close
Long Range Hunting Online Magazine


Go Back   Long Range Hunting Online Magazine > Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment > Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics

Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics Applied Ballistics

Reply

Why no 270-08 ?

LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #85  
Unread 08-16-2013, 04:09 AM
Bronze Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 33
Re: Why no 270-08 ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by benjamin2515101 View Post
I might have missed it, but why didn't anyone mention the .260 Remington (used to be the 6.5-08 A-sqare)? Same thing you want in grains and fps, with a great selection of high BC bullets and commercially available brass. Only 13 thousandths difference, same bullet weights available. 7mm-08 is even less diameter difference, maybe just less velocity. I just don't think you'd see any real difference in the field after you put the effort into the wildcat. There is also a 6.5-06, if you want the fps advantage over the .260 Rem. If you really want some power behind a 130-140gr bullet, look at the .264 Win Mag.

If I were going to insist on the .270 caliber, I think you can't go wrong with the original. I have a friend that loves his .270 WSM, a real flat shooter.
The 270wsm is not the original.
Reply With Quote
  •   #86  
    Unread 08-16-2013, 04:13 AM
    Bronze Member
     
    Join Date: Jul 2013
    Posts: 33
    Re: Why no 270-08 ?

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by msalm View Post
    Ding ding ding, Benjamin just nailed it. I just glossed through this whole thread and was wondering why in the hell the 260 was completely glossed over. Better selection of bullets, more than capable of elk @ 300, low recoil, GREAT round! Why in the blazes would you want to go to a bullet a few thou larger with less than half of the selection of bullets?

    It's called thinking out of the box - making things happen.
    Reply With Quote

      #87  
    Unread 08-16-2013, 04:39 AM
    Bronze Member
     
    Join Date: Jul 2013
    Posts: 33
    Re: Why no 270-08 ?

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MontanaRifleman View Post
    Why? Becuase if you have the availability of the 7-08 why do a 270-08 It's almost the same thing except the 7 has a much better selection of bullets, headstamped brass and off the shelf dies. .277 vs .284 - the diff is .008


    But hey, if it floats your boat (or his boat) then go for it. You should be able to get dies for about $200
    No. The difference is .007
    I don't know why remington created the 280 when the diff is .007 Not worth it.
    Reply With Quote
      #88  
    Unread 08-16-2013, 04:44 AM
    Bronze Member
     
    Join Date: Jul 2013
    Posts: 33
    Re: Why no 270-08 ?

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MontanaRifleman View Post
    Plus 1. That would interesting, except I would go a little heavier to help absorb some recoil. Hopefully more bullet choices will appear in the .277 cal

    Plus 2.

    Hopefully research and development will be done for high BC bullet choices in .277 cal
    Enough of the stupid boring same old 130 gr, 140 gr, 150 gr.

    examples: 129 gr, 132 gr, 137 gr, 141 gr, 146 gr, 151.5 gr, 158 gr, 162 gr
    Reply With Quote
      #89  
    Unread 08-16-2013, 05:40 AM
    Bronze Member
     
    Join Date: Jul 2013
    Posts: 33
    Re: Why no 270-08 ?

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by J E Custom View Post
    Hey . are you still catching flack about building a 270 ?

    In addition to my love for shooting and building guns, I really like some trivia and I think you will enjoy
    this little tidbit.

    First to all of the 7mm fans (I am one of them to) when you do the conversion from MM to .000 the 270
    is closer to a true 7mm (7mm = .27559) than a .284. (7.22mm = .2842).

    So It looks like your 270/08 is in truth a 7mm.

    In 1925 when Winchester decided to come out with the 270 WIN they did not like the Idea of calling
    it a 7mm/06 because the Chinese already had a 7mm cartridge so they named it the 270 Winchester.

    The 6.8 mm is very close to the .264 (.2677) so it looks like the folks that name there cartridges have
    played wild and loose with there metric designations. So the 6.8 (.277) is actually also a 7mm.

    It goes on and on. I thought everyone would get a kick out of this And hopefully they wont throw away
    all of there 7.22 mm rifles, to build a 270.

    J E CUSTOM

    Let me put it clearly:

    .277 inches = 7.0358 mm

    .284 inches = 7.2136 mm

    7 millimeters = .2755 in
    Reply With Quote
      #90  
    Unread 03-09-2016, 03:09 PM
    Bronze Member
     
    Join Date: Aug 2015
    Location: Rural PA
    Posts: 83
    Re: Why no 270-08 ?

    Actually i have a custom built 270-08, its a remington 700 action with a barrel i got made at my local gunsmith shop. It was a mcgowen barrel blank and i have a boyds stock it. Nothinng special but i dropped a bear at 280 yards this year! I use a 130 amax on top of varget powder
    Reply With Quote
      #91  
    Unread 03-09-2016, 03:12 PM
    Platinum Member
     
    Join Date: Jan 2008
    Location: Falls Church, VA
    Posts: 3,474
    Re: Why no 270-08 ?

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Deerslayer11 View Post
    Actually i have a custom built 270-08, its a remington 700 action with a barrel i got made at my local gunsmith shop. It was a mcgowen barrel blank and i have a boyds stock it. Nothinng special but i dropped a bear at 280 yards this year! I use a 130 amax on top of varget powder
    Nothing quite like waking up a three year old thread!

    You shot a bear with an Amax? Bullet seems kinda fragile for a tough animal like a bear.
    __________________
    I'm not gonna shoot here. I'm gonna shoot waaaaaaaay over there!
    Reply With Quote
    Reply

    Bookmarks

    Thread Tools
    Display Modes



    All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:45 PM.


    Powered by vBulletin ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
    Content Management Powered by vBadvanced CMPS
    All content ©2010-2015 Long Range Hunting, LLC