Thread: New .270 cal cartridge from Winchester

180,000 rpm sounds like an dramatic way of describing it.
1:8 twist means the bullet will rotate about 500 revolutions over a distance of 100m.
1:10 twist means the bullet will rotate about 400 revolutions over a distance of 100m.
Passing through a deers chest, a typical bullet will only rotate 1.5 to 2 times.
Not that extreme really.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This sounds a good idea. I don't like those cartridges which are just too long to fit in a 308 length action with a heavy bullet and this goes a way to addressing that. Plus a standard fast twist in factory rifles and higher pressure specs which assume you have a new, heavy duty action. Similar recent cartridges are the 300PRC, 6.5 Cr and 6mmARC, which make the 300WinMag, 260 Rem and 6mmPPC into easily useable commercial hunting and long range target rounds.

Not so good for people who already have a 270WSM. Poor support for Winchester's existing loyal customers. Has the 270WSM drifted into a handloaders' semi wildcat territory ? A real gap would be a replacement for the 7mmWSM, which never got established.

I like the idea of a truly 308 length 270 with the grunt of the traditional 27-06 or maybe even more.

Can someone tell us which is more economical in weight - a 3006 length/base diameter action or a WSM width/length one ?

Originally Posted by Bagheera

I like the idea of a truly 308 length 270 with the grunt of the traditional 27-06 or maybe even more.

Isn't 284 Winchester the ticket? Should be golden since Lapua are going to make the correct brass for it.

Originally Posted by Simon

180,000 rpm sounds like an dramatic way of describing it.
1:8 twist means the bullet will rotate about 500 revolutions over a distance of 100m.
1:10 twist means the bullet will rotate about 400 revolutions over a distance of 100m.
Passing through a deers chest, a typical bullet will only rotate 1.5 to 2 times.
Not that extreme really.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Centrifugal force is what will tear the bullet to pieces the rotational speed doesn't sound that impressive over 100 metres but the bullet is experiencing over 2,000 gs on the outer jacket during that time and the faster it rotates the greater that gets till something gives.

Gents,

This could be winchesters commercial offering from the NGSW program.

The US Army Next Gen Squad Weapon program https://taskandpurpose.com/military-...raining-video/ has selected 3 manufacturers.

Sig makes its own ammunition (277 Fury) with a steel case head and Textron uses caseless telescoping ammunition. GD might use Olin?

If Winchester want to make money they should have done a 6.5 WSM 24 months ago...

The 284 isnt the ticket ,with the high bc 7mm bullets it is a medium /long action round .Despite being designed to be a short action round . The main reason it has become so popular is using a Tikka action which is a long action . The real handicap is most short actions only allow an overall length of 2.8 inches which is not the best length for seat out those longer bullets . The 284 win given it length is pain ,and what performance does it have over the 280 ?? The 6.5 prc size case is the new 284 and there are actions out there that fit it on the shelf .Will do any thing that any other long action round do like the 270/280 /30/06 ? no but it will fit in a short action . And it sounds like this is Winchesters attempt to match Hornady's PRC and use the fan base of the 270 to get it moving .Hornady if they are smart will counter it with a 7mm PRC and you have to admit it they have been very cleaver with their marketing .

The 284 is also a bit fat to fit well into 308 sized magazines.

Looks like the 270 wsm is headed to the scrap heap and we will see a wave of short fat cartridge's
https://www.1911forum.com/threads/6-...ridge.1028482/
Funny but it is the same overall length as the 6.5 prc bring on the 7mm prc and let the games begin

Neck this thing up to 7mm and it looks like a perfect short action cartridge.

Originally Posted by Beetroot

Neck this thing up to 7mm and it looks like a perfect short action cartridge.

And you would have just reinvented the 7mm Remington SAUM give or take a few thou here and there.
Grandpamac.

I have 3 'go to' calibres depending on the requirement; .223 (63 years old), .30-06 (114 years old), and .338 Lapua Magnum (37 years old), all of them well sub-MOA in my rifles. I don't think the ammo marketers are going to make any inroads with me. If I need anything bigger it will be the .375 H&H Magnum (108 years old). Apart for some relatively minor powder improvements the has been bugger all advancement in firearms and ammunition in over 100 years. The rest is all marketing!

Originally Posted by gundoc

I have 3 'go to' calibres depending on the requirement; .223 (63 years old), .30-06 (114 years old), and .338 Lapua Magnum (37 years old), all of them well sub-MOA in my rifles. I don't think the ammo marketers are going to make any inroads with me. If I need anything bigger it will be the .375 H&H Magnum (108 years old). Apart for some relatively minor powder improvements the has been bugger all advancement in firearms and ammunition in over 100 years. The rest is all marketing!

Hmm gundoc, I'm sensing a gap somewhere around the 120-143gr mark, 116yrs old.

Originally Posted by jakewire

Hmm gundoc, I'm sensing a gap somewhere around the 120-143gr mark, 116yrs old.

I have tried 6.5x54MS, 6.5x55, and 7x57, all of which performed well, but the .223 and .30-06 give sufficient overlap to keep the choice manageable. I do have a small clump of other calibres but I chose the three with best performance over the widest range. The 250/300 is one I have never tried but I do like its offspring, the .22/250.

Originally Posted by grandpamac

And you would have just reinvented the 7mm Remington SAUM give or take a few thou here and there.
Grandpamac.

Yeah but it'd have a cool wizzbang name like 7-277 Western.

You know what I like? Long actions. If you are willing to carry just a hint more action, then you can dear your projectiles to whatever you like.

There was a time when logic dictated that a small bullet launched by a huge case was easier to shoot because there would be less hold over required.

This was sound knowledge for decades till ballistics calculators became regularly available and people started shooting ordinary rifles in long range targets.

Turns out that little fast bullet has terrible aerodynamics and is like entering a van in a formula one race. They fly like a plane with no wings.

What in theory was a flat trajectory actually wasn't, relative to much slower, quieter things with less recoil, that didn't burn out barrels.

Thus, the myth of the flat shooting 270 died

I can hunt with a 303. Everything else is academic. But if you want to make real comparisons in real world shooting challenges, the new chamberings with fast twist barrels and ultra-aerodynamic projectiles are way easier to actually hit things with.





Sent from my CPH1701 using Tapatalk