Can the .30-06 do more than the .270 Win? [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Can the .30-06 do more than the .270 Win?


Yankee2718
11-12-2012, 13:29
As stated in the title. Is the .30-06 capable of performing more tasks than the .270 Win?

countrygun
11-12-2012, 13:54
People have been arguing this since way before most of us were born. It wa probably the first published "caliber war" of the smokeless powder era for rifle cartridges.

To the velocity crowd they dismiss the fact that there are more bullet weights available to the '06 as being insignificant, I don't. A deer hit with a proper bullet from either doesn't know the difference obviously, but the ability of the '0 to go up to a 200 gn bullet (or heavier) can't be ignored. Taking down a tough critter under adverse conditions, gives the "06 an advantage and yet it can go down to a 120-130 gn bullet when that is the proper choice.

Fanboys of both will argue for years but I grew up watching Keith and O'Connor go over it and the experience I gained in my youth told me that the .30 cal would be my choice.

Both due best with handloads IMO But there is much more flexibility to be gained with the .30. I picked up, or rather my wife picked up a .270 over a year ago (Remington 760) and while it may just be stock design, I find the .270 with a 150 gn bullet (what I would use for elk) distinctly less friendly to my shoulder than a 165 gn 06 load.

O'Conner made a career and a living out of championing the .270 against all arguments but if he had handloaded a 30-06 round to .270 spacs with the same weight bullets, nothing he shot would have known the difference.

rednoved
11-12-2012, 13:55
I guess it depends on the tasks. The 30-06 can handle a heavier grain bullet, and still deliver higher velocity and energy. I believe the 30-06 has a slightly flatter trajectory as well.

Travelin' Jack
11-12-2012, 14:09
I guess it depends on the tasks. The 30-06 can handle a heavier grain bullet, and still deliver higher velocity and energy. I believe the 30-06 has a slightly flatter trajectory as well.

You have the bolded part backwards. The 30-06 hits harder, the 270 shoots flatter.

I'd rather have a 270 out of the two, but I don't hunt anything bigger than deer.

LASTRESORT20
11-12-2012, 14:19
I prefer the 30-06...

rednoved
11-12-2012, 14:27
You have the bolded part backwards. The 30-06 hits harder, the 270 shoots flatter.

I'd rather have a 270 out of the two, but I don't hunt anything bigger than deer.

Good catch. When I replied to the post I started thinking about 308 vs 30-06.

I would still go with the 30-06 over a 270.

Zombie Steve
11-12-2012, 14:31
Can the .30-06 do more than the .270 Win?


Yep.

Same exact case. .270 obviously skinnier. When you get into heavier bullets, the bullets get long enough to start taking up volume that should be used for powder.

As far as trajectory goes, the difference is really insignificant until you start getting to 400+ yards. Even then it's only a few inches. If you know your rifle and have dope for your loads it makes no difference at all.

countrygun
11-12-2012, 14:35
Yep.

Same exact case. .270 obviously skinnier. When you get into heavier bullets, the bullets get long enough to start taking up volume that should be used for powder.

As far as trajectory goes, the difference is really insignificant until you start getting to 400+ yards. Even then it's only a few inches. If you know your rifle and have dope for your loads it makes no difference at all.

:goodpost::thumbsup:

glockman10mm
11-12-2012, 14:40
Another thing about the two that is a consideration, is the 270 has a little more sectional density to it, which helps with penetration. With a properly constructed bullet, this gives a little flatter trajectory with the ability to take game like elk.

But, like others have stated, the 06 gets the nod if tough thick animals with alot of heavy bone and muscle are going to be hunted because of the heavier bullet.
They are both excellent choices, and probably in reality, the only calibers needed for most hunting in the lower 48.

PrecisionRifleman
11-12-2012, 14:49
Yep.

Same exact case. .270 obviously skinnier. When you get into heavier bullets, the bullets get long enough to start taking up volume that should be used for powder.

As far as trajectory goes, the difference is really insignificant until you start getting to 400+ yards. Even then it's only a few inches. If you know your rifle and have dope for your loads it makes no difference at all.

