Looking info on .270

South Pender said:
Yes, that would be my choice too. One of the finest bolt actions ever designed according to the experts. They come labelled 'Husqvarna', 'Carl Gustaf', 'Viking Arms', and 'Zoli' with "1900" added--all the same action. Greatly superior to most actions, older and modern. Many can be found used at Intersurplus in 6.5x55, 30-06, and 9.3x62 chamberings in the $700-$800 price range. Great value for the money.
Click to expand...

I bought a classic 2000, same as fairfox , in 6.5x55, looks damn near new from intersurplus (3 lug bolt, 60* ) hear similar to 1900. I love it.
 
mikeyb said:
Nope. Similar hunting loads in 6.5 Creedmoor and .270 Winchester show the .270 hitting harder and shooting flatter out past 800 yards with similar weight/construction bullets.
Click to expand...
Agree and now there's high bc bullets for the 270. However the 270 has always had an edge over the 6.5 cm at sane hunting ranges. A 130gr bullet at 3100 fps out to 400+ yards will out do the cm.
 
mikeyb said:
Nope. Similar hunting loads in 6.5 Creedmoor and .270 Winchester show the .270 hitting harder and shooting flatter out past 800 yards with similar weight/construction bullets.
Click to expand...
How many animals have you killed at 800yds? I have a shoulder injury which limits the amount of recoil I can handle.
I have both rifles. The difference in recoil is almost 5lbs depending on the grain weights.
I find it far easier to hit 500yd targets with my Creed than my 270.
In my experience recoil equals accuracy.
In terms of ballistics the 270 is better at every range. But that doesn't mean it's more accurate.
But it isn't just about ballistics. It's about actual accuracy.
Less recoil better accuracy has been my real life experience of shooting these rifles at those distances.
Go ahead and try them both at the range. You will see what I mean.
 
Last edited:
Mogulrider said:
How many animals have you killed at 800yds? I have a shoulder injury which limits the amount of recoil I can handle.
I have both rifles. The difference in recoil is almost 5lbs depending on the grain weights.
I find it far easier to hit 500yd targets with my Creed than my 270.
In my experience recoil equals accuracy.
In terms of ballistics the 270 is better at every range. But that doesn't mean it's more accurate.
But it isn't just about ballistics. It's about actual accuracy.
Less recoil better accuracy has been my real life experience of shooting these rifles at those distances.
Go ahead and try them both at the range. You will see what I mean.
Click to expand...
So if you are recoil sensative it automatically makes the creed more accurate. So if I am not recoil sensative is my 270 better at long range?
 
Mogulrider said:
6.5 Creedmoor is better than a 270 long range.
Click to expand...

I only compare factory offerings so everyone can play in the discussion, as reloaders and those willing to swap barrels to faster twist etc. can get infinitely more from any cartridge.

Factory 140 accubond .270 win and 140 eld-m match white box 6.5 creedmoor from recollection both land around 2000 fps impact at 600 yards....one just burns about a dozen less grains of powder to do it....but I have them both as 600 yard cartridges, just one from the 20th century and one from the 21st century. Far less recoil and more shoot ability from the one and proper short action to boot...lots of reasons why the 6.5cm has done so well and has maybe become an equal to the universal cartridge as the 308. Less wind drift from the 6.5 also, higher hit probability.

Hunting is largely defined as 0-600, even by the elr and prs crowds, the majority self impose typical 5-600 limits on game even though they shoot and compete to much further and there are natural laws that govern why that is. Only the immortals who shoot year round and are very good at it can consistently kill past 600, it's a very tiny percentage of shooters/hunters.

So there is no arguing these 2 for hunting, to me they are as equal a match to compare as you could get....from a hunting standpoint. Just a older standard and a modern interpretation of the same performance range.

For target work the 6.5 will start to walk away from the .270 past where hunting ranges stop for the 98%+ of us due to the higher bc's for same weight bullets.

I remember running up to a .270 wsm with 140 accubonds to get the kind of impact velocities for an 800-ish yard build. The .270 win is a couple hundred shy of that. Now you'd put a 6.5 prc up against a .270 wsm and the prc just widens the gap even further on the .270 wsm...quite a bit more range gained than 200 yards. But that spirals off into weeds and gets off topic.
 
^^^ So which cartridge will have the most energy at typical hunting ranges with the best bullet for each caliber. Let's say under 400 yards. I'm sure the 270 will have the edge on the cm. I'm not trying to put down the cm, I happen to like it, however the 270 has more power at typical hunting ranges.
 
You just can't pick a model.
You need to factor in weight, blued or stainless, wood or synthetic, 16" or 26" barrel or in between, length if pull, weight, sights or no sights etc etc.

It's not uncommon to own 2 rifles in the same caliber in different makes and models for different purposes..
 
I never had any time for the 270 after testing a few boxes of factory ammo over the chrono. Speed was not even close to what 270 should do. I stuck with 308 after that and was happy to drop deer out to 500yds. The 308 will be ahead of the CM in energy up to around 400yds with the right bullet. It will all depends on the individual rifle, barrel length, bullet load, speed... meaning every case must be put into a ballistic calculator to know the facts. There are some funny examples like European Geco ammunition 8x57 in one offering has such lousy bc that my 20" 6.5CM has more energy after 100yds in comparison using the geco data. What I don't like about the 270 is that the bullet development has stopped in time somehow. Much more effort is put into 6.5/7 and 7.62 bullets. What people seem to forget is that the benefits of good bc starts at the muzzle not at 400yds.
edi
 
pete dobinson said:
^^^ So which cartridge will have the most energy at typical hunting ranges with the best bullet for each caliber. Let's say under 400 yards. I'm sure the 270 will have the edge on the cm. I'm not trying to put down the cm, I happen to like it, however the 270 has more power at typical hunting ranges.
Click to expand...
yes the .270 will have more hp in 0-400, could come in handy on larger game? although I ran a .270 win the most and .270 wsm for a bit also....I get shorter recoveries and more drt's using a 6.5 grendel with 123gr eld-m only burning 29.6 grains of powder.....so when you have 'enough' hp its far more about the bullet and you can find magic formulas.....I ran 140 accubonds in the .270's and some 130 fusions, to do over and try to get more drt's and shorter recoveries I would look for more frangible lighter constructed option.....in my case most of the potential work was ending up in the hill sides beyond the critters

to the OP, if .270 win is on the menu look at the tikka's, they already have long action and long action magazines, that's where I would start and probably end if I was going to get back into the .270 game, I had one and it drove tacks to 700 with 130 fusions

factory ammo I've noticed over time is generally 30 fps under rated even from factory 24" barrels, so keep going 20-25 fps per inch from there as the barrels shorten
 
First time hunter this fall, I was looking for a 3006 but I've been pointed towards a 308... And now a 270 since my wife might use it too. I'm 🤔
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom