.270 and 6.5x55?


PDA






browncoatdawn
October 31, 2011, 09:50 PM
I am looking for impressions on both, .270 win and 6.5x55 swedish.

I have noticed a LOT of used, in excellent condition .270 win cal rifles around here for sale at reasonable prices. There are several Win model 70's on the rack at 2 of the shops I have been to here lately. I have gathered that the round must be quite good, but I have never shot one, and know nobody who has one. There are no ranges around that rent anything really, and that's sad.
So what are they like? Recoil? Round performance?
I don't plan on hunting with it as of right now, but if I did, it would be Iowa deer, or perhaps hog if I take a trip down south. Other than that, I just like to have choices, and ammo is widely available for this cal.

My other questions are similar, about the 6.5x55mm swedish round,
I won't hunt anything but paper with this, but I understand it's a military round, and available in some surplus rifles. I happen to love C&R firearms, and am about to file for my C&R license soon. I just want to know what to expect from this.

I see many well seasoned shooters here, with a wide variety of experiences, so I'm asking the questions here.

Thanks all,
Dustin

If you enjoyed reading about ".270 and 6.5x55?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
GJgo
October 31, 2011, 10:01 PM
In the most basic terms I'd say the 270 kicks harder, but it's also easier to get ammo for if you don't reload. Either will take deer no problem. I'd vote 270 if you're only going to have one game rifle, and the Swede if you're into having multiple calibers.

303tom
October 31, 2011, 11:25 PM
My .270 kicks harder than my Swede, they both work great on everything up to moose. I buy most all my ammo from Midway & they always seem to have a great selection of both. I can get 6.6x55 for about 17 bucks a box & .270 runs about the same.

sixgunner455
October 31, 2011, 11:35 PM
.270 is a great round. I've seen it drop a running cow elk, flat, with one shot. Much more pleasant to shoot than .30'06, and flatter shooting. I like it.

I hear great things about the 6.5 Swede, but I've never seen one.

ColtPythonElite
October 31, 2011, 11:42 PM
I know of several fellows that choose customs built in 6.5 Swede because of it's inherent tendency to be very accurate and pretty darn flat shooting.

2ndtimer
October 31, 2011, 11:46 PM
The Swede kicks less, ammo is tougher to find, and modern rifles are somewhat rare. The .270 Win is a top medium game cartridge, isn't bad in the recoil department, has ammo readily available anywhere that sells ammo and is reasonably priced. I have both, although my .270 is the Winchester Short Magnum version. It shoots a little flatter than the standard .270 and has more expensive ammo, but since I handload, it isn't a problem for either cartridge. I agree with the poster that recommended the .270 Win for the one gun guy, and the 6.5x55 if you plan on owning several different rifles. I kind of like having something a little different.

Mr. T
November 1, 2011, 01:32 AM
I would look for a Remington Model 700 (one of the older ones) in .270 Win. I picked up a used one up a couple of years ago that had a Simmons scope on it and got it at a local sporting goods store for $300. At first I thought something might be wrong with it, but looked it over carefully and it was in apparently good shape. I think that it has been the best rifle purchase I've made for the money. The gun easily shoots MOA at 100 yards. It's been a really good gun. My son shot his first Whitetail with it at over 200 yards; it dropped at 6 point buck in his tracks one shot...it never moved....needless to say I was impressed with the performance. I'd recommend the .270 to anyone hunting game in North America.

R.W.Dale
November 1, 2011, 02:38 AM
Besides 30/06 and in some cases even beating it you'll find more bolt action rifles used in 270 win than in pretty much all other calibers combined.

You'll have such a vastly superior selection of rifles to find one that suits you best ill always recommended 270 to the bolt action hunting rifle beginner.

And flame me all you want but there's not a dang thing that a 6.5x55 will do that a 270 wont do just as well

posted via tapatalk using android.

Gunnerboy
November 1, 2011, 06:46 AM
The 6.5x55 ballistically with its BC and penetration is very similar to the 3006 and in power similar to a 308 so yeah its probably one of the best rounds out there.

303tom
November 1, 2011, 09:19 AM
I don`t know why everybody says the 6.5x55 is so hard to find, Midway has over 20 different makers, bullets, & weights on the shelf !!!!!!!!!!!

BoilerUP
November 1, 2011, 11:26 AM
You can expect roughly 3000fps from a 22" .270 Win using a 130gr bullet and 60.0gr H4831SC.

You could expect 2900fps+ from a 22" Swede using a 130gr bullet and less than 50 grains H4831SC (or H4350 or RL17)...assuming you were using a modern action.

