Resurrecting the 270 Win

[Alexandro Faria]

So the following is just for interest sake and I want to hear what everyone has to say on the matter:

So everyone raves about the various 6.5mm's, I completely get why, to be honest. I'm also well aware that the BCs of most .277 bullets are rather mediocre and the slow twist barrels associated with 270 rifles don't help.

However, I've noticed quite a few high BC .277 bullets around (150-180gr) and I was wondering what the general consensus is regarding what impact this might have on the competition between the various 6.5's and 270's? While I speak under correction, I think the highest BC I've seen was around 0.7 for a 180gr projectile which seems mighty useful if stabilized and launched with a MZ of between 2800-3000ft/s.

Interested to hear what everyone has to say!

 

[Alistair]

Hmm. It'd be a specialist tool though. 180s will need a 1-8 twist barrel I would think, and probably an abnormally long throat, which immediately makes it a custom job, and you'd probably need a 26"+ tube to have any chance of hitting 3000. Even 2800 is shifting some with a 180.

As a dedicated comp gun (Practical or maybe even F class or the like) it'd be possible and probably fairly competitive, but when you're spending big bucks on a custom rifle, why limit yourself on projectiles, sacrifice a bit of BC and lumber yourself with an inefficient, old cartridge with a substantial powder load?

Don't get me wrong, I love the .270win. It was my first rifle, I do all my hunting with one and to this day I shoot 100+ rounds of it a month, but if I was building a LR comp gun? Not a chance. Even .308 is probably better in that arena, let alone various 6.5 and 7mm options.

My view, appreciate the .270 for what it is, a brilliant, flat shooting, mild mannered hunting cartridge for medium size game. Don't try and make it something it was never designed to be, it'll always just be a compromise.

 

[Rum Runner]

I won my model 700 .270 at a county fair in 1993...love that gun. So much, I'm taking it to Tanzania in a few months for PG (a recommendation made my outfitter). I shoot 140 g TSX @2,800 fps, a killer combination! No need for 6.5mm...

 

[bruce moulds]

for hunting, 6.5mm is a step down from the 270.
far better to look at the 280 rem for more versatility.
just as flat shooting and a little more powerful when loaded to the same pressure.
also, just as easy to shoot as the 270 win.
both good, but more of the same thing with the 280.
another is the 7x64 brenneke.
bruce,

 

[sgt_zim]

a good choice for a 1-gun-hunter; or if it's your first gun in a collection which is going to be acquired subsequent to being a 1-gun-hunter. and especially if you don't plan on reloading.

otherwise, in the same weight bullets, it recoils like a 30-06. not bad recoil, but why sacrifice the versatility you'd get out of a 30-06?

I agree with @bruce moulds - 280 Rem is a better choice.

IMO, "flat shooting" is way over-rated. if you understand the concept of Maximum Point Blank Range, then pretty much all modern cartridges are "flat shooting" inside about 300 yards. and in all honesty, if you aren't practicing past 300 yards, pretty routinely at that, you've no business hunting at distances that far, either.

reloading choices for the 264 and 284 bullets are staggering. reloading choices for the 270 are a bit more limited. I've said it before - if 280 Rem had come out before 270 Win, the latter would be an oddity today, a footnote.

to each his own, but I've never been a fan.

 

[TMac]

The 6.5 craze in the states was driven by LR competition and shooting rags, IMO. Now that there are smaller calibers, with similar exterior ballistics easily available, many competitors are moving that direction. Turns out recoil matters... Had there been very heavy .277 pills commonly available with barrel twists to match, I am sure they would have had their day competitively, losing out to easier to shoot calibers. Essentially, there are better choices to 1,000 ish yards, and better choices if you need to reach out more, for target shooting.

For hunting, in my experience, a very heavy mostly lead .277 bullet is lethal. Used them on game, up to and including our Elk. What one may sensibility do with a 160-180 gr. or so .277, one could likely do with a 140-156 .264, or there abouts. Use mono metal bullets and fewer grains are needed. So the 270 is far from dead for hunting as far as I am concerned. Last two bull elk we took, in 2018, both fell to 130 gr. TTSX’s. DRT.

