Why no 27-08?

Probably same reason for no commercial production of .257-08... "25Souper".

7-08 was first developed as a 500m silhouette round, and there were match bullets available for it. It grew out of the 7BR Remington, big green was on a metric kick. Like the creedmore more recently, it caught hunters attention as well (albeit much more gradually) and the rest is history. When it came out, metrics were starting to be "cool" and inch designations passe. Had they called the .260 the 6.5-08, we'd probably not have the 6.5 Creedmoor. The .270 Redding wildcat is a fine round, and easily formed with commercially available dies and reamers, so if you need something to bridge the gap between the .260 and 7-08, you can have it.

We have both 6mm rounds (6mm Rem & 243 Win), a 6.5 (260), and the 7-08. When the 270 was introduced, no metrics in that range were available. Now with those rounds, any .277 on the 308 case would be moot.

Newtosavage said:

I ask because the .270 was such a wildly popular hunting round, I'm just surprised nobody "shrunk" it down to a short action.

Click to expand...

The problem is - the .270 would lose its "magic" with the reduction in case capacity - which, for that caliber, is near optimum.

A slightly skinnier 7mm-08... or fatter 260 Rem - would not kill game any better.

Perfect... is.

P.O. Ackley proved that.


Although - if they did?

They could up the twist rate - and replace all the now obsolete 6.5 and 7mm shorties.






GR

Don't worry, it will be next year's super hot must have defeats all others uber long range tactikewl hot stuff: the 27 Creedmoor.

LRDGCO said:

Don't worry, it will be next year's super hot must have defeats all others uber long range tactikewl hot stuff: the 27 Creedmoor.

Click to expand...

Like a... Creedwaymoor?






GR

LRDGCO said:

Don't worry, it will be next year's super hot must have defeats all others uber long range tactikewl hot stuff: the 27 Creedmoor.

Click to expand...

And brew the coffee in the morning.

There is only .007" difference between 7mm and .277. The 270-08 would be the ballistic twin of the 7mm-08.

Ackley did try the 277-08, and found it only gave up about 50 FPS vs. the 270. So it would be a nice round. But still, that space is occupied by the 7mm-08.

I think maybe the closest we currently have is the 6.8 SPC but the case is based on the old 30 Rem.

denton said:

There is only .007" difference between 7mm and .277. The 270-08 would be the ballistic twin of the 7mm-08.

Ackley did try the 277-08, and found it only gave up about 50 FPS vs. the 270. So it would be a nice round. But still, that space is occupied by the 7mm-08.

Click to expand...

Yep, the .270 is a bit of a powder hog just for Bambi thumping duty, not terribly efficient. A .270-08 pushing 130s along with only 50 fps lower velocity would have been a better deer cartridge, but with only 0.007" difference in bullet diameter, you'd just be reinventing the 7mm-08

What is firearms development without the next iteration of the wheel?

Don’t use logic in front of marketers because they will laugh you out of the room.

Give them what they want and make what will sell. No other reasoning.

Once in a while there is something truly interesting but then they have to spend billions to convince folks of its merits.

There are people who just buy guns because they think they are neat and there are firearms enthusiasts who really analyze these things. Gun companies wish all the enthusiasts would go away so they would not get in the way of them being able to produce whatever they wanted to sell to the folks who just buy the next new thing.

Hyperbolic speech ended.

Isn't there a 270 Federal essentially a 27-08?

Post #13 is the truth. Do y'all ever start kinda wishing the marketing people would shut up while we, the customer base decide for ourselves what we'd rather have? They think we're here to serve the markets rather than the markets serving us.

Newtosavage said:

I ask because the .270 was such a wildly popular hunting round, I'm just surprised nobody "shrunk" it down to a short action.

Click to expand...

Well, they kinda did. 270 WSM is a short action 270. And it's better than the 270 ballistically. But it has a sharp kick and wears barrels out.

Newtosavage said:

I ask because the .270 was such a wildly popular hunting round, I'm just surprised nobody "shrunk" it down to a short action.

Click to expand...

There is loading data in Ackley book. You might want to build one since you don't like 270.

There is a wildcat 27-08 out there, but I'd have to look again to find the name, it just doesn't answer any niches.

Goes back further, there is an established wildcat .270/.300 Savage for the Model 99, predating the .308.

Newtosavage said:

There are so many calibers based on the .308 parent case, why have I never seen one that uses the .277 bullets?

I'm a huge 7mm-08 fan, but for most medium sized game, a .277 diameter bullet would seem ideal out of that sized case.

Click to expand...

7mm bullet diameter = .284"

.270 bullet diameter = .277"

Is there really that much to be gained by dropping 0.007"?

If you wrap a sheet of paper around a .270 bullet, it is now the diameter of a 7mm.

Have one built if you want one. You for sure be the first kid on the block to have one lol.

BigBlue 94 said:

Well, they kinda did. 270 WSM is a short action 270. And it's better than the 270 ballistically. But it has a sharp kick and wears barrels out.

Click to expand...

Only if you load it up to compete with a 7mm Rem. Mag. Load it to .270 Win. level, and it doesn't kick as hard and barrels last longer. Load it down to 7mm-08 levels and it kicks even less, and barrels last longer still. The .270 WSM handloaded, is extremely versatile. And unless you buy Nosler brass, components are affordable.

Anyone with a Salvage action laying around can give the .270-08 a try, ARP has barrels for some reason:

https://www.ar15performance.com/inc/sdetail/38016/51091