Author Topic: 270 Redding (Read 2593 times)

Mac11700 · « **on:** February 17, 2006, 09:26:22 AM »

Just curious...does anyone here shoot one..or a 270-308? It looks like a pretty easy conversion

Mac

Lone Star · « **Reply #1 on:** February 17, 2006, 02:07:03 PM »

There was an article in Handloader about 12 years ago on the .270 Redding. It is a good cartridge, but is so close in performance to the existing .260 and 7-08 that the only good reason to build one would be because you wanted to. IMO that's enough reason to do it!

Siskiyou · « **Reply #2 on:** February 17, 2006, 04:38:33 PM »

A close cousin is the .270-300 Savage. A former co-work was a WWII GI Bill gunsmith. His favorite deer rifle was the 270-300 Savage. His success on deer was the talk of the hills. I recall that he was using Barnes bullets, and I think the powder was IMR4064. The rifle a Savage 99.

Mac11700 · « **Reply #3 on:** February 17, 2006, 04:51:46 PM »

Thanks Guys...I was doing a-little research on a future project..and ran across this article and it really peaked my curiosity..http://www.looksmartsports.com/p/articles/mi_m0BQY/is_10_47/ai_78130022

Mac

Siskiyou · « **Reply #4 on:** February 18, 2006, 08:12:03 AM »

I find this project interesting because of my friend. I had heard of him and wildcat rifle some years before I ever met him. I think a .277 round based on the .308 family case makes a lot of sense to a wildcatter. The primary character the case itself can be created from many commonly found cases. Going up in caliber from the .260 Remington case makes sense today. I do not know the issues with resizing .308 cases to .277 but in should not be a problem. I have resized a lot of 30-06 cases to .270 Win. without problems. The 270-308 conversion will not work in older Savage 99 models. Savage lengthen the Model 99 action when the .308 Winchester came out.

The .270-284 Winchester is another combination. The .284 case gives you 30-06 case capacity in a short action case. At times .284 cases are difficult to obtain. I have a hard time keeping track but I think my brother currently has a 6.5-284 and a .25-284. In the hunting field I see no advantage of the 6.5-284 over a handloaded 6.5 Swede in a modern action. I know the 6.5-284 with super long barrels is used in 1000 matches with great success. I think for deer hunting the advantage goes to the .308 case. I think that the .284 case will burn more powder to achieve the same velocity obtained from the .308 case.

So the hook is in my jaw. If I had the bucks I would need a .270-308 Redding on a short action. And as a companion piece I would have a .270-284 built on a long action. That way I would not lose case capacity when setting 150 grain bullets.

lgm270 · « **Reply #5 on:** February 23, 2006, 02:27:44 PM »

Iread the old Handloader article about this cartridge.

The gist of it was a .308 length .270 cal. wildcat that produced in a 24" barrel the the same ballistics produced by a factory, off the shelf .270 Winchester with a 22" barrel.

I believe the 7/08 Rem is a better round.

Siskiyou · « **Reply #6 on:** February 23, 2006, 03:55:42 PM »

Igm: I can not argue with over logic of the 7mm-08. Nor with those who say the 260 Remington is a better choice. Just from per economics and easy of doing business the two factory rounds are better choices.

But my brother continues to try and convience me that the only way to go is with this or that wildcat. He is the guy who keeps meat and potates on his gunsmiths table. If there is a case out there he has turned it into a 6.5 buck killer. I stand back and wonder why,this 6.5 and that 6.5. Then he gave me a 6.5 as a retirement gift. I am a .270 guy, what I am I going to do with a 6.5. I found out. I took a hard fall in the woods when I tripped on a old #12 phoneline. In the process I dropped my rifle.

I did not have time to check the sights so the 6.5 came out and it killed a deer just as fast, and just as dead as my .270. But the mere mention of a .270 what ever gets my interest. A tough pill after giving my wildcat brother such a bad time. I mean it is only money. I know that was a lucky shot and a .277 bullet would have done a better job. :-D

Mac11700 · « **Reply #7 on:** February 23, 2006, 07:55:56 PM »

In the link I provided above..the author state what he did..and what lenght barrels..

Quote

When at long last the project was completed, I examined the result. The rifle was truly a knockout. With a Zeiss 3x9 scope, the rifle weighed 7.3 lbs. I had struggled over the matter of barrel length, but as the intent was to build a light, handy rifle, I eventually settled on a length of 22. That abbreviated barrel was in keeping with the theme of the rifle, but it would come back to haunt me later.

and his follow up in the article is this..

Quote

Shooting The Good-Humor Man

The project was so pleasing that I wrote an article describing it. In writing the article, I chose to deal cautiously with loading data for this wildcat. The loads that I placed in print were somewhat conservative, and the highest velocity I listed was around 2,950 fps.

I also stated that the little wildcat duplicated the venerable .270 Winchester -- you would have thought I had shot the good-humor man.

Letters rolled in quoting factory ballistics for a 130 gr. .270 load and telling me that I was a charlatan. How could I possibly claim to duplicate the .270 when the factory data clearly showed a velocity of 3,060 fps?