The 6.5mm bullet will also have ballistic coefficient and sectional density superior to its .277 competition.

But...ya can't pick up a box of Swede at your average Wal-Mart.

WayBeau
November 1, 2011, 01:30 PM
Can't speak to the 270, but I wouldn't get rid of my swede for anything. In fact, I'm looking to buy another one. Remington made the 700 in 6.5x55 a while back and Ruger has produced the #1 in 6.5x55, so modern versions are out there. I've found that you have to be super quick and almost grab them as they're coming in the door. My local shops can't keep them around. The kick is marginal and it's the flatest shooting round I've ever shot.

mgmorden
November 1, 2011, 02:06 PM
Both are good rounds. Both tend to be very inherently accurate. .270 will kick a LITTLE harder and is deadly out to slightly longer distances.

It's largely a toss-up. I will say that I've owned both, and I still own the .270.

IMHO though, if you're willing to reload, my favorite light-recoiling rifle I own is a .257 Roberts. To me its the absolute PERFECT balance of everything for a whitetail cartridge.

NCsmitty
November 1, 2011, 09:01 PM
As much as I like my 6.5x55 rifles, a M38 Swede and a M98 rebarrel, it's hard to fault a 270 Win for all around deer/hog use. Fairly flat shooting, and energy levels approaching 308 Win, it does recoil a bit more than a 6.5x55, but it is using 10gr more powder.

The superb ballistic coefficient of the 6.5 caliber bullets, allows the Swede to close some of the ballistic difference over longer ranges, but the 270 will get the job done if you can tolerate the extra recoil over the Swede.

I have a 270 Win also, but I haven't shot it in a couple years.


NCsmitty

R.W.Dale
November 1, 2011, 09:34 PM
Again we get that entirely false mantra of "superior ballistic coefficient" repeated by the Swede look aid drinkers.

This is the 21'st century we have. 277" vld's. In hunting bullets it doesn't really matter what caliber you choose 6.5, .277, 7mm or 30 Cal there is a bullet that will match what's avalible for 6.5 in terms of BC within a close enough degree to not matter.

I rank the belief in 6.5mm magic right up there with the Easter bunny or Santa clause

posted via tapatalk using android.

ArtP
November 1, 2011, 09:42 PM
To do a fair comparison you have to compare ballistics with the same sectional density. It this case,a Swede 129 grain is about the same as a 270 in 140 grain. Comparing the same SD is going to get you about the same BC too from similarly designed bullets. The .270 is 300fps faster according to my 7th ed. Hornady book, which will be slightly flatter shooting, bringing more energy and a bigger hole, at the cost of a little more recoil.

Ultra-premium brass is easy to come by from the Scandinavian makers for the Swede, something that I've found tough to find for my .270. There are likely for more rifles available chambered in .270.

NCsmitty
November 1, 2011, 10:05 PM
I rank the belief in 6.5mm magic right up there with the Easter bunny or Santa clause

Boy, I hope you don't spread this around and burst someone's bubble.


NCsmitty

bobnob
November 1, 2011, 10:06 PM
I handload two different loads for my .270 Win:

- A 150 SST at 2925 fps. Has some recoil but hits very very hard right out to 500y. I seldom shoot quite that far out. This is not an excessive load.
- A 130 Hot Cor load at about 2975. This slightly exceeds the hotter 6.5 Swede loads and is very mild to shoot, very little kick and a milder report, more of a crack than a boom.

Both loads shoot to the same POI with almost the same trajectory out to about 400y, but I essentially have a 270 and a 6.5 in one. The lighter loads are great for when a mate uses the rifle who doesn't shoot as much.

But you can't load a 6.5 up to 270 specs.

browncoatdawn
November 2, 2011, 01:22 AM
I have noticed that there are lots of nice model 70 Winchesters for sale, used, of course, for a good price. I'm seeing most around $375-450 depending on wear, character marks, and the glass that it wears.

I don't see many of the 6.5 rifles around, but since I love the old surplus rifles, and love to shoot them, I would love impressions and any advice on the surplus rifles that are commonly found.

The .270 is a curiosity of mine right now, and I have far too many curiosities when it comes to things that go bang. I pretty much want to own one, or a dozen, of everything, so a solid model 70 would not hurt the collection.

I currently have an old savage 22 hornet, I forget the model, it's 2 hours away in my dads safe, and I have the action for an SMLE but that't it.
I have a Remington 700 in .308, topped with an older fixed 4x Burris scope.
I have a few others, well, more than a few, but most are .22lr and other varmint rounds.