Agreed,

People put far to much emphasis on a "flat cartridge" when what they should be concerned with (for long range) is wind bucking ability. It's a LOT easier to dope for trajectory than calling and doping for the wind. When considering each cartridge for hunting this really shouldn't be a large point of concern. The majority of of all shots on game are taking within 100-300 yards (with most within 100-150). At these ranges the difference in trajectory is minimal.

Yankee2718
11-12-2012, 14:51
I'd consider the 130 gr bullet to be the mid weight standard for the .270, and 150 gr the mid weight standard for the .30-06. To achieve the same sectional density as a 130 grain .277 bullet, a .308 bullet needs to reach 165 grains in weight. Even at 165 grains, the 130 grain .277 bullet has a much higher ballistic coefficient.

As someone on here said, the argument is rather academic. Trajectory and impact energy are so similar that the differences don't matter for 99.9% of common application. I currently use a .30-06 and have never fired a .270 Winchester.

I think my question should have been - is there any game the .30-06 can take that the .270 can't? I have a feeling that in North America the differences between the two cartridges are academic.

Happypuppy
11-12-2012, 14:59
I have used a .270 for decades. It is my preferred round at 130 grains. I find it very flat shooting and I have used it all the way to Elk with good success. Is one better than the other? No, just loading a have specific characteristics that you find you like. The closest bullet to the 130 grain I find is the 165 grain .30 caliber.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

countrygun
11-12-2012, 15:08
Another thing about the two that is a consideration, is the 270 has a little more sectional density to it, which helps with penetration.

Not quite the whole story. In a given weight yes, just as in a given weight the 6.5x55 will have more SD than the .270. The 06 can meet or exceed the SD of the .270 with a heavier bullet and has the ability to go to heavier for diameter bullets than the .270 due to less pressure with the larger diameter and more case room.

K.Kiser
11-12-2012, 15:41
Not quite the whole story. In a given weight yes, just as in a given weight the 6.5x55 will have more SD than the .270. The 06 can meet or exceed the SD of the .270 with a heavier bullet and has the ability to go to heavier for diameter bullets than the .270 due to less pressure with the larger diameter and more case room.

This is accurate.. I feel there's no appreciable difference in the cartridges until the intended game get up to Elk size, and then it's still not a drastic difference but like said the ability to spit heavier bullets from the 06' can be useful on a bad shot where heavy bone gets hit..

I like them both, and for anything that exists in most of America it wouldn't make me any difference.. We don't own any .270's anymore but still load for a couple other folks... The 140 grain Barnes has yet to let a deer/hog move outta the immediate impact area..

Yankee2718
11-12-2012, 16:02
Duplicate

countrygun
11-12-2012, 16:19
I'd consider the 130 gr bullet to be the mid weight standard for the .270, and 150 gr the mid weight standard for the .30-06. To achieve the same sectional density as a 130 grain .277 bullet, a .308 bullet needs to reach 165 grains in weight. Even at 165 grains, the 130 grain .277 bullet has a much higher ballistic coefficient.

As someone on here said, the argument is rather academic. Trajectory and impact energy are so similar that the differences don't matter for 99.9% of common application. I currently use a .30-06 and have never fired a .270 Winchester.

I think my question should have been - is there any game the .30-06 can take that the .270 can't? I have a feeling that in North America the differences between the two cartridges are academic.

The 165 is my "standard light" in the 06. it happens to be the weight most of my 06s like for accuracy. I wouldn't worry bout shooting too much with a .270 given a "perfect shot" , but on an elk or bear I like the option of a "raking shot" (diagonal to the "Off" shoulder or hip depending of facing towards or away) with a heavier bullet that I would have to pass on with a .270.

Yankee2718
11-12-2012, 17:23
The 165 is my "standard light" in the 06. it happens to be the weight most of my 06s like for accuracy. I wouldn't worry bout shooting too much with a .270 given a "perfect shot" , but on an elk or bear I like the option of a "raking shot" (diagonal to the "Off" shoulder or hip depending of facing towards or away) with a heavier bullet that I would have to pass on with a .270.

