Is the 270 Win going the way of the 280, and slowly dying?

[Mykolaivka887]

Moose are not exactly hard to get close to.

What is he shooting to justify those ranges?

That's what I said to him, about getting close. The point being, no reason not to have fun and get close to animals.

In reference to what caliber he's taking with him, I didn't ask. I really didn't care. The whole conversation with him was mute, in my way of thinking.

 

[Southern Lights]

Using Bison Ballistics Hit Probability Calculator with extremely favorable parameters for 1000 yard shot:

7mm 175 ELDX at 3300fps. G7 BC .347 and zero standard deviation in bullet drag between bullets.
1 MOA gun accuracy (not likely in field shooting)
Group standard deviation of only 0.5MOA
5 MPH wind with +-2MPH wind call deviation (elite level wind reading at 1000 yards)
10MPH wind with +-4MPH wind call deviation (extremely good wind reading at 1000 yards)
Wind direction variance +-10 degrees from 90
Target size 1MOA (10" at 1000 yards)

First 5MPH simulation: 20% hit rate
Second 10MPH simulation: 15% hit rate

In other words, 80% chance of missing or wounding animal at 1000 yards.
85% chance of wounding or missing if wind is 10MPH.

If you aren't a perfect 1 MOA shooter, hit probability drops in half plus easily. So basically 9 in 10 chance of miss or wounding animal.

The percentage odds for LR hunting are extremely bad even for elite-level shooters. Now add on that they are shooting in unknown locations with wind, compromised position, wet, cold, tired, etc. Odds are really really bad.


5MPH



10MPH

 

[Southern Lights]

Here is the same 10MPH data above, but we move to 300 yards. For making a hit, high BC is so far down the list vs. just getting closer. Here we increased the target size to 3MOA which will be about 9" kill zone at that range vs. the 1MOA/10" at 1,000 yards above.

The best single thing you can do to improve your chances of a hit is not BC, hyper accurate rifle, latest kestrel firmware, etc. But to simply get as close as you can. Also more fun...

Related to the thread, it also shows the 270 is still a great hunting round and more than capable of getting the job done at realistic hunting ranges.


T

 

[Marbles]

Here is the same 10MPH data above, but we move to 300 yards. For making a hit, high BC is so far down the list vs. just getting closer. Here we increased the target size to 3MOA which will be about 9" kill zone at that range vs. the 1MOA/10" at 1,000 yards above.

The best single thing you can do to improve your chances of a hit is not BC, hyper accurate rifle, latest kestrel firmware, etc. But to simply get as close as you can. Also more fun...

Related to the thread, it also shows the 270 is still a great hunting round and more than capable of getting the job done at realistic hunting ranges.

View attachment 740471
T

It can depend. I have seen animals in the mountains in both of the following conditions:
1. 20 mph sustained wind gusting up to 35 mph.
2. 15 mph sustained wind with gusts above 40 mph.

There is no way to accurately call that. With the 40 mph gusts at 70 degree angle, 3000 ft elevation with temp of 56 F, on a 9 inch target using Bison and my actual loads

223 wit 77 TMK (G7 .202, MV 2700)
-200 yards: about 50% hit probability
-85% probability at 70 yards

My actual 243 load with 108 ELDMs (G7 .270 MV 2780)
-200 yards: about 70% hit probability
-85% hit probability at 130 yards

There is a massive difference in closing to 130 yards vs 70 yards in the alpine.

Move to a .347 G7 of the 175 ELDX at 2900 (like a 7 PRC).
-200 yards: about 80% (75% allowing for significantly worse baseline precision due to recoil).
-85% at 170 yards

On the other hand, take 6mm 95 gr Partition at a 0.177 G7 BC and lets assume I can push it at 2900 fps.
-200 yards: 50%
-85%: 60 yards

So, I still think high BC bullets are a good idea, and velocity.

Like most things, there is a diminishing return. Functionally, there is a large difference between the 108 ELDM and a 95 Partition or 77 TMK. The number differences are about the same between the 108 ELDM and the 175 ELDX, but functional the difference is much less significant.

Another fix is don't be a bone head like me and don't walk ridge's when the wind makes you stagger like a pleasantly tipsy sailor.

