270 vs 308

[d2wing]

Why fool with trying to push the 270 as upgrade to a 7 MM mag. Better in every performance measure.

 

[Elkins45]

we have put alot of meat in the freezer with a 243 and 270. but 308 is always on the shelf when everything else is gone.

My experience is the opposite. In an ammo panic the guys who own military pattern guns like the M1A snap up all the 308 while the pure hunting cartridges like 270 are on the shelf a lot longer

 

[Chuck R.]

Why fool with trying to push the 270 as upgrade to a 7 MM mag. Better in every performance measure.

Actually it's not so much "pushing" it as it it putting back where it used to be. The original .270 130 grain loads were over 3100 FPS. It was neutered sometime later.

The .270 Winchester was released in 1925 chambered in the Model 54 bolt action rifle. The first factory load featured a 130 grain bullet at a muzzle velocity which closely approached the factory advertised figure of 3160fps from the 54 rifle's 24" barrel.

https://www.ballisticstudies.com/Knowledgebase/.270+Winchester.html

Or:

The cartridge was initially commercially loaded to drive a 130 grain (8.4 gram) bullet at approximately 960 m/s (3,140 ft/s), later reduced to 930 m/s (3,060 ft/s), demonstrating a high performance at the time of its introduction while being marketed as a suitable cartridge for big game shooting in the 270 to 460 metres (300 to 500 yd) range.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.270_Winchester

If that's not enough, here's more published load data from Speer:

That shows 7 loads over 3000 FPS and 4 loads at over 3100.

https://reloadingdata.speer.com/Dow...chester-with-130-gr-spitzer-sp-hot-corpdf.pdf

Now I've shown 4 different sources of published data that show that 3100+ is possible in a .270W with the 130 grn.

So honestly ,which part of loading to published loads, doing due diligence to normal load work up, is "fooling" or "pushing"??

 

[Slamfire]

I don't know, but with my limited experience with two .270 Winchesters 3100 was easily attained with either IMR4831 and H4831SC and that was over 2 different chronographs.

View attachment 1101301

So while each rifle/barrel is individual, but there appears to be a lot of data supporting being able to drive a 130 grain at over 3000FPS.

I have five 270's that I can think of. Did a lot of chronographing, the tightest barrel is the most accurate, and the slowest. Blows primers before the other barrels. It is what it is.

Velocities were a primary selling point before the current obsession with ballistic coefficient. I know from 1920's American Rifleman magazines, the authors were claiming a 150 in a 30-06 going 3,000 fps. I am not getting that in a 26 inch barrel, so I wonder how they did it in 24 inch barrels.

For some reason, American shooters have obsessive behaviors with 3000 fps. If 3000 feet is converted to meter, 914 meters, would 914 meters per second sound as impressive, or would it have to be 1000 meters per second?

 

[jmorris]

would there be much difference for deer hunting in the 200 yard range?

Coke vs Pepsi, if you can put them both in the same spot with the same quality of bullet.

 

[JFrank]

Coke vs Pepsi, if you can put them both in the same spot with the same quality of bullet.

Coke is better.

 

[d2wing]

Actually it's not so much "pushing" it as it it putting back where it used to be. The original .270 130 grain loads were over 3100 FPS. It was neutered sometime later.



https://www.ballisticstudies.com/Knowledgebase/.270+Winchester.html

Or:



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.270_Winchester

If that's not enough, here's more published load data from Speer:

That shows 7 loads over 3000 FPS and 4 loads at over 3100.

https://reloadingdata.speer.com/Dow...chester-with-130-gr-spitzer-sp-hot-corpdf.pdf

Now I've shown 4 different sources of published data that show that 3100+ is possible in a .270W with the 130 grn.

So honestly ,which part of loading to published loads, doing due diligence to normal load work up, is "fooling" or "pushing"??

A 7 MM is bigger, heavier and faster and more accurate.

 

[Chuck R.]

A 7 MM is bigger, heavier and faster and more accurate.

And that has to do with a .270 easily reaching 3000 with a 130 grain how exactly??

And a .300WM is bigger and faster than a 7mmRM right? The the .300PRC slightly outdoes the .300WM and on and on and on, and to top it off there's a good chance my barrel is longer than yours.

My last few posts were in response to this:

The chart in post #43 is widely optimistic about 270 Win velocities. I did get 3000 fps with 130's in my FN Deluxe, no apparent pressure signs at the range and no sticky extraction. Yippie! All the happeness ended when I found that the primer pockets were so expanded that primers would not stay in.