I just stick with 180 grain .30-06. The areas I'm hunting currently are best suited to my iron sighted .30-30. I'm using a 150 grain Federal Power Shok JSP.

fredj338
11-12-2012, 17:55
I am not a fan of either round, but the 06 can handle heavier bullets w/ enough vel to take anything that walks the planet.
With 220gr solids, it has taken all the DG in Africa as well as the largest bears. I prefer a 280 & 338-06, but I am just a bit on the odd side.:cool:

Bigpoppie50
11-12-2012, 17:59
I've shot many deer with my 06 and I would say 98% of them dropped dead in their tracks. Deer were shot with a Remington Model760 BDL using Federal 165 grain boattail ammo. All deer were shot in Ranges from 50yds. to 270yds.

dkf
11-12-2012, 19:01
I have factory 30-06 loads from 55gr to 220gr. Can load heavier. The 30-06 is a more versatile round but that does not mean the .270 is a slouch.

17&27
11-12-2012, 19:02
Short answer, yes.
That said, my favorite hunting rifle is a Ruger .270 bolt gun.
If I feel the need for a .30 caliber I pull out the Sako trgs in .300 Weatherby.

PrecisionRifleman
11-12-2012, 20:04
I'd consider the 130 gr bullet to be the mid weight standard for the .270, and 150 gr the mid weight standard for the .30-06. To achieve the same sectional density as a 130 grain .277 bullet, a .308 bullet needs to reach 165 grains in weight. Even at 165 grains, the 130 grain .277 bullet has a much higher ballistic coefficient.

As someone on here said, the argument is rather academic. Trajectory and impact energy are so similar that the differences don't matter for 99.9% of common application. I currently use a .30-06 and have never fired a .270 Winchester.

I think my question should have been - is there any game the .30-06 can take that the .270 can't? I have a feeling that in North America the differences between the two cartridges are academic.

I think they both are *more* than enough for deer/wild hog sized game, but the 06' clearly gets has the edge when it comes to Elk, Moose, and bear due to the ability to use heavier bullets that are better at punching through heavy bone and continuing to penetrate. If medium sized game is what your after then either one will do a dang fine job, and I'd go with the cartridge that I like the most. Deer are not hard to kill, and I've taken as many with my 243 that I got in my youth as I have with my 308Win. I haven't had a deer go more than a few feet before piling up with either. Put the rounds where they need to go using a properly constructed bullet of a proper weight for the game intended and you'll have meat on the table. All other considerations are camp fire talk unless you also want to punch paper, and that's an entirely different discussion.

jeremy1
11-12-2012, 20:11
There is nothing in North America that a '06 cant kill. As for the 270, the only animal that I would hesitate shooting would be a grizzly bear.
I have shot dozens of deer with the 270, and none of them knew what hit them, and most fell in place without taking a single step. I know lots of hunters that have taken moose and elk with a 270 with similar results.
The one advantage that the 06 has is that you can load from 100 to 220 grain bullets if that is your thing. With most rifles I would bet that one one end of the scale accuracy would be an issue. The rate of twist on off the shelf rifles is probably sufficient for 150 to 180 grains. I doubt that most rifles would stabilize a 100 grain bullet. I have yet to find a 100 grain load that my 270 will shoot accurately.
Both rounds are excellent for the average hunter and I prefer 270. But, if my hunting area was in bear country I would take the '06

PrecisionRifleman
11-12-2012, 20:17
Short answer, yes.
That said, my favorite hunting rifle is a Ruger .270 bolt gun.
If I feel the need for a .30 caliber I pull out the Sako trgs in .300 Weatherby.

I had a Sako TRG42 in 300 Win Mag, but I wasn't aware that they were produced in 300 Weatherby?

hogfish
11-13-2012, 04:55
Something that is baffling to me is internal ballistics(?). The .270 will throw a 130gr bullet at >3,100f/s, while the '06 has much less velocity with the equivallent sectional density bullet (165gr). The '06 can only come close with the 150gr bullet, which has a lower sectional density.

I would still pick the 150gr/'06 over the 130gr/.270. :) (for deer)

17&27
11-13-2012, 06:22
I had a Sako TRG42 in 300 Win Mag, but I wasn't aware that they were produced in 300 Weatherby?

Yep. TRG-S M995. I bought it new in the mid 1990's.
I think the TRG-S has been discontinued. It shoots way better than my MK V Weatherbys did.

