Calvin45
Well-Known Member
Rubbish!!!! It's what the 30-06 would be if it was interesting!!!
Whats the cartridge you LOVE to HATE?
- Thread starter Thebobcat
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Well that's your opinion and that's all it is
Well it got your attention so are you coming out of the closet?
crm3006
Well-Known Member
.270 Winchester. Kicks like a **** mule, won't do anything a .30-'06 can't do better.
Once again an opinion.
Calvin45
Well-Known Member
Doesn't kick as hard as a .30-06, neither kick hard enough to warrant serious complaint
But seriously, my first deer as a kid was taken with a .30-06. My first deer rifle to call my own was a .270. I appreciated then as a scrawny gangly 14 year old that it really didn't kick much…
I'll never be without a 270Doesn't kick as hard as a .30-06, neither kick hard enough to warrant serious complaint
But seriously, my first deer as a kid was taken with a .30-06. My first deer rifle to call my own was a .270. I appreciated then as a scrawny gangly 14 year old that it really didn't kick much…
Calvin45
Well-Known Member
Sho Nuff'
I honestly still think of it as the cartridge that hasn't figured out it's not a magnum.
Kinda funny the 270 Win was the creedmoor of the late 1920's.
And until recently the 270 Win had crap for b.c. bullets it just pushed them hard.
Calvin45
Well-Known Member
But it wasn't! It almost flopped, mediocre sales for a decade plus (due mainly to the availability of inexpensive milsurp 30-06 rifles and ammo) until Jack oconner basically single handedly turned it into a success.Kinda funny the 270 Win was the creedmoor of the late 1920's.
If the present day hornady hype-squad marketed the 270 back then you know it'd be an INSTANT commercial success (and probably have a lot of BS claimed about it too)!!!
That's the entire point of this thread
Calvin45
Well-Known Member
can't argue with that…but until relatively recently the amount of people (and rifle/optic combos) that had any real business or capability of shooting at game beyond 400-500 yards was exponentially lower than what is the case today. Heck I'm not old but I know when I was a kid, among the very accomplished hunters and proficient shooters I knew, 300 was considered a far poke, 400 was long range, and 500 and up was deemed akin to stunting.
Inside those ranges a bc of .35-.5 doing 3000 ish feet per second has little real world disadvantage to higher bc bullets, especially if they're starting off slower, and the .270 by virtue of muzzle velocity keeps impact velocity at "emphatic" levels (over that 2400-2600 mark) for lighter framed big game farther out than the , .30-06, .303, .300 savage, and other common big game cartridges of that era while having the projectile mass to be decidedly more suitable for elk, moose, black bears and such than any quarter bore or 6.5 of its era (and I don't think it's any less suitable for those bigger animals at normal ranges than any 6.5 today either).
I absolutely agree with ya, if designed today it would make no sense, the long sloping shoulder, the handicap of the 10 twist…but in its day it really was a step forward in cartridge performance that came to success over time, not overnight, because it actually does work wonderfully and was able to do things few of its competitors could do and hits a lot of "sweet spots" for terminal and external ballistics in conjunction with acceptable recoil for ordinary hunters at the far end of "conventional" hunting ranges.
timo308
Well-Known Member
Why can't any manufacturer keep the brass i want in stock?