Which I think I've pretty much debunked by posting a plethora of published loads exceeding 3000 (and 3100 even). No reports of blown primers, dogs and cats living together, just tested and published data. Now IF you're still not getting it, I can keep posting published load data that counters the above quote until the cows come home.

Uh OH, here's another!

https://www.barnesbullets.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/270WinchesterForWeb.pdf

Those crazy risk taking Barnes guys pushing a 130 to 3173FPS! I'm guessing they were trying to out horsepower the 7mm RM by using a case that holds significantly less powder!

Again, it's not about pushing a .270 to exceed a 7mm Mag as you implied earlier, it's about loading the .270 to it's potential.

But then again, *** cares?

 

[Shanghai McCoy]

Coke is better.

Unless it was "New" Coke...

 

[WisBorn]

I love my 7rm....
I thought the thread was about 270-308???

I guess I'll say it again. The 308 is as capable as the 270 at ethical hunting distance. It's ok Jack you can roll back over

 

[d2wing]

And that has to do with a .270 easily reaching 3000 with a 130 grain how exactly??

And a .300WM is bigger and faster than a 7mmRM right? The the .300PRC slightly outdoes the .300WM and on and on and on, and to top it off there's a good chance my barrel is longer than yours.

My last few posts were in response to this:



Which I think I've pretty much debunked by posting a plethora of published loads exceeding 3000 (and 3100 even). No reports of blown primers, dogs and cats living together, just tested and published data. Now IF you're still not getting it, I can keep posting published load data that counters the above quote until the cows come home.

Uh OH, here's another!

https://www.barnesbullets.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/270WinchesterForWeb.pdf

Those crazy risk taking Barnes guys pushing a 130 to 3173FPS! I'm guessing they were trying to out horsepower the 7mm RM by using a case that holds significantly less powder!

Again, it's not about pushing a .270 to exceed a 7mm Mag as you implied earlier, it's about loading the .270 to it's potential.

But then again, *** cares?

Because you responded to my post.

 

[JFrank]

I love my 7rm....
I thought the thread was about 270-308???

I guess I'll say it again. The 308 is as capable as the 270 at ethical hunting distance. It's ok Jack you can roll back over

How Dare you !!!

 

[citizenconn]

270 Win is long action 308 Win is short action of that matters to you.

I hear that quoted a lot of times and while it is theoretically true, there are several rifle manufacturers that use a long action for both short/long actions cartridges. So you might have to dig a bit deeper on the particular rifle you intend to use to make sure that's the case and then see if the weight difference or bolt throw is more than negligible

No disrespect intended to mcb.

I have more .308s than .270s but I really like the .270 a lot. I'm also a contrarian and still like using my .30-06. Luckily my boutique ammo loader (Dad) is happy to download (or upload) the .30-06 load if I request it.

 

[mcb]

I hear that quoted a lot of times and while it is theoretically true, there are several rifle manufacturers that use a long action for both short/long actions cartridges. So you might have to dig a bit deeper on the particular rifle you intend to use to make sure that's the case and then see if the weight difference or bolt throw is more than negligible

No disrespect intended to mcb.

I have more .308s than .270s but I really like the .270 a lot. I'm also a contrarian and still like using my .30-06. Luckily my boutique ammo loader (Dad) is happy to download (or upload) the .30-06 load if I request it.

I guess I was thinking about Rem 700's. 270 Win will not fit in a 700 Short Action nor any of the clones based directly on the 700. The Army's M24 is a 700 Long Action chambered in 308 Win, this was a deliberate decision knowing they would want the option to upgrade to a long action cartridge. This became the M2010 in 300 WM.

 

[mshootnit]

For open plains hunting without scope clicking, it is 270 all the way. Last year we ranged a buck at an even 300 yds moving up a hill after a doe. Was itching to put my crosshairs on from my 270 and squeeze. Would have been less comfortable with a 308 in that situation. Passed on the buck, wasnt big enough. Needed to grow.

 

[mshootnit]

would there be much difference for deer hunting in the 200 yard range? i know the 270 is flat and fast and i love it! but ammunition availability is becoming an issue. around here there seems to be much more 308 available than 270.
are there any serious drawbacks at this yardage for 308?

At 200 yds, not much difference.