SCmasterblaster
11-14-2012, 07:23
I guess it depends on the tasks. The 30-06 can handle a heavier grain bullet, and still deliver higher velocity and energy. I believe the 30-06 has a slightly flatter trajectory as well.

'nuff said! :cool:

fredj338
11-15-2012, 11:57
The one advantage that the 06 has is that you can load from 100 to 220 grain bullets if that is your thing. With most rifles I would bet that one one end of the scale accuracy would be an issue. The rate of twist on off the shelf rifles is probably sufficient for 150 to 180 grains. I doubt that most rifles would stabilize a 100 grain bullet. I have yet to find a 100 grain load that my 270 will shoot accurately.
Both rounds are excellent for the average hunter and I prefer 270. But, if my hunting area was in bear country I would take the '06
There really would be no issue of stability w/ a100gr bullet. IME, you can't over stabalize a bullet. Current rifles may have issues w/ the longer 220gr bullets though. The 270 is a marginal bull elk round IMO, but with proper bullets, it will certainly take elk to 300yds.

RWBlue
11-15-2012, 13:33
As stated in the title. Is the .30-06 capable of performing more tasks than the .270 Win?

As a reloader, I can do more with the 30-06 than the 270.

Just look at a reloading manual and see all the bullets in .308 and think of what you can do with each of them. Then remember the Remington 30-06 to 22 sabot sleeves. Then there are round balls in .308.

SCmasterblaster
11-15-2012, 13:36
As a reloader, I can do more with the 30-06 than the 270.

Just look at a reloading manual and see all the bullets in .308 and think of what you can do with each of them. Then remember the Remington 30-06 to 22 sabot sleeves. Then there are round balls in .308.

So true. The .30-'06 is a much more capable cartridge than the .270. :cool:

Berto
11-15-2012, 13:43
For longer ranges and medium game, I'd probably lean .270 for flatter trajectory and flight time (antelope in WY). For med to heavier game at realistic hunting ranges, I'd lean '06 for the option of 180gr and heavier boolits (PNW and elk).

Both had advantages and disadvantages, but both are well proven game-killers well outside of speculative SD and BC arguments. IMO that applies across the whole family of '06 cased rounds.

t4terrific
11-15-2012, 14:57
'nuff said! :cool:

Yep, if you aren't concerned with the accuracy of the statement.

SCmasterblaster
11-15-2012, 15:04
Yep, if you aren't concerned with the accuracy of the statement.

"'nuff unsaid" then :cool:

RWBlue
11-15-2012, 18:34
So true. The .30-'06 is a much more capable cartridge than the .270. :cool:

I love that you agree with me, but I actually didn't say that.

What I am saying is with the current bullet development & gun development, a reloader can do more with the 30-06.

The same can be said for the 45s. Rifle and pistol cartridges.

If there was time and energy devoted to the 270 it could be as flexible as the 30-06.

SCmasterblaster
11-15-2012, 19:35
I love that you agree with me, but I actually didn't say that.

What I am saying is with the current bullet development & gun development, a reloader can do more with the 30-06.

The same can be said for the 45s. Rifle and pistol cartridges.

If there was time and energy devoted to the 270 it could be as flexible as the 30-06.

C'mon now. No amount of bullet and gun development can ever turn the .270 into an elk or moose cartridge like the .30-'06 easily is.

RWBlue
11-15-2012, 21:08
C'mon now. No amount of bullet and gun development can ever turn the .270 into an elk or moose cartridge like the .30-'06 easily is.

Change the bullet design. Change the twist in the barrel. Look into the powders that can change the 270 into a 270 magnum. I would also suggest doing and Adkins to it.

Yes, the 270 could be better than the current 30-06 on the market and maybe better than what can be hand loaded.

Berto
11-15-2012, 21:26
You mean Ackley?

RWBlue
11-15-2012, 22:34
You mean Ackley?

Thank you.

I wonder if this means I need to go on a diet.:shocked:

countrygun
11-15-2012, 22:49
I love that you agree with me, but I actually didn't say that.

What I am saying is with the current bullet development & gun development, a reloader can do more with the 30-06.

The same can be said for the 45s. Rifle and pistol cartridges.

If there was time and energy devoted to the 270 it could be as flexible as the 30-06.

The round has been around since When?, how much time do y'all need?

