.270 and 6.5x55?

[Abel]

Between the two, I'd have to go with the 25-06 instead.

 

[vaupet]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.