Happy 100 .270!

Let’s put it this way, the 270 is last century cartridge,when there was no rangefinder , not flash optics and a limited choice of good bc ammo available .the 6.5 creedmoor is this century cartridge, where efficient bc pills take over, their drop can be compensated with a good dial up or reticle scope and the distance accurately measured. In a 100 years times our kids will be shooting deer with laser guns if the greens allow it.

By the way, I would actually rather celebrate Jack o Connor who did everything to promote the cartridge. I love his books.

When I'm ready to calibre up, it'll be to a .270 very possibly because
A: What I've read about it, it makes a lot of sense
B:It'll give me a matching pair in the safe, 2 x Horizons...what's not too like :thumbsup:

It's always served me well. Love the 145 eldx's in mine. Hits hard, shoot flat and brings home the veni without any fuss.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zedrex

When I'm ready to calibre up, it'll be to a .270 very possibly because
A: What I've read about it, it makes a lot of sense
B:It'll give me a matching pair in the safe, 2 x Horizons...what's not too like :thumbsup:

---

Have you considered joining the Church ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by turtleSO

Have you considered joining the Church ?

---

I'm already a pastafarian, does this church of which you speak accept cross denomination? :D

A quote from Derry Girls that I think applies to Jenny and
270s... Sister George Michael says "You will go far in life, Jenny, but you will not be liked."
https://youtu.be/L9SVZ86nlUk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whanahuia

As they said in the blog, Give the 270 the same projectiles, twist rate and powders, and it still outperforms the creed, and arguably the PRC if you are going with a PRC because of barrel length.

---

To be fair that can be said if anything. If everything is equal more powder means more performance. In the general things we measure. The creedmoor would still be lower in recoil and more efficient.

And saying it's better than the PRC if it was in a shorter barrel is kind of a yarn.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stocky

To be fair that can be said if anything. If everything is equal more powder means more performance. In the general things we measure. The creedmoor would still be lower in recoil and more efficient.

And saying it's better than the PRC if it was in a shorter barrel is kind of a yarn.

---

I dont think so. All things being equal the PRC just manages to match the 270 in heavier weights of 140-150 gr. It's anaemic with lighter weights. What people often use to justify this is shorter barrel lengths. But so far every PRC ive seen over a chrono with a short barrel has struggled to reach Creedmore velocities.

Factory ammo comparison.
https://ammo.com/ballistics/6.5-prc-ballistics

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Friwi

Let’s put it this way, the 270 is last century cartridge,when there was no rangefinder , not flash optics and a limited choice of good bc ammo available .the 6.5 creedmoor is this century cartridge, where efficient bc pills take over, their drop can be compensated with a good dial up or reticle scope and the distance accurately measured.

---

Funnily enough if you used dial up and rangefinder..suppressor ,bipod etc etc the old .45/70 could well be just as good too.

Some of the negative comments here are making me sad. I can't believe so many people are so disrespectful to one of the greatest cartridges ever produced.
I've owned a 270 since I got my first one back in 1996 and I don't think I'll be without one.
Please try and be nicer.

No

Thank you Rumpy I would have another every day of the week - should never have sold my Tikka 690 in .270 but we do these stupid things - they just work as a caliber - no need to rave about it just shoot deer

Well done to the .270 somehow I have never owned one had one on laybuy once but changed to a .308 at the last minute. Have a 270wsm though would have bought a. 270 but it was cheap at the time.

Not bad for a near copy of the 7x64 which came out in 1917.
GPM.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whanahuia

I dont think so. All things being equal the PRC just manages to match the 270 in heavier weights of 140-150 gr. It's anaemic with lighter weights. What people often use to justify this is shorter barrel lengths. But so far every PRC ive seen over a chrono with a short barrel has struggled to reach Creedmore velocities.

Factory ammo comparison.
https://ammo.com/ballistics/6.5-prc-ballistics

---

Your links broken in what way are you quantifying that the PRC "just matchs" a 270?

For another comparison

A 22 creedmoor at max loads will shoot an 88 eld m at 3300fps
A fast twist 270 will shoot a 170 Berger (the highest bc projectile available at 2900fps.

For the projectiles to maintain the 1800fps approximate required for proper expansion the 270 runs out of steam at around 760m whilst the 22 creed runs out at 860m. The 22 creedmoor also wins in wind and does so with around half the recoil.

In factory ammo the most suitable longer range load for the 270 is the factory 145 eld at 2970

Or the 6.5 PRC equivalent a 143 at 2960
The PRC maintains 1800fps until 750m whilst the 270 only holds it until 670m. With reloading this gap widens with a PRC being able to reach closer to 900-1000m.

Yes factory ammo is slower but that's primarily a factory ammo issue and applies to both the 270 and 6.5prc.

I use the extreme end because any difference in close is way more than needed anyway so isn't really relevant. It's all trivial anyway as almost every calibre with the appropriate projectile is capable inside 300m