If you look at the SAAMI specs and chamber dimensions you may well discover that there isn't much room to ge heavier bullets into the envelope. Plus the ract that twist rates in barrels to date favor the lighter bullets you are just about at the point of wildcatting it.

Zombie Steve
11-16-2012, 07:45
Ackley Improved cartridges usually get about 2% more case volume by bumping the shoulder to 40 degrees and taking any taper out of the case walls. The Sierra manual contends that taking out the taper helps mask pressure signs, which is where most of the perceived improvement originated - gross overloads in a time where few people had chronographs and copper crushers. They go on to estimate that velocity improvements at similar pressure levels is about 40-50 fps. AI conversions will squeeze out a little more for you, but just aren't worth the hassle, IMHO.

RWBlue
11-16-2012, 08:47
The round has been around since When?, how much time do y'all need?

If you look at the SAAMI specs and chamber dimensions you may well discover that there isn't much room to get heavier bullets into the envelope. Plus the ract that twist rates in barrels to date favor the lighter bullets you are just about at the point of wildcatting it.

It is not time, it is desire. Or to put it a different way it is a causality chain.

If the military had adopted the 270 and the 30-06 was delayed 10 years. We would be talking about how the 270 was the better more developed cartridge.

M 7
11-16-2012, 09:43
As a general rule, I believe that the .30-06 is the more versatile of the two cartridges.

The .270 is a good cartridge, but because the .30-06 can fire heavier, higher sectional density bullets than the .270 (200 gr and 220 gr bullets in the '06 have a higher SD than a .270 cal. 150 gr bullet) at 2400-2600 fps), I think the '06 is the "better" cartridge of the two.

SCmasterblaster
11-16-2012, 11:14
as a general rule, i believe that the .30-06 is the more versatile of the two cartridges.

The .270 is a good cartridge, but because the .30-06 can fire heavier, higher sectional density bullets than the .270 (200 gr and 220 gr bullets in the '06 have a higher sd than a .270 cal. 150 gr bullet) at 2400-2600 fps), i think the '06 is the "better" cartridge of the two.

agreed!

K.Kiser
11-16-2012, 15:46
It really just comes down to what you're wanting to kill with it... Up to a certain body size it won't make a bit of difference, that's worth debating... In regard to bullet drop, it's not enough to make a flea's fart, especially if you're familiar with the ballistics.. We with some regularity kill 250lbs. hogs with .308s at 500+ yards and it doesn't shoot as flat or as hard as either of these two calibers mentioned, but it's irrelevant because we know where the bullet will be when it gets there..

When we shoot those hogs with a 28" barreled .338 edge at that distance they most typically fall down and die... When we shoot hogs at that distance with a 22" .308 with handloaded berger bullets, they typically fall down and die... None of these hogs ever argued to each other who got hit harder..:cool:

SCmasterblaster
11-16-2012, 20:02
I have forgotten about the 7mm Rem Magnum round. It's .284 bullet really moves.

Darkangel1846
11-17-2012, 10:48
I think the 30-06 is the most flexable round on the market today. Has been studied and used more then any other round, more options and availability then any other.
For hunting or even combat its a all around great round.

but once again you use what you like and what works for you.
My hunting days ended decades ago, after the military I lost my love of hunting anything. Now I just shoot targets...usually with 5.56 and 762X39 and several handgun cals.

SCmasterblaster
11-18-2012, 06:36
I think the 30-06 is the most flexable round on the market today. Has been studied and used more then any other round, more options and availability then any other.
For hunting or even combat its a all around great round.

but once again you use what you like and what works for you.
My hunting days ended decades ago, after the military I lost my love of hunting anything. Now I just shoot targets...usually with 5.56 and 762X39 and several handgun cals.

about the .30-'06. :cool:

Wil Terry
11-18-2012, 08:25
OF COURSE IT CAN !!!

WAS this even a serious question ??

And so it goes...

SCmasterblaster
11-18-2012, 12:02
I guess it depends on the tasks. The 30-06 can handle a heavier grain bullet, and still deliver higher velocity and energy. I believe the 30-06 has a slightly flatter trajectory as well.

This is a well-thought-out summary of the .30-'06.

brisk21
11-19-2012, 08:51
Too close for it to matter.

