Why the .270 is obsolete

Status
Not open for further replies.
Newtosavage said:
The downrange velocity and energy are almost indistinguishable between the two but the 7mm-08 has noticeably less recoil.
Click to expand...
Physics would seem to indicate that equal downrange energy equates to equal recoil. If the recoil is noticeably different - I would attribute that to differences between rifles and not differences between the chamberings. But since bagging on chamberings seems to be the forum meme du jour - carry on.

CraigC said:
I don't understand the need to choose one and deride the rest. I grew out of that juvenile mindset years ago.
Click to expand...
No kidding. But Garandimal started being obnoxious about the 270 (and other topics) and evidently some folk just can't let it slide.
 
My 30-06 is obsolete too and not nearly as sexy as some of my other rifles, but I've killed more game with it than I have with anything else and the ammo is cheap and readily available.

Maybe being obsolete isn't always a bad thing.
 
rbernie said:
Physics would seem to indicate that equal downrange energy equates to equal recoil. If the recoil is noticeably different - I would attribute that to differences between rifles and not differences between the chamberings. But since bagging on chamberings seems to be the forum meme du jour - carry on.
Click to expand...

That is not true. In any mechanical system energy output does not equal energy input. Powder charge weight contributes to recoil.
 
For equal-weight rifles, the comparative recoil is easily found. For each cartridge, add the weight of powder and bullet; then multiply by muzzle velocity. Divide either by the other to compare recoil, as a percentage difference.
 
someguy2800 said:
That is not true. In any mechanical system energy output does not equal energy input. Powder charge weight contributes to recoil.
Click to expand...

Your strictly correct but felt-recoil is such a nasty difficult subject to try to compare/discuss in all but the most constrained situations as so many many different factors effect the user's felt-recoil experience. I have shoot over a hundred rounds of 338 Lapua in a session and was not even sore due to the gun I was using. I have shot half a box through an ultra-light weight 308 Win and it left a noticeable bruise.

If you have two very specific cartridges you can estimate or measure the differences in recoil impulse but that does not take into account the weight of the rifle, the presence and efficiency of any muzzle device, and a plethora of other ergonomic factors that will effect each individual experience.
 
I call it the uncle curse.

So many people's Dad or Grandpa had a 30-06 for years and lived and died by that round but it seemed there was always an obnoxious brother, uncle, great uncle, that had a 270 Win and a loud mouth. Always saying how much better and flat shooting his 270 Win is than that 30-06 and with less recoil yada yada.

After having to listen to the loud mouth uncle so many people developed a hate for the 270 Win that followed them throughout life. If you pay attention you will notice the haters will always say, "I'll admit I've never liked the 270 Win even before I knew about ballistics." So basically they had an ignorant view of the round and therefore found any negative they could to justify their feelings.

Garandimal is being that uncle and people are coming out of the woodwork to bash the round. Either side can be as nice or obnoxious as they want, still doesn't change the performance of the cartridge and the designer wasn't the one being obnoxious so why attack his design?

Downing the 270 Win because of Garandimal or your Uncle being obnoxious is like the anti gun folks going after guns because some idiot shot someone.

Think about that.
 
I originally bought the .270 Win because the club where I shot running deer and both 50 and 100 yard turkey shoots banned my .22-250 and I didn't want to shoot my .30-06 for that venue. The 90 grain Sierra handloaded fairly light made a pretty good turkey shoot load and shot to the same POI as my 130 grain, hot, flat, maximum "Maine distance" round (about 400 yards) using Reloder 22, that went out of my 24" barrel at about 3,200 fps.

The 130 grain load took at least 10 Maine deer at ranges between 30 and 350 yards. I've never felt "under-gunned" or over-gunned with the .270 Win.; not that it's the best cartridge or the most versatile for those folks who don't reload.

Using that turkey-shoot load, I won several turkey shoots, and a couple of running-deer shoots and the Best Damn Shot in Maine" contest.