I am currently looking at the 2 rifles I mentioned earlier, but would love to pick up a full, functional SMLE, and got eyes on MN 91/30. Can anyone possibly direct me to any place that carries the SMLE?

Got eyes open for an M1 carbine also, I love them.

Thanks everyone!

AK_Maine_iac
November 2, 2011, 01:58 AM
Quote:
I rank the belief in 6.5mm magic right up there with the Easter bunny or Santa clause
Boy, I hope you don't spread this around and burst someone's bubble.

Yes Santa is for real. I live next to him. But that is a different topic:)
http://www.santaclaushouse.com/

Back on topic. I do not own a 270 at this time. Have in the past. I do have and like my 6.5x55. I have to may 30.06 relatives as it is. ( 35 Whelen 25.06 30.06 and it's baby brother 308) I am thinking about a 338.06 just to round of the family.

BoilerUP
November 2, 2011, 02:33 AM
Again we get that entirely false mantra of "superior ballistic coefficient" repeated by the Swede look aid drinkers.

This is the 21'st century we have. 277" vld's. In hunting bullets it doesn't really matter what caliber you choose 6.5, .277, 7mm or 30 Cal there is a bullet that will match what's avalible for 6.5 in terms of BC within a close enough degree to not matter.

I rank the belief in 6.5mm magic right up there with the Easter bunny or Santa clause

There's absolutely nothing "magic" about 6.5mm...but ballistics don't lie.

Yes there are some high BC bullets for the 270; the .277 150gr Berger Hunting VLD has a BC of .531 and an SD of .279 and the .277 150gr Hornady Interbond and SST have BC of .525 and SD of .275.

Compare this with the .264 130gr Berger Hunting VLD, with its .552 BC and .266 SD...which is much better than its equal-weight .277 130gr Berger Hunting VLD counterpart which has .452 BC and .241 SD.

But since most folks don't hunt with VLDs of any flavor, let's look at the 130/140gr Nosler Accubond offerings.

130gr 264: BC .488, SD .266
130gr 277: BC .435, SD .242
140gr 264: BC .509, SD .287
140gr 277: BC .496, SD .261

Additionally, the Swede loaded in a modern action (ie. not the century-old Mauser load manuals are written for) gets the shooter to the same velocities as the 270 with less powder burned and less recoil. That doesn't matter for some, but does matter for many. As said previously though, you can get 270 ammo anywhere but aren't going to find Swede on the shelves of many Wal-Marts.

In the end, however, I agree that no game animal is going to be able to tell the difference between any well-placed 6.5mm-7.62mm bullet.

ArtP
November 2, 2011, 02:42 AM
There's absolutely nothing "magic" about 6.5mm...but ballistics don't lie.

130gr 264: BC .488, SD .266
130gr 277: BC .435, SD .242
140gr 264: BC .509, SD .287
140gr 277: BC .496, SD .261


I do own a .270, but my next rifle just might be a .260. I could care less about playing favorites. But I do have this to say...

You're not playing fair. The only real way to compare is compare performance of equal SD. You're comparing 130 to 130 & 140 to 140. Because the .270 has a slightly larger diameter, its equal weighted counterpart in the smaller 6.5 will always fly better.

I mentioned a 129g Swede has the same SD roughly as the 140g .270 (similar bullet profiles). Go run your numbers with similar SD's and see where you come up. Do you notice as the SD drops, so does the BC? Well no kidding.

Use your same analogy to run the 22LR against a 45ACP. Use a 40 grain bullet for both and see where you wind up (imagine dimensions). Now play it out in your mind - what a 40 grain .22 would look like and how it might shed velocity and how a 45ACP 40 grain would look and how it would shed velocity. No offense, but you're missing out on an entire dimension.

Though the diameter difference of 6.5 & 6.8 are smaller, it does matter when you run ballistics. So please, use the same SD.

BoilerUP
November 2, 2011, 03:17 AM
I'm not sure how comparing bullets of equal weight, which will fly at roughly the same velocities from their respective rifles meaning equal energy at the muzzle, isn't considered "playing fair".

What you're talking about is part of the "6.5mm magic" mentioned upthread - lighter bullets than larger calibers to achieve the same BC/SD, allowing equal velocities yet less recoil and powder burn.

In other words, why use a 140gr .277 or 180gr .308 bullet when a 130gr 6.5mm gives equal ballistics and does the job more than sufficiently?

