Why has the performance of the 270 Winchester not been improved?

Brithunter

Well-Known Member
The 270 Winchester introduced back in 1925 seems to have almost the same velocities now as it did back at it's introduction yet powders have come along quite a bit since then. Other cartridges have had their performance levels upped yet the old 270 Winchester still languishes where it came into the world almost as if it's unloved by the various ammunition makers.

Oh some years back they tried with the WSM to update and make the 270 fashionable as a calibre again but they still left the old original 270 Winchester alone and I have never understood why :cry:.

We know that Winchester was economical with the truth about the velocities actually achieved in rifles with the original loadings. Chronographs were not easily obtained and were difficult to use and very time consuming back then but some labs did do the testing and Winchester was caught out.

Original claims for velocity of the 130 grain loading was 3,140 fps but if one reads the reports of those who did have access to chronographs actual velocity was more like 3,020 fps :doh:. Despite this the cartridge was still hugely popular and successful. At one time it seems it was THE cartridge to use upon the Hill in Scotland before falling out of fashion. I notice it seems to be gaining some ground back in recent years though.

This brings us back to the question why when other cartridges of similar vintage have had their real world performance improved has the old 270 Winchester been ignored?

Looking in Hornady's 7th Ed I see in their testing they managed to get 3100 fps with Four powders and Speers 14th lists 3117 fps with their 130 grain bullets but that is still shy of the original velocity claimed by Winchester in 1925.

Most strange.
 
what is there to improve?

3000fps
100-150gr realistic bullet range
0-6" drop between muzzle and 300yds
readily available
suitable for all quarry from hoodie crows to boar.

why would pumping it up by 100-200fps make it better?
I would imagine most home loaders keep it around 28-2900 dont they?
 
Well let's see:-

If as you both say there is no need for improving it why did they bother with the WSM? Does this mean that some people really cannot manage the weight of a long action rifle or the bolt travel of the long action?

Why are people loading the .308 Winchester with 150 grain bullets to 3,000 fps? This of course beats the 270 Winchesters 2,900 fps with 150 grain bullets.

Back to the .308 Winchester over the 50 or so years since it's introduction they have improved it's performance by 200 fps with 150 grain bullets to bring it level.

Just checking and Norma at least claim to load the 270 Win and 130 grain bullet to it's original specs of 3140 fps. Their 150 grain load though is at 2854 fps. The Norma 150 grain .308 load however almost equals it at a claimed 2822 fps.

Now Federal on the other hand their 130 grain Soft Point load only gives a claimed 3060 fps and their 150 grain Sierra G ame King BTSP 2830 fps yet once again their 150 grain loading for the .308 gives 2820 fps.

So not only has there been no development or improvement in fact it looks like a lot of ammunition makers don't even load it to the original specs and so have dropped it's velocity by about 100 fps.

Makes no sense to me :confused:.
 
It's fashionable to have a short action!!!! I thought you knew that Brit. Everybody is developing the inability to cycle a long action because they are couch potatoes!!!!! :D :stir:

David.
 
.277 in 150gr at 2800fps
or
.308 in 150gr.... 2800fps

know which one I would prefer on paper..

.465 BC in the .277 vs .423 BC in the 308 (and that is with a Boat tail 308 against a flat base Nosler in .277!)

The WSM was marketing ploy that failed.
still dont see how bumping MV by 200fps is an improvement! anyone can do that with some hot loads and snappier powder
 
Brit: You're looking at this from an emotional view point, not through a business lens.

Why the WSM? To sell more ammo and rifles. It's "New and Exciting" and Winchester did their best to get everyone to believe that they needed one. Plain and simple.

As to the 270 performance. Ammo makers improve ballistics of the individual loading as they can BUT, they must stay within SAAMI limits. To change the cartridges upper pressure limits would toss the manufacturing world into a tizzy. Not only would it be expensive change the spec, but it would cause them to need an entirely different cartridge designation. Think of the mess they got into with the 257 Roberts, producing "+P" ammo for it to accommodate weaker rifles. It eventually became a confusing burden that they abandoned.

Lastly, I agree: Why bother? It's a fine cartridge. Is it being over-shadowed by newer calibers? Sure, but that's the nature of the business.~Muir
 
It's fashionable to have a short action!!!! I thought you knew that Brit. Everybody is developing the inability to cycle a long action because they are couch potatoes!!!!! :D :stir:

David.

..you know what they say about people with long actions:norty:
 
what is there to improve?

3000fps
100-150gr realistic bullet range
0-6" drop between muzzle and 300yds
readily available
suitable for all quarry from hoodie crows to boar.

why would pumping it up by 100-200fps make it better?
I would imagine most home loaders keep it around 28-2900 dont they?

2850 for me using 130gr SSTs. It's the accurate load (in my rifle) and plenty fast for my needs....
 
Funny thing the 270, it was the only calibre I owned for 10 years. I have messed about quite a bit with other rifles over the past five or six years, don't have one now. I shot everything from Muntjac to wild boar, mostly 140gr Hornady Interlocks, laterly with 140 gr Accubonds.

