Long range with a 270 win questions???

[TXGunNut]

Welcome to the asylum, Aaron.
If I hadn't gotten into .30-06 so early in the game I'd probably have changed my name to Jack O'Connor years ago. I can't justify a .270 when I have two good .30-06's (and all the loading acoutrements) but I'll always wish I had one or maybe a dozen. Just because the .30-06 does everyhing I need it to do doesn't mean the .270 can't do it a little bit better.
My question is why are you re-barreling? Is there a problem with the barrel now on the rifle or is this a project that starts with a barreled action?

 

[emcon5]

You are a little off base, it is all about prefrence pretty much. First off you have to take two similar bullets to compare so let us look at the Nosler Partitions. The .277 150 grain bullet and .308 180 grain bullet have similar BC and SD. Going to Federal's web site you can compare ballistics of the loaded ammunition.

Why would you compare similar bullets? You want to compare the best bullet for each option.

For starters, ignore drop numbers, for a long range target gun they are meaningless. If you know the target is 1000 yards away, as long as you know the drop and your sights can get you on paper, it doesn't matter if the drop is 100", 300", or 400". All that matters is wind.


If you are shooting long range, you aren't using factory ammo, and if you are shooting 30-06 you aren't shooting 180gr bullets. You are shooting match bullets, over 200 grains.

A .308 220gr SMK @ 2500 FPS drifts 17.1" @ 500 yards in a 10 MPH full value wind.
A .308 200gr SMK @ 2600 FPS drifts 18.2" @ 500 yards in a 10 MPH full value wind.
A .308 210gr Berger VLD @ 2500 FPS drifts 16.8" @ 500 yards in a 10 MPH full value wind.

On paper the .270 is about the same, depending on bullet.

A .277 150 gr Berger VLD @ 2900 FPS drifts 16.1 @ 500 in a 10 MPH full value wind.
A .277 135gr SMK @ 3000 FPS drifts 17.7" @ 500 yards in a 10 MPH full value wind.

From what I can see, Berger makes the only decent heavy match bullets in .277, Sierra only goes up to 135 gr, which is still pretty good. I don't see any other match quality bullets in .277.

With the .308 you can get good match bullets from just about everyone, and they are about $10/box cheaper than the the heavy Bergers.

For comparison, the 6.5-06 or 6.5-284:

.264 140gr AMAX @ 2950 drifts 15.6" @ 500 yards in a 10 MPH full value wind.
.264 142gr SMK @ 2950 drifts 14.6" @ 500 yards in a 10 MPH full value wind.
.264 139gr Scenar @ 2950 drifts 14.7" @ 500 yards in a 10 MPH full value wind.
.264 140gr Berger VLD @ 2950 drifts 13.4" @ 500 yards in a 10 MPH full value wind.

And while not as available as .308, there are a lot of choices in quality match bullets, and the worst of the 6.5mm ~140gr bullets is better than the best 270 or 30-06, with equal or less recoil.

6.5-284 works better with the 6.5 bullets and you can buy properly headstamped brass. With the long action you can use the longest 6.5 bullets in the magazine without fear of eating powder capacity.

For what it's worth, my Hornady manual shows 2-300 FPS higher for the 6.5-06 over the 6.5-284 with the same weight bullet. For the Hodgdon load data they are about equal. As to the headstamp, I really don't care, and .25-06 brass is about half the price of 6.5-284 brass.

That being said, in some cases you get what you pay for, and Lapua brass is the best I have ever seen. They make 6.5-284 brass, but the only option for them for the 6.5-06 is to start with 30-06, and that needs more prep than just a neck size.

 

[xr_aaron]

It is just a sport barrel on it right now and i want to go with something more heavy and a little longer. I like the 6.5 284 but for now I want to stick with the 270. Although I was looking at a savage last week that was one and itwas tempting.

 

[taylorce1]

Why would you compare similar bullets? You want to compare the best bullet for each option.

Because the resources that I used anyone could look up easily and it was KISS. I could have done exactly what you did but that would haver required more references and time. If I was smart I would have just taken a screen shot and posted it as it would have saved me even more time.

If you know the wind value you can drop that as well from my post and yours, because that can be compensated for at the known target range is well. Then it all boils down to who is the better shot and has the more precise rifle.

I guess my main reason for 6.5-284 is that it isn't a wild cat. Besides properly head stamped match grade brass being available. Reloading dies, even the competition ones are going to be cheaper since it isn't a wild cat anymore. Plus you have the option of buying factory ammunition although it will be quite expensive, it will still be cheaper than custom 6.5-06 cartridges.

 

[kenno]

What?

I use the 270win
It is completley unsuited to 1000 yard shooting, the pre-WW2 8mm Mauser round is far better round at that range and IT is obsolete now.
It's your money and it is still (briefly) a free country.
Personaly I' be working on a round that would shoot 3 miles

 

[bamaranger]

Did anybody notice

Take note of the stats posted by Taylor 1 and compare the .30/180 drop at 500 to the .270/130, this w/ the same 200 yd zero. The difference is 10 inches LESS with the .270.

That is about the size of the proverbial kill zone on a whitetail. As a hunting round, the .270/130 on medium, deer sized game, offers a significantly flatter trajectory than the heavy .30/180 combo, to 500 yds.
That has always been its edge over heavy .30 loads, offering a flatter trajectory that is more forgiving on range estimation errors. It does it w/ less recoil too. And less fuss than a 7mm mag.

Now, one may need the heavy slug combo on bigger game. I don't think I would won't to brace a grizzly with a .270/130, if a heavy '06 were available. Or a moose either. The new space/premium bullets close the gap on the bullet weight issue a bit, Ol Jack O'Conner would have loved a "Failsafe" or an "X-bullet" , but since heavy .30 bullets are also available in the premium styles, its a moot point.

Since I will never hunt moose or grizzly, and likely never elk either, the flat .270/130 is all I will ever need for deer in open spaces like bean fields, ROWs and green fields.

 

[bamaranger]

Oh yeah

Rant over. If I was doing a build for a range/match rifle, I would not do it w/ a .270. as there are a world of other options.

But if I were building a good beanfield/ROW hunting rifle for deer, I wouldn't shy from the .270. A longer 24-26" will boost velocity and milk all the zip you can get from the cartridge, again, w/ less fuss than something bigger. I've toyed with the idea of rebarreling my 700 ADL from the Wally World 22" tube to something longer and heavier, but never have. The Sendero and plains rifle set ups are examples of this concept.

 

[.300 Weatherby Mag]

I still like my .270 even after buying and shooting a .280....

If I was going to rebarrel one of my long action rifles with a 30-06 bolt head.. I would turn it into a .280AI... Almost 7mm Rem Mag Performance w/o a belt... Load it with a 160 grain accubond with a BC of .531...

 

[dahermit]

Well let's just start the gaggle of idiotic negatisms by saying that first of all Dahermite, that target that JIM243 posted is stellar hunting performance from a developed handload Period!!! yes its Stellar!! 100 yds 5 shots only three holes,,,, pull your hoody down and leave the bottle alone this weekend...

Uh...If you look at the squares on the the target (1 inch squares), and compare it to the five shot group, you will see that the extream spread of the group is about and inch and an eighth to an inch and a quarter, which most rifle shooters would say is not considerer outstanding for modern hunting rifles and is considered pitiful for a target rifle. Too old for a "hoody", do not drink, just an old guy who has been hand loading and shooting, and been concerned with accuracy since the middle sixties. I have a Ruger No.1 in 30-06 that produces similar "stellar" groups at 100 yards with cast lead bullets.

 

[taylorce1]

Uh...If you look at the squares on the the target (1 inch squares), and compare it to the five shot group, you will see that the extream spread of the group is about and inch and an eighth to an inch and a quarter, which most rifle shooters would say is not considerer outstanding for modern hunting rifles and is considered pitiful for a target rifle. Too old for a "hoody", do not drink, just an old guy who has been hand loading and shooting, and been concerned with accuracy since the middle sixties. I have a Ruger No.1 in 30-06 that produces similar "stellar" groups at 100 yards with cast lead bullets.

That is a very nice group you shot with your .30-06 but I don't have a good refrence to measure yours. However that group that was posted earlier is as sub MOA group. If the shooter can hold that kind of group across the range then his .270 is a viable long range rifle.

 

[emcon5]

If you know the wind value you can drop that as well from my post and yours, because that can be compensated for at the known target range is well. Then it all boils down to who is the better shot and has the more precise rifle.

Sorry, but it doesn't work like that.

Range doesn't change between shots, wind does. The advantage of having less wind drift isn't for when you read the conditions right, it is for when you get them wrong. And since there is no magic muzzle-to-target wind value gauge, you will get it wrong. A lot. High Master long range shooters still get the wind wrong.

Depending on the terrain, wind can be doing different things on the way to the target. If you go to a long range match and look at the wind flags, they will very rarely all show the same thing. You need to judge what the wind flags and mirage are doing, compare them to what they were doing for your last shot, make a SWAG based on your ballistics data and experience and adjust accordingly.

When you call the wind is 60º at 8mph, but it is really 90º at 12, how bad do you miss?

At 500 yards with a 6.5 (140 SMK @ 2800) you are off by 1.5 MOA, which is just under 8 inches. A couple of extreme examples for comparison (which I have wind dope sheets worked up for) are the 30-06 150 FMJ, and .223 55gr FMJ. For the same error, the .30-06 will be off by 2.3 MOA (about a foot) and the .223 will be off by 3.1 MOA (~16").

