm, not so much; it's kind of a metric rival; an, "Anti-270". My brother has had both and handloaded both to the redline and beyond over a chronograph. His comments were that the 280 was good but try as he did he could not take it as far as the 270 could go before he hit the ceiling of excessive pressures. Limited experience, for sure. All metrics are oddballs where I come from.
 
Right.... and the .270 is the oddball round @ .277 / 6.8 mm. The .280 is .284 / 7.0mm caliber. Nice rounded mm number. That's why everyone should get .280 instead. But seriously, this is true. The 7mm has way more bullets; the .277 does not, so which one is the "oddball"?
Click to expand...

The 280 is a fine cartridge from any point of view. What makes it an "oddball" has nothing to do with the cartridge's merits and everything to do about its marketing niche. Remington tried to squeeze another cartridge in between two very similar and extremely well established cartridges and there simply isn't room for a third very similar cartridge to establish a user base.

Try comparing the 280 ammo selection at the hardware store in a tiny town in Montana to 270 and 30-06.

There may not be as many 270 bullets available as 7mm, but there's certainly enough 270 bullets to fill any legitimate need.
 
What makes it an "oddball" has nothing to do with the cartridge's merits and everything to do about its marketing niche. Remington tried to squeeze another cartridge in between two very similar and extremely well established cartridges and there simply isn't room for a third very similar cartridge to establish a user base.
Click to expand...

Well, right, I gotcha.... but my point here is to change things - what say we stop doing things for tradition's sake and do things for sake of a reason?

And if millimeter rounds are Euro-oddball, then that means 7.5mm cartridges are out - that would make .308 and .30-'06 Euro-oddball. So that idea doesn't hold up.

5.5mm (.224), 6mm (.243), 6.5mm (.264), 7mm (.284), 7.5mm (.308), & 8mm (.323) => Not oddball

.257, .277 => Are oddball

because they're not a "mm" or "half-mm" increment based caliber - see what I'm saying? Not right or wrong; just one way of looking at it. I understand that it's extremely hard to change inertia and takes a long time, but just doing my part to help change along. Having said that, .277 bullets have come a long ways, and the .270 is a fine fine traditional American cartridge to be sure - one of the best ever.
 
It might have been a slightly different outcome if the .280 Rem. had been loaded from the beginning to the same pressure level as the .270 rather than downloading it for the semi-auto and pump action rifles. Even that did not make sense as the same rifles were also chambered to the .270 which apparently never was a problem. It also would have been nice if the .280 had come out in a bolt action as well. I have several .270's and one .280 and all I can say is I can get higher velocity with a 150 gr. bullet from the .280 than any of the .270's by a noticeable margin. :cool:
Paul B.
 
I don't doubt that a 280 can reach 3,000 fps with 150 grain bullets, as I know my 270 does. According to my reloading manuals, the numbers show that they are ballistic twins. The huge advantage of the 270 is easy availability of factory ammo. When you can even find 280 ammo, the selection is limited and you can expect to pay $10.00 more per box of 20. For the handloader this is no obstacle and there is even a slight advantage to the 280 as there are more bullets to choose from. I say slight advantage because there are gobs of different 270 bullets to choose from. The selection is greater than any 270 owner will ever need. It's not like we're talking 348 vs 30-'06 here.
 
The .270 has some VLD choices in 165, 170 and 175 grain, but they're not nearly as common as 7mm bullets.
Click to expand...

There have been some better heavy 270 bullets recently. The problem is that none of the common factory hunting rifles are twisted to take advantage of them. If you're building a long range gun and use a custom aftermarket barrel made to shoot the heavies fine, but if you're going to go to the trouble of doing that there are still better choices than 270. The 270 works best in most rifles with 130-150 gr bullets. The 280 is twisted to be capable of using the heavier bullets.

I have no doubt the 270 is in decline, not dying, but certainly in decline. For one thing there are fewer and fewer hunters every year. The 270 is a classic hunting round, but most new shooters are going for target style guns. Not the 270's forte. FWIW, the 30-06 is in the same boat. The 308, and 300 WSM have both cut into 30-06 popularity in the last 10-15 years.

And just like everything else styles and tastes change. Most newer hunters want something different than the gun grandpa used. The trend even among hunters is for short actions in 6.5 and 7mm loadings.
 
I did not read through all the posts, but I would say no. I have never hunted with one, never even owned one except for resale. All you need to do to answer a question like that is go look at the ammo shelves at the stores. It is back ordered at most of the places I see.
 
It appears to me that the calibers with the best long range potential in a rifle of practical hunting size and weight, begin with the 6.5mm's and end with the 7mm's. 30 calibers are good but it takes a 300 magnum to match the trajectory of a 270 and that means more recoil. 25-06 is good too, but the 6.5 to 7mm bullets have better ballistic potential. The 270 is right in the middle of the ideal zone. Can the 270 be bettered by a 6.5 or 7mm? Perhaps, but not likely by much. It would seem that the 30-'06 and the 270 Winchester have become the yardsticks by which all other cartridges are measured in this country. ("Meter-sticks, Captain?") I think the 270 is at it ballistic optimum with bullets of 150 grains while the 280 would likely be optimum at about 160 grains and for comparison's sake, around 140 grains in a 6.5-06 and similar. A one-in-ten twist is ideal for a 150 grain bullet in 270Winchester.
 
Well, right, I gotcha.... but my point here is to change things - what say we stop doing things for tradition's sake and do things for sake of a reason?

And if millimeter rounds are Euro-oddball, then that means 7.5mm cartridges are out - that would make .308 and .30-'06 Euro-oddball. So that idea doesn't hold up.
Click to expand...

I'll give this one more try. The only reason the 280 is an "oddball" is that it doesn't have an established user base, therefore ammo and rifle availability is sketchy.

It has nothing to do with metric vs inch size bullets, numerology or astrology.

Good luck with your campaign to have the 280 replace the 270.
 
Pathfinder,
Not arguing, just offering a different opinion here.

I believe the 270 is at its optimum with 140 grain bullets, and the 280 with 150's...I've spent some time comparing these rounds because of a rifle I ordered a while back...my choices were 270, 280, 280 AI, 30-06, and 7mm Rem Mag...I ran the numbers for all and came up with the following bullet weights being optimum...

270...140
280...150
280AI...160
30-06...175
7 mag...160

My conclusion was based on 600 yard hunting....if you stop at 400 yards, take 10 grains off all them.

Like I said, not an argument...just a different point of view.

I decided on the 280 Ackley by the way...
 
The hunter armed with a .270 AND a .30-06 would be hard pressed to find anything better from prairie dogs to large bears with appropriate loadings.

Ammo is cheaper and available in any little Podunk store you should come across.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top