Why is the .270 dying?

[Q_Sertorius]

Yes, especially with any thicker jacketed hunting bullet, and especially with monos.

Agreed. I meant to include the mono lengths above. They are longer for weight than traditional bullets, so they tend to benefit more from faster twists.

I don’t currently shoot monos, but I bought some in case the idiots in Northern Virginia join their ideological allies in California in deciding that lead bullets are bad.

When I pick mono bullets, I usually base my choice on its length when compared with a cheaper traditional bullet I know shoots well in my rifle. For instance, I have some loads I am supposed to work up using .243 80-grain TTSX (1.081”) in a rifle that shoots really well with 100-grain Sierra Gamekings (1.078”). They won’t use the same load or necessarily have the same trajectory, but I can expect them to stabilize as well. And I can expect the bullet that passes through the whitetail will weigh about the same amount on the far side. Hopefully the faster moving TTSX will do enough damage to make up for the lower upset.


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

 

[nm.otter]

A shooter could definitely continue to use 150-grain factory ammunition in a 1:8 twist barrel without any issues. I suspect, but have not seen first hand, what it would do with 130-grain bullets. I would not attempt to use the 90- to 115-grain bullets in a 1:8 twist. Those are typically .851 to .959” long.

a 1:8 twist rate will hit 300,000 RPM at 3,333 FPS. As long as they're below that they should hold together.

 

[Lou270]

Better bullet choice? No. Not hardly. There is a much wider variety of .264 bullets available than .277. Take a look at the JBM Ballistics bullet length list. Even allowing for duplicate entries, .264 entries outnumber .277 entries by a good margin. I would love to see more .277 bullets offered, but right now .264 has more options.

Edit - you should compare the .277 145-grain ELDX with the .264 143-grain ELDX and 147-grain ELDM. I think that is a closer comparison than the 140-grain Accubond.


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

This is true, but it is specific to match bullets only. The 270 gets all the latest hunting bullets including heavy high BC offerings. Just not a “match” cartridge so does not get the umpteen tweeks there are in match bullets for the various gun games people play. For ex:

Berger offers 13 6.5 bullets. 6 are “hunting”, 7 are match with redundancies like 4 different match bullets between 140-144 gr. The heaviest hunting is 156 Berger eol

Berger offers 7 .270 bullets. 6 are hunting, and 1 is target. The heaviest hunting is 170 eol

Sierra offers a whopping 20 6.5 bullets. 11 are target with 4 weighing 130 and 3 weighing 142-144. 9 are hunting Heaviest hunting is 145 tgk

Sierra offers 9 bullets in 270. 1 is target and 8 are for hunting. The heaviest hunting is 175 tgk

You see a similar story everywhere. The 270 is not left out in heavy for call 1-10; 1-8 high BC hunting bullets but it does not have the umpteen match bullets. The 6.8 military round may change this down the road - for ex Berger is making a 150 target and Sierra makes a 155 matchking for sig

Not disagreeing the 6.5 has more bullets, but the 270 has not been left out in the hunting bullet side of things

Lou

 

[Cdnance]

I personally believe that the 270 win is the best hunting cartridge in history! It is versatile, capable, readily available, and has unbelievable potential for hand loaders.

I have some of the “hot new” cartridges, but come every deer season I always seem to go right back to the trusted old 270!!! It’s never failed me (when I’ve done my part)!

270 Win, the Lord’s Caliber!

 

[Q_Sertorius]

Unless you are talking about FMJs, “match” bullet and “hunting” bullet are just marketing and public relations terms.


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

 

[Maverick1]

Most people have no business shooting at animals past 400 yards. (Myself included.)

That said, inside 400 yards pretty much all calibers perform similarly enough to get the job done. Believing otherwise is just an exercise in mental masturbation, regardless of how much information you can regurgitate and spew out. Which is what most of you are doing in this thread. Carry on.

 

[Elkhuntinfool78]

While it's true that in normal configuration the .270 is not capable of shooting newer high bc bullets as well as the new kids on the block do, but for those of us that still like to hunt without all all the electronic gizmos that most are accustomed to using these days I would say it's still damn hard to beat a 130 gr accubond. Sighted in properly it doesn't require much thought out to 300 or 350 yards.

For me that is a purer form of hunting and I enjoy it more without having a Rangefinder, kestrel or Rangefinding ballistic smart binos, nothing against those who use all the technological advancements.

I guess I'm old school at 47 years old...lol

 

[NRA4LIFE]

Unless you are talking about FMJs, “match” bullet and “hunting” bullet are just marketing and public relations terms.


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

I think my ELDMs out perform the ELDXs on animals.

 

[cnelk]

Love my ol model 70 270

The 270 Winchester is synonymous with Jack O'Connor

If you dont know who Jack O'Connor is, you're not a 270 guy

 

[Hondo64d]

TLDR: retailers and internet traffic is showing that while .270 is still popular with the existing crowds. It is getting blown out of the water on gun sales by new comers like 6.5 prc and is slowly going to die off. Why?

Background: I've got a couple of rifles that shoot fairly well but aren't the most flat shooting (.308, 6.5 creed, .30-06, etc.) I got looking into new calibers for bucking the wind more to serve as a primarily desert based antelope/mule deer gun where the wind is brutal. I took to the internet and everyone was ranting and raving over the 6.5 PRC which almost got me to buy one until I saw ammo costs. I then went to sportsmans ammo section and filtered by lowest cost and found out that the 270 is nearly the same cost as my current calibers. I then got to researching it and immediately was shocked by how good of a cartridge it is and wondering why I had never heard of it before other than old guys with their wood stocked 1970's beauties claiming it can hit a tick on a coon hound. I realized for my hunting distances is effectively the same as the 6.5 prc and fits my goals pretty well. So, the shopping for a .270 rifle began and I realized very few of the higher end brands are making rifles in .270. In fact, across a few different retailers I've seen 2x the offerings of new rifles in 6.5 PRC vs .270 and only medium to budget rifles (tikka or below) offered in .270. I then asked around and couldn't find any hunting friends under the age of 45 who owned a .270. And none under 50 who actively hunted with it. I tried doing research on the caliber and could find many current posts or marketing for it. The ones I did find just talked about how it hasn't modernized as well as the legacy 30 cals. In fact, everyone points back to jack o conner who died 20ish years before I was born and I had never heard of. This ultimately lead me to believe that while the cartridge is still popular with certain shooters. The internet and retailers are showing that new sales and future generations are moving towards other options.

So, ammo is way cheaper, more plentiful, and it's ballistically equivalent to the modern 6.5 prc for hunting distances, and the same recoil. The only downside is a longer action and lesser chamber tolerances. So, why is it slowly dying? Is it just the marketing machine of "new"? Is it really that much easier to be accurate with the tighter tolerances of newer calibers?

It’s dying because SAAMI spec twist rates are unable to take advantage of modern high BC bullets and it requires a long action. I love the .270, but if it’s going to compete in today’s market, they’re gonna have to modernize it.

John

 

[Trr15]

I picked up a (barely) used Kimber Montana in .270 win last fall and absolutely love that rifle. Apparently it sat on the shelf for quite a while, and I got it for a heck of bargain. Isolated example, but seems to support that the .270 has fallen out of favor, at least in my part of the country. I’m ok with it if I keep finding steals like that one.

 

[Elkhuntinfool78]

I know it's a really really bad day when I can't close the distance on an animal to within lethal striking distance of my
270

 

[Q_Sertorius]

It’s dying because SAAMI spec twist rates are unable to take advantage of modern high BC bullets and it requires a long action. I love the .270, but if it’s going to compete in today’s market, they’re gonna have to modernize it.

John

If the long action is a real hindrance, how does one “modernize” it?


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

 

[Elkhuntinfool78]

I'd be willing to bet in 20 years from now I'll still be able to find ammo on the shelf for my .270, not sure I'd make that bet on a 6.5 or 7 prc, not that they aren't fine calibers

 

[Hondo64d]

If the long action is a real hindrance, how does one “modernize” it?


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

I prefer short actions but a long action is definitely not a show stopper for me. However, the current marketplace seems to have a definite preference for short actions.

To answer your question, you can’t. You could give it less case taper and a sharper shoulder, but then it would not be a .270 Winchester. Best pitch would be to increase the ROT and produce ammo with some good, high BC bullets and heavily market its improved capabilities. Even that wouldn’t sway folks that don’t have any history with the .270 from buying a 6.5 or 7 PRC, but it might keep folks that have used and loved the .270 on board with it. I doubt we’ll ever see the fast twist .270 Win offered in factory rifles. That would cut into 6.5 PRC sales.