Remember that handy 22" barrel? Here is where it became a factor. Velocity figures in factory catalogs showed a test barrel of 24", not the 22" of my rifle. My critics must have missed that tidbit. A 2" difference in barrel length is worth at least 50 fps.

We also know that real guns and test barrels are different too. It is so rare as to be remarkable for anyone to get the published catalog velocity from a production rifle. My experience with various .270 Win, rifles suggested that a more realistic velocity was between 2,950 and 3,000 fps. But even if my speed was 5 percent low, were all those deer 5 percent less dead?

Now..figuring things the way I do..since Wichester unvield the short mags..they also reduced the velocity of the regular 270 loads and a bunch of others..and since they are actually getting concivably less velocity with the standard loads..this short compact round will equal the factory velocities of it in a 22" barrel..and should give almost if not equal to the short mag in a 26" tube..and seems to me it would be much more efficiant doing so...Just my take on it

Mac

Siskiyou · « **Reply #8 on:** February 24, 2006, 06:39:04 AM »

Mac11700: Interesting post. The barrel length issue along with shooter owned choney's sure has changed the "truth." Published velocitys in the 60's were always from 26 inch barrels. Now days it appears that most are from 24 inch barrels. A data card taped on a stock using factory numbers mostly is incorrect for that rifle.

With a 24 inch barrel I have found factory .300 Savage ammo to be about 120 fps below published numbers. With the my .270s with 22-inch barrels I have found factory ammo from 50 to over 100 fps below published numbers. I use the average number from a session with the Chrony, and then run those numbers with my Serria ballistic program. The Serria program allows the user to choose the brand of bullets and wt. I then create a data card for that rifle.

There are a lot of arguments regarding barrel length but if long range shooting is a critical issue, then a 24 inch barrel in my mind makes sense over a 22 inch barrel. When I write about long range shooting, I am thinking 300 yards or more. The grain in engery at 300 yards on the target is a critical factory. I want to anchor my deer with a killing shot. Having said that a shot at 300 yards or more is rather rare with deer but not with antelope.

quickdtoo · « **Reply #9 on:** February 24, 2006, 06:50:02 AM »

There's another wildcat .277" based on the .308, the .270 Sabi....sounds like a good youth caliber....

http://www.sabirifles.co.za/sabi270.htm

Mac11700 · « **Reply #10 on:** February 24, 2006, 09:42:11 AM »

Quote

There are a lot of arguments regarding barrel length but if long range shooting is a critical issue, then a 24 inch barrel in my mind makes sense over a 22 inch barrel. When I write about long range shooting, I am thinking 300 yards or more. The grain in engery at 300 yards on the target is a critical factory. I want to anchor my deer with a killing shot. Having said that a shot at 300 yards or more is rather rare with deer but not with antelope.

Siskiyou

Your right..300 yards is what I consider the beggining distance of long range..for open terrain..and the remaining energy is critical for proper bullet upset and expansion..not to mention a host of other reasons..I'm a big fan of the longer barrels for this reason..they give you a-lot more velocity..without all the pressure issues of max'ing the cartridge out to do it..I have a sweet little Mod 70 stainless 308 Featherwieght in law-a-way right now..and I have giving serious consideration to this cartridge as a possible conversion to the Winchester.I'm a big fan of the 270 and also the 25-06..This short action rifle is a joy to hold and look at..and it seems that both calibers would work rather well with this action..and getting it rebarreled wouldn't be a major problem..not with all the great selection to choose from...and both of these short wild-cats can equal the standard cartridge..I think it might be fun to do this one...

Mac

Siskiyou · « **Reply #11 on:** February 24, 2006, 12:16:06 PM »

Wildcatting is a strange obsession. A little like being a teenager in love. I like the .270 Redding concerpt because there are number of fine short actions out there, good medium burning powders, and the number one reason the millions of .308/7.62 cases waiting for us. It is a better choice then my choice.

Years ago I had dis-respectful thoughts. My Dad gave me his Remington short action 722. Brother wildcatter had already wildcatted a 722 in .257 Roberts into a .257 AI. He wanted Dad's old 722. My first and still my reaction no. But I thought about reaming the chamber out to .308 Winchester. I discarded the idea when I started loading for it. I found that maximum published loads were not a problem in that rifle. So I discarded that idea.

Quote

The .270-284 Winchester is another combination. The .284 case gives you 30-06 case capacity in a short action case. At times .284 cases are difficult to obtain. I have a hard time keeping track but I think my brother currently has a 6.5-284 and a .25-284. In the hunting field I see no advantage of the 6.5-284 over a handloaded 6.5 Swede in a modern action

I did a lot of research for my brother on the 6.5-284 on the internet. It must be a great thousand yard round with match bullets. But when I looked at the numbers I felt a .270-284 was a better option. I have thought that many years. But in some other short action. Dad's rifle will not change. It is good as it is.

But I think the 270-284 with it's 30-06 case capacity has some advantages.