.270 or 6.5 x 55

[glasshalffull]

If anyone finds a .270 to have 'too much recoil' it probably means a badly shaped stock (all those wooden stocks some people drool over, older Sako are some of the worst) or some form of flinch is coming into play.


Pretty sure @Norway has a video of him neck shooting a Sika in Ireland at 300m with a borrowed rifle, he has extensive experience with 6.5x55 ballistics from which he estimated drop data... I think 300m is a 'chip-shot' for him anyway!

Even a .224 bullet is deadly at extreme ranges if placement is correct, the skill is getting it there.

Flatter trajectory from a higher BC and MV will help but it's not going to make it easy.

I've absolutely no issues with my .270's recoil just that it's noticeably more so than my 6.5x55 even though it's a lb+ heavier than the later, my .270 more or less has been retired in the cabinet since I bought my Sauer 202 in 6.5x55

 

[25 Sharps]

I don’t get the “270 recoils too much” argument as the energy is very similar to a 308 which is considered a soft shooter! Newton’s laws must apply equally so I can only assume that it is a result of poor stock design on some commonly used rifles of yesteryear. I accept that powder charge weight is a touch higher in the 270 but that difference is going to be marginal at best.

The amount of powder burned (erupting gases) also has a part to play in felt recoil, the .270 burns more powder

 

[25 Sharps]

You start shooting red deer out to 250 plus there is a massive difference between the 2.

6.5x55 simply does not have the legs for it.

Thats the reason i sold my 6.5x55

Lovely calibre for sniffing around the woods with, but its not an all round killing calibre.

That’s because you’re using copper bullets

 

[25 Sharps]

Sorry have to disagree, Have shot 100's of deer from Norfolk Stags , hill hinds/Stags , woodland Sika and lowland Fallow all with my 6.5x55 never ever thought it doesn't have the "Legs" for the job. To be honest its all about shot placement and knowing your setup

And using lead bullets?

 

[Selous]

The amount of powder burned (erupting gases) also has a part to play in felt recoil, the .270 burns more powder

Thats why I said ......"I accept that powder charge weight is a touch higher in the 270 but that difference is going to be marginal at best"

 

[25 Sharps]

Thats why I said ......"I accept that powder charge weight is a touch higher in the 270 but that difference is going to be marginal at best"

20% is more than a touch, the amount of gas makes a big difference which is why people are suggesting a moderator for the .270, slowing the gas reduces the recoil. Less powder and therefore gas means less recoil, and definitely noticeable at 20% less…..

 

[Dalua]

20% is more than a touch, the amount of gas makes a big difference which is why people are suggesting a moderator for the .270, slowing the gas reduces the recoil. Less powder and therefore gas means less recoil, and definitely noticeable at 20% less…..

I tend to think that recoil's related to the mass of what comes out of the end, and at what speed. So the mass must be bullet + powder charge - the latter seeming indeed to be about 20% more in the .270 than the 6.5x55.

The work of the mod is interesting too - as it is presumably catching and slowing the gaseous mass of powder resulting in a fair bit of the kinetic energy of that part of the ejacta pushing the mod (and therefore the whole rifle) away from the shoulder. It must be very complicated to work out exactly what's happening there, I think!

 

[Tazz]

Get a 270, there is no such thing as “Too dead” but there are lots of versions of wounded. Other opinions will follow

 

[25 Sharps]

I tend to think that recoil's related to the mass of what comes out of the end, and at what speed. So the mass must be bullet + powder charge - the latter seeming indeed to be about 20% more in the .270 than the 6.5x55.

The work of the mod is interesting too - as it is presumably catching and slowing the gaseous mass of powder resulting in a fair bit of the kinetic energy of that part of the ejacta pushing the mod (and therefore the whole rifle) away from the shoulder. It must be very complicated to work out exactly what's happening there, I think!

Wiki has you bang on

“The overall recoil applied to the firearm is equal and opposite to the total forward momentum of not only the projectile, but also the ejected gas. Likewise, the recoil energy given to the firearm is affected by the ejected gas. By conservation of mass, the mass of the ejected gas will be equal to the original mass of the propellant (assuming complete burning).”

Recoil - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

So the amount of recoil energy induced by the expanding gas correlates with the amount of powder burned.

 

[Tazz]

Wiki has you bang on

“The overall recoil applied to the firearm is equal and opposite to the total forward momentum of not only the projectile, but also the ejected gas. Likewise, the recoil energy given to the firearm is affected by the ejected gas. By conservation of mass, the mass of the ejected gas will be equal to the original mass of the propellant (assuming complete burning).”

Recoil - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

So the amount of recoil energy induced by the expanding gas correlates with the amount of powder burned.

I think I understand the theory in this argument and I don’t profess to be a scientist but the recoil is surely the equal and opposite force of the projectile force and speed isn’t it, if you fire a blank full of powder there is no felt recoil or am I missing something

 

[25 Sharps]

I think I understand the theory in this argument and I don’t profess to be a scientist but the recoil is surely the equal and opposite force of the projectile force and speed isn’t it, if you fire a blank full of powder there is no felt recoil or am I missing something

No, it’s the force of the accelerating gas and the bullet, read the wiki article, it explains it quite well.

A blank doesn’t reach the same pressure or burn nearly as much powder, it is also not completely contained at any point.

 

[Tazz]

No, it’s the force of the accelerating gas and the bullet, read the wiki article, it explains it quite well.

A blank doesn’t reach the same pressure or burn nearly as much powder, it is also not completely contained at any point.

Too much science, I feel a nose bleed coming on

 

[25 Sharps]

Too much science, I feel a nose bleed coming on

The opposite of the gas analogy is recoilless guns, which still fire a projectile but don’t recoil, they achieve this by redirecting the gas out in the opposite direction to the bullet, so the 2 directions of mass being ejected cancel each other out…..

 

[Sonicdmb73]

Just looking at my next Deer Rifle, would value opinions on the above Calibres?

Cheers,

Dave

I have both. I bought a 6.5x55 Sauer 202 cheap from a culler, it’s killed an awful lot of deer mainly red to the best of my knowledge.
I also acquired a 270 barrel for it. To be fair all things bar cartridge being equal. Scope, moderator, rifle all the same parts. The difference in felt recoil is negligible.
In the grand scheme of things either will take any legal quarry in this country and many others for that matter.
I doubt that you would be disappointed with either, assuming you found a rifle that you liked that fit you.

 

[wildfowler.250]

Just looking at my next Deer Rifle, would value opinions on the above Calibres?

Cheers,

Dave

I’ve both. Used the 6.5x55 for the last year because it was new to me and did a lot of load development for it.

Both will kill deer fine in normal stalking ranges.

6.5 is slightly less punchy but I only ever notice it on either caliber when I’m shooting a series of targets. .270 doesn’t kick anything like people say and you certainly won’t notice it shooting one or two deer in a sitting.

My 6.5 will drop several inches at 250 yards. .270 I don’t really think about it. Feels a bit similar to comparing .17HMR and .22 for rabbits.

Try both first?

 

[Basil H]

Neither of the above. 7 mm Remington Magnum is the answer.

 

[Wills]

I have both.
270 for reds with a 130grn bullet and occasional roe (I use 150grn for them).

6.5x55 for roe and fallow. I use 140 SSTs but when they are gone, will use 120's.

You'll be fine with either.

 

[Bowland blades]

You start shooting red deer out to 250 plus there is a massive difference between the 2.

6.5x55 simply does not have the legs for it.

Thats the reason i sold my 6.5x55

Lovely calibre for sniffing around the woods with, but its not an all round killing calibre.

I shoot 260 rem while my mate shoots 270 the 6.5 x55 can generate more energy that the 260 rem . However we notice no difference out to just over 300 yards on red stags other than the 260 is better on noise as it carries less power and the gasses cool more effectively!

 

[glasshalffull]

 

[NullMac]

If anyone finds a .270 to have 'too much recoil' it probably means a badly shaped stock (all those wooden stocks some people drool over, older Sako are some of the worst) or some form of flinch is coming into play.

Isn't that the truth !