Using the MR-65 500 yard target, if you held and broke a perfect shot, the 6.5 would still be in the 10 ring. The .30-06 would be in the 9 ring, and the .223 would be in the 8 ring.

Also, for "long range" target shooting, 500 yards is just the beginning.

I guess my main reason for 6.5-284 is that it isn't a wild cat. Besides properly head stamped match grade brass being available. Reloading dies, even the competition ones are going to be cheaper since it isn't a wild cat anymore. Plus you have the option of buying factory ammunition although it will be quite expensive, it will still be cheaper than custom 6.5-06 cartridges.

True, but as far as wildcats go, 6.5-06 isn't all that wild. Hornady, RCBS, and Redding make dies off the shelf, and to form cases all you need to do is neck size .25-06 cases.

 

[dahermit]

That is a very nice group you shot with your .30-06 but I don't have a good refrence to measure yours. However that group that was posted earlier is as sub MOA group. If the shooter can hold that kind of group across the range then his .270 is a viable long range rifle.

The rings on my target are one-inch apart. The group is a measured, 1.815".
The target posted for the .270 indicate about 3/4 inch at the widest point. Adequate for hunting...not outstanding by today's out-of-the-box hunting rifles like the Savage and Remington rifles. If the group did not have that flyer, it would be a superb group for a hunting rifle, but not what would be expected for a target rifle.
If he would test his rounds for bullet concentricy run-out and shoot a group with .002 or less run-out, he may be able to put all five into the area he put four. I do not doubt that a .270, with target bullets (not hunting bullets), and sorted to less than .002 concentricy of the bullet to case, it could very well become a contender in the target community, along with .308, .300 Winchester Magnum.

 

[JerryM]

Jack O'Connor, and others in his time frame, recommended what was know as the rule of 3. The rifle was sighted in with the bullet striking 3 inches high at 100 yards. At 200 it is about 4 inches high. At 400 it is about 10 inches low, and at 500 about 30 inches low.

I used to use the Weaver Rangefinder reticle. It had a second cross hair that was 6 moa below the top cross hair. Sighting in 3 inch high at hundred, the bottom cross hair was just a shade low at 500. If one judged a mulie to be approx 18 inches from top to bottom of the chest, range estimation was pretty simple, and no holdover was necessary to slightly over 300 yds with 130 gr bullets at 3100 fps. It was not difficult to make good shots out to 500 yards if you knew the trajectory of your bullets.

I would not choose the .270 WCF for a 1,000 yard target rifle, but for medium size game it is as good as they come. In general bullets in the 130 range are designed for med size game, and with today's premium bullets like the Barnes X they will do for elk.

Regards,
Jerry

 

[emcon5]

Jack O'Connor, and others in his time frame, recommended what was know as the rule of 3. The rifle was sighted in with the bullet striking 3 inches high at 100 yards. At 200 it is about 4 inches high. At 400 it is about 10 inches low, and at 500 about 30 inches low.

I do roughly the same thing with my hunting rifles, but as you mention the most important thing is to know the trajectory of your bullets.

This means use a chrono to get an accurate muzzle velocity, and punch the numbers in to a good ballistics program, that includes input for sight height (having that wrong changes things a lot more than you would think).

Once you have that, do a sanity check in the real world. If your numbers say you should be 18" low, try it and find out if they are right.

 

[Big Pard]

It's great for what it is designed for...under 300yrd shots on medium sized game.

I think the 270 is certainly capable of taking medium-sized game beyond 300yds. Just last season I killed a big 7 pointer with one shot at 346 yds. Familiarity with a rifle is more important than any "paper differences" between any of the '06 base rounds. In my opinion....

Rifle fit, recoil tolerence, shooter confidence should have more to do with choosing a round than what the charts say

 

[taylorce1]

Range doesn't change between shots, wind does. The advantage of having less wind drift isn't for when you read the conditions right, it is for when you get them wrong. And since there is no magic muzzle-to-target wind value gauge, you will get it wrong. A lot. High Master long range shooters still get the wind wrong.

I threw it out because you were stating a known range, I mean if you are going to assume that the range is known and throw out bullet drop. Why can't I do the same and assume the theoretical shooters have equal ability to judge wind. Besides with the data you posted it still proved my point that at 500 yards the wind doesn't effect the lower BC bullets of the .270 and worse than the higher BC .308 bullets and it will still boil down to the shooters equipment and ability. Even with the data you posted at 1000 yards the windage adjustment is going to be very close but the .270 with the 150 grain Berger will still beat the 200 grain Sierra in trajectory and windage adjustment.

What if the range isn't a given and the shooters have to range the target that is of an unknown size with their scope reticles? Then the margin for error goes up and the flatter shooting rifle will have the advantage. At 500 yards the winner at least on paper is still the .270 Win. Again it really doest matter what bullet you use as long as you make the more precise calculations.