That doesn't make the 6.5mm better or "magic" than a 270 or 30-06...but what it does make it is more efficient. Again, that doesn't matter to everybody, but it matters to many.

I own a 270...it was my first deer rifle and I cherish it; I'm hoping to fine tune a 150gr Gameking load tomorrow as a matter of fact. That said, my primary deer rifle for the last few years has been a 260. I see no need to subject myself to more recoil & powder consumption when a smaller, lighter, easier-kicking rifle is available...which is more conducive to practice and provides nearly identical energy on target.

ArtP
November 2, 2011, 03:42 AM
If you want to compare ballistics, all I'm saying is to compare them with the same SD. It's the only fair way to do it.

Once that's done, you will find equivalencies between calibers (usually), if you use comparable SD's. Some calibers use "lighter for caliber" bullets, and some "heavier for caliber". There's usually a trade off. But if you compare calibers with THE SAME SD, you will be comparing on a more even playing field.

Ask yourself this... What does SD mean to you? Really, Boiler, what does it mean? To me, it means the relation between a bullets length and its diameter. It's the difference between throwing spears or throwing round balls. Spears will always fly further and penetrate deeper.

Once you compare SD between 6.5's and .270's you will discover the 6.5 does offer an unusually high SD bullet, which equates to higher BC as well -- but it's at the cost of velocity.

For example... A 6.5 Swede will shoot a bullet weighing 160 grains, with an SD of .328, but only at 2300fps. The .270 can't match that SD, but it can throw a .287 SD 150 grain bullet at 2900.

There's always a trade-off.

Your claim to more efficiency must consider bullet diameter to have any credibility. Your smaller caliber 6.5 may well indeed burn less powder, achieve similar velocity and have a great SD. But it may also lack the diameter and inertia (mass) to make the same wound a 270/7mm/308/30-06 would make.

There is no free lunch!

Personally, I think a 6.5 is an excellent deer cartridge and quite enough to take deer. But if you'd like to make the claim it's a better caliber for deer than a .270, because it's more efficient, I'd ask you to also then say, the other calibers I mentioned are more than what you might need for the job -- NOT that they're they're inferior.

""I'm not sure how comparing bullets of equal weight, which will fly at roughly the same velocities from their respective rifles meaning equal energy at the muzzle, isn't considered "playing fair". ""

What you wrote is ignoring bullet diameter, frontal area and momentum. It's no different than forgetting about car weight when comparing horsepower. You forgot a major component.

Caddisflied
November 2, 2011, 05:07 AM
I don't see many of the 6.5 rifles around, but since I love the old surplus rifles, and love to shoot them, I would love impressions and any advice on the surplus rifles that are commonly found.

A couple things to consider if you're comparing a more modern Win 70 in 270 to an older vintage 6.5 Swedish Mauser.
The older Swedes don't handle as much chamber pressure as modern rifles, but they still make a fine deer rifle.
Also, I don't think there's a good way to mount a scope on an old Swede without altering it in some way which would affect it's value to a collector.
But they're very accurate with the original iron sights

The wood on my 1920 CG m\96(B) has been notched to accommodate mounts that clamp on over the receiver.
I just put the mounts back on last saturday to try out a 3 x 9 Bushnell Elite 3200 that a buddy wants to sell.

Abel
November 2, 2011, 05:13 AM
Between the two, I'd have to go with the 25-06 instead.

vaupet
November 2, 2011, 05:59 AM
First , I don't hunt, I only shoot at the range, so I don't have to carry my guns very much.

I do know that I almost always take along my Carl-Gustav and i rarely take my Interarms Mark X in 270.
The Swede is so much Sweather (the rifle weighting 50% more helps of course)

I also have a custom uild sniper rifle on order in 6,5x55.

6,5x55 is plenty available at 23/box20, compared to 270 at 38/box20

BoilerUP
November 2, 2011, 07:47 AM
What you wrote is ignoring bullet diameter, frontal area and momentum. It's no different than forgetting about car weight when comparing horsepower. You forgot a major component.

Not that I'm terribly interested in a pissing match, but this simply isn't correct.

Basic physics says if you throw two equal masses at equal velocity, they have the same energy. In other words, doesn't matter if you have a Honda Civic loaded down with steel or a UPS truck - if they both weigh 8,000lb and are moving 60mph they have the same kinetic energy.

In my above example, a 130gr 6.5mm bullet and a 130gr .277 bullet both exiting the muzzle at 3000fps. Leaving the muzzle in that scenario, both the Swede and 270 will have roughly 2600 ft/lb of energy. And yes, a Swede can push a 130gr bullet just as fast as a 270 can in a modern action, contrary to what load manuals written for 100yr old Mausers say, and do so with nearly 20% less powder.

