Printable View
I am looking to get a tikka and cut the barrel to around 17 inches and add a suppressor. I am in between 6.5prc and .270win and plan on shooting 130-140gr bullets in either. Max hunting distance probably won’t be over 400 yards. I currently shoot .270 so I have components already but I cannot find much data on short .270s. Does anyone have velocities to share out of either cartridge in a short barrel?
I would stick with the .270 @Ryan songhurst had a short barrel .270 and maybe able to help you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Akj
Sent from my CPH2145 using Tapatalk
Please don't. Not with either of those.
Just get a 308.
Agreed. Either a .308 or 7mm/08 are much better suited to a short barrel rig. The PRC or .270 will just burn a whole lot of extra powder for very little gain. Short barrel rifle are best when matched with a small case capacity in relation to the bore size.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pommy
I would go with the 6.5prc, short fat cases always do better in a shorter barrel than long skinny cases
Just look at 280 vs 284win
Ive had 20" .270 and 6.5PRC.
270 met expectations, 6.5prc fell short.
Too much fussing around with the PRC - dies, cases etc and performance wasn't startling.
The .270 was so easy to set up and get going. It's quite an efficient cartridge. Mate had an 18" Ruger Lightweight and that was pretty good too. The Duleys use a short barell'd .270 (20" maybe) and I respect their judgement.
308
Answering the question you wish he had asked and not the question he actually asked. Classic. :):)Quote:
Originally Posted by STC
your nurse should give you your meds and bring you back to bed sir.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tahr
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pommy
I’m open to suggestions. Care to elaborate?
If you have all the components as well as familiarity (and/or nostalgia), then they are definitely good reasons to stick with 270. Change up the powder as necessary for shorter time in barrel. But, if the question is relative performance, the 270 cartridge was developed 100 years ago. Are there any recently developed cartridges that look anything like it? It is basically superseded technology.
Do you have data to support this? Not trying to argue. I just haven’t seen much data, but the little I have seen seems promising to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by zeropak
What kind of velocities did you see out of the .270?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tahr
try to crunch a few numbers in quickload if you want proof.Quote:
Originally Posted by Akj
you can shorten any caliber, some are just more suitable to do it than others.
Hah. For a person who doesn’t know me you are scarily close to the truth.Quote:
Originally Posted by STC