Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
? .270
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="royinidaho" data-source="post: 449246" data-attributes="member: 2011"><p>I note that the 270 cal discussion has risen to a new level. Very interesting, being one that is addicted to the 270.</p><p></p><p>Bryan and Kevin represent their backgrounds very well. Logical, experienced, educated and business like.</p><p></p><p>jwp475 presents a good summary.</p><p></p><p>As for the SMK. I'm with Kevin on that one. Who's dumb design was that? It has the poorest bc of the bunch......Plus doesn't shoot for squat in any 270 I've tried it.</p><p></p><p>Bryan and Kevin's post clearly why a company wouldn't spend the resources to develop a higher bc offering in the caliber. The logic is reasonable.</p><p></p><p>Kevin's closing statement: "Great cartridge for the game fields, and that's enough to justify its existence" Is what jirks my girdle!!!</p><p></p><p>"..enough <strong><em>JUSTIFY</em></strong> its existence." Where is the drive going to originate to <em><strong>Magnify</strong></em> its its existence.</p><p></p><p></p><p>By magnify I mean achieve maximum performance, as a LR game caliber. I consider 150 grain offerings the beginning of the top end weights for the Winchester and at the bottom end for WSM.</p><p></p><p>The other posters including the thread starter, bigngreen, BigSkyGP, et al and myself seem to be suggesting, "why not!"</p><p></p><p>There have been several here who have used the WC 169 in the Win and shot well with it. It should do well in the WSM. But find some!</p><p></p><p>150 NBT @ 3600 opened its chute beyond 1k. The NBT's bc at 0.496 is dismal.</p><p></p><p>A 270 cal bullet @ 3300-3400 FPS holding together is going to be a challenge</p><p></p><p>A decent performing, ballistically and terminally, 0.6xx 277 bullet in the 160 gr class will bring hunting performance to higher level of confidence.</p><p></p><p>Will a bullet manufacturer jump on it? Probably not in the near future. It just doesn't pencil out business wise.</p><p></p><p>Here's what I'm betting. Some nondescript, never heard of fella, with drive, commitment, stupidity and little respect for a dollar will come up with something that some, such as the posters on this thread, will develop into small blip on the charts and get some attention.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="royinidaho, post: 449246, member: 2011"] I note that the 270 cal discussion has risen to a new level. Very interesting, being one that is addicted to the 270. Bryan and Kevin represent their backgrounds very well. Logical, experienced, educated and business like. jwp475 presents a good summary. As for the SMK. I'm with Kevin on that one. Who's dumb design was that? It has the poorest bc of the bunch......Plus doesn't shoot for squat in any 270 I've tried it. Bryan and Kevin's post clearly why a company wouldn't spend the resources to develop a higher bc offering in the caliber. The logic is reasonable. Kevin's closing statement: "Great cartridge for the game fields, and that's enough to justify its existence" Is what jirks my girdle!!! "..enough [B][I]JUSTIFY[/I][/B] its existence." Where is the drive going to originate to [I][B]Magnify[/B][/I] its its existence. By magnify I mean achieve maximum performance, as a LR game caliber. I consider 150 grain offerings the beginning of the top end weights for the Winchester and at the bottom end for WSM. The other posters including the thread starter, bigngreen, BigSkyGP, et al and myself seem to be suggesting, "why not!" There have been several here who have used the WC 169 in the Win and shot well with it. It should do well in the WSM. But find some! 150 NBT @ 3600 opened its chute beyond 1k. The NBT's bc at 0.496 is dismal. A 270 cal bullet @ 3300-3400 FPS holding together is going to be a challenge A decent performing, ballistically and terminally, 0.6xx 277 bullet in the 160 gr class will bring hunting performance to higher level of confidence. Will a bullet manufacturer jump on it? Probably not in the near future. It just doesn't pencil out business wise. Here's what I'm betting. Some nondescript, never heard of fella, with drive, commitment, stupidity and little respect for a dollar will come up with something that some, such as the posters on this thread, will develop into small blip on the charts and get some attention. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
? .270
Top