The only reason that the .277 bore has never been used as a competition round is because it never made it as a military cartridge. Had it been a military cartridge a lot more resources would have been used to design better bullets for it, plain and simple. That is why .224, 6.5, 7mm, and .308 are so popular today in long range shooting. They had far more R&D money go into making a better bullet.

 

[emcon5]

I threw it out because you were stating a known range, I mean if you are going to assume that the range is known and throw out bullet drop. Why can't I do the same and assume the theoretical shooters have equal ability to judge wind.

The OP was talking about Target shooting out to 1100 yards, I thought he was talking about building a LR target rig. Reading his later posts, he talks about closer range and hunting, in that case (depending on what he is hunting) it is a wash. Frankly most folks don't have any business shooting at game at any range where the differences in exterior ballistics would matter.

Besides with the data you posted it still proved my point that at 500 yards the wind doesn't effect the lower BC bullets of the .270 and worse than the higher BC .308 bullets and it will still boil down to the shooters equipment and ability. Even with the data you posted at 1000 yards the windage adjustment is going to be very close but the .270 with the 150 grain Berger will still beat the 200 grain Sierra in trajectory and windage adjustment.

Yeah, wind drift is close enough between the 30-06 and .270 (with the 150 Berger) not to matter, and the .270 is flatter.

The only caveat is that this is based on one bullet (which costs ~$10/100 more than the other options). Hopefully for you it is always available when you need it. Also, match quality brass is not available.

Of course the 140gr 6.5-06 beats both in wind and drop and is available from several manufacturers.

What if the range isn't a given and the shooters have to range the target that is of an unknown size with their scope reticles? Then the margin for error goes up and the flatter shooting rifle will have the advantage. At 500 yards the winner at least on paper is still the .270 Win.

And neither are as good as the 6.5. It shoots just as flat (or better depending on bullet) as the .270, but has less wind.

 

[taylorce1]

The only caveat is that this is based on one bullet (which costs ~$10/100 more than the other options). Hopefully for you it is always available when you need it. Also, match quality brass is not available.

Sure match quality brass is available, just have to make it out of .30-06 match brass. There is plenty of that around to use both for the .270 and 6.5-06. Besides I think we have both agreed that the 6.5 would be a better option however the OP has stated he will go with the .270 Win to try and prove a point.

Plus there are some bullets out there so you don't have to rely on one bullet.

140 grain Nosler AB .496 BC
150 grain Berger VLD .531 BC
150 grain Hornady Interbond & SST .525 BC

Then it is rumored Cutting Edge Bullets have a 169.5 grain .277 caliber bullet that has a BC in the .700's. It requires as well a faster twist barrel to stabilize this solid copper bullet. Kirby Allen had it designed for his .277 AM rifles and is supposed to be coming out with a 180 grain in the future. It will be more expensive to shoot but if you are trying to prove a point then you might be willing to spend the money for custom high BC bullets.

 

[bobnob]

Over here in Aussie the 270 has a bigger following than the 30-06. Probably goes back to the days when a lot of SMLE rifles were rechambered to 303-270.

I must admit I resisted for years what I thought was hype. I was a .308 Win shooter to the core. Recently I got a .270 and I must say I now understand.

Personally I prefer the 150 grain bullets. They leave the muzzle around 2900 fps and as I don't use bonded bullets I find they hold together better than the 130 grainers at 3100+.

The 150 grain SSTs with a BC of .525 - no slouch!

Go ahead and build it mate and you will do well with it I am sure.

 

[old roper]

Thanks everyone!!! This will not be my 1100 yard gun, it is just my project gun for now. I love the 270 round. i want to see what I can do with it then go from there. One reason why I want to stay with the 270 is to prove some people wrong but that is just me. This rifle will be mainly target with some hunting but not at far distances. I am a firm believer in taking a closer shot where you know for sure that it will be an ethical kill. this is a quote from OP


I said this in another post that the 270 wasn't a LR target rifle due to lack of bullets. It's unfortunate all I can say and it doesn't take away from the 270 being a great hunting rd.

You can build a 270 that will do over 3000fps with 150gr bullets if you get a good barrel. Best I've done is 3077fps with a Lilja barrel in my 270

One problem your going to run into now is the wait on a good barrel Bartlein is running almost a year, Rock maybe 6mos to year,Kreiger 4 to 6mos I think the same with Brux. Lilja is about 4/6 mos not sure on Broughton heard he was back up also.

You can get other barrels quicker the ones I listed above is what I shoot and there good barrels.

Best I've done so far is around 800yds I've got a project (270cal) up the gunsmith now hoping it work out as a 1000yd rifle shooting the Berger 150gr VLD hunting bullets not that I'm going to hunt that distance should be a nice deer/elk rifle.