Note, Bison will give different percentages if you run the exact same numbers. It is roughly +/- 3%.

 

[Southern Lights]

No doubt if you can shoot a higher BC bullet that's always gravy. It's more that at some point people use high BC to justify taking ridiculously long shots at animals vs. the much more likely short range scenario you point out.

I'm currently working up moving to copper bullets and making loads for the 129 LRX @3100fps and 110 TTSX @3400fps in the 270. The LRX has significantly higher BC, but when I look at the data in a spreadsheet, it all favors the much higher velocity for the situations I face in hunting and likely errors below. This assumes all shots under 400y for 2200fps impact velocity for the monos.

Again I think for monos, the 270 ain't dead yet. It has the power to drive 3100+ fps with 130gr and much faster with 110-120gr. This keeps the speed well into effective area for monos. I will be shooting them going forward and will report back how things go. But this is something for 270 lovers to consider and why I don't think it's going away any time soon (especially when more areas ban lead which I think is inevitable at this point).

My list of prioritized errors that have caused me and other people I've seen miss shots hunting. When I'm honest, a wind call is rarely the reason I've missed at reasonable hunting ranges (again 3-400y and usually much closer [under 200y]).

Below the lighter/faster bullet lowers recoil and lowers ranging errors which are biggest advantages vs. heavier bullet with higher BC which mainly helps in wind errors (or maybe very high winds as you discuss which is rare for me or I'd just try to get closer and accept the risk).

Missing a Shot During a Hunt​	Hunting Risk Priority​	Flat trajectory helps?​	Hvy bullet/high BC helps?​	​	​	​
​	​	​	​	​	​	​
Ranging errors.​	1​	Y​	N​	​	​	Flatter trajectory lowers chance of miss if range is slightly off.​
Animal moving off quickly/can’t re-range.​	2​	Y​	N​	​	​	Range changing rapidly with no time to adjust. +- 10-20y​
Too much recoil/hard follow-up.​	3​	Y​	N​	​	​	Lighter flatter shooting is lower recoil for follow-up shots.​
Accuracy in weird field positions (recoil).​	4​	Y​	N​	​	​	Less sensitive to weird position errors with less recoil.​
Under pressure breathing vertical shift.​	5​	Y​	N​	​	​	Flatter trajectory lowers vertical dispersion error.​
Horizontal wobble on shot under pressure.​	6​	N​	Maybe​	​	​	Both bullets affected. Maybe less on heavy bullet with wind added into error.​
Wind estimation error.​	7​	Maybe​	Y​	​	​	Marginal for hunting ranges 400 yards and closer.​

 

[BCD]

Mostly again I say that the chasing highest ultimate BC bullets for hunting is a waste. There are these fantasies of elk sniping across 800 yard ridge to ridge shots, but I've done a lot of long range comps even ELR out to 2K, and there is nobody reading this thread right now that has any business shooting at animals past 600y max. And really, it's more like 300y max in field conditions.

So with those criteria for me, basically any caliber will work for hunting and a 6.5 PRC isn't doing anything the 270 or even 308 is going to do at those ranges.

This is interesting. Is it really that rare for someone to be that accurate at longer distances-especially 400-500Y? Although I know I am certainly not, i do have a buddy that has shot multiple elk at ranges I would never attempt (one at 750Y and another that he shot twice in the chest at 830Y). He shoots a lot and routinely shoots prairie dogs in the 500Y range but maybe he is quite the exception.

 

[wind gypsy]

This is interesting. Is it really that rare for someone to be that accurate at longer distances-especially 400-500Y? Although I know I am certainly not, i do have a buddy that has shot multiple elk at ranges I would never attempt (one at 750Y and another that he shot twice in the chest at 830Y). He shoots a lot and routinely shoots prairie dogs in the 500Y range but maybe he is quite the exception.

I wont say nobody reading this has any business shooting at animals, especially large ones like elk, past 600 yards. But i agree that it's a very small percent. The WEZ calcs, CBC, and measured demonstrated competencies under time stress and field positions make that clear.

Lots of hunters have a high odds of wounds or miss at short distances but still fill some tags. That doesn't mean that wounding/missing half the animals they shoot at isn't sad and likely easily avoidable.

thinking about it more.. at 700+ yards an animal might not even run off if you buzz a bullet past him. They'll hang around and let people lob lead at them until they get killed sometimes. Because they got killed doesn't mean the first shots were well advised.

 

[Southern Lights]

This is interesting. Is it really that rare for someone to be that accurate at longer distances-especially 400-500Y? Although I know I am certainly not, i do have a buddy that has shot multiple elk at ranges I would never attempt (one at 750Y and another that he shot twice in the chest at 830Y). He shoots a lot and routinely shoots prairie dogs in the 500Y range but maybe he is quite the exception.

This is my personal opinion after watching even very good shooters make mistakes at range. I've done heaps of LR shooting, PRS matches, and ELR. There is a lot that can go wrong.

I was just discussing this yesterday with someone that for most people, they have already introduced 2-3MOA of error in their rifle system before the bullet has even left the barrel. This is their own errors when taking the shot, rifle system accuracy limits, scope limits, ammo limits, etc. If you've got it really dialed in, maybe I'd say you are 1.5MOA of error before the bullet leaves the rifle in field conditions.

I can shoot 1-0.5MOA on a flat range on a sunny day with perfectly set bipod, etc. That's not what we're talking about though.

At range for the average shooter in the field I'd suspect they have 2-3" of variability per 100y (2-3MOA error per 100y). At 300 yards they are at 6-9" cone of fire for the kill. For extremely dialed in shooters, they are 1.5" per 100y. They are then at about 4.5" cone of error as the bullet leaves the rifle at 300y (1.5" per 100y).

Then on top of this you add in wind which is an issue past 300y, and definitely an issue past 400y. This error varies substantially. Also, animals move a lot. You can shoot at the animal, it takes a step when you break the shot, and now the perfect shot is in the guts.

For the average shooter, they are already at max effective accurate range for them at 300y with 6-9" error. Add in a couple inches potential for wind and they are 8-10" cone of error. That is basically the kill zone for a deer sized animal. For most, 300y is their limit and that may be generous in the field.

For the expert shooter, if we ignore wind, their 1.5" of error is 9" cone at 600y. That is the likely absolute max they can do reliably under perfect conditions. Now you add in wind and I'd say again that range rapidly erodes to 4-500y max for them for reliable hits. That's just how the numbers work when you incorporate all these other factors the shooter has no control over as well.

With the above, and my own experience, when I hear these stories of really long shots on animals and they never wound any? Well I think that's just BS. They are missing and wounding and there is no way they can't be based on odds alone.

It's like someone coming up to me and saying when they go to Vegas they spin the roulette wheel 10 times and always win. I mean sure it could happen, but if I were allowed to bet against that happening on the table that would be the better way to use the money.

Those are just the numbers and no campfire story telling can change them!

 

[Southern Lights]

For those that didn't see the Backfire 600 Yard Challenge Video, these were the results from three shooters of probably better than average skill level. Those extended range shots 2-3 out of 8 is what I'd expect (note they could see their impacts and walk on following shots). At 3-400 yards you can see the odds are only slightly better, and even 200-300 is about 50% of kill zone shot in field shooting.

Anyway, supposed to be a 270 thread, so again I'd say at any reasonable hunting range the 270 is perfectly fine for just about anything you can hunt if you ignore all the long range snipers with their amazing hit rates on YouTube.

 

[MarkOrtiz]

I don't think so yet. My dad had a 270 when I was growing up, so when I went to get my wife an I a rifle for deer hunting we chose a 270 win also. Fast and Flat. Its taken all of our mule deer and pronghorn so far. Ammo is still easy to find. It's a very capable round that I think will hold on a little longer. The faster twist would definitely help it hang a little longer. Good velocity and it would help push those larger bullets that are popular these days.

 

[Formidilosus]

For those that didn't see the Backfire 600 Yard Challenge Video, these were the results from three shooters of probably better than average skill level. Those extended range shots 2-3 out of 8 is what I'd expect (note they could see their impacts and walk on following shots). At 3-400 yards you can see the odds are only slightly better, and even 200-300 is about 50% of kill zone shot in field shooting.