Been thinking about one again recently, 140gr Accubond or BT at 2925FPS would do just about everything I ever need to do, that, and a 156 gr Norma for pigs.

The WSM is a nice idea that was born redundant.
 
I'm not bothered how fast mines going all i know is with 130-150 grain bullets its dropped and killed everything i've pointed it at end of
 
Hmmm well if we look at this logically if your happy with a 130 grain bullet at 2800 fps well I can and do get that out of my bolt action 30-30 and 130 grain Spire Points. Don't need boat tails and I can save a lot of expensive powder. The .270 Winchester was designed as a high velocity cartridge from the get-go and although there really is no such thing, as a flat shooting cartridge, now as most have gathered I am very fond of the .270 Winchester it was my first proper commercial centre fire sporting cartridge and the second rifle I brought and I still own, as far as I am aware anyway, was my BSA CF2 "Stutzen" in 270 Winchester. Back they I started out with 130 grain yellow tipped Nosler Ballistic tips.

I still own four rifles chambered for the 270 Winchester :D .


Muir I was not suggesting altering the pressure limits just wondering why with the improved powders that have become available since 1925. Why has not the velocity been improved upon. Most other cartridges have been improved in performance over the years but not teh 270 Winchester. It's almost as if there is a conspiracy to keep it back :-|.
 
Hmmm well if we look at this logically if your happy with a 130 grain bullet at 2800 fps well I can and do get that out of my bolt action 30-30 and 130 grain Spire Points. Don't need boat tails and I can save a lot of expensive powder. The .270 Winchester was designed as a high velocity cartridge from the get-go and although there really is no such thing, as a flat shooting cartridge

it makes next to no difference at stalking ranges to push a 130gr at 3000 vs 2800, apart from 4gr less of powder!
same question but what advantage would you get from pushing a 130 at 3200fps?

i can see the advantage of pushing a 150gr at 3000+ but that is going to push your pressures through the roof
 
To my opinion the 270 Winchester, for use in UK, is best improved by downloading it to about 2,700 with the 150 grain bullet. It was further "improved" by becoming the 280 Remington! Now I know that they are two different cartridges but in fact the 280 Remington is what the 270 Winchester should always have been...a 150 0r 165 grain bullet at 2,700 fps.
 
Now I am finding this quite amusing as there are several suggesting that the 270 Winchester be down loaded to the same levels of performance as would you believe it the old 303 British cartridge.

The 150 grain loading for the 303 is 2700 fps and there is a thread on here about shortening barrels and in that thread is the comment:-

" I don't want to drop the performance to 303 levels"


Yet here we are with people suggesting just that about the 270 Winchester :lol:.
 
Hmmm well if we look at this logically if your happy with a 130 grain bullet at 2800 fps well I can and do get that out of my bolt action 30-30 and 130 grain Spire Points. Don't need boat tails and I can save a lot of expensive powder. The .270 Winchester was designed as a high velocity cartridge from the get-go and although there really is no such thing, as a flat shooting cartridge, now as most have gathered I am very fond of the .270 Winchester it was my first proper commercial centre fire sporting cartridge and the second rifle I brought and I still own, as far as I am aware anyway, was my BSA CF2 "Stutzen" in 270 Winchester. Back they I started out with 130 grain yellow tipped Nosler Ballistic tips.

I still own four rifles chambered for the 270 Winchester :D .


Muir I was not suggesting altering the pressure limits just wondering why with the improved powders that have become available since 1925. Why has not the velocity been improved upon. Most other cartridges have been improved in performance over the years but not teh 270 Winchester. It's almost as if there is a conspiracy to keep it back :-|.

How would you have them do it? As I said, ammo makers try for improvement in speeds per given bullet weight all the time. It is, especially in these days and times, a high selling point -with bullet design a close second. I think they do what they can within their manufacturing price point while staying under the SAAMI limits. The 270 is an over-bore case: There is just so fast you can push a bullet within certain pressure limits. MAybe they haven't gottent here yet. I have faith that if and when there is way for Remington to make faster 270 than Hornady, it will get done... provided there is a financial incentive to do so. And right now, there probably isn't. To embark on an expensive R&D for a new propellant with out some pressure from customers or competition would be resources taken away from other more lucrative ambitions. People like the 270 as it is. They might buy into a few fps more but enough to pay for the cost of the project and the ensuing press? I guess not. Not now, at least.~Muir
 
Muir,

Your sounding a lot like Parker. O. Ackley my friend ;).

I knew there must have been a good reason to build that .280 AI. If we can ever get back onto the project and I believe it should be possible to achieve my original aim which was to make a modern rifle with the same performance as the original .280 Ross. So 3,200 Fps with a 140 grain bullet should be achievable ;) and 2750fps with a 175 grain bullet. That should deal with any quarry I am ever likely to meet or hunt.
 
Back
Top