Why is the .270 dying?

[go_deep]

Did you ask them if they were offended by you using an "obsolete" cartridge?

Ooh, they get a little pissy, but they get over it.

 

[Kendall Sorensen]

Ultimately I believe the gun manufacturers are largely following suit to the ammo manufacturers. Browning is making a fast twist 270 win that allows for extended length in the magazine and faster twist, if the rifle manufacturers start to adopt this concept you will see a resurgence of some of the legacy cartridges. Imagine a long throated 30/06 with extended magazine length, correct twist and a throat in a factory rifle. My hunch is the next craze will be updating legacy cartridges and marketing them as the next best thing.

My M1917 sporter with 10” twist has the extended mag and the long throat and we celebrated its 107th birthday this morning out on the AZ Strip. With NECG peep I’m good on a 24”x36 target at 600 and 205 Bergers are clocking 1800+ fps at that distance.

 

[UnckleBob]

Did you ask them if they were offended by you using an "obsolete" cartridge?

He died of shame.

 

[cal30_sniper]

It’s going to take a lot of dirt to bury the .270 Winchester. The .270 has enough “wallop” to kill anything in North America out past where most people should be shooting.

Rifle manufacturers could easily be making faster twist barrels to shoot heavy for caliber bullets in the .270, but they work in conjunction with bullet manufacturers to sell new rifles and cartridges. These become a package deal to get people to stop using what they already own. As you noted, the 6.5 PRC and .270 Winchester are very similar within normal maximum hunting ranges. The difference is purely marketing.

I just had my old custom Mauser .270 cut (21”) and threaded so that I feel comfortable continuing to use it for years to come. Wearing her OG she measures 46.5” long and 9.9#. I will probably upgrade the old Redfield scope she wears (and the mounts, which I don’t consider a reliable design), but she’s been a great rifle for me for over 30 years and I expect she will only get better with age.

____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

Now just get UM to make a wood Rokstok for it and we’ll have finally achieved perfection!

 

[Deerfield]

As much as I like geeking out over the more modern, efficient and high performing cartridges, for some reason I’ve been wanting a classic wood stocked .270 with a set and forget scope to hunt with from time to time.

 

[NRA4LIFE]

Yet it still works exceptionally well on game of all sizes.
You don’t need to have the newest shiniest rifle or bullet to kill animals.

Yep, my near

As much as I like geeking out over the more modern, efficient and high performing cartridges, for some reason I’ve been wanting a classic wood stocked .270 with a set and forget scope to hunt with from time to time.

One of my .270's is a near 40 year old Browning BAR with an old Redfield Tracker on it. I keep the rifle out in MO with a friend so it really doesn't get shot too much. However, I haven't adjusted the scope in any way for probably 25 years.

 

[bnewt3]

I think ill pull "Ole Faithful" from the back of the safe and take a deer with her this year.

 

[kevingm1987]

Which of these rifles is shooting “modern” bullets? And which one is obsolete? Each example is using actual MV and Litz values for a 140-grain bullet.

1.

2.

3.

PS - it doesn’t matter because most people should not be shooting at big game far enough away for it to matter.

No where did I say obsolete. I still shoot .270, but I also shoot 6.8w. We have a rule in BC, to hunt bison, you need a certain grain bullet. Both calibers have killed the moose I have shot at.

The photos all compare 140gn offerings. The 3rd photo would most likely be the most "modern" bullet in the 140 class.

When I think modern bullets for the .277 class, its the 165ablr, 170 EOL, 175tgk. None that would work in the standard .270.

 

[kevingm1987]

The modern, long, high BC bullets that have shot up in popularity have bled over and improved the performance of more traditional cartridges such as with the ELDX. Still viable for slower twist and shorter throat barrels but increased BC.

As mentioned in my comment, bullets have gotten better. Like you said, the 143 eld-x is an improvement, sure. But it's just an update on the standard design. a normal .277 can't shoot anything from the .277 165-175gn class, these are modern day bullets to me. Long, high BC, heavy for caliber.

 

[bnewt3]

The ammo for a .270 hasn't changed.

As mentioned in my comment, bullets have gotten better.

Only 1 can be true.

 

[kevingm1987]

Only 1 can be true.

