The 270 Winchester and old myths.

the more i shoot the 270 win the more i like it ... and it s not mine.

thanks to Why not ? to open my eyes on this caliber, his good reloading tips and his very huge friendship.
 
Saved from somewhere else:

Let's look at some real world numbers for energy delivered to target.

Winning numbers are bolded.

Federal premium 270 150gr sierra gamekings

Muzzle 2667

100 Y 2320

200 Y 2010

300 Y 1733

400 Y 1487

500 Y 1268

Bullet drop at 400 yards is -21.8"
note: 130gr bullets deliver competitive performance and only drop 18.8" at 400 yards.

Federal Premium 30'06 150gr sierra gamekings

Muzzle 2820

100 Y 2368

200 Y 1975

300 Y 1635

400 Y 1343

500 Y 1093

Bullet drop at 400 yards is -22.3"


What do we learn from this? That with the same bullet type and weight, the 30'06 delivers more energy inside 150 yards. Beyond 150 yards, the 270 pulls ahead in a big way due to suffering less surface area forward. It also shoots slightly flatter. The 30'06 has the option of heavier bullet grades for even bigger close range hitting power.

So, 30'06 is superior for less than 150 yards, especially given bullet selection. 270 is superior for longer range shooting, especially as it pertains to energy delivered to target.
Click to expand...

So the .270 outperforms the .30-06 at distances beyond 150 yards.
 
Why not? said:
...Really, when it comes right down to where the rubber meets the road, the 270 Win is such a fine performer on game, that even if there were only half the bullets available, that would still be enough to cover all the bases....

Again, I wonder how many guys who perpetuate these myths have ever actually used the cartridge?

Ted
Click to expand...

Oh sure, I guess maybe the 270 works in the Yukon, but it won't work here in central BC!

All deer, bears, moose and elk have taken to wearing military surplus kevlar vests the last few years. Since they started this you need much, much, more cartridge.

Not only that, if you aren't burning at least 90 grains of powder per round they don't shoot flat enough. Dang 270 has a trajectory like a rainbow...


:p
 
We'll all be reloading .270 Win long after an archeologist can't prove a short or ultra mag really existed....................Harold
 
What that ballistic comparison chart between a 270 and the 30-06 does is point out what I have said so often, there are so many theories out there and most of them can't be proven. Meaning a person could spend a liftetime of hunting with a 270 and a 30-06 and if proper bullets for the game were used, he couldn't tell by the results on the game, which calibre he was using.
Hey, I didn't think of that. A long time ago Jack O'Connor published that statement in one of his articles, as shooting/hunting editor of Outdoor Life.
 
philthygeezer said:
Saved from somewhere else:



So the .270 outperforms the .30-06 at distances beyond 150 yards.
Click to expand...


I see your point.

But........If I could only get 2667 fps at the muzzle with 150gr. bullets out of my 270 I would toss the barrelled action and use the stock as a canoe paddle.:)

I dont' know where those numbers are coming from but they are off and i always chuckle when people compare same bullet weights in different calibers and not giving a mention to the obvious advantage of one in Sectional density. Apples and Oranges.
 
Pathfinder said:
I see your point.

But........If I could only get 2667 fps at the muzzle with 150gr. bullets out of my 270 I would toss the barrelled action and use the stock as a canoe paddle.:)

I dont' know where those numbers are coming from but they are off and i always chuckle when people compare same bullet weights in different calibers and not giving a mention to the obvious advantage of one in Sectional density. Apples and Oranges.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I have owned and loaded for quite a few 270s, and all of them would get way over 2800 fps with 150 gr bullets. It is no trick at all to get very close to 2900 with Swift A Frames in a Husqvarna with its 23 3/4" barrel, and 2850 in the 22" Marlin XL7.

Ted
 
I finally took my new Sako 270 to the range a couple weeks ago to site it in for a hunting trip I have planned. I bought it last year with plans in going with my brother (Who tragically passed away last summer) I just couldn't go.
When i finally felt i could get back to dong what he and I both loved to do I opted to throw my zeiss 3-9x40 scope on, I then Bore sighted it and happily went to the range. first shot at 100 meters was 2" above the bullseye using 130 grain bullets. The next 4 shots continued to tear the first hole a little bigger each time. I switched over to the 150 grain bullets and they ALL landed dead center of the target. I live this rifle, love the caliber! It beats hauling my 308 Remington 700 around, it's a great rifle but it's a tank. The sako is beautiful, light and a DREAM to shoot! I don't think I'd have a problem using it on anything I go hunting for. Mind you I am also DYING to take out my Sako TRG42 338 Lapua and see what it will do on some big game!
 
So if I understand right I might as well throw out the 270 I was just given and buy a 300 ultra mag?

I love days when people knock on your door, you open it and they hand you a browning safari in 270.
 
If the .30/06 didn't exist I would probably shoot a .270 more than I do. Like many, I ate up the anti .270 propaganda that was generated a couple of generations ago and instead swooned for the .30/06. In the early days, perhaps guys like Elmer had a point; there was nothing particularly wrong with the .270 cartridge, but there were no suitable .277" bullets for big game. Today that objection doesn't hold up, and with bullets like the 180 gr slug made from copper tubing and pure lead from Colorado Custom Bullets, now Barnes, I suspect it has been a very long time since that objection was valid. About 15 years ago, logic finally prevailed and I began to give the .270 a chance, but for some reason it was never a lucky cartridge for me. Perhaps becasue subconciously I expected it to fail it didn't disappoint. My son in BC has my old M-54 .270 equipped with a gallows style receiver sight, and he thinks its a giant killer. My step son in Whitehorse recently bought a .270 Browning for sheep rifle but now packs it for Yukon moose, and I suspect his SAKO .300 Winchester might be ignored for the foreseeable future. Well, they can keep their mouse guns, and I'll stick with the .30/06.
 
Why not? said:
Exactly. I have owned and loaded for quite a few 270s, and all of them would get way over 2800 fps with 150 gr bullets. It is no trick at all to get very close to 2900 with Swift A Frames in a Husqvarna with its 23 3/4" barrel, and 2850 in the 22" Marlin XL7.

Ted
Click to expand...

I load them to 2850 also. Good hunting load.
 
Pathfinder said:
I see your point.

But........If I could only get 2667 fps at the muzzle with 150gr. bullets out of my 270 I would toss the barrelled action and use the stock as a canoe paddle.:)

I dont' know where those numbers are coming from but they are off and i always chuckle when people compare same bullet weights in different calibers and not giving a mention to the obvious advantage of one in Sectional density. Apples and Oranges.
Click to expand...


So what you're saying is that the energy numbers for the .270 are even more better than the .30-06.

Unless of course the numbers for the 150 grain '06 are low too...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom