Explain this: 270 wins the poll

[roklok]

I no longer own a .270, I re-barreled mine to a .280 Ackley, which I prefer. However the 270 is an excellent cartridge and has been for 100 years. I am puzzled by the premise of this thread. Maybe the .270 isn't as popular in the African Hunting context, but it is and has been an extremely popular cartridge in the USA and for good reason. I killed my first Dall ram with my .270 handloaded with 130 grain SST at a lasered 584 yards, then a week later loaned it to a buddy who killed a 62 inch bull moose with my 150 Grain Grand Slam handloads. One of these days maybe I will pick another up, I still have dies, brass, and bullets.

 

[MS 9x56]

A 280 is a great caliber, it’s pretty much a 7x64 brenneke. The only reason my son shoots the latter? Prettier guns.

Not just prettier,better.

 

[BFaucett]

Yep. In those days in France .30/06 and .308 Win were classified "Category 1: Military Weapon" and it was simply impossible to buy them.

As to the .300 Mag, I remember it as being considered in those days generally as an "African caliber" too powerful for France, and very expensive to feed.

I am surprised that you do not mention the 7x64 in your reply, it really was dominant in the 1980's and 1990's in France, and I would have expected that dominance to continue, as it is a VERY useful caliber due to its ability to use heavier bullets (the perceived Achilles' heel of the .270 Win).

The .280 Rem: Remington's other market mis-read (beside the 6 mm Rem)

The .280 Rem (.28/06) tried in 1957 to replicate in the US the 7x64 european success, and I am not sure that the .270 Win was too solidly anchored in the market that it could not have worked. After all, the .280 was positioned as being able to fire .30/06 class bullets at .270 Win (.27/06) class velocity. However, Remington introduced the .280 Rem in the Model 740 semi-automatic rifle and the Model 760 pump-action rifle. That put the two calibers in two different markets. And to add insult to injury, Remington also initially offered lower pressure, hence lower velocity, ammo (compared to .270 Win) that would function well in these actions. This was another market mis-read, after the 1955 abortive launch of the .244 Rem. And when Remington introduced the 7 mm Rem Mag in 1962, it killed the .280 Rem, notwithstanding the fact that the 7 mm Rem Mag is nothing but a loud .280 Rem, when the .280 Rem fires ammo loaded at the full 60,000 PSI SAAMI spec. Try as they might to rename the .280 Rem the "7mm Express", as they renamed the .244 Rem the 6 mm Rem, the perception damages were done. As they say, "you never get a second chance to make a first impression", and both 6 mm Rem and .280 Rem retain "also ran" status to this day, never mind that technically both 6 mm Rem and .280 Rem are technically better cartridges than the run-away commercial successes .243 Win and .270 Win.

A few years ago I would have said that the .280 Rem is probably a more versatile safari cartridge than the .270 Win with loads in the 140 gr to 165 gr range, but the advances in bullet technology have really changed the paradigm, and I am not thinking about the .270 150 gr slug here, but about the 130 gr. In particular I find the 130 gr TTSX absolutely deadly, all the way to large, tough PG and although I did consider both 7x64 and .280 Rem for my wife PG rifle, the .270 Win won easily: where do you find 7x64 ammo in the US, and where do you find .280 Rem ammo in Africa? Or even the US !?!?

I think the .270 Win is hard to beat for a large variety game but I've never owned or used one. The .270 certainly has a proven track record. I just never warmed up to the .270 Win for some reason. I probably read too much Elmer Keith and not enough Jack O'Connor back in the day.

I'm a fan of the classic cartridges that were (and are) used in Africa. For me, they just add a little romance and nostalgia. After reading some articles by Finn Aagaard years ago about using a 7x64 Brenneke in Africa, I really wanted a 7x64. I knew Ruger once made a small run of M77 rifles (the push feed version; pre Mk II) in 7x64 but I gave up trying to find one. This was back in the pre-Internet days.

So, back in the 2000s, I stumbled across a new Ruger M77 Mk II in .280 Remington at my local gun store. I figured that would be a good substitute for the 7x64 in my little rifle collection so I grabbed it. I also figured that Ruger probably wouldn't continue to chamber the M77 in .280 Rem.

I really like the rifle and the .280 cartridge but I freely admit that I've never hunted anything with it. Too many rifles and not enough hunting opportunities for this city boy. Maybe one of these days I'll poke a feral hog with it here in Texas.

And besides, this thread gives me the opportunity to post a few pics of the rifle. Don't most of us like to see pics of each other's rifles?

Cheers! Bob F.


Stainless Ruger M77 Mk II in .280 Remington customized by Lone Star Armory (Todd Johnson; deceased) of Pearland, Texas. Action, barrel, and bottom metal have been vapor honed to a matte finish. Pillar bedded in factory synthetic stock. Bolt and extractor jeweled. Bolt lugs lapped; action polished; extractor tuned. Trigger tuned and adjusted to 3.5 lb pull. It's not fancy but I like it.

Classic Cartridge: .280 Remington
by Craig Boddington
https://www.craigboddington.com/hunting-tips/classic-cartridge-280-remington

Behind the Bullet: .280 Remington
by Philip Massaro posted on August 25, 2017
https://www.americanhunter.org/content/behind-the-bullet-280-remington/

Head to Head: .280 Remington vs. .280 Ackley Improved
by Philip Massaro posted on June 17, 2020
https://www.americanhunter.org/content/head-to-head-280-remington-vs-280-ackley-improved/

 

[CoElkHunter]

The 270 produces around 19lbs of recoil I believe? Maybe 21? That’s a fairly stout push for what little work it does.

7x57= 13
7x64 = 16-17

16.5 130gr to 17.0 150gr ft pounds of recoil in a 8.0lb rifle according to Chuck Hawkes recoil chart. Too much for me! I’m buying a Creedmoor! LOL

 

[Red Leg]

At last count l own 5 .270’s. I have used but one of them extensively and the last one will likely gets its opportunity this fall. Though a 7x65R is my current favorite dear rifle it is all bout the rifle rather than the loading. The .270 was and remains the perfect North American rifle chambering.

 

[MS 9x56]

16.5 130gr to 17.0 150gr ft pounds of recoil in a 8.0lb rifle according to Chuck Hawkes recoil chart. Too much for me! I’m buying a Creedmoor! LOL

I thought that 21 figure was a bit high.

 

[ve7poi]

I believe all the elk I've killed with the .270 were substantially larger than any of the kudu I've taken. Im quite certain the .270 could proficiently take kudu as well. I'd chose a 150 Nosler partition and not worry about it at all.

Does quiet well.

 

[ve7poi]

At last count l own 5 .270’s. I have used but one of them extensively and the last one will likely gets its opportunity this fall. Though a 7x65R is my current favorite dear rifle it is all bout the rifle rather than the loading. The .270 was and remains the perfect North American rifle chambering.

I own one a pre 64 built in 1948 still a tack drive loves 140tsx. It did its job very well on hunt in Namibia with Zana Botes

 

[Creigh]

I own one a pre 64 built in 1948 still a tack drive loves 140tsx. It did its job very well on hunt in Namibia with Zana Botes

A fellow hunter has one of the last model 70s, (.375 h&h Delux), built in the US. Am I right Winchester moved manufacturing to Portugal? His pride and joy.

Coincidentally, he hunted for over twenty years with a model 70 .243 before he found out it was the worst cartridge in the world. *wink.

 

[colorado]

I've read on numerous occasions where people say the 270 is as useless as a 243. Too much recoil for the ordinance sent down range. Hence my surprise at the outcome.

I love the 270 Win have killed dozens of elk, deer and 9 bears with mine. In my opinion (putting on my asbestos suit) it hits as hard as the 30-06 down range, recoils less, and shoots flatter. My pet load is a 150g Partition at 3000 fps.

 

[Sideshow]

The 270 produces around 19lbs of recoil I believe? Maybe 21? That’s a fairly stout push for what little work it does.

7x57= 13
7x64 = 16-17

My first 2 rifles where a 270 Churchill followed by a CF2 BSA. Sold both because of the recoil. Yet I could shoot a Lee 303 no worries always felt that the recoil of the 270 was more a sharp slap where as the 303 was more a lovely shove. That being said I did not hesitate to hunt with a 270 when in Texas. Taking a nice white tail doe. Maybe age has harden me up
That CF2 really did have a stock shape that suxed balls

A quick look on the guntrader sale sight here in the UK
147, 270 for sale.
111, FS 3006
647, FS 308
582, FS 243
102, FS 303
537, FS Manbuns....Creedmoor
11, FS 7X57

 

[colorado]

The reason I didn't buy a 7mm Rem Mag in 1968 when I bought my BDL in 270 was concern about the recoil. Now I shoot a 500 Jeffery lol Never lost an animal with the 270, most dropped like they were hit by lightning. I always placed my shots well even when jump shooting elk in the black timber.

 

[sgt_zim]

.270 too much recoil .....LOLOLOL

A 150 gr pill out of a 270 has the same recoil as a 150 out of a 30-06. Except with a 30-06, I can upgrade to 180 or 200 gr. So why waste time with a 270? They occupy the same useless niche as 243 - a solution in search of a problem. Right, @Bob Nelson 35Whelen ?

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

A 150 gr pill out of a 270 has the same recoil as a 150 out of a 30-06. Except with a 30-06, I can upgrade to 180 or 200 gr. So why waste time with a 270? They occupy the same useless niche as 243 - a solution in search of a problem. Right, @Bob Nelson 35Whelen ?

@sgt_zim
Me thinks that you are correct.
If'n Jack O'Connor didn't praise the living daylights out of it it mightn't have been popular.
To me if Remington had loaded the 270 to its FULL POTENTIAL instead of strangling it at birth it would have been more popular. It a far more versatile cartridge in my book.
Bob

 

[BFaucett]

@sgt_zim
...<snip>...
To me if Remington had loaded the 270 to its FULL POTENTIAL instead of strangling it at birth it would have been more popular. It a far more versatile cartridge in my book.
Bob

I think you meant the 280 (280 Remington)??

Cheers! Bob F.

 

[Sarg]

@sgt_zim
Me thinks that you are correct.
If'n Jack O'Connor didn't praise the living daylights out of it it mightn't have been popular.
To me if Remington had loaded the 270 to its FULL POTENTIAL instead of strangling it at birth it would have been more popular. It a far more versatile cartridge in my book.
Bob

Do you mean .280/7mm Express Bob ?

If so 100% agree, faster twist .270 would be ok but why even invent the caliber .277 - 7mm is there & great - 7x64 is also great cartridge, just stop there !

Unfortunately I have a couple because I wanted the rifles & ended up being in .270Win, it works but ???

Now the .270 Weatherby for some reason kills like Thors Hammer !

Had multiple clients over the years use it on Deer Thar Chamois even Donkeys/Horse drop right there but way different kettle of fish that.

 

[BFaucett]

...

If so 100% agree, faster twist .270 would be ok but why even invent the caliber .277 - 7mm is there & great - 7x64 is also great cartridge, just stop there !

....

Back in the 1920s - pre WWII, I think Winchester may have been worried about Mauser Model 1893 rifles in 7x57 (maybe many souvenirs from the Spanish-American War in 1898) being rechambered to the new cartridge if Winchester had introduced it as a 7mm. Hence designing it as a .277 avoided that potential problem.

Just my two cents... Cheers! Bob F.

 

[Wyatt Smith]

It’s funny where people decide to separate their calibers.
Some will say why have a 243 the 25-06 will do everything better, others say why have a 25-06 the 270 will do everything better, the the same for 280, 308, 30-06, 338, and all the way up to the 600 NE.
There is no hard rule, use an appropriate caliber and bullet, and poke a hole in the right place and you will see good results.

 

[TERMINATOR]

.270 too much recoil .....LOLOLOL

Thank you. Light recoil for the amount of FPS you get is a virtue of the .270.
I own 2 different .270s For a long time it was my only rifle for whitetail, mule deer, pronghorn and elk.

I eventually moved to a .300 WBY for Elk and Plains game in Africa, but honestly a .270 with tough bonded bullets would be just fine for me on African plains game until we started talking about Eland. But I would be using the 150 grain bullets in Africa. And of course J.O.C. killed everything you could kill with one until you got to DG where he loved the .375 H&H

Now my .270s are left for Mule Deer and Pronghorn (especially now that I am old and the mountains got bigger I just love my Melvin Forbes ULA Model 24) and most people would be better served with a .270 than any "magnum" for those species.

And yes...I grew up reading and idolizing J.O.C. so that is why I got my first .270. But the fact that sh1t kept dying every time I pulled the trigger is why I fell in love with it and stayed with it exclusively for a very long time..

Now my favorite is.....300 Wby...and .416 Rem...and 30-06...and 7mm08 and....358 Win
I can live with those. Well and a .375 H&H....and a .257 Wby and....

Never mind...shoot what makes you happy and the one you can put through the lungs every time and shoot within whatever range you know you can put it through the lungs every time