SCmasterblaster
11-19-2012, 12:56
Is long enough to secure a 220-gr bullet, and the case capacity is big enough to drive the long bullet at 2300 FPS. This leaves the .270 Win way behind.

ADK_40GLKr
11-19-2012, 18:07
Surprised no one has mentioned the history of the .270. IIRC, Wasn't it developed to get higher velocity & longer range by just necking down a .30-06 case? I think case volume behind the bullet is the same, is it not? So you can "reach out and touch" smaller targets at greater distance!

I'm certainly not a ballistics authority, but I believe I read that somewhere BEFORE the Internet. (Sports Afield or the like)

oscarthegrouch
11-19-2012, 19:38
"There ain't many problems a man can't fix, with $700 and a 30-06."
Lindy Wisdom

2bgop
11-20-2012, 11:36
I have both and hunt with both. For someone of average skill who takes shots at average ranges, they both work just fine for me.

countrygun
11-20-2012, 12:32
Surprised no one has mentioned the history of the .270. IIRC, Wasn't it developed to get higher velocity & longer range by just necking down a .30-06 case? I think case volume behind the bullet is the same, is it not? So you can "reach out and touch" smaller targets at greater distance!

I'm certainly not a ballistics authority, but I believe I read that somewhere BEFORE the Internet. (Sports Afield or the like)

You have to look at the marketing strategy to understand the .270, really, ballistically, it doesn't make a lot of sense. You do not gain effective "longer range" with a lower ballistic coefficient. You might gain a flatter trajectoy which translates to a slightly longer PBR but not as much as one would think. put a 130 gn bullet in a 30-06 and see what happens.

The ability to hit targets at long range is much more in the hands of the shooter and their knowledge and skill than in a realtively few FPS. But shrewed marketers would have you think otherwise.

At the time America was "30-06'ed" to the max. There was considerable interest still, in rounds like the .257 Roberts but Americans would not accept a "foriegn caliber" with things like "8mm, 7mm, 6.5mm" in the title or based on "Odd" bore diameters. "If we are going to have an odd caliber, it will be one our own making" was pretty much the sentiment.

When it comes down to it, and with the benefits of todays projectiles, the wildcat "6.5-06" is a giant leap above the .270 in versatility. But in the day "All American" "with more velocity" is what sold new guns.

Zombie Steve
11-20-2012, 14:29
They just hadn't adopted the term "magnum" yet...

http://pocketwineassistant.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/wine-bottle-sizes1.jpg


Imma do the .277 Nabuchadnezzar although the Methuselah sounds pretty potent.

dougader
11-20-2012, 20:09
I am not a fan of either round, but the 06 can handle heavier bullets w/ enough vel to take anything that walks the planet.
With 220gr solids, it has taken all the DG in Africa as well as the largest bears. I prefer a 280 & 338-06, but I am just a bit on the odd side.:cool:

I started with a 30-06 because that's what my Dad had and I inherited all of his ammo, bullets, powder, etc. If I started from scratch, I'd probably go with the 280 Rem for deer and antelope, 338-06 for elk, bear, moose.

As it stands, I have the 30-06 and 338-06. :cool:

dkf
11-20-2012, 20:16
Surprised no one has mentioned the history of the .270. IIRC, Wasn't it developed to get higher velocity & longer range by just necking down a .30-06 case? I think case volume behind the bullet is the same, is it not? So you can "reach out and touch" smaller targets at greater distance!

I'm certainly not a ballistics authority, but I believe I read that somewhere BEFORE the Internet. (Sports Afield or the like)

From Wiki

"While it is true that a .270 Winchester case can be formed from a 30-06 Springfield (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/30-06_Springfield) case, the case length of a 30-06 is 2.494 inches (63.3 mm) while the case length of a .270 is 2.540 inches (64.5 mm), the same as a .30-03 Springfield (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.30-03). It is recommended that .270 Winchester brass be formed from .35 Whelen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.35_Whelen) or .280 Remington (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.280_Remington) cases.[11] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.270_Winchester#cite_note-11)"

.270 - "Case capacity 67 gr (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grain_%28unit%29) H2O (4.355 cm³)"
30-06 - "Case capacity 68 gr (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grain_%28unit%29) H2O (4.42 cm³)"

So sounds like the extra length on the .270 is neck.

