Author Topic: 270-08 anyone? (Read 2974 times)

kkeetr · « **on:** June 17, 2005, 01:43:11 PM »

As much as I read boards on rifles and cartridges, I've never seen a discussion on this round or a similar one. I have a 7-08 and a 243 and the 270-08 would fit right in between the two. I know a lot of people would say the 270 WSM would fit there too but the 270-08 would fit better into my reloading scheme than the WSM would. Is there a short action .277 round out there already that I just don't know about? Discuss!

Gregory · « **Reply #1 on:** June 17, 2005, 02:04:08 PM »

What about the 260 Rem?

Do you have your heart set on a .277 bullet?

Yukon Jack · « **Reply #2 on:** June 17, 2005, 02:16:11 PM »

Yes, the round is discussed in Wolfe Publishing's "Wildcat Cartridges II". I can't remember exactly when the original article was published, but the round proved to be very accurate for the author in a rifle he built from a BLR, I believe.

kkeetr · « **Reply #3 on:** June 17, 2005, 02:30:56 PM »

I've never looked at the 260 before. After doing some research, it looks like that would fit in that slot nicely. The 277 bullets have a higher BC than the 264's but the 264's have a higher sectional density compared to 277 bullets of the same weight...

BruceP · « **Reply #4 on:** June 17, 2005, 03:46:54 PM »

Without looking in my Wildcat Cartridges II book, I belive that one is called the 270 Redding. If it were me I would probably just go with the 260 Rem.
BruceP

ringo · « **Reply #5 on:** June 17, 2005, 03:55:41 PM »

A 277/284 gives the same case volume as a 270win and should be ballistically similar but this round would fit a short action rifle.

oso45-70 · « **Reply #6 on:** June 17, 2005, 05:13:33 PM »

kkeetr,

PO Ackley has a 277/308 listed in his book of Shooters and Reloaders #1
There is another 277/ short cartridge shortened to 2.0" that will work in a mod 88 winchester, Its called a Brooks short mag. The cases are made from a 257 weatherby mag, 3000fps. There are many things you can do with the 270 round or the 280 which in my opinion is one great round to work with as far as medium bore goes, Hope this helps.....Joe........

2ndtimer · « **Reply #7 on:** June 25, 2005, 08:20:35 PM »

Quote from: BruceP

Without looking in my Wildcat Cartridges II book, I belive that one is called the 270 Redding. If it were me I would probably just go with the 260 Rem.
BruceP

There are probably multiple .270/308 wildcats out there. The .270 Redding definitely is one of them. I remember reading an article about it 15 or 20 years ago in one of the smaller gun magazines. Sounded like a good cartridge, pushing a 130 gr bullet up to 2900 fps with minimal recoil. I sort of thought I would have one built someday, but then Winchester came out with the .270 WSM which also fits in a short action and can be loaded down to .270 Redding ballistics or up to near 7mm Remington Magnum levels. It also has factory ammo available for the non-handloader, and was available in a low line Model 70 with synthetic stock for less than $400 US. Takes some of the glamour away from the .270 short action wildcats. That combined with the .260 remington, also has factory ammo available, not to mention those amazing ballisticly efficient 6.5 mm bullets, sort of precludes the need for any additional .270 cartridges, IMO.

Lone Star · « **Reply #8 on:** June 26, 2005, 04:44:37 AM »

Quote

The 277 bullets have a higher BC than the 264's but the 264's have a higher sectional density compared to 277 bullets of the same weight...

Nosler bullets:
.264" 125 grains = 0.449 BC
.277" 130 grains = 0.416 BC

Hornady bullets:
.264" 140 brains = 0.520 BC
.277" 140 grains = 0.495 BC

Personally, the 0.007" difference in diameter between the .270 and the 7mm is so small that I wonder about any real difference. The .260 fits better between the 6mm and the 7mm - in fact it is exactly in between.

kombi1976 · « **Reply #9 on:** June 26, 2005, 04:58:10 AM »

Here's a couple of short action .270 cal cartridges aside of the 270-08:

- 6.8 Rem SPC (Special Purpose Cartridge) - speciality is 115gn bullets and will fit any action designed for .223 without the same presure as a .223. Downside is that only Remington makes cases for it.

- .270 Sabi - technically a 270-08 actually but designed for specific purposes with specific loads. Check out this link to learn more about it:
http://www.thehunterslife.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1591&highlight=African

Siskiyou · « **Reply #10 on:** June 26, 2005, 08:48:20 AM »

I worked with a gunsmith by the name of Jack Lange who had built a .270-300 Savage on a model 99 action. It was/is a fine deer round. Jack was a veteran of WWII Patton's outfit. His job was weapon maintenance. After the war he went to a Oregon Technical Institute gunsmithing school on the G.I. Bill. He built his shop in the middle of a deer factory. In 1956 his home and shop burned down during a major forest fire. It wiped him out and he had to find work other then gunsmithing. He remained an active shooter and hunter.

I did not know him at the time of the fire. But we did spend sometime discussing the rifle he saved. He was an avid hunter. And the .270-300 Savage was his choice, and he did have more then one rifle to choose from. As I recall his favorite bullet was a 120 grain Barnes.

In my opinion the .270-.308 would be a slightly better round.

The .300 Savage case and the .308 case bring efficiency to the table. Using old Hornaday and Speer data I load 44 grains of IMR4064 to get 2800 fps out of my M722 in .300 Savage with a 150 grain bullet. That works out to 150 rounds per pound of powder. I am averaging 2850 fps out of my .270 with a 22 inch barrel. I am loading 56.5 grains of H4831 to push a 150 grain bullet. The .270 case is costing me 124 rounds per pound of powder. (Note these loads may exceed maximum in some rifles. They are only shown as a bases of case efficiency. These loads exceed max in newer manuals :!: ) Remember the .300 Savage round was the starting point for the military development of the 7.62 NATO round.(.308) The military put a longer neck on the case and increased the pressure level.

An advantage over the .270 WSM is that the magazine will hold a couple more rounds.

A review of the dies out there show that there are a number of rounds that fit the bill from the .270-243, .270-308, .270-308 improved, and a few others. I guess the simple one would just be the .270-308.

My brother is the custom case nut in the family but the idea of a .270-300 Savage or a .270-.308 kind of gets me excited.

PEPAW · « **Reply #11 on:** June 28, 2005, 02:55:52 AM »

I am just a hunter, so new cartridges usually don't impress me.
But for a great cartridge in that "range", a factory .260 is tough to improve upon. Check the ballistic tables and the SD of this long bullet in 140 grains and you can see why it is a game getter. With low recoil! The case works extremely well for the 7 mm and the .243, and the 6.5 is a great middle round.

Good luck with your .270. Sounds like a fun project.

pepaw

Slamfire · « **Reply #12 on:** June 29, 2005, 08:28:16 PM »

When Ken Waters proposed his .263 Express, the earliest .260 incarnation I'm aware of, P. O. Ackley argued that the .270/08 would be better. I think Parker was wrong. :-D

kkeetr · « **Reply #13 on:** July 09, 2005, 07:25:17 AM »

That .270 Sabi is exactly what I was talking about!!! I didn't see that one in the Tikka catalog though. :roll:

It's really funny that they've had a commercially produced 270-08 in Africa for years that we never heard about whereas they would consider the 7-08 a wildcat round that would be impossible to find ammunition for.

I wonder how many other desirable rounds exist in other countries that we haven't seen marketed over here.

kombi1976 · