Why is the .270 dying?

[Bluefish]

I won

I wonder if the high twist thing is over-rated. A standard tikka stabilses the 145 eldx no problem. Bingo - LR

A heavy for caliber (270) is probably a 165-175g. The 145 is on the heavier side for a 6.5, but not for an almost 7mm. I have a fast twist 25-06 and a 25 prc. The 25 prc is easier to load the 134’s. Also shorter.

 

[Lou270]

Lol. All the champion PRS guys use 6mm bullets with BC similar to 1-10 twist 270 high BC bullets. Yet somehow, a .5-.55 BC is a handicap for hunting. You will figure out as you get more experience paper numbers are not that important compared to other things like bullet performance

As for 6.8W being an enthusiast cartridge, what is wrong with that? 280AI and 7saum are marvelous enthusiast cartridges as are about a gazillion other 7mms. Only the 7rm has been sustainably popular and the 7prc is too new to tell. Guess 7mms suck just because not everyone is a roaring success (far more dead 7s than .27s…)

Lou

 

[Vern400]

The two main technical reasons:
1. To shoot really long, you need a twist rate to stabilize 150 Plus grain .277 bullets.
2. There are a lot more bullet choices in .284
3. It's not new and shiny.

There's no arguing that a 270 continues to be a great cartridge. But if I personally were building a rifle with just a little more range and punch than my 308, I would probably opt for a 280 AI.

Yet, I have no need to burn 60 gr. of powder when I can get the job done with style burning 46 grains. So I'll stick with what the new generation calls my musket.

 

[CMP70306]

I’m pretty sure Hornady wouldn’t bring out a cartridge if the only shooters were a small group in PRS. I have no doubt that’s what the marketing department would like everyone to believe. It’s following the pattern of the creedmoor - not anything more than a 22-250, 260 Remington, or 243, but call it new and improved and suck sales out of the existing cartridges. It’s not a coincidence that the 6.5 is nearly a ballistic twin of the 270, the 7 PRC matches the 7 Rem mag, and the 300 PRC is not much more than a 300 Win mag. I’m one of those who believe PRC stands for profit reaping cartridge - take the performance of a popular cartridge, convince people its new and improved and even if it isn’t, laugh all the way to the bank. I think it’s a poor design for a hunting cartridge and it seems every week someone posts an issue directly related to the lack of taper to the case, or feeding issues.

Or you could just listen to George Gardner, the owner of GA Precision who outlines why they developed the round.

As for the 7 & 300 PRC, the whole purpose is that they can easily use the long, high BC bullets with factory ammo in factory rifles. At no point could you buy factory 7 Rem Mag or 300 Win Mag loaded with the 180gr or 225gr class high BC bullets. I know this as I was hand loading the 212gr and 225gr ELD’s in my .300 WM since before the .300 PRC existed hence I haven’t felt the need to switch from the Win Mag.

For your other examples, the .22-250 sucks with AICS mags over 5 rounds and the majority are 12 or 14 twist drastically limiting any bullets over 60gr. The .260 had a standard 9 twist and was pretty much abandoned by Remington in less than 10 years. The .243 had an even worse 10 twist which pretty much eliminated the option of shooting any of the high BC bullets over 100gr.

Each of the Creedmoors and PRC’s has a tangible benefit over similar legacy cartridges to all but the most dedicated shooter willing to get a custom rifle made and handload ammo for it to get the same advantages with the older cartridges.

I won

I wonder if the high twist thing is over-rated. A standard tikka stabilses the 145 eldx no problem. Bingo - LR

Considering the 145 ELD-X was specifically designed for the 10 twist of the 270 it would be more of an issue if it didn’t work.

I found out twist rates were a thing I should pay attention to when I loaded 105gr Berger Hybrids in a buddies .240 Weatherby, it would shoot 100gr soft points fantastic but that 105 hybrid would barely hit the broadside of a barn sideways at 50 yards.

 

[Deere_Man]

How far away in yards is it that a 270 Winchester shooting 150gr soft points becomes obsolete? At what distance is that wind drift and trajectory just too many clicks to be relevant? 375 yards? 497? Just curious

 

[Steve O]

Just because I’ve not bought a new .270 recently does not mean it is dying. I’ve got a Model 70 that has been all over NA with me that I won’t ever seek and I’ve sold a lot of 270s. Of course we all like new shiny toys but that does not mean the .270 is not still fantastic. It will do everything 99% of hunters need it to do.

 

[JackButler]

Consider this, all bullets fall to the earth sometime. So what difference does it make if it bucks the wind or is flatter shooting than another cartridge? If you cant shoot a 308 to a thousand yards you cant shoot a 7 PRC or a 6.5 PRC either, cause they all fall down. It comes down to your ability to shoot a rifle.

True to a degree, but the same guy shooting one of those PRC's you mentioned will shoot better at 1000 yards than he will with a 308. And I love the 308. Killed an elk with mine last fall and it's what I always hunt with. Was ringing steel just today with it at 1000, and in a varying 10+mph crosswind, I would no doubt have gotten more hits with one of the PRC's than I did with the 308.

 

[JackButler]

Under 500 yards, the 270 is as good as anything out there. I think the thing other calibers got for the longer range crowd was rifles with faster twists to shoot the heavier for caliber bullets. The 270 doesn't seem to have been included in that trend?