Anyway, supposed to be a 270 thread, so again I'd say at any reasonable hunting range the 270 is perfectly fine for just about anything you can hunt if you ignore all the long range snipers with their amazing hit rates on YouTube.

View attachment 740779

Probably no or that actually shoots long range and kills animals at long range has been more critical, or pushed more caution than I to do so. However, you also are tending the other way. The issue is above- “above average” means about 1-2 hours of correct teaching and practice for nearly anyone. The “average” shooter is so poor that it takes nothing to be “above average”.

With optimized techniques, proper practice, and correct rifle system- it takes about 500 rounds a year to be on demand (that is above 90%) at 450’ish yards on vitals of big game animals in the field. The issue is that very, very few are using optimized techniques, proper practice, or optimized rifle systems for field shooting (see all the videos posted).

To go to on demand at 600’ish takes well over 1,000 rounds a year with proper techniques, proper practice, and proper rifle systems. Once you start shooting past about 400-450 yards in the field, you MUST be practicing in novel, broken and mountainous field environments- shooting a thousand rounds on a flat range in the east, in no way prepares someone to call winds and make shots on animals in broken terrain.

 

[Southern Lights]

Probably no or that actually shoots long range and kills animals at long range has been more critical, or pushed more caution than I to do so. However, you also are tending the other way. The issue is above- “above average” means about 1-2 hours of correct teaching and practice for nearly anyone. The “average” shooter is so poor that it takes nothing to be “above average”.

With optimized techniques, proper practice, and correct rifle system- it takes about 500 rounds a year to be on demand (that is above 90%) at 450’ish yards on vitals of big game animals in the field. The issue is that very, very few are using optimized techniques, proper practice, or optimized rifle systems for field shooting (see all the videos posted).

To go to on demand at 600’ish takes well over 1,000 rounds a year with proper techniques, proper practice, and proper rifle systems. Once you start shooting past about 400-450 yards in the field, you MUST be practicing in novel, broken and mountainous field environments- shooting a thousand rounds on a flat range in the east, in no way prepares someone to call winds and make shots on animals in broken terrain.

There's a lot to go wrong at 500. At 600+ the chances of something going wrong rise massively.

When I see people shooting at animals past 600 and claiming they never wound, etc. I just think that's not true, or they've been extremely lucky.

EDIT: I wanted to add that I think all hunters should get LR training simply because it will make them better shots at closer ranges. It can help them develop good skills to use in the field and learn their own shooting limits with their gear. I think a lot of the LR hunting craze is being pushed by companies to sell products and not because it's a good idea.

I just heard a podcast with very good shooter Jon Pynch. At about 45:00 in he discusses long range hunting and how the more he shoots the less he thinks it's a good idea. Here is the clip below.

 

[BCD]

Probably no or that actually shoots long range and kills animals at long range has been more critical, or pushed more caution than I to do so. However, you also are tending the other way. The issue is above- “above average” means about 1-2 hours of correct teaching and practice for nearly anyone. The “average” shooter is so poor that it takes nothing to be “above average”.

With optimized techniques, proper practice, and correct rifle system- it takes about 500 rounds a year to be on demand (that is above 90%) at 450’ish yards on vitals of big game animals in the field. The issue is that very, very few are using optimized techniques, proper practice, or optimized rifle systems for field shooting (see all the videos posted).

To go to on demand at 600’ish takes well over 1,000 rounds a year with proper techniques, proper practice, and proper rifle systems. Once you start shooting past about 400-450 yards in the field, you MUST be practicing in novel, broken and mountainous field environments- shooting a thousand rounds on a flat range in the east, in no way prepares someone to call winds and make shots on animals in broken terrain.

Do you have any suggestions on where to go to get the right kind of training at a reasonable price? I'm in WI if that matters.

 

[Formidilosus]

There's a lot to go wrong at 500. At 600+ the chances of something going wrong rise massively.

Of course it does. Hence the corresponding rise in correct practice in field environments.

When I see people shooting at animals past 600 and claiming they never wound, etc. I just think that's not true, or they've been extremely lucky.

