Why was the .270 invented?


PDA






chains1240
April 8, 2010, 04:45 PM
Disclaimer: This is not a loaded question and I am not stirring the pot.

Looking over the trajectory, energy, and velocity numbers for the 30-06 and the .270 I do not see a huge difference between them. Also on Chuck Hawke's recoil table the .270 has only 1 pound less recoil with a 130 grain round than a 30-06 with a 150 grain round. Was there a specific reason that the .270 was invented? Any advantages? Thakn you.

If you enjoyed reading about "Why was the .270 invented?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Maverick223
April 8, 2010, 04:59 PM
Folks have always tinkered with generic cases by changing the caliber (going larger and smaller), why it stuck is the good question. FWIW, I have often wondered the same thing about any .270cal (6.8mm) bullet, owned one and it just didn't do anything for me, so it was promptly sold. http://forums.nitroexpress.com/images/graemlins/smilies/general/dunno.gif I do like other cartridges that were derived from the '06, such as the .280Rem. and the .35Whelen, but the .270, amongst others, just isn't for me.

:)

SlamFire1
April 8, 2010, 05:01 PM
Jack O'Connor was the greatest proponent of the 270 Winchester, and it is highly likely that without him the round would have faded into obscurity.

It is an excellent non magnum round, in my opinion at its best with a 130 grain bullet at 3000 fps. This combination shoots flat, non offensive recoil, and has killed most everything on the North American continent.

But is that really all that much better than a 130 grain 30 caliber bullet at 3200 fps?. Hard to know.

But as to why it was developed?. Don’t know. Commercial companies have tried to fill so many cartridge niches with new cartridges that have so little to offer over existing rounds that it is often baffling why they were ever introduced.

I have read justifications for new cartridges that were presented as “equals the 180 grain bullet in the 30-06 at 300 yards”. Or, “equals the kinetic energy of a 357 in a 32 Caliber round”, or provides “300 Win Mag performance in a short action”.

Sometimes the little differences create a commercial success, most of the time it leads to obsolescence.

Murphys Law
April 8, 2010, 05:12 PM
What does Hawkes chart say for the 180 grain 30-06? It could be that when the 270 came of age, the 30-06 was usually loaded with the heavier bullets and the lighter loaded .270 was considered to be lighter recoiling and flatter shooting. Much like the argument of 7mm-08 vs. the .308. Stop stirring the pot. :)

WNTFW
April 8, 2010, 05:19 PM
Too much gap between .260 and .280? .270 is Winchester so there in probably lies part of it.

stork
April 8, 2010, 05:26 PM
My belief is it was a vast conspiracy to enable Jack O'Connor to give constant digs to Elmer Keith.
FWIW

Dr T
April 8, 2010, 05:30 PM
Like most cartridges developed by factories, it was developed to sell more guns and ammo (Case in point: the short magnum cartridges).

I just wonder why the 270 Win was developed well before the 280 Rem. With only 0.007 difference in bullet diameter, it would seem that the 7 mm bullet would have been a more natural choice for Winchester to make.

It seems to me that 0.277 was an odd choice, even in 1925.

ArmedBear
April 8, 2010, 05:38 PM
it would seem that the 7 mm bullet would have been a more natural choice

Nobody wanted that damned Natzi ammo, maybe?:D

My belief is it was a vast conspiracy to enable Jack O'Connor to give constant digs to Elmer Keith.

Elmer Keith was, along with damn near everyone else in and around the Army who knew about rifle ballistics, a strong proponent of the .276 Pedersen, which was shockingly similar to 7mm-08. As a cowboy shooting for meat, and as a guide, he'd just seen too many elk go running off after what should have been a good hit from the ammo available at the time, so he advocated heavier, larger rounds for big game hunting.

I'm not sure what the friction between O'Connor and Keith was all about, though they did edit rival magazines.

joed
April 8, 2010, 05:48 PM
When it came about it was capable of killing anything in North America with a 130 or 150 gr bullet. It still is one of the most popular cartridges in the US, own one and you'll know why it's popular.

It's popularity has dropped in recent years I suspect due to the gun writers hawking the newer WSM and other cartridges.

Myself I never owned one, but do have a .25-06 Rem which is very close to a .270 Win. I bought the 06 because I couldn't buy a VS in .270, no regrets though.

MachIVshooter
April 8, 2010, 05:59 PM
Too much gap between .260 and .280? .270 is Winchester so there in probably lies part of it.

Except the .270 predates both of them

ArmedBear
April 8, 2010, 06:02 PM
The real reason was that it was 1923. WW I was long over, there was plenty of .30-06 brass around, and rifles designed for it, and smokeless powder had been around long enough for people to start thinking about high-velocity, lighter-weight bullets for flat shooting. So, Winchester necked down the .30-06 to make it shoot faster and flatter, with lighter bullets. The .270 was a pioneering round, in that it started the whole trend of tweaking a platform cartridge in all sorts of ways, to optimize for trajectory, terminal performance, etc. Many of today's rounds are the stepchildren of the .270, if you think of it like that.

06
April 8, 2010, 06:22 PM
My sons are half cocked caliber nuts but I have stuck to my tried and true old '06s for the last 30+ yrs. I can shoot just as well as their wildcat rds taken on the whole spectrum of ranges. Some shoot flatter, some shoot faster, but mine cost one half to one third of theirs and are available at every corner store. I have a set of 270 dies and will pick up a shooter at some time. Do not know why--just because--I reckon--lol.

Jim Watson
April 8, 2010, 06:28 PM
I recall reading that Winchester management thought something like the 7x64 Brenneke would sell well in the US. But they fudged the caliber from .284" to .277" (.270 bore) because they did not want confusion with the 7mm Mauser. Perhaps they also had an eye on the .256 Newton, which was a hot performer not widely available.

And maybe somebody knew about the 1907 Chinese Mauser in 6.8x58mm and that was where they got the caliber not just a random "hey, this number looks good."

jmr40
April 8, 2010, 07:53 PM
The 30-06 loads of today are vastly different from 1923 when the 270 came out. In 1903 when the original work was started on what became known as the 30-06 smokeless powder was still new and somewhat unproven. Most hunters used heavier 180-220 grain bullets in the 30-06 and viewed it as more of a large game round than a long range round.

By the time the 270 was developed metals had improved, and smokeless powder was less of a mystery. The 270 was traditionally loaded to higher pressures which helped the lighter 130 grain bullets shoot flatter than the older, lower pressure 30-06 shooting heavier bullets. Back in the day, they were viewed as vastly different cartridges for different uses.

With modern powders and bullets there is very little that one can do that the other cannot. I give the '06 a slight advantage if you feel the need for truly heavy bullets of 200+ grains, but in reality if you need heavier bullets than that you probably need a bigger gun.

chains1240
April 8, 2010, 08:43 PM
Thank you everyone for all of the great information. The only thing I could find was that it was developed as a fast long range medium game round.

52grain
April 8, 2010, 09:00 PM
What I want to see is a 90 grain .224 Sierra Matchking in an '06 case. That would be fun. :evil: But something tells me that having to replace the barrel every 1000 rounds wouldn't be very fun. :uhoh: Not to mention the twist rate required to stabilize it.

Runningman
April 8, 2010, 09:09 PM
Was there a specific reason that the .270 was invented?There is only one reason a new cartridge comes out. Money (profit), look at it from Winchester's perspective they sold rifles and ammo when the 270 was introduced in 1925. The idea of the 270 Winchester was a good one IMO. Keep in mind back in 1925 most rifles used steel butt plates. Shooting heavy bullets out of an 06 was not very pleasant for many.

Maverick223
April 8, 2010, 10:12 PM
What I want to see is a 90 grain .224 Sierra Matchking in an '06 case. That would be fun. But something tells me that having to replace the barrel every 1000 rounds wouldn't be very fun. Not to mention the twist rate required to stabilize it.Easy, use a disintegrating sabot round (like the SLAP or Rem. Accelerator rounds), should be good for 3500+fps. It also has the side benefit of not burning up barrels too bad due to the plastic sabot touching the bore, as well as needing less twist for stabilization due to the higher velocity (but I don't know how much less). The deficiencies are degraded accuracy and reduced efficiency.

:)

52grain
April 8, 2010, 10:23 PM
Easy, use a disintegrating sabot round (like the SLAP or Rem. Accelerator rounds), should be good for 3500+fps. It also has the side benefit of not burning up barrels too bad due to the plastic sabot touching the bore, as well as needing less twist for stabilization due to the higher velocity (but I don't know how much less).