So, the flexibility of the .270 Win, along with the somewhat lower recoil than the .30-06 proved to be a winner for me in several ways. I have two of them that shoot under 3/4 MOA, after some judicious bedding and careful handloading, and feel "blessed" to have discovered the joy of using that wonderful round for all my deer hunting. (My son loves the gift of my old Rem. 700 BDL, 30-06 and I've never missed it.)

I was also fortunate to have a one-shot kill on a large, moving bull moose at 270 yards two years ago, using handloaded, 140 grain Nosler Bonded Ballistic Tips in my 'new' Rem 700 CDL Stainless-Fluted.
 
TN Outlaw said:
I call it the uncle curse.

So many people's Dad or Grandpa had a 30-06 for years and lived and died by that round but it seemed there was always an obnoxious brother, uncle, great uncle, that had a 270 Win and a loud mouth. Always saying how much better and flat shooting his 270 Win is than that 30-06 and with less recoil yada yada.

After having to listen to the loud mouth uncle so many people developed a hate for the 270 Win that followed them throughout life. If you pay attention you will notice the haters will always say, "I'll admit I've never liked the 270 Win even before I knew about ballistics." So basically they had an ignorant view of the round and therefore found any negative they could to justify their feelings.

Garandimal is being that uncle and people are coming out of the woodwork to bash the round. Either side can be as nice or obnoxious as they want, still doesn't change the performance of the cartridge and the designer wasn't the one being obnoxious so why attack his design?

Downing the 270 Win because of Garandimal or your Uncle being obnoxious is like the anti gun folks going after guns because some idiot shot someone.

Think about that.
Click to expand...

You have a good point. I have a 270 and like it, don't really have anything bad to say about it in fact, even though I do have other cartridges I like better. I'm just so tired of hearing about how great it is that it just goes in one ear and out the other.
 
rbernie said:
Physics would seem to indicate that equal downrange energy equates to equal recoil. If the recoil is noticeably different - I would attribute that to differences between rifles and not differences between the chamberings.
Click to expand...

One would think, but these are identical rifles. Both stainless Tikka T3's so they even have the same action weight.
 
TN Outlaw said:
Downing the 270 Win because of Garandimal or your Uncle being obnoxious is like the anti gun folks going after guns because some idiot shot someone.

Think about that.
Click to expand...

I can assure you that isn't the case with me. I actually CHOSE the .270 in a stainless Tikka T3 for my son, because he liked my Tikka T3 in 7mm-08 so much, and I wanted to give him a rifle for which factory ammo was more available and less expensive. The ballistics are so close it's not even worth talking about, so I figured the .270 was a no-brainer for him. It's only now that I have the opportunity to shoot two identical rifles side by side in both calibers, that I have noticed the difference. The .270 burns a lot more powder and has noticeably more recoil shooting a 150 grain bullet at 2800 fps. than my 7mm-08 has shooting a heavier bullet (162 grains) 125 fps. slower.

It is what it is.
 
jmorris said:
Better is different than obsolete.

A T bone and a hotdog are both meat and both wind up pretty much the same in the end. Neither is obsolete as food and “better” is subjective.
Click to expand...

But you can get a slow cooked rotisserie hot dog at almost any gas station on the planet. You can’t say that about a T-Bone.

Plus, when you boil it down to what’s most important, they both will make a turd.
 
Newtosavage, Is that 270
Newtosavage said:
I can assure you that isn't the case with me. I actually CHOSE the .270 in a stainless Tikka T3 for my son, because he liked my Tikka T3 in 7mm-08 so much, and I wanted to give him a rifle for which factory ammo was more available and less expensive. The ballistics are so close it's not even worth talking about, so I figured the .270 was a no-brainer for him. It's only now that I have the opportunity to shoot two identical rifles side by side in both calibers, that I have noticed the difference. The .270 burns a lot more powder and has noticeably more recoil shooting a 150 grain bullet at 2800 fps. than my 7mm-08 has shooting a heavier bullet (162 grains) 125 fps. slower.

It is what it is.
Click to expand...
You did same with 6.5CM with that 270.
avatar_m.png
Newtosavage Member
Joined:
Nov 30, 2015
Messages:
2,214
Alaskan Ironworker said: ↑
Cant find creedmoor chambered in a crown jewel,(96 mauser) lol. I was just being a smart ass, calm down creedmore hipsters. I respect your “new cartridge” which has already existed for a hundred years, but it is not and wont ever be a .270. Only my opinion...
And wasn't ever designed to be.

I have in my stable right now, my buddy's Tikka .270 that I have been working up loads for, and a Savage build that currently wears a 6.5 CM barrel. Taking them both to the range, and shooting factory ammo from both, I'm getting 2875 fps. out of the .270 Hornady ELD-X load, and 2700 fps. out of the 143 grain 6.5 CM Hornady ELD-X load. Both are almost exactly the velocity printed on the box, so no surprises. Both are shooting right at 1" and the .270 recoil is noticeably more than the 6.5 CM - both in 7 lb. hunting rifles.

Does the .270 "outperform" the 6.5 CM? I guess so, but it also produces more recoil. So to me, this is simply a matter of choosing the amount of recoil your shooter or you are willing to tolerate, and then selecting a proven chambering that produces that amount of recoil. Nothing more, nothing less.

Newtosavage, Mar 16, 2019 Report
#13 Like
 
CraigC said:
Is the .270 "no longer used"? According to the list you posted, it's #19 and right ahead of the .45Colt. Which is more popular now than at any other time in history.

The above mentioned .348Winchester is a good example of a cartridge that is actually obsolete.
Click to expand...

Uh, I never implied that it was obsolete.
You said that I didn't understand what obsolete meant.
I posted that information to prove that it was not obsolete. And the definition to prove that I fully understand the meaning.
Sorry if you took it some other way.
By your reply I am assuming you took my post as an attack, it was not. It was just information. Period.
No hard feelings here.
 
TN Outlaw said:
I call it the uncle curse.

So many people's Dad or Grandpa had a 30-06 for years and lived and died by that round but it seemed there was always an obnoxious brother, uncle, great uncle, that had a 270 Win and a loud mouth. Always saying how much better and flat shooting his 270 Win is than that 30-06 and with less recoil yada yada.

After having to listen to the loud mouth uncle so many people developed a hate for the 270 Win that followed them throughout life. If you pay attention you will notice the haters will always say, "I'll admit I've never liked the 270 Win even before I knew about ballistics." So basically they had an ignorant view of the round and therefore found any negative they could to justify their feelings.

Garandimal is being that uncle and people are coming out of the woodwork to bash the round. Either side can be as nice or obnoxious as they want, still doesn't change the performance of the cartridge and the designer wasn't the one being obnoxious so why attack his design?

Downing the 270 Win because of Garandimal or your Uncle being obnoxious is like the anti gun folks going after guns because some idiot shot someone.

Think about that.
Click to expand...

We are a Stoic, thick-skinned, long-lived bunch.

Weathered by adversity - but unscathed and undeterred.

Buoyed by Physics and Empirical truth, we celebrate the joy of hunting/shooting a round that is truly worthy of our praise and affection.

And you will find no "safe spaces" or Encounter Groups with us.


Hate?

RUSS-TROLL-DOLL-SOLDIER-MILITARY-55%E2%80%9DTall-Orange-Hair.jpg
"Now, show us on the doll where the .270 Winchester touched you..."
​
:D




GR

​
 
Last edited:
old heeler said:
Newtosavage, Is that 270

You did same with 6.5CM with that 270.
View attachment 834586
Newtosavage Member
Joined:
Nov 30, 2015
Messages:
2,214
Alaskan Ironworker said: ↑
Cant find creedmoor chambered in a crown jewel,(96 mauser) lol. I was just being a smart ass, calm down creedmore hipsters. I respect your “new cartridge” which has already existed for a hundred years, but it is not and wont ever be a .270. Only my opinion...
And wasn't ever designed to be.

I have in my stable right now, my buddy's Tikka .270 that I have been working up loads for, and a Savage build that currently wears a 6.5 CM barrel. Taking them both to the range, and shooting factory ammo from both, I'm getting 2875 fps. out of the .270 Hornady ELD-X load, and 2700 fps. out of the 143 grain 6.5 CM Hornady ELD-X load. Both are almost exactly the velocity printed on the box, so no surprises. Both are shooting right at 1" and the .270 recoil is noticeably more than the 6.5 CM - both in 7 lb. hunting rifles.

Does the .270 "outperform" the 6.5 CM? I guess so, but it also produces more recoil. So to me, this is simply a matter of choosing the amount of recoil your shooter or you are willing to tolerate, and then selecting a proven chambering that produces that amount of recoil. Nothing more, nothing less.

Newtosavage, Mar 16, 2019 Report
#13 Like
Click to expand...

Aside from the creep factor...

The .270 is such a well known ubiquitous cartridge that of course a lot of other cartridges will be compared to it. Other than that, I don't get your point.
 
Matthew Clark said:
Uh, I never implied that it was obsolete.
You said that I didn't understand what obsolete meant.
I posted that information to prove that it was not obsolete. And the definition to prove that I fully understand the meaning.
Sorry if you took it some other way.
By your reply I am assuming you took my post as an attack, it was not. It was just information. Period.
No hard feelings here.
Click to expand...
I wasn't responding to you at all but the OP. I don't know why you'd think I was responding to you. Your post was #7 and mine was #16.

It's the OP that doesn't seem to know what "obsolete" means. :confused:
 
Porterhouse and my 30-06 pump action. There. Now it’s settled.





Just stirring the pot, boss. Just stirring the pot.
 
Some years ago.... probably 30-35 my hunting friend and I were at a farmer's house fixing to go deer hunting. The land owner's son was about 15-16 at the time and they had just bought him a deer rifle a few days prior. It was a Remington 700 .270 ADL with a walnut stock (an explanation of how long ago its been).
We were sighting in rifles in the owners back yard which opened into a large partly wooded area. The 700 was laying across the hood of a pickup truck when the owner said to me "pick it up and shoot it", which I did. After the recoil it took a few seconds for me to realize if I was dead or alive...my gawd what a massive recoil. I cranked another round it to it and WHAM... same thing. The boys father said "kicks a bit huh?"
 
Newtosavage said:
Just got a Tikka .270 in trade from a good friend.

I've been a 7mm-08 fan for about 25 years now but I am very familiar with the .270 and it's history as a well-regarded hunting round with millions of devout fans.

What's curious to me however is that after hand loading for both now, all I get out of the .270 over the 7mm-08 is more recoil. That's it.

Here's why I say that. My "heavy" load for the 7mm-08 is a 162-grain ELD-X (BC. .612) going 2675 fps.

My "heavy" load for the .270 is a 150 grain Accubond LR (BC. .591) going 2800 fps.

The downrange velocity and energy are almost indistinguishable between the two but the 7mm-08 has noticeably less recoil.

Tell me again why the .270 is better?
Click to expand...
That 150 gr. 270 can be pushed to over 2900 according to Hodgdon. Maybe not in all rifles though...
If you could get there though you are talking 200-225 fps advantage for the 270 along with the respective gain in Point blank zero. It can matter.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Garandimal
  • Locked
Why does the 6.5 Creedmoor Crowd claim the 143 ELD-X as the Bullet that Beats the .270 Winchester?
2 3 4 5 6 7
Replies
172
Views
15K
Art Eatman
A
N
  • Locked
Why isn't the 7mm-08 more popular?
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Replies
178
Views
20K
Robert
Robert
N
  • Locked
Why not the .284 Winchester?
2
Replies
41
Views
5K
Varminterror
Varminterror
Garandimal
  • Locked
An Interesting Coincidence: .270 WCF and 6.5x55mm
Replies
10
Views
849
Dr T
Dr T
T
  • Locked
First rifle, Tikka T3 lite - 7mm-08 or 270?
2
Replies
39
Views
6K
Art Eatman
A
Back
Top