quote:

Cal301906

It all started in 1903 when the U.S. decided to catch up with the rest of the World .Since 1906 the only thing spectacular that has happened was in 1925 when God created the .270 Winchester.

More beautiful words have never been spoken!

friar

quote:

Originally posted by friarmeier:

quote:

Cal301906

It all started in 1903 when the U.S. decided to catch up with the rest of the World .Since 1906 the only thing spectacular that has happened was in 1925 when God created the .270 Winchester.

More beautiful words have never been spoken!

friar

no, gentlemen,, in 1911, the perfect medium cartridge was invented, the 7x64.. of which every other medium is just an inferior copy of..

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:

quote:

Originally posted by friarmeier:

quote:

Cal301906

It all started in 1903 when the U.S. decided to catch up with the rest of the World .Since 1906 the only thing spectacular that has happened was in 1925 when God created the .270 Winchester.

More beautiful words have never been spoken!

friar

no, gentlemen,, in 1911, the perfect medium cartridge was invented, the 7x64.. of which every other medium is just an inferior copy of..

Wasn't the 7x64 invented in 1917?
Only an 8 year gap. How long before it became popular in Europe?
The 7x64 is a great round as you know and ideal taper for Mauser feeding.
Seems the 7x64 is only 50 or 100 fps behind the 270 but that means little.

quote:

What will a 7 mag do that a 270 won't?

Go faster with the same weight bullet or go the same speed with a heavier bullet. Either way: More energy and momentum. More reach, better short range terminal performance, less susceptible to wind.

Small differences? - Yes. Better? - Yes. Can a 7mmRM do what a 270 won't? - Yes. Is it worth the extra cost? That we can discuss.

Agree Gerard, now if we compare a 7mm Rem Mag to 270 Weatherby I think the advantage still remains with the 7mm but only with 175g bullets

If I were a dyed in the wool elk and moose hunter then the 7 mag and 175 gr. noslers at 3000 FPS in a 26" tube, would be my choice, not saying my 270 would not work with 160 gr. Noslers at 2800 FPS in my 22" tube, but the advantage is with the 7 mag anyway you cut it...That is the fact of the thread..

BUT,I still prefer the .270 as it can be built lighter, shorter and more compact and I don't shoot elk at over 300 yards, one that does that can end up with some horrible hunting stories to tell in Idaho where the canyons are deep and ugly and following up a shot elk can turn your hunt into a nightmare, trust me on this one.

Agree Ray, the goal when I lived in Western Montana was always to shoot your elk above your camp or pickup truck so it would roll right in ...

owning both, neither will do anything my little 260 Rem won't do... unless what you are hunting might have the capability of eating you if you mess up...even then, neither might give you the edge you'd need at the time...

myself, I'd take the 270 first...

a 160 grain Nosler partition at 2950 fps can put a world of hurt on a lot of big stuff...

quote:

unless what you are hunting might have the capability of eating you if you mess up...even then, neither might give you the edge you'd need at the time

So there is an edge but it is not important to you. Fact is, there is an edge.

I'd rather have something that shoots a 7mm bullet because they have a significantly higher BC. Doesn't matter at most hunting distances but it irks me that the .270 has one of the worst weight to BC ratios around.

quote:

Originally posted by RyanB:
I'd rather have something that shoots a 7mm bullet because they have a significantly higher BC. Doesn't matter at most hunting distances but it irks me that the .270 has one of the worst weight to BC ratios around.

I agree in general but the Hornady 150 gr SST is often overlooked at .525. I keep telling Nosler they need a 150 gr accubond which would really shine in the WSM version.

oh and in answer to the origional question, if anyone cares, the 7 mag will get you about a 100 yds of effective range over the .270 with a little longer MPBR and less wind drift.

All this comes at the expense of weight, recoil, barrel life and expense. Enjoy.

quote:

Originally posted by Wayfaring Stranger:

quote:

Originally posted by RyanB:
I'd rather have something that shoots a 7mm bullet because they have a significantly higher BC. Doesn't matter at most hunting distances but it irks me that the .270 has one of the worst weight to BC ratios around.

I agree in general but the Hornady 150 gr SST is often overlooked at .525. I keep telling Nosler they need a 150 gr accubond which would really shine in the WSM version.

You're both absolutely right. Why Nosler doesn't make a 150g and a 160g Accubond is beyond me. An 160g Accubond in a 270 WSM or Weatherby would be an awesome long range round.

As a .270wea shooter I have too been looking for a high BC bullet in .277cal. The bullet manufactors do high BC bullets in 6,5 an 7MMs which have left me to the conclusion it must be political.

Berger bullets offer 140grain bullets for the .284cal and the .277cal but the choose to make the .284cal with higher BC.
How long/heavy should a .277cal become to have a BC at .600?.

http://forums.accuratereloadin...351047461#2351047461

Wow that makes no sense! A .277 140g bullet of the same design should have a higher BC than a .284 caliber bullet of the same weight. It's a conspiracy! Actually I think they just screwed up on their web site. The .277 140g bullet should have an SD of .261 and the .284 bullet an SD of .248. Since they have their section density's backwards, they probably have their BC's backwards in their chart as well. A .277 160 VLD Hunting bullet should have a BC of close to .600