Long Range Hunting Online Magazine


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


Reply

Why no 270-08 ?

 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #85  
Old 08-16-2013, 04:09 AM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 20
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  
Old 08-16-2013, 04:13 AM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 20
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  
Old 08-16-2013, 04:39 AM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 20
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  
Old 08-16-2013, 04:44 AM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 20
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  
Old 08-16-2013, 05:40 AM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 20
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
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Current Poll
Do you archery hunt for elk?
YES - 31.75%
60 Votes
NO - 52.38%
99 Votes
Not yet, but I plan to. - 15.87%
30 Votes
Total Votes: 189
You may not vote on this poll.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:11 PM.


Powered by vBulletin ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Management Powered by vBadvanced CMPS
All content ©2010-2014 Long Range Hunting, LLC