I can only speak for myself and those I have hunted with (there are quite a few RS members that have seen me shoot quite a few animals at ranges from 450+/- yards to 1,106 yards). I have missed 6 out of the last 200 first round shots on game animals from 400-1,106 yards- 2x if those were on the same animal two days apart- one of those was a graze. Only one was a wound- a graze in a bear, and was killed the next day confirming so. Other than that singular bear, the first round has either been in the chest cavity, or a total miss.

Of those I have hunted with- it’s all over the map. From the people that fall into the optimally trained/equipped/practiced pool- out of the last 100 animals past 400 yards: they have missed 1x shot on an elk from a failed scope (735y), 1x shot from not correcting the DA from the day prior (994y), and 1x poor hit on an antelope (427y. 2 of those 3 the immediate follow up shot was perfect and the animal died without fuss.

Of the people that I have not shot/practiced with- it’s much different. Past 400 it has been less than 50% hit rate.


I am in no way saying that people should shoot animals at long range- almost no one will put in the time and effort to do so with a high probability, and of the few that will lots of them have compromised equipment or techniques, and/or lack of knowledge in animals behavior when wounded, and lack of ability in tracking those wounded animals.

 

[Southern Lights]

Do you have any suggestions on where to go to get the right kind of training at a reasonable price? I'm in WI if that matters.

The best rifle course I took when I lived in the US was actually an Appleseed Shoot. The range is "only" 25 meters but is not an easy task. To qualify Rifleman (I did), you must be able to do off-hand, kneeling, sitting and prone under time pressure. It is also a cheap course to take and usually available in many areas.

schedulemap | Project Appleseed

appleseedinfo.org

The most important part is their emphasis on Natural Point of Aim (NPOA). If you know and understand how to get into a good NPOA for your positions, your accuracy rates go up dramatically. Many bad shots are because people have not gotten their NPOA and their position is bad. Up close you can fudge bad NPOA and still do OK, but at range you are going to have big trouble. This is regardless of how well you can read the wind.

 

[Formidilosus]

The best rifle course I took when I lived in the US was actually an Appleseed Shoot. The range is "only" 25 meters but is not an easy task. To qualify Rifleman (I did), you must be able to do off-hand, kneeling, sitting and prone under time pressure. It is also a cheap course to take and usually available in many areas.

schedulemap | Project Appleseed

appleseedinfo.org

The most important part is their emphasis on Natural Point of Aim (NPOA). If you know and understand how to get into a good NPOA for your positions, your accuracy rates go up dramatically. Many bad shots are because people have not gotten their NPOA and their position is bad. Up close you can fudge bad NPOA and still do OK, but at range you are going to have big trouble. This is regardless of how well you can read the wind.

While Appleseed is good for what it is, what they teach for body positioning and sling use is not good for on demand field shooting and spotting your own impacts/misses.

 

[BCD]

While Appleseed is good for what it is, what they teach for body positioning and sling use is not good for on demand field shooting and spotting your own impacts/misses.

What would you recommend?

 

[Southern Lights]

I didn't find that at all. Their emphasis on NPOA immediately improved my shooting across all positions such as pack supported, straight behind the rifle prone, etc. The qualifications is under tight time pressure on small targets. If the rifle is bouncing all over, you won't pass the test.

 

[Marshfly]

shooting a thousand rounds on a flat range in the east, in no way prepares someone to call winds and make shots on animals in broken terrain.

There are dozens or hundreds of videos of people coming west for spring bear and missing long shots that prove this out. Pisses me off every time I see it. Lazy people not willing to close the distance.

 

[Formidilosus]

I didn't find that at all. Their emphasis on NPOA immediately improved my shooting across all positions such as pack supported, straight behind the rifle prone, etc. The qualifications is under tight time pressure on small targets. If the rifle is bouncing all over, you won't pass the test.

I didn’t say that Appleseed was “bad”. I said “what they teach for body positioning and sling use is not good for on demand field shooting and spotting your own impacts/misses”

Which is a fact.

Appleseed teaches standard conventional (service rifle) sling style shooting.

This is what Appleseed teaches for prone-




That does not result in the rifle wanting to recoil neutrally straight to the rear in order to see and spot one’s own shots and misses. Beyond that, tight sling use introduces extreme torque and tension to the rifle and shooter, further exaggerating any errors and degrading the rifle responding neutrally.