for making holes in paper, which cart is more inherently accurate? which one in a sub $800 rifle is more accurate? thanks and let the fun begin

.308 Win has the history.

quote:

Originally posted by Quarter Round:
.308 Win has the history.

.308 first, then 270 and 7mag together, IMHO. For less than $800, try a tikka. My t3 lite in 270 is super accurate with factory loads. Just a suggestion.

308 not one of the options

Ok, I'll play, factory rounds or handloads? In factory, I would say the .270, just been around longer. Too much variation in the 7mag & not enough factroy ammo for the .280 (my fav.). In handload form, I don't think it rally matters much, my .280 is plenty accurate & so were the 7mags I have owned.

quote:

380 rem

Well, it is a little confusing as to what you ment some wildcat cartridge, 380auto, 280rem or 308Win or?????

280 remington 7mm rem express

quote:

Originally posted by fredj338:
Ok, I'll play, factory rounds or handloads? In factory, I would say the .270, just been around longer. Too much variation in the 7mag & not enough factroy ammo for the .280 (my fav.). In handload form, I don't think it rally matters much, my .280 is plenty accurate & so were the 7mags I have owned.

i was thinking hand loading...

They all have the same INHERENT potential for accuracy. With equal quality rifles and optimum loads for each, neither of the three will out shine the other two. All three seem to be predominately hunting rifles rather than BR or varmint so it is doubtful that accuracy technology has been greatly bestowed on one rather than the other two. JMHO roger

The rifle and load are far more important than the cartridge as far as accuracy is concerned.Unless you are talking benchrest competition,the cartridge will not make a difference.If you are talking competition the 270win never has been very successful.

Agree 100% with stubblejumper, the rifle is the biggest factor in accuracy. Case in point, my 270 is my most accurate rifle, not because it's a 270, but because it's a Sako with a bedded McMillan stock. Buy the rifle for accuracy, choose the caliber for performance.


Without guns we are subjects or victims, with guns we are citizens

quote:

The rifle and load are far more important than the cartridge as far as accuracy is concerned.Unless you are talking benchrest competition,the cartridge will not make a difference.If you are talking competition the 270win never has been very successful.

Ditto, the rifle is where the accuracy lay.

Good Luck!

Reloader

the number 1 choice in long range shooting is the .308 win. it is still the choice of snipper rounds. no matter what rifel you shoot.

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:

308 not one of the options

OK, KaZam! You're un-hijacked. The .284

I have never owned a 280 that shot as well as any of my 270 rifles. I have seen several 280's that were just so so shooters. The 7MM mag has been pretty good to me also. I say it's 270 first, 7MM Rem mag second and 280 dead last.

Another way to look at this is to compare the available match grade target bullets in both .277" and .284".The result is that there are far more choices available in .284" than in .277".Why do you suppose that is?Could it be because the .284"(7mm) cartridges are more suitable and therefore more popular for target shooting?

The 280 chamber specs are really sloppy to make sure the 742/760s for which the round was designed would cycle. If you use a 7MM/06 wildcat chamber you will likely get the same accuracy as a 270.

quote:

Originally posted by stubblejumper:
Another way to look at this is to compare the available match grade target bullets in both .277" and .284".The result is that there are far more choices available in .284" than in .277".Why do you suppose that is?Could it be because the .284"(7mm) cartridges are more suitable and therefore more popular for target shooting?

No, they're not more siutable in the technical sense. Just more commonly available. A 270 match bullet can be made just a well as any other caliber/cartridge combo. Since no one asked, no one tried.

quote:

No, they're not more siutable in the technical sense. Just more commonly available.

Why do you suppose that they are more commonly available?Could it be that more people use the 7mm's in competition than use the .277's.My point is that the manufacturers supply what there is a demand for.Of course .277" match bullets can be made just as precisely as 7mmbullets,but since the .277" calibers have not been successfull in competition ,they is not a large demand for them.

Many of the hunting bullets for the 270 are very accurate and I am not sure but at one time there was a matchking bullet available for it. You don't see many 30-06 rifles in matches either because it has been beaten out by the 308 for ranges under 600 yards and the magnums for longer ranges.

trigger ,many years ago the .280 was at one time called a 7MM-06 and before it was a .280 it was called a .280 many years ago,then called a 7MM express rem. and then went back to the .280 for the SECOND time. about 10 or so yaers ago I have had both 270 and 280 they are tic for tac with the same bullet weight but i liked the 280. more . the 7mm offers more bullet choices to the reloader

I haven't been following 1000 yard matches in quite awile, but I thought that a world record was set in the last decade or so using the 7mm mag. Around 10" I thought, and at the time everyone was saying that it was the most accurate long range round. I thought that the Secret Service went to 7mm mags about the same time. I'm sure this is outdated now, but I don't recall anyone setting records w/ the other two choices (though I could be wrong).

Gary

I never had much luck with the SMK's. Have a lightweight 30-06 that is not very accurate and in hunting for a load tried 175 grain match kings. They shot very poorly. The Barnes TSX and the Accubonds shot much better.

A friend has a Sako TRGS in 300 win that won't shoot for &(#@ so I tried everything including the 190 grain match king. They didn't shoot any better than anything else.

Now I know that I'm probably prod someone into passing gas, but I don't know what I would have done if they had shot well, since I sure as hell wouldn't have used them for hunting.

JMHO


Without guns we are subjects or victims, with guns we are citizens

.270 win without a doubt!

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:
for making holes in paper, which cart is more inherently accurate? which one in a sub $800 rifle is more accurate? thanks and let the fun begin

Well, of the three you listed, none has a clear advantage over the other two. Accuracy in such similar rounds is more dependent upon bullet quality than any other single factor, given rifles of equal precision & quality.....

Many threads have been written on this subject - Check out the one below.

270 = The Best

There are those who argue that x cartridge is more accurate than y cartridge, but I believe that there are accurate rifles and an accurate rifle can shoot any caliber. I have a .270, 30-06, 7x57, and 30WM and 7RM rifles that will all shoot with one another. I have had rifles in those calibers (some the same rifles before they were 'fixed') that would not shoot.

It isn't the cartridge, but the rifle. Kudude

PS: If you look at the ballistics of the three rifles you mention, there is doggone little difference in reality in their performance all round. kd

The 7X64 Brenneke been around since 1917. No need for any 280 or 7mm express

6,8X64, 7X64 and 7mm rem mag are all great calibers. A well built rifle and good ammo should work

Cheers
/JOHAN

Is it just me, or is everyone splitting hairs AGAIN?