A bigger diameter bullet gives more area for the burning powder to "push" against the bullet and more room in the bore to burn. For example a .338-06 can push a .338 220gr bullet with more "authority" than a 30-06 can push a .30 220gr bullet.

countrygun
11-20-2012, 20:22
From Wiki

"While it is true that a .270 Winchester case can be formed from a 30-06 Springfield (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/30-06_Springfield) case, the case length of a 30-06 is 2.494 inches (63.3 mm) while the case length of a .270 is 2.540 inches (64.5 mm), the same as a .30-03 Springfield (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.30-03). It is recommended that .270 Winchester brass be formed from .35 Whelen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.35_Whelen) or .280 Remington (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.280_Remington) cases.[11] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.270_Winchester#cite_note-11)"

A bigger diameter bullet gives more area for the burning powder to "push" the bullet and more room in the bore to burn. For example a .338-06 can push a .338 220gr bullet with more "authority" than a 30-06 can push a .30 220gr bullet.



This is an important, and often overlooked point.

RWBlue
11-20-2012, 21:40
They just hadn't adopted the term "magnum" yet...

http://pocketwineassistant.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/wine-bottle-sizes1.jpg


Imma do the .277 Nabuchadnezzar although the Methuselah sounds pretty potent.

Reminds me of the story of a wildcat cartridge maker. He had come up the ultimate varmint cartridge. It was suppose to have an extremely flat trajectory and because of the speed it would not have to worry about wind drift as much.

He had take a 50BMG cartridge and necked it down to .45. Then he took that cartridge and necked it down to .40. At this point he had to thin the neck because the brass was getting too thick. Then he took the case and necked it down to .308. Then he necked it down to .264. Again he had to thin the neck. He was finally able to neck it down to .224.

He then put a gun together with with a barrel chambered in his special round.

His test loads were with with the same powder as normally loaded in a 50BMG.

He said that he was only having one issue with the ultimate varmint cartridge. It was vaporizing the bullet before it reached the end of the barrel.

:whistling:

SCmasterblaster
11-21-2012, 13:03
From Wiki

"While it is true that a .270 Winchester case can be formed from a 30-06 Springfield (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/30-06_Springfield) case, the case length of a 30-06 is 2.494 inches (63.3 mm) while the case length of a .270 is 2.540 inches (64.5 mm), the same as a .30-03 Springfield (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.30-03). It is recommended that .270 Winchester brass be formed from .35 Whelen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.35_Whelen) or .280 Remington (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.280_Remington) cases.[11] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.270_Winchester#cite_note-11)"

.270 - "Case capacity 67 gr (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grain_%28unit%29) H2O (4.355 cm³)"
30-06 - "Case capacity 68 gr (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grain_%28unit%29) H2O (4.42 cm³)"

So sounds like the extra length on the .270 is neck.

A bigger diameter bullet gives more area for the burning powder to "push" against the bullet and more room in the bore to burn. For example a .338-06 can push a .338 220gr bullet with more "authority" than a 30-06 can push a .30 220gr bullet.

Thanks for the good info! :cool:

omega48038
12-04-2012, 11:01
C'mon now. No amount of bullet and gun development can ever turn the .270 into an elk or moose cartridge like the .30-'06 easily is.

Let me guess, you own a 30.06, right? Do you have any experience at all with the .270?
The .270 win has long been considered a premier elk cartridge by plenty of people who know what they're talking about.

Sure, an 06 may be marginally better when both are pushed toward their limits, but within their intended scope (CXP2 & thinner skinned CPX3 sized game at medium to long range), they're too close to matter much at all. I'm not denying the OP's claim that the 06 is more versatile, but you are claiming that it's better at everything.

dkf
12-04-2012, 12:45
There are many different opinions on the "perfect elk cartridge". Some say .338-06, some .300win mag, some .300rum, some 30-06, some 7mm, some .338 win mag and etc. The 30-06 is a more versitile cartridge than the .270 hands down due to many factors, I really don't know how someone can argue otherwise. Is the .270 a bad cartridge? Nope. If I would come up on a big bull I just would prefer a little more bullet than what the run of the mill .270 provides. Opinions vary.