Not true. Ammo refers to 130gn to 150gn offerings.

Bullets have gotten better, refers to something like the eld-x replacing the sst.

Use the word better lightly. Some people still prefer SST. the eld-x does have a higher BC and different tip.

 

[Cdnance]

I think we also need to be a little realistic about these modern bullets. Yes, there is new technology, new manufacturing processes, new production, all that kind of thing, but at the end of the day, these aren’t some game changing advancement. Yes they are better in certain aspects and applications.

Having said that, the average hunter/shooter doesn’t have the skill, discipline, or technique to fully realize the advantages of modern technology in these rifles and bullets. Lots of guys shoot coffee cup size groups regardless of rifle or bullet.

 

[Deerfield]

Having said that, the average hunter/shooter doesn’t have the skill, discipline, or technique to fully realize the advantages of modern technology in these rifles and bullets. Lots of guys shoot coffee cup size groups regardless of rifle or bullet.

This is very true. I know plenty of people that shoot paper plate size groups regardless of what they are using and call it good.

 

[Backwoods_wanderer]

Coming from a .308, I’ve taken a good look at the .270. I certainly don’t see it dying, but for me it comes down to which cartridge has the most capability if I’m investing in a new platform. Something like a 6.5 or 7PRC just has a higher threshold and potential. Ammo costs are a bit eye watering, but I expect those will level out as the new cartridges get a few more years under them.

 

[bnewt3]

Well to say that long, heavy-for-caliber, high BC bullets are new is not true either.

6.5x55(i assume others as well) has been using just that formula for over a hundred years. There are definitely newer, higher BC bullets that have come out in the past 20 years or so, but its hardly a new or "modern" concept.

The large scale market shift to those types of cartridges is whats new.

The concept of sacrificing the "traditional" muzzle velocity for a given caliber and instead switching to carrying more downrange velocity via higher BC bullets is not new, just more popular now.

As @Q_Sertorius pointed out, at the ranges the vast majority of hunters should be shooting, new bullet, old bullet, "high" BC, "low" BC........makes no difference. Dead is dead.

 

[S-3 ranch]

As much as I like geeking out over the more modern, efficient and high performing cartridges, for some reason I’ve been wanting a classic wood stocked .270 with a set and forget scope to hunt with from time to time.

My 1953 made Winchester M70 .270 with a set and forget scope feels 1000%
More trusted then my geeky 6.5cm with the dial up
Love the walnut stock too!

 

[minas stiris]

the .270 win cf will never die because the .270 WB and .270 WSM are barrel burners and unless your trying to shoot a pronghorn at 600 yards they offer little balistic advantage over the classic .270 win cf

also guns like 7mm RUM and 7mm dakota and some of the more powerfull weatherby usually are used for 500 plus shots.

the .270 wb and .270wsm dont have a niche at this point.

most of the new rifles that have flooded the market in the last 20 years have been proven to be fads and will go the way of the likes of 22K hornet or .218 bee

most of the newer guns are specialy guns for exotic hunts.the .243,25-06,.260/6.5_55,.270 wcf,7mm-08,7mm mag,30-30.308,30-06 and .300 win mag will rule everyday hunting forever.

 

[Deerfield]

My 1953 made Winchester M70 .270 with a set and forget scope feels 1000%
More trusted then my geeky 6.5cm with the dial up
Love the walnut stock too!

That’s exactly why something very similar is on my list of guns to search for. Growing up I always thought the .270 was really neat.

 

[Lowedown]

My wife's 270 worked well yesterday 1985 Ruger M77 shooting 140 grain Hornady SP. Drop reticle scope actually lines up extremely well with the 200 yard zero and other marks repeatedly verified as falling right on at 300, 400, and 500. What else could a 10 year old boy need for his first big game animal?
As long as a tool does it's job well; it is not obsolete.

 

[peaceful_ruler]

My 270 sure isn’t. It’s my main gun.

1) cheap ammo and lots of it via availability
2) flat and fast
3) moderate recoil(even in a 7# gun)
4) extremely accurate

I’m getting sub .5 MOA at 100 with factory Hornady Superformance 140 grainers. Right at 1500 fpe at 500 yards.

What more does a hunter need?

“Finger of God”