 

[JPbowhunter]

Well in Australia it's certainly not dead. 6.5 aren't legal for most deer in my state so lots of guys use a 270 with 130 or 150gn.

 

[bruce moulds]

I like the 270 and the 280, and have shot out 2 barrels in each.
now I just like the 280 a little more.
I also feel it has a little less recoil than a 30/06 with bullets of similar sectional density.
when I say flat for a hunting rifle I mean out to 300 yds.
bruce.

 

[TMac]

I like the 270 and the 280, and have shot out 2 barrels in each.
now I just like the 280 a little more.
I also feel it has a little less recoil than a 30/06 with bullets of similar sectional density.
when I say flat for a hunting rifle I mean out to 300 yds.
bruce.

I shoot a 25-06, 270 and 280 the most. 280 is also my fav. One loves 145gr. LRX’s, the other thrives on a steady diet of 175gr. partitions.

 

[sgt_zim]

Well in Australia it's certainly not dead. 6.5 aren't legal for most deer in my state so lots of guys use a 270 with 130 or 150gn.

Nothing like having uninformed politicians writing game laws.

Swedes and Norwegians have been killing moose, stag, and caribou with 6.5x55 for more than a century.

 

[Mike Van Horn]

They may have 270, 180 grain bullets, their like the 190 grain 28 caliber bullet, what gun can you shoot they out of?
Bullet makers right now are going on the theory that if we make a bullet with high enough BC's someone will make a gun to shoot it in competition
As far as the 270, if Remington knew how to market anything the 280 would have passed the 270 and 6.5 creedmore would be in a distant second to the 260. But even as popular as the creedmore is Remington still can't figure out how to market the .260

 

[bruce moulds]

They may have 270, 180 grain bullets, their like the 190 grain 28 caliber bullet, what gun can you shoot they out of?
Bullet makers right now are going on the theory that if we make a bullet with high enough BC's someone will make a gun to shoot it in competition
As far as the 270, if Remington knew how to market anything the 280 would have passed the 270 and 6.5 creedmore would be in a distant second to the 260. But even as popular as the creedmore is Remington still can't figure out how to market the .260

exactly.

 

[sgt_zim]

Agreed. 260 is a superior platform. I think there isn't any questioning that. Remington is full of retards, apparently.

And 280 gives up little ground to 7mm RM, and both are better than 270. And maybe that's why Rem doesn't push the 280 - they're already the king of the 284 market with the 7RM.

 

[TMac]

They may have 270, 180 grain bullets, their like the 190 grain 28 caliber bullet, what gun can you shoot they out of?

.277 180 gr Woodleigh Weldcore Bonded. Within a very few 1/1,000ths of an inch as long as their 220 gr .308 bullet and a very similar SD. Double Tap sells them as loaded ammo. It’s not a high BC bullet play at all, their soft nose line, makes for a shorter bullet by weight vs a high BC profile form factor. Probably why they work, I suspect, in many 1 in 10 twist 270’s. It’s what I’d call a round nose, should shoot it fine for most, but that’s a guess on my part.

 

[TMac]

Agreed. 260 is a superior platform. I think there isn't any questioning that. Remington is full of retards, apparently...

The 6.5CM was designed for LR competitors, where it excels, despite being a slightly slower round. It’s that longer neck, designed to grip heavy match bullets, with a fairly long ogive, that distinguish it. Along with a 30 degree shoulder that is said to help accuracy. So I suppose I do respectfully pose this question relative to the 260.

They each have their place. I shoot a 260 and love it, it is the superior hunting platform imo. It was my choice for my youngest son’s first BG rifle. But the 6.5CM wins for target shooting at very LR imo.

 

[Red Leg]

Doesn't need resurrecting. One of the most perfect balanced things ever created. I own three .270's - probably room for a fourth. A well constructed modern 140 gr bullet makes it one of the best choices for deer and antelope-sized game ever created - ever. All four of mine shoot sub-MOA with 140's (Steyr/ Ruger/ custom). Only target shooting that I have ever done much of was service rifle (30-06, 7.62. & 5.56). Since I don't target shoot with it, and have no plans to brain an elephant with one, I can't conceive of a use for anything heavier than the 140 - though I admit to shooting several red deer and boar with Norma 150's back in the day.