Unfortunately the people on this site initiated me into the cult of accuracy. I was going for a high BC. 3500 fps with a BC of about 0.5 would be nice, but I don't want one bad enough to rebarrel a rifle, neck the cases down and make the wildcat rounds myself.

52grain
April 8, 2010, 10:29 PM
Easy, use a disintegrating sabot round (like the SLAP or Rem. Accelerator rounds), should be good for 3500+fps. It also has the side benefit of not burning up barrels too bad due to the plastic sabot touching the bore, as well as needing less twist for stabilization due to the higher velocity (but I don't know how much less).

Just found some of the Remington accelerator rounds. That's an interesting concept. 3400fps out of a .30-30?

lopezni
April 8, 2010, 10:42 PM
why was the .223 wssm made?

Maverick223
April 8, 2010, 10:45 PM
Unfortunately the people on this site initiated me into the cult of accuracy.Therein lies one of the great problems with it.

That's an interesting concept. 3400fps out of a .30-30?Not with the projectile you chose, but those light, little boogers move quick-like. I want to play with some in the .300WM just to see what kind of carnage results. :evil:

why was the .223 wssm made?Whatcha talkin' bout, the Whizzums are the best evah...Winny-Herstal told me so. :rolleyes: Gosh I hate those little screamers...a horrible infliction brought on by Winchester. :barf:

saturno_v
April 8, 2010, 10:48 PM
One story I heard is that the 270 Winchester was born to remedy the failure of the early 280 Ross (unpredictable bullet behavior).

Just a little bit more sedate and with more sophisticated bullet design at the time of introduction (the early Silvertip) the 270 ended up being what the 280 Ross should have be.

DIM
April 8, 2010, 11:31 PM
270 WIN was the first attempt to create magnum cartridge and it was successful, it is still considered as a step up to magnums. Myself I own one, used it few times for deer as far as performance I would put it next to .308 however 270 is faster and flatter, but at the distances I hunt it makes no difference.

Why was it invented, its another story, why any cartridge is invented... If I'll answer, but I will probably open up can of worms. But here it goes, all cartridges were invented to eradicate proficiently, 270 win was a good choice for long range, 6.8 mm is a very good ballistic projectile capable of devastating terminal performance, including remote wounding effects known as hydrostatic shock. 6.8 mm SPC is the minuter 270

chains1240
April 9, 2010, 07:13 AM
Thank again. I have looked up many many many 30-06 vs .270 vs .308. Spirited debates with the calibers close to people's hearts.

rangerruck
April 9, 2010, 10:33 AM
270; I hated it for years, for no good reason. After a ballistics study, I found they are a great flat shooting round. And then after many years of not shooting, I shot one, right after shooting a 30.06. If you have not done this, and have not shot either for a while, you should. the difference in recoil, at least felt recoil, was amazing; the 270 was like butta...

ants
April 9, 2010, 11:56 AM
They introduced the .270 Winchester in 1925 because they wanted to instigate endless debates among gun owners over the telephone, telegraph and radio: Which caliber is better?

Unfortunately, gun owners didn't get the joke and took it seriously. Instead of endless debate, they wanted the new caliber. Gun manufacturers made and sold millions upon millions of rifles in .270 Win. Millions and millions of animals fell to the 130 and 150 grain rounds. Everyone was happy!

Then, 80 years later, internet forums replaced telephone, telegraph and radio. Suddenly, the debate was on and just wouldn't stop...

At least that's my theory... :neener:

cougar1717
April 9, 2010, 06:13 PM
Why did they invent it? Because they could. What else did people have to do in 1925?
But seriously, everyone necks existing cartriges up and down to try and find a winner of commercial success. Sometimes they got a 243 Winchester, other times a 25 WSSM.

nelsonal
May 13, 2010, 08:57 PM
I'd guess, because lighter bullets are fine for popular US game (whitetail, antelope etc), and lighter bullets in a .30-06 have a very low BC, so they didn't retain much energy at longer distances (which are common for almost all Western hunting). So the cartridge was necked down and someone either got lucky the first time or found that BCs were pretty near optimal the desired weight at .277 cal.

Savage99
May 13, 2010, 09:30 PM
Of course the 270 was introduced to sell each of us, who already had an 06, a new rifle!

I started handloading in 1953 and back then we could get all the 06 ball ammo we wanted free from the DCM and that included rifles, chambered in 30-06 of course, that we could borrow.

It made zero sense to bother with the 270 but some did for the fun of it.

I would rather that they came out with a 7mm or just chambered one of the euro. rounds that were already being made.

d2wing
May 13, 2010, 09:50 PM
The .270 shoots flatter? By maybe an inch at some ranges. In bullets of the same weight, loaded to the same pressure there is very little difference.
Strictly a myth created by Jack O'Conner along with others. Short mags were pretty much created the same way by some gun writer, I don't remember which one. Most gun writers won't tell you about crappy stuff or useful info camparing ammo or guns because gun company ads pay their wages. So they make up bs to sell mags. Most those myths persist because
too many people don't check stuff like actual ballistics tables.

GunsBeerFreedom
May 13, 2010, 11:55 PM
Probably because back then the lighter bullets, higher velocity and subsequent flatter trajectory in limited factory ammo made a bigger difference that it does with the wide varieties of 30-06 loadings. But that's just my speculation.

OrangePwrx9
May 14, 2010, 12:19 AM
270; I hated it for years, for no good reason. After a ballistics study, I found they are a great flat shooting round. And then after many years of not shooting, I shot one, right after shooting a 30.06. If you have not done this, and have not shot either for a while, you should. the difference in recoil, at least felt recoil, was amazing; the 270 was like butta...
Interesting comment, rangerruck. For awhile I had two nearly identical Rem. 700s. One in 270 and the other a .30-06. Bought 'em new a year apart. Both had walnut stocks and no recoil pad.

Never felt the .270's recoil was "like butta", and I fired them side-by-side several times. In fact (and I never understood this), I felt the kick of the .270 was more annoying than that of the -06. Mostly this was comparing 130 gr. 270 loads to 150 gr. .30-06 loads.

As a result, I never had much love for the 270 and traded it off. Part of the reason was that the -06 was quite accurate while the 270 wasn't. Couldn't justify keeping a less accurate, less powerful and more annoying gun when I had that 06.
Bob

Art Eatman
May 14, 2010, 08:51 AM
Going back to the "Why?" of the original question. Remember that? :)

Armed Bear is correct...

Back in 1923, and continuing on into the 1960s if not later, factory '06 loads were limited to around 47,000 to 49,000 psi because of the older rifles. The .270 could be loaded to 50,000 to 55,000 psi without worry about low-number Springfield '03s.

With the lighter bullet, this gave higher MVs and flatter trajectories. Complaints from hunters about meat damage caused the introduction by Winchester in 1933 of the 150-grain loadings at lower velocities.

So sayeth Phil Sharpe; he was there.

If you run across a copy of Sharpe's "Complete Guide to Handloading", buy it. Aside from multitudes of load data, it gives some bit of history about just about every factory cartridge and wildcat used prior to around 1951. Aside from beaucoup other all-inclusive information and histories.

Kernel
May 14, 2010, 01:59 PM
The Army developed the .30-06 to effectively kill draft horses at 1000 yds through the use of volley fire. (Remember, the military is always preparing for the LAST war). Civilian arms manufactures realized it was overkill for 90% of most North American hunting. The .270 was introduced to provide less recoil and a flatter trajectory, while still retaining the general form factor and powder capacity of the .30-06 case.

rdb
May 14, 2010, 02:35 PM
Because God wanted a nice hunting rifle.

Model 70 in .270.:evil:

sig220mw
May 14, 2010, 09:20 PM
The 270 has great ballistics, good sectional density, not a lot of recoil and kills like a lightning bolt.

I've never had to shoot an animal twice with a 270.

jlbpa
May 15, 2010, 10:06 PM
I know why..... load up a .270 with a 110 grain hornady. Then load up a 30-06 with a 110 speer. Now tell me which one looks sexy. The 30-06 looks like a stumpy girl with no neck who wants to go home to momma....the .270 looks long and lean and ready for anything. ;)

Al LaVodka
May 15, 2010, 10:25 PM
Invented?

To make Jack O'Conner a career!?

Al

dgarvin1
May 16, 2010, 03:09 PM
Someone said that without Jack O'Connor, the 270 likely would have faded into obscurity. I disagree.

I think the fact that the .270 shoots flat, hits hard, and is perfect for most North American game is the reason why it is one of the most popular calibers ever.

If you enjoyed reading about "Why was the .270 invented?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!