I have more DRT kills with the .270 Win than any other cartridge, but don’t even own one now. I keep threatening to put one together with an 8 twist barrel just to be contrary…

John

 

[S-3 ranch]

I'd be willing to bet in 20 years from now I'll still be able to find ammo on the shelf for my .270, not sure I'd make that bet on a 6.5 or 7 prc, not that they aren't fine calibers

In 2021 I went to my local big box sporting goods store to buy some ammunition, selves were all bare except for .270win , .308 , 30-06 ,.243win
In every brand , federal, hornday, Winchester, Remington
lol zero PRC stuff
So I doubt the 243 , 270 , 308, 30-06 are going jimmy Hoffa anytime soon
Prc will start to disappear when barrels start needing replacement @1000-1500 rounds, those others usually get 2500-5000 rounds

 

[Macintosh]

1) I dont think the 270win is dying at all. The rifles that come in 270 win ARE where the market is, so the vast majority of rifles are made in 270. The fact that boutique makers may not be manufacturing them isn't a reflection of the overall market. A good anlogy: boutique auto makers dont make minivans...yet minivans are everywhere. And ammo sales in 270win are up there with some of the most popular hunting cartridges. The fact that the cartridge isnt heavily marketed is a different topic altogether.

2) a big reason why people have the impression the 270win is dying is that the market is NOT DRIVEN BY HUNTING. The gun and ammo market is driven by sales of new guns and sales of new ammo, ie target and recreational shooters. especially in ammo. We all can look around and easily see that in centerfire rifles, the market volume is in AR's and similar, or in practical precision long-range rifles. And ammo sales are clearly dr=iven by high-volume shooters, ie AR's and target shooters. So the manufacturers are putting their energy into catering for the largest market volume, ie shooters, not hunters. 270 is very much alive and functional as a hunting cartridge. That is not the same thing as being alive and functional as a high-volume shooting cartridge. Even within hunting, the marketing is on long-range hunting, and other cartridges are better suited to a long range FOCUS, ie 6.5prc is +/- the equivalent of a 270 inside 500 yards, but with a long range focus out of the box. It takes custom work to be well-suited for 500-1000yds in a 270win. Even if this isnt needed for most, it's an aspirational thing.

 

[lil' bear]

I don't think 270 is dying. I just think bullet manufacturers are slow to make the heavy high bc bullets. I think that 160-170 grains is the ideal grain weight for elk. And we are just waiting for more bullets than the game king.

A few years ago the military asked for a new 270, this is what got us the 277 sig fury and the 6.8 western. And on paper the 6.8 western is a superior round compared to the 7Prc. Especially when you find out that hornady 7prc data is over inflated. And winchester under loads the 6.8 western.

The only problem here is the hornady marketing team being all stars and the browning marketing team isn't worth their weight in dog shit.

 

[slatebuilder]

I am a 270 guy. My first hunting rifle was a model 70 featherweight in 270. I still have it. It’s a great rifle. It has a 3 to 9 gloss leupold on it.

Choosing the best round is like choosing the best looking girl. Everyone’s got their preferences and what they think is best.

The reality is that the 270 became commercially available in what 1925? 1930? The gun writer who made the round famous is long gone. Many of his original readers are long gone. The children of his original readers have to be in their late 60s early 70s now. Someone in their late 20s early 30s looking for a new rifle probably is not looking for something that came out in 1930 regardless of its ballistic and killing effectiveness. They are going to be purchasing “new and awesome technology “

On another note, I have and have worked on several 270s. My go to loads are 145ELDX with 52.5 grains of H4350 or 56.5 grains of 4831SC. I am working on one right now that does not like those loads. It is a Remington 700 sendero with a 26” barrel and a 10xswfa. It will shoot 130 Federal blue box to inch and a quarter at 100 yards (20 shot). I would really like to use the ELDX though does anyone have any powder suggestions?

 

[Cdnance]

Yeah but the age of the cartridge doesn’t determine its validity.
Once you get past the shiny wrapper and cool graphics and n some of these new cartridges the 270 performs right there with the best of them.