Of course the UPS truck and Civic above can maintain velocity on their own and a bullet slows once it leaves the muzzle. Because of this, bullet shape then plays a major role in maintained velocity at a given distance, which directly impacts energy. The smaller diameter bullet has to be longer to be the same weight as a larger diameter bullet, giving it higher SD, making it more aerodynamic, allowing it to lose less velocity and energy to drag over distance. That higher sectional density allows it to penetrate further than a larger diameter bullet with lower sectional density, which while poking a slightly smaller entrance hole, may allow it to break bone, expand more, and exit the off side.

Exactly how much of a difference are we talking here, though? At 500yd, the difference between the Swede & 270 each shooting a 130gr Accubond @ 3000fps is 60fps and 70ft/lb energy in favor of the Swede...hardly enough for any game animal to notice. But that doesn't mean the difference doesn't exist, which is my entire point.

As I said before, none of the above makes the Swede or any other 6.5mm chambering "better" for hunting than anything offered between 6.8mm-7.62mm...the other intangibles it offers (more efficient use of powder, reduced recoil, ability to use a short action, oddball factor, etc) might do that, but only in the eye of each rifleman.

ArtP
November 2, 2011, 07:56 AM
What exactly is your point? The 270 is more powerful -- hands down. I tried to demonstrate that you were comparing apples to oranges when you compared equal weight 270 (6.8's) against 6.5's - regarding BC.

You cannot compare equal weights against different diameters. It's why I suggested comparing bullets with the same SD.

You obviously don't get and it might take you some time, to get it.

I tried.

O&O

By the way, in your original comparison, you compared SD and BC with the same bullet weight. I tried to school you, but you won't listen.

If you want to compare straight-up velocity with 130 against 130 -- my hornady 7th edition says the 270 is 3100fps while the Swede is 2700fps. That's 400 fps.

Those aren't equal. PERIOD!

My 7th edition book is from 2007.

I never doubted the Swede is a great deer caliber. I said the .270 is on a par and is also a great cartridge, albeit more power and more recoil. But the only thing it loses to the Swede is more recoil.

Your math was simply wrong and misleading. "Math" equals your weight to weight comparisons yet different diameters.

BoilerUP
November 2, 2011, 08:25 AM
What exactly is your point?

One that was obviously lost on you.

The 270 is more powerful -- hands down.

No denying that, and I've never said it wasn't. One would hope it would be "more powerful" using 20% more powder than the Swede.

This is kinda like the 30cal guys that say "...but you can't shoot a 180gr bullet from a 6.5mm." They fail to comprehend that you don't NEED a heavy bullet that sacrifices velocity to achieve high BC & SD with a 6.5, that's the "magic"!

You cannot compare equal weights against different diameters. It's why I suggested comparing bullets with the same SD.

But you HAVE to do that in order to get a fair comparison between two calibers - how much more apples-to-apples can a comparison get when bullet weight, bullet type, and muzzle velocity are all equal, with bore size being the only difference?

But to play your game, let's look at the 6.5mm 130 Accubond @ 3000fps vs. the .277 140 Accubond @ 2900fps. As noted above, the .277 has slightly higher BC and the .264 has slightly higher SD though both figures are VERY close (within 0.008).

At 100yd, the Swede has a 92fps advantage and the 270 has a 16ft/lb advantage. Out to 500yd, the Swede has a 68fps advantage and the 270 has a 10 ft/lb advantage.

Again, no game animal will ever notice the difference between the two...but your shoulder might.

Either are great hunting calibers; make yer pick and don't look back...

bobnob
November 2, 2011, 09:20 AM
I am sorry but the Swede will not get(s) the shooter to the same velocities as the 270 with or without less powder.

There is no way a Swede is getting a 150g bullet out there at 2950 fps.

And as for SD and BC. For a hunting bullet anything with a BC over .400 is entirely sufficient for shooting up to 500 yards, and an SD of .220 likewise is more than enough for anything.

A 300g 45-70 only has a SD of .204, is that heavy enough? And the difference between a BC of .450 and .500 is what, an inch at 500y at the same MV?

There's nothing wrong with the Swede, the fact that many choose to load their 270 down to 6.5 Swede levels says a lot in this regard. But the .270 Win is just a little bit harder hitting and as said earlier, can be easily loaded down to Swede performance, but that can't be done in reverse.

If you enjoyed reading about ".270 and 6.5x55?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!