 

[JackButler]

How far away in yards is it that a 270 Winchester shooting 150gr soft points becomes obsolete? At what distance is that wind drift and trajectory just too many clicks to be relevant? 375 yards? 497? Just curious

Not obsolete, but beyond about 500 or so, there are calibers that shoot long for caliber bullets with a fast twist more efficiently. Less drop, more importantly less wind drift, and less recoil to maintain the same velocity for a given bullet weight. Make no mistake, a 270 will drop an elk at 500 yards and beyond, but there a calibers today that can do it a little more efficiently. If someone has one, no reason to get rid of it. But if a guy is getting into the rifle game from scratch, and wanted to hunt game to 500, and ring steel to 1200, a 270 would not be at the top of the list I'd recommend. YMMV, to each their own, etc...

 

[ozyclint]

Woodleigh makes a 180gr .277 bullet.
I was told by a bloke that stocks them here in Australia that they would stabilise in a 1:10 twist no worries. He went on saying that bullet length wasn't a factor in stabilisation of bullets.
I called BS and bought some 150gr Woodleigh bullets elsewhere.

I'm guessing the throat length and mag length are limiting factors in 'conventional' 270 rifles.
Even if you had a fast twist barrel, if the throat and mag lengths force you to seat the longer bullet so deep that you are taking up powder space unnecessarily then you aren't maximising performance.

 

[Lou270]

Woodleigh makes a 180gr .277 bullet.
I was told by a bloke that stocks them here in Australia that they would stabilise in a 1:10 twist no worries. He went on saying that bullet length wasn't a factor in stabilisation of bullets.
I called BS and bought some 150gr Woodleigh bullets elsewhere.

I'm guessing the throat length and mag length are limiting factors in 'conventional' 270 rifles.
Even if you had a fast twist barrel, if the throat and mag lengths force you to seat the longer bullet so deep that you are taking up powder space unnecessarily then you aren't maximising performance.

I have a couple boxes of barnes original 180 270 bullets. Had them for years as bought a big lot of bullets off ebay when they used to allow reloading components. Anyway decided to finally load them a couple years ago and hunt them and shot 4 or 5 pigs with them. Shot sub moa and worked great. I have some of the 180 woodleigh but never loaded them. I have seen guys report they work fine in 1-10. Any 270 bullet heavier than 150 to work in 1-10 is typically a round nose or semi-round nose to keep length down though they can still have reasonable BC (the 160 Nosler BC is .435ish or similar to 165 30 cal nosler which is a spitzer)

Lou

 

[AZ_Hunter_2000]

How far away in yards is it that a 270 Winchester shooting 150gr soft points becomes obsolete? At what distance is that wind drift and trajectory just too many clicks to be relevant? 375 yards? 497? Just curious

It’s not good.

Hits 1800 fps @ 349 yards which is bad. Wind drift is very bad.

But depending on where you hunt, the numbers up top can be just fine.

 

[cacklercrazy]

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?

Browning is now offering a fast twist barrel for 270. So you can shoot heavier bullets.

 

[roadrunner]

...and cartridges that recoil far less deliver far more ass down range. Easy as that

Comparing apples to oranges.

 

[Deere_Man]

It’s not good.

Hits 1800 fps @ 349 yards which is bad. Wind drift is very bad.

But depending on where you hunt, the numbers up top can be just fine.

I see! The only 270 I currently have is a Browning 1885 single shot. It’s a fun rifle, and I don’t think I’ll let it get away just yet. Thanks

 

[Q_Sertorius]

It’s not good.

Hits 1800 fps @ 349 yards which is bad. Wind drift is very bad.

But depending on where you hunt, the numbers up top can be just fine.

That’s the .277 round nose bullet? They make them in spitzers too…


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

 

[whoami-72]

The two main technical reasons:
1. To shoot really long, you need a twist rate to stabilize 150 Plus grain .277 bullets.
2. There are a lot more bullet choices in .284
3. It's not new and shiny.

There's no arguing that a 270 continues to be a great cartridge. But if I personally were building a rifle with just a little more range and punch than my 308, I would probably opt for a 280 AI.

Yet, I have no need to burn 60 gr. of powder when I can get the job done with style burning 46 grains. So I'll stick with what the new generation calls my musket.

I do really like the 280 AI in every way except rifle and ammo availability and cost. I've pushed myself to go down that road a few times but always come back to the same issue of wanting to shoot more for the same amount of money and I dont enjoy reloading.

 

[whoami-72]

Just because I’ve not bought a new .270 recently does not mean it is dying. I’ve got a Model 70 that has been all over NA with me that I won’t ever seek and I’ve sold a lot of 270s. Of course we all like new shiny toys but that does not mean the .270 is not still fantastic. It will do everything 99% of hunters need it to do.

I think that people not buying new rifles is entirely the cause of the death. If people stop buying rifles chambered in it then ammo will start to die off as the current 20-30 year old become the 60-70 year old and doesn't own any .270's.

That being said, I don't think it will be completely dead in 40 years but will certainly be a lot less popular than it is now which is less than it was 50 years ago.

 

[whoami-72]

I just saw Cristensens new Evoke is also a fast twist. I won't reload for the cartridge though so if factory ammo isn't also loaded heavy then I probably would never see the advantage.

Browning is now offering a fast twist barrel for 270. So you can shoot heavier bullets.

 

[CMP70306]

Browning is now offering a fast twist barrel for 270. So you can shoot heavier bullets.

That’s due to the 6.8 Western, means they only need to stock one type of barrel to cut down on costs.