.270

Home Loader

Well-Known Member
#1
Evening all
Im sat here wondering why the .270 a very popular/effective deer caliber, it does not seem to be used as a target round?
any ideas?
cheers
 

Southern

Well-Known Member
#3
Not being a military cartridge, it was not permitted in many of the centerfire matches in the USA. There just never were many bullets developed for it. There were, and are, so many 6.5x55, .303, .30-06, .308 matches and rifles out there. And the surplus ammunition for these rifles was so cheap and plentiful. If you went .270 or 7mm, even where permitted, you were out there on your own with just a few bullets.

If you want to play around, try the Sierra 135-gr MK.
 

JabaliHunter

Well-Known Member
#5
A catch 22 of typical factory barrel twist rates not stabilising heavy high bc bullets and bullet manufacturers not making high bc heavy bullets because typical barrels wouldn't stabilise them if they did
 

Woodsmoke

Well-Known Member
#6
If it was good enough for Jack O'Connor :stir:

Target shooters and hunters have completely disparate requirements from a cartridge, & what's a superb option for one won't necessarily suit another. I love my .270, but I'll readily agree that other calibres offer better accuracy if that's what floats your boat. For my part, I need a cartridge that offers good downrange energy, with a trajectory I can easily visualise to take a fleetingly-offered shot at very short notice on anything I'm likely to encounter, be it roe, red or whitetail in the USA. I don't need a tack-driver that can cloverleaf at 600 yards. Horses for courses :thumb:
 

Southern

Well-Known Member
#7
150-gr is heavy enough for the bore, and there are so many great bullets in 130, 140 and 150 grains. You could just shoot different types of 130-gr bullets and take most of the big game in the world. Same for the 150-gr. It was literally made to order for 300 yard shots on deer, antelope and sheep.

The .270 shoots as flat as the hard-kicking magnums without the recoil, so bullet placement is easier for most hunters. You can simply practice more with it. It is not expensive to shoot.

Many people overlook its versatility. It can accurately shoot bullets from 90 grains to 150 grains, and at less than top velocities. You can make it like a .243 for fox, coyote or small deer, or like a .308 for big deer, bear, and boar.
 

jonylandrover

Well-Known Member
#8
I also love my .270 I do use it for some fun target shooting. Nothing official. There are less choices of bullet head compared to say .30 cal but in my opinion get a bullet head that works well in the particular rifle you are using and stick with it for hunting and target. .270 will easily take 600yd shots and above if the person behind it is up to the task. Love the calibre and there will always be one in my cabinet.
 

norma 308

Well-Known Member
#9
Didn't want one because of the ( kicks like a mule ) reputation untill I found a L61R I really liked I've now shot fallow and roe and fox with 130 gr geco polymer tipped bullets and have to admit the recoil is negligible Even without a mod and it certainly does the buisness with no more damage than my 6.5 or 308 but it's very noisy :D
norma
 

bewsher500

Well-Known Member
#10
135gr Sierra SMK's work well
i have shot at 5-600yds with mine

never had a target style scope on mine though, it's my stalking rifle!
 

Thar

Well-Known Member
#11
In theory the calibre should per perfect as it is 6.8mm indiameter and so lies in size almost exactly between the two long range targetshooters favourites the 6.5 and 7mm.
But as others have said for practical reasons it has neverhad the chance to be developed into a target cartridge.
ATB
Tahr
 

bewsher500

Well-Known Member
#13
.270 has / is being looked at by the military ballistics people, as a replacement for some rounds already in service.

really?
That does surprise me
given the move away from large case rounds like 303 and 30-06 wouldn't it represent a u-turn?

I am a big fan
but not sure it offers the flexibility that the 300WM gives when the military are looking for a gap fill solution between 5.56 and .338
 
#14
Excerpt from this article, worth a read,
The above tables clearly demonstrate that the .270 Winchester calibre outshines the other comparison rounds in all respects and with a slightly lighter (130 grain) projectile in a good rifle, MVs up to 3000 FPS should be achievable.
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCYQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.chuckhawks.com%2Fdefinitive_service_caliber.htm&ei=gNGnVNHGK8m1Uebdg7gL&usg=AFQjCNEDUey8WbX9FlpeCCkOLnTul5YJGg&bvm=bv.82001339,d.d24&cad=rja
 

Claret_Dabbler

Well-Known Member
#15
The 6.8SPC has been around for a while.

Basically a 115gr 270 bullet on a smaller case designed to fit in existing AR-15 sized actions.

Something the yanks invented 50 years after forcing the Brits to drop a very similar project.
 

VIGILAIRE

Well-Known Member
#16
270 is one of the few calibres I've never owned nor used but pals who have swear by it. Very capable cartridge by all accounts, some very nice Parker Hales, BSAs and Brnos in tip top condition available for little money if you shop around.
 

bewsher500

Well-Known Member
#20
The article is a bag of sh1#e.

A 150gr 7.62x51 bullet is uncontrollable in a full auto rifle, therefore, a 150gr .277 bullet from the same case and rifle will allow controlled full auto fire.

The whole thing is laughable.
He lost me at "knock down power"!
no military general purpose round is designed with that in mind!
they want holes, incapacitation and logistical tie up with a wound
 

Top