Elkins45
Member
I always assumed it was an outgrowth of the development work for the .276 Pederson, but I was seemingly wrong. I just Googled it and the .276 Pederson was actually a .284 bore according to the Wikipedia article.
.270 Caliber. Why?
- Thread starter Laphroaig
- Start date
- Status
AABEN
Member
The 270 is a neck down 30.06
Zeke/PA
Member
Well, maybe, but Jack was a .270 afieciando and he made the same of quite a few of us who took his word as Gospel!
Jack was NOT a bull#### artist and he personally experienced everything that he wrote about!
Arkansas Paul
Member
When comparing apples to apples (ie the same bullet weights) there is very little difference in bullet drop.
I'm looking at the charts right now and it is showing the .270 with 130 grain bullet dropping 11.57 inches at 300 and 50.9 at 500 yds.
The .30-06 with 150 grain bullets is dropping 13.3 inches at 300 and 55.3 inches at 500 yds.
I don't think that would be considered "much" flatter.
This does not answer the original question but I am absolutely sold on my 270 cal: the 270 WSM. Especially in a light rifle that truly takes advantage of the short action, such as my Kimber 8400M classic. I have heard that the Montana is also nice. 270 WSM shooting 140 gr. Accubond or 130 gr. Sierra is outstanding on the prairie. In the fast and versatile category I would recommend over even the 257 Weatherby mag. which was said to be Roy Weatherby's favorite.
Not always the case with Elmer Keith.
lysanderxiii
Member
The .276 Pederson chambering has a .284" groove diameter, .277 bore diameter. the bullet is .284"
7mm is almost exactly .276"
.284 is actually 7.21mm
ThomasT
Member
There was a very good answer in post #17 and #23. You can also order the issue of Handloader Magazine the information came from by contacting Wolfe Publishing. Get the February 2003 issue #211 and read the article for yourself.
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2003
- Messages
- 13,342
H&Hhunter:
I was waiting for you to add a post, so I could ask what you think of Weatherby's new (to-be-released in 2016) 6.5X.300 Wea Mag?!
Geno
That and the .26 Nosler are stupid human tricks. Throat eroding, over bore and a waste of gun powder. I might have to have one!
MachIVshooter
Member
Sounds like my thought process!
I think I'll finally get around to building my 29" barreled 6mm-06 AI in 2016! 107 gr. SMKs exiting the muzzle at about 3,700 FPS should leave few praire rats or coyotes out of reach!
outlawjw
Member
I just happen to have a 300 weather by accumark that is in need of a new barrel .I will just have to check that option out. I love a magnum!
"Military type cartridge" as in long distance rifle? Because it had been solidly established before WWII that most engagement distances were well under 300 meters. Intermediate cartridges like 5.56x45mm and 6.8SPC allow many more cartridges to be carried for the same mass and weight, and are more useful as general issue cartridges than high power "battle rifle" cartridges.
John
Was there a cartridge firing a .277 bullet when the 270 was invented?
I wonder if it is a coincidence that .277 is exactly 7.0 mm. Someone at Winchester could have had a bunch of ballistic curves and made the case that a true 7mm bullet was the Holy Grail of bullets.
I wonder if it is a coincidence that .277 is exactly 7.0 mm. Someone at Winchester could have had a bunch of ballistic curves and made the case that a true 7mm bullet was the Holy Grail of bullets.
jgh4445
Member
DrT, Didn't Remington name it the 7MM Remington Express first? Then there was a lot of confusion between it and the 7MM Rem Magnum so they changed the name to the .280 Rem.? I think I remember reading that. I may be wrong. wouldn't be a first.
tactikel
Member
Lyman reloading Handbook 49 edition states "some sources indicate the bullet diameter may have been based on an obscure prototype for a Chinese military cartridge dating to the turn of the century". That's 1900.
IIRC The Hunter's Encyclopedia (a 1940's edition) recounted the same basic tale.
Likely the contract called for a 7mm rifle- .276 caliber. Winchester lost the bid but had the tooling. A bit of R&D showed the potential, and it was proprietary, every bullet and cartridge came from Winchester. The rest is history.
IIRC The Hunter's Encyclopedia (a 1940's edition) recounted the same basic tale.
Likely the contract called for a 7mm rifle- .276 caliber. Winchester lost the bid but had the tooling. A bit of R&D showed the potential, and it was proprietary, every bullet and cartridge came from Winchester. The rest is history.
Two reasons, well... Three.
USAmericans did not wish to have a rifle designated in millimeters at that time.
The .270 is a necked down .30-06, and coincidentally, when resized, rarely needs trimming to length. That was on purpose.
