nah they suck hard, if any of you out there have any classic rifles in 270 cal I will buy them off you at scrap prices.......and that's doing you a big favour :D
Printable View
nah they suck hard, if any of you out there have any classic rifles in 270 cal I will buy them off you at scrap prices.......and that's doing you a big favour :D
Curiosity got the better of me and I reinstalled Quickload. The 270 with loads based on 130 gn projectiles with "traditional powders" Win 760 and H4381 does indeed run at 12,000 psi at the muzzle (not much unburnt at 24"). At 22" the pressure is up to 13,500 and only 94% burnt. If you compare this with a "modern" tuned load of a 120 gn in something like 260 with N550, the muzzle pressure is 9500 psi with a 99% burn.
Spent all day plinking gongs with the 270 out to 500 comfortably with no dialing .:thumbsup:
110 gr barnes or even 110 gr sierra prohunter if you can,t afford barnes are real flat shooters that deck animals with little recoil as tetawa said do your bit and you can,t go wrong
It works just fine, and is a capable long range cartridge as well.
However, 260, 6.5CM, 7mm08 will all do everything the 270 does with the correct bulllet (Especially the 7mm08) and it will do it with a smaller case, less recoil, less noise, less muzzle blast, less powder use etc so i personally wouldnt bother getting one if im buying a gun, but if you already have one you can use it very effectively with the right loads etc
I just ran the numbers just for sake of interest.
I used max velocity's in the Hodgdon website and used the highest BC eldx bullet that these guns generally will stabilize to try and keep it consistent. and the range they still carry the 1000ftlb of energy to (just for comparison as i know they will kill under 1000 still easy provided your bullet can expand at that distance) and a 5mph 90deg crosswind
Note: i used 140gr data for 270 as they dont have 145gr data
260- 143 ELDX - 2796FPS- 1000Ftlb = 740 Yards @ 1775fps Supersonic (1350fps) until 1110 yards - 17.25MOA drop @ 735 yards - 1.75MOA wind
6.5CM - 143 ELDX - 2795FPS - 1000Ftlb = 735 Yards @ 1780fps Supersonic (1350fps) until 1110 yards - 17.25MOA drop @ 735 yards - 1.75MOA wind
270 - 145 ELDX - 3023FPS - - 1000Ftlb = 850Yards @ 1768fps Supersonic (1350fps) until 1200 yards - 18.75 MOA drop @ 850 yards - 2.0MOA wind
7mm08 - 162 ELDX - 2725FPS - 1000Ftlb = 840Yards @ 1675fps Supersonic (1350fps) until 1150 yards - 22.25 MOA drop @ 840 yards - 2.0MOA wind
You can probably get more distance out of all of these with different bullets like the LRAB etc but this is just to have a reasonable comparison out of factory available rifles.
Atmospherics used was just whatever it is today in Hamilton
I own a 6.5CM, 243, 308 , 300 win mag but almost always reach for the 308 as it does everything i need for general sub 500 yards shooting but i grab the 300 win mag if i know long shots are likely.
My first and only experience of a 270 was using an open sighted one a mate had.
Didn't fit too well belted me on the cheek made my eyes water using the open sights.
Had a Parker Hale 303 myself at the time.Using only the the best.
Then went too and still use a Winchester Featherweight in 30-06.
IMO the fit makes all the difference to the the experience.
A bad experience lasts a long time.
On paper 7x57,308,30-06,270 nothing in it for us joe blow averages.
But wouldn't it be boring if every post made was liked.
Every recommendation become gossip.
We wouldn't have Dundee stretching his barrel every time he shoots something.
Nothing to laugh at.
And if I did have a 270 it would be better than anything else.
There are some better bullets in .270 so I guess it sucks less in 2019 than ever. I rummaged through all my old brass today and I have a surprising amount of .270 brass. I'm sure I only owned one? Her name was Christine. I wanted to go Tahr hunting and my short barreled .308 Spanish Mauser was sub optimal. @Carlsen Highway offered to help me defraud my then girlfriend and buy Christine without her knowing. Christine was a BSA Majestic in .270. It had been lightened and had the barrel cut down at some point. The but stock was wafer thin. I fired six rounds through it and then walked away horrified. In an act of charity, Carlsen Highway traded me in a straight swap, a 25-06 Ruger for Christine. Then Christine proceeded to try and kill him. Headspacing issues. The barrel was on sideways and she had no rifling to speak of.
The muzzle flash was something to behold in the late afternoon. I think it had a 16 inch barrel.
All the posts in this thread are in vein, 6.5 Creedmoor is all you need isn't it! ;)
@Tentman So just to clarify, are you saying that less muzzle pressure gives lower recoil and muzzle blast than that of a load with the same speed but a higher muzzle pressure?
Less muzzle pressure won't lower recoil (can't , laws of physics wouldn't allow it) but it will reduce muzzle blast, which is a big part of a physiologically induced flinch (IMO)
If the rifle in question isn't a piece of shit, then shooting it will generally be a positive experience regardless of the calibre.
Most modern factory rifles are way too light and unbalanced, with cruddy recoil pads.
If I was gonna go factory in .270 (or any other calibre) I'd pick up an older L-series Sako, a BSA, a Brno M21/VZ, an Orbendorf M98, a Sauer 202 or a Tikka LSA 55 (they've got very nice triggers). Something with a long barrel and a bit of heft.
Any one of those will easily last another few lifetimes with good use.
I really like my 24" barreled 270. I like that you can fit 5 rounds in the mag compared to 3 in most magnums.