 

[Saul]

I used to be pretty infatuated with the .270 win, but I got over that once I found the .280 AI, which IMO is one of the finest hunting cartridges of all time.

Jack O'Conner spent a lot of time talking up the .270 as the ultimate sheep hunting round, but the 26 Nosler shoots a lot flatter through wind and hits a whole lot harder, though with more recoil.

 

[Velo Dog]

Good day my fellow Hunters,

I agree with Red Leg that the .270 Winchester, shooting 140 grain bullets, is one of the best cartridges for hunting deer / antelope (and sheep) sized game.
IMO, this cartridge is not very well suited to heavy bullets as, most of the rifles made for it have (as others already have pointed out) too slow of rifling twists to stabilize longer bullets.
I agree with those who say the .280 is better for that (and I will add that, the 7 mm Magnum a little better yet, especially with 175 grainers).

Well anyway, over the years I’ve owned the .270 Winchester caliber in assorted bolt action rifles, including a dreaded Pre-64 Model 70 Winchester.
With 130 grain spitzers I’ve shot multiple caribou, black tail deer, coyotes, red fox, jack rabbits and ground squirrels (Alaska, Nevada and California).

Also, I’ve shot a caribou with 150 grain Hornady spire point bullets but, these proved to end the animal’s life a bit slower with a double lung shot than my multiple experiences have shown with 130 grainers.
I had to shoot the animal twice to put it down.
My 2nd shot was a lengthwise “Texas heart shot” and very effective.
One animal is however hardly a conclusive test.
And in all fairness, I’ve had the same 2nd shot required on a double lung shot caribou when, using a .375 with 235 grain Speer semi-spitzers.
So, there IS that.
Any way, I’m under the impression that the .270 is best suited to lighter bullets.

Moving right along, a hunting companion of mine brought his beautiful custom made little Mauser 98 in .270 to Namibia, back when neither of us had ever been there before.
He wisely chose 140 grain A-Frames as his bullet.
This was my first experience (and his) witnessing what that bullet is capable of.
It is IMO the very best premium soft widely available in the world today.

Anyway, his .270 so loaded, turned out to be quite excellent (no surprise there) on almost all his animals, up to and including Kudu.
As is typical with hunting, not all shot angles were perfectly broadside either.
It tuned out to be a bit weak on a Burchell’s zebra stallion but again, in all fairness, his first shot was not placed well.
Three more shots were required to finish the animal.
In that one case, a larger caliber / shooting a heavier bullet would have very likely ended the situation quickly with his 2nd shot.
After the first hit (gut shot) the wounded beast was then galloping off, in a slightly quartering away to the left angle, as if on fire.
The 2nd shot seemed to not impress the zebra whatsoever and it kept up its galloping.
When located again, it requires two more shots to end it.
(This is where cartridges like the 9.3x62 / 286 grain and .375 H&H / 300 grain really shine).

That all said and at the end of the day, I would still recommend the .270 for anyone intending to hunt N. American deer size game / world wide deer, antelopes and sheep of similar size as well, especially in open geography / sparse foliage where, longer shots would be likely.
However, I would also recommend a hand full of other calibers for same as well.
As an illustration, when the Heavens parted and the sunshine of enlightenment shone upon my thick skull, I suddenly realized that, anything I could consistently hit with my .270 and 130 grain spitzers, I could also consistently hit with my .30-06 and 150 grain spitzers.
Soon after this awakening, I sold my last .270 and perhaps will never own another one.
Maybe I will will but it is not very likely.

I now stand ready before my attackers,
Velo Dog.

 

[walk-in]

If the new 6.5s are still around in 80 years our grandkids can have this discussion. The 270 is proven and, with modern bullets, better than it ever was back when Jack O'Connor was writing about it. I use 140 gr. Nosler Accubonds in mine. I don't find it to be a "compromise" in any way. Every moose, caribou, and bear I've shot with it is dead, and so far nothing has required a 2nd shot. The 1st moose I killed with it was ranged at 396 yards. I killed a caribou at just slightly less than that. Admittedly, the only bear I've killed with it was a black bear. I'll be taking it sheep hunting this year.

 

[Red Leg]

Good day my fellow Hunters,

I agree with Red Leg that the .270 Winchester, shooting 140 grain bullets, is one of the best cartridges for hunting deer / antelope (and sheep) sized game.
IMO, this cartridge is not very well suited to heavy bullets as, most of the rifles made for it have (as others already have pointed out) too slow of rifling twists to stabilize longer bullets.
I agree with those who say the .280 is better for that (and I will add that, the 7 mm Magnum a little better yet, especially with 175 grainers).

Well anyway, over the years I’ve owned the .270 Winchester caliber in assorted bolt action rifles, including a dreaded Pre-64 Model 70 Winchester.
With 130 grain spitzers I’ve shot multiple caribou, black tail deer, coyotes, red fox, jack rabbits and ground squirrels (Alaska, Nevada and California).

Also, I’ve shot a caribou with 150 grain Hornady spire point bullets but, these proved to end the animal’s life a bit slower with a double lung shot than my multiple experiences have shown with 130 grainers.
I had to shoot the animal twice to put it down.
My 2nd shot was a lengthwise “Texas heart shot” and very effective.
One animal is however hardly a conclusive test.
And in all fairness, I’ve had the same 2nd shot required on a double lung shot caribou when, using a .375 with 235 grain Speer semi-spitzers.
So, there IS that.
Any way, I’m under the impression that the .270 is best suited to lighter bullets.

Moving right along, a hunting companion of mine brought his beautiful custom made little Mauser 98 in .270 to Namibia, back when neither of us had ever been there before.
He wisely chose 140 grain A-Frames as his bullet.
This was my first experience (and his) witnessing what that bullet is capable of.
It is IMO the very best premium soft widely available in the world today.

Anyway, his .270 so loaded, turned out to be quite excellent (no surprise there) on almost all his animals, up to and including Kudu.
As is typical with hunting, not all shot angles were perfectly broadside either.
It tuned out to be a bit weak on a Burchell’s zebra stallion but again, in all fairness, his first shot was not placed well.
Three more shots were required to finish the animal.
In that one case, a larger caliber / shooting a heavier bullet would have very likely ended the situation quickly with his 2nd shot.
After the first hit (gut shot) the wounded beast was then galloping off, in a slightly quartering away to the left angle, as if on fire.
The 2nd shot seemed to not impress the zebra whatsoever and it kept up its galloping.
When located again, it requires two more shots to end it.
(This is where cartridges like the 9.3x62 / 286 grain and .375 H&H / 300 grain really shine).

That all said and at the end of the day, I would still recommend the .270 for anyone intending to hunt N. American deer size game / world wide deer, antelopes and sheep of similar size as well, especially in open geography / sparse foliage where, longer shots would be likely.
However, I would also recommend a hand full of other calibers for same as well.
As an illustration, when the Heavens parted and the sunshine of enlightenment shone upon my thick skull, I suddenly realized that, anything I could consistently hit with my .270 and 130 grain spitzers, I could also consistently hit with my .30-06 and 150 grain spitzers.
Soon after this awakening, I sold my last .270 and perhaps will never own another one.
Maybe I will will but it is not very likely.

I now stand ready before my attackers,
Velo Dog.

So when you look at the ballistics of a .270 gr SP from a .375 are you going to sell the '06?

I am all about balancing the caliber (and the rifle) to the game. Obviously, lots of things will kill lots of things all operating in the same general ballistic envelope. For me - purely from my perspective - I prefer a 6.5 thru 7mm for whitetail. More specifically, I prefer the non-magnum (or traditional) versions in those calibers. I have taken a lot of deer with 6.5x57, 6.5x54, 7x57, and .270. They all seem sort of perfectly balanced for whitetail and anything in that size category. Which is not to say an '06 in 150 gr guise isn't equally lethal - it clearly is. I have taken a lot of game with an '06 - in fact, I would agree that it is a better general purpose caliber for North America than the others I listed. It just always seemed a bit more than required for deer, and is usually packaged in a stouter, less elegant rifle.