It was something new and different, and we all know gun writers have to proclaim something new and different to attract readership and legions of fans...
USAmericans did not wish to have a rifle designated in millimeters at that time.
The .270 is a necked down .30-06, and coincidentally, when resized, rarely needs trimming to length. That was on purpose.
It was something new and different, and we all know gun writers have to proclaim something new and different to attract readership and legions of fans...
There are several cartridges based on the 30-06. They all started as wildcats (a bullet/cartridge combination that wasn't being used by someone else) and later adopted by a major company. Of coarse there's the 30-06, wildcats that I know of include the 25-06, 270 Winchester, 284 Remington, 338-06 and 35 Whelen. Then there are the so called "Improved" chamberings where the neck is blown out slightly to increase capacity just a smidgeon for no real performance benefit. Until recently (basically with the 7mm mag, and it just barely) Americans weren't receptive of the metric cartridges to the point where if a company would release a new chambering in a metric designation it would be ignored but if the company renamed it in a decimal type it would be accepted, they used what would sell.
J-Bar
Member
I looked in "The Rifle In America" by Philip B. Sharpe, first published in 1938:
"The .270 Winchester is another one of those necked-down cartridges using the .30/06 as its basis of development. This was first produced by Winchester in 1923 but not announced for at least three years following this. This author first saw and shot the .270 in a visit at the Winchester Laboratories in 1923. The gun was the experimental Model 54 which had not at that time been produced. This .270 cartridge has a much lighter recoil than the .30/06 and is very pleasing to use in a rifle as light as 7 pounds. When Winchester announced it with the 130-grain bullet it achieved almost immediate popularity throughout the United States..."
Mr. Sharpe goes on to describe various bullet weights produced "...only by Winchester and Western..."
So from this I gather that choosing .270 allowed Winchester to corner the market on the ammunition production, and that the .270's popularity may not have depended on Mr. O'Conner as much as we have been led to believe.
I love my Ruger #1 in .270 Winchester. It is a lot shorter than most bolt guns which makes it handy on a deer stand. And I have never had to take a second shot with it for the sixteen deer I have taken since purchasing it in 1999. The deer go down fast. Whatever Winchester's reasons were for developing this cartridge, I'm glad they did.
"The .270 Winchester is another one of those necked-down cartridges using the .30/06 as its basis of development. This was first produced by Winchester in 1923 but not announced for at least three years following this. This author first saw and shot the .270 in a visit at the Winchester Laboratories in 1923. The gun was the experimental Model 54 which had not at that time been produced. This .270 cartridge has a much lighter recoil than the .30/06 and is very pleasing to use in a rifle as light as 7 pounds. When Winchester announced it with the 130-grain bullet it achieved almost immediate popularity throughout the United States..."
Mr. Sharpe goes on to describe various bullet weights produced "...only by Winchester and Western..."
So from this I gather that choosing .270 allowed Winchester to corner the market on the ammunition production, and that the .270's popularity may not have depended on Mr. O'Conner as much as we have been led to believe.
I love my Ruger #1 in .270 Winchester. It is a lot shorter than most bolt guns which makes it handy on a deer stand. And I have never had to take a second shot with it for the sixteen deer I have taken since purchasing it in 1999. The deer go down fast. Whatever Winchester's reasons were for developing this cartridge, I'm glad they did.
MachIVshooter
Member
It was the .280 first. Big green tried the 7mm Express nomenclature in an attempt to bolster sales, following the tremendous success of the 7mm Mag, as well as improved sales of the 6mm Rem after renaming it from .244 Rem (the name change also indicated faster rifling twist in so chambered rifles in the case of the 6mm). But the ensuing confusion between 7mm Express and 7mm Mag caused them to revert back to the original moniker in short order.
barking_dog
Member
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2014
- Messages
- 4
Like J-Bar, I don't know why it was created but it has served me well. I've not shot anything larger than a white tail but have very rarely had to make more than one shot to get a clean kill.
Cocked & Locked
Member
Why? I don't know why, I just know it to be a great cartridge. I bought this Remington 700 .270 new in 1988. I put a newer factory stock on it (pictured) several years ago. I've shot nothing but whitetail deer and hogs with it...130 grain bullets.
I'm giving it to my 15 year old grandson for Christmas and miss it already. A couple weeks ago he shot a deer DRT at a GPS measured 240 yards with a borrowed from a friend Ruger American .270.
I'm giving it to my 15 year old grandson for Christmas and miss it already. A couple weeks ago he shot a deer DRT at a GPS measured 240 yards with a borrowed from a friend Ruger American .270.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