I think it would be better if it was a 280AI... but for now the 270 shoots good and is easy to get factory ammo for.
I feel the 270 is a bit let down by the standard 1in10 twist rate and the lack of match bullets.
Better yet a 280
270s a awesome choice for NZ , providing one knows what he's doing....
but if your dick is small maybe a magnum is better
It seems the 270 is caught up between bad performance from poor ammo 40+years ago (CAC forestry ammo did them no favours supposedly) and now everyone thinking that 350 yards is close enough to chuck rocks and you've got to have a calibre that can slay them miles away.
I always thought of the 270 as quite adequate (never owned one but that's changing) out to 350m'ish on deer. If you wanted to hit things and make them stay hit out past that you needed a 7mm rem mag or bigger. Not many 300cal magnums in my areas back in the day.
In saying that I did know of a couple of 338wm's back then and they did have the punch to reach out and touch things a long way away.
a couple of friends now have 300wsm's and really like them for that reason. If its big or far away it doesn't matter.
Before range finders no one had a clue how far 350m was. Guestimates, especially in variable light and terrain and with no frame of reference are all over the place.
270 and its twin the 25-06 are the two overbore rounds in the 06 line up. You get a hint more noise and with the 270 a hint more recoil than you really need for the terminal performance. They both work just fine. They are 280s inbred cousins.
270 never got a bad reputation. It had a ridiculously good reputation it never deserved. The South Island can be very conformist and people mock each other in a competitive fashion as a matter of routine. 270 was the caliber your mates would not take the piss out of. A backlash was inevitable, especially on the internet where being a competitive beta male with a big ego gets you nowhere.
270 is as good as it ever was, just not as good as the legend. 280 and better mates solves its shortcomings.
@Tussock I agree with you and I also don't.
I always thought there was nothing wrong with it nor did several of my friends that shot them. I was always aware of the 3006 v 270 preference with several of my schoolmates and their dads.
BUT reading on this forum there are quite a few who had bad experiences with 270's and just don't like them hence my reference to the CAC and other bad ammo.
gundoc posted velocity figures for the NZFS ammo and it was pretty poor. If that's the case its no wonder people got the shits with it.
Nothing sucks about a 270 - but I can’t compare it with more modern options as I didn’t need one - I started with a 303 at 16 and quickly changed to a 30-06 for 4 years - I shot most animals in NZ with the 30-06 - then changed to a 270 when I thought I would be shooting chamois and tahr every year. I shot a lot of reds with the 270 and still use it when I hunt for reds. I was always scrawny - noise and recoil never bothered me while off-hand shooting - but I put 20 rounds through it on a range about a year ago and it nearly tore my shoulder off - the recoil pad on the Brno is stuffed and I have lost a lot of muscle mass - I used 130 grain Norma soft points for years and then changed to 130 grain Winchester silver tips - both had fantastic performance. I thought it was too fast on fallow so changed to a 243 with better results. I have seen a lot of animals go down with a 303, 30.06, 7*57, 308 and 270 - they didn’t give a rats arse about what hit them because they were all walking or falling dead!
Worth remembering that 270 is a zillion years old and chambered in every rifle imaginable and so suffers from the same loading fatigue 6.5x55 does. They have to consider the old actions. Liability and what not. Buy a Sako 75 in .270 (due to the stock shape) and stoke up 140g to 150g Hornady projectiles and I can't see what you could find to complain about. I do think in light straight stocks it has a sharp/fast recoil that is unpleasant.
It was so cool it became lame and now I find out it is actually considered lame I might buy one.
I missed your style of writing Tim. Welcome back.
Nail on the head there Tim, my a7 270 kicked pretty firmly but my finnbear 270 is an absolute pussycat and one of the softest shooting rifles I've owned. Stock design and barrel length have a lot to do with "perceived" recoil. I am shooting almost the exact same load in both rifles only different by .1 of a grain and seating depth and they are very different rifles to shoot. You would swear the finnbear was a lesser caliber if you didn't know.
The 270 will always suck for me , just never liked it. used it, had a couple but never felt the love. The 280 on the other hand always appealed to me and now with the high bc bullets in heavy weights why bother with the 270. Right now i'm happy with my 30/284 till i get the itch to try something different. The 270 was very much an advertising success just like the creedmore hence why they are still around and made in lots of rifles. The 280/260 on the other hand where marketed badly and hence they are not as readily available . Which is a shame as they are both very good cartridges .
I've owned two .270's. It was the very first deer calibre I owned (Winchester M70 Ranger) and shot a few animals with it, but sold it (more to do with the rifle than calibre. Last .270 I owned was in a Blaser but sold it to pay for my trip to USA back in 2009.
It's a great calibre, but despite owning two of them, personally I'm not a fan of it, though I'd be tempted by a .270 Weatherby.
For me, 7mm is where it's at. I like the higher BC 7mm projectiles and have just shot my Kimber Hunter .280 Ackley for the first time yesterday, using the 160gr Trophy Bonded Tipped projectiles, and from my first range shoot this rifle will be a definate keeper.
It's a shame that no major manufacturer has produced a .270 with a faster twist than 1:10, considering that there are some higher BC bullets coming out. I like the look of the 170gr Berger Elite Hunter, they have a wickedly high BC...
...A .270 Weatherby Mag fitted with a custom fast twist barrel and shooting the above mentioned projectiles would be an interesting proposition.
I present to you.... The 1:8" 27Nosler :) I feed it 170 Elite Hunters
Attachment 108099
Very nice too. I assume straight neck down of the 28 Nosler?
What velocity with the 170's?