Most 6.5's I've seen used have performed adequately at best and averagely at worse.
The 25.06 is a cartridge that has always made me curious.
The 280? Nope. Why would it...? No reason it would.
More powder for nothing.
Dan M
Printable View
Most 6.5's I've seen used have performed adequately at best and averagely at worse.
The 25.06 is a cartridge that has always made me curious.
The 280? Nope. Why would it...? No reason it would.
More powder for nothing.
Dan M
And the difference in powder charge between a .25-06 and a .280 would be about...?Quote:
Originally Posted by Danny
You surely can't be arguing that a .25-06 makes you curious, comparing it to the powder charge of a .280?!
Good grief.
I don't have a 270, (have had) but I know that the case is brass and the bullet is either 130 or 150 grns and can be quite pointy. It's the powder stuff in the case that burns and makes the bullet come out. Any difference between this and other similar calibers is simply an argument constructed for the sake of having one.
280, 270, 3006, 308, 6.5, 708...the difference is immeasurable without a computer. I've had all of them, and would be happy with any of them.
But please do carry on, I'm enjoying it. :thumbsup:
Umm- so why did you keep changing?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tahr
Isn't that obvious? I didn't have a computer. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by veitnamcam
Neither did I hence stuck on 308:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Tahr
No shit that's probably the first time in my life I have seen this being stated.Quote:
Originally Posted by Danny
Just to baffle all of us with ballistics.....I ran some numbers thru JBM, mainly coz I was interested as I'm looking at building something based on a 30-06.....
I compared high BC Hornady pills (as that is what I'll be using) and used max velocity's out of the ADI manual.
I compared them at 600m, and then looked at what range the bullet dropped below 600ft/lbs or 30 MOA as a max range. All were 200m zero. 10 mph crosswind. Drop and drift measured in MOA.
25-06, 117SST, Drop= 12.8, Drift= 6.1 Energy= 709 Max range 680m
6.5-06 140 amax, Drop= 11.9 Drift= 4.2 Energy= 1124 Max range 950m
.270 150 SST Drop=13.1 Drift= 4.7 Energy= 1058 Max range 900m
.280 162 Amax Drop= 13.7 Drift= 4.1 Energy= 1184 Max range 920m
.308 168 Amax Drop= 16.3 Drift= 6.0 Energy= 890 Max range 800m
30-06 208 Amax Drop= 14.7 Drift= 4.2 Energy= 1435 Max range 900m
Interesting........:thumbsup:
Same! Have not had one that long but wish I changed sooner than I did.Quote:
Originally Posted by Toby
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What velocity?Quote:
Originally Posted by sniper80
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'm guessing the 6.5 hit the deer and killed it while the other projectiles shot the deer in theQuote:
Originally Posted by sniper80
Toe:D
Sent from my HUAWEI Y210-0100 using Tapatalk 2
You need an ant-acid for the wind!:sick:
Classic. As good as a bit of cricket on a Sunday arvo.
Dan M
Why would someone buy a new 270 or 25-06 when a 280 or 30-06 would do everything thing as good if not better for the same $$.
Because if we all had the same cal noone could have these awesome discussions :)Quote:
Originally Posted by PerazziSC3
I like adequate, adequate implies job done, no fuss, without it beating the crap out of me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Danny
As I said. I wanted to compare apples with apples. The 280 hardly has the powder capacity to make a 160gn+ projectile worth it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beavis
I haven't looked at data but I would imagine a 162grain from a 280 would be pushed at the same speed as a 150grain from the 270 at the same pressures. Same speed, better bc = more energy and less wind drift...
True but you wouldn't pic the shittest apples in the bunch... I'm pretty sure an A max spat out a 280 would be more than capable. A helluva lot more exciting than what .270 offers anyway. Your view may differ.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shearer
Out of curiosity, what is the best cal and projectile with best bc?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beavis
And if you rifle didn't shoot this magical bullet?
Who cares the amount of people shooting animals over 500m would be how many that it wouldn't matter what it was . . . .
Sent from my GT-I9300T using Tapatalk
50 :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Gibo
Ok should have narrowed that down to one thats practical for jo average :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Toby
Quote:
Originally Posted by R93
I used the max velocity quoted for each cartridge in the ADI manual for a 24" barrel. I realize that each one may be able to be pushed faster, but I was trying to get a reasonable comparison.
The OP was looking at .270 Win compared to 2506 Rem
I have, and use either/iether, there is nothing in NZ other than scrub bulls that I would not use my 2506 on inside 400m, but my velocities and projectiles are selected for the intended game, I run dual loads to suit: 117 Sierra Pro hunter at 3100 and 117 SST/110AB at 3250, it is my go to mountain rifle, Mk5 Wby Utralite,Truflite 25".
I also have a 270, M70 Winchester, there is nothing in NZ I would not use it on out to 500m, again, dual loads, 130 TTSX at 3250 AND 150 Sierra Pro Hunter/150 Berger at 3000, it sits in the locker and waits........it doesn't do much that the 2506 won't do- it really depends on intended purpose, the only advantage the .270 holds is with heavier stout bullets at close range on big tough animals, or soft heavy frangible bullets on big animals at really long ranges.
The average hunter/shooter will not notice the difference in terminal effect between them at any sensible range assuming range, shot selection and projectile choice are reasonable.
At unreasonable distance or paticularly tough critters, in the "planes trains and automobiles" catigory, neither is really it, got a 338 Lap for that. SMK or TTSX out of that stops anything, anytime.
Check the case capacities.Quote:
Originally Posted by PerazziSC3
I am not trying to champion the 270 or any other calibre. I am saying the 270 and 280 are so similar that to choose one over the other for huntig in nz is not a practical choice, rather an emotional one, as your reference to excitement illustrates.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beavis
At lighter projectile weights, they are similar in SD and BC, but the balance starts to tip in the .280 favour at 150gn/145gn and really shows at the heavier weights unavailable to the .270, the 175gn 7mm projectiles leave the .277 offerings for dead if hunting big game, huge SD and good BC, but the best avantage for the 7mm is the projectile range available to the handloader, add to that, if you have a .280 Rem, a simple ream job and you have .280 Ackley or Gibbs, then you can nearly match the mighty 7mm Mag, and can hunt stuff you simply should not with a .270 (yes, nearly every animal on the planet has been killed by someone with a .270, does not make it the smartest option.)Quote:
Originally Posted by Shearer
Is 25-06 a barrel burner?
True but people are getting all touchy about there being no difference between the cartridges, when there kind of is. If your gonna go long action and burn more powder and fret about 500m shots, then to me it only seems logical to go for a caliber with better bullets. Even if you only hunt normal ranges why not go for a more efficient round anyway? That's just how I look at it, I'm a pedantic cunt over things like that.Quote:
Originally Posted by tui_man2
Have used both. More recently bought a 270 and can't fault it mate. Yeah sure if you're target shooting then go buy a .338 or some hella big cal but for hunting medium/big game in NZ I can not fault the 270. Nice and flat, enough punch in the round to drop ANYTHING in hits and a huge range available in NZ. The ammo isn't horrendously expensive either. Every cal has is pros and cons but you asked our experiences and mine have been that it is robust and hard to fault in the field.
Sent from my Browning
Very hard to find a factory offering in .280 rem now from a major US or European rifle manufacturer. I use both the .25/06 and the .270, and find the .270 seems to have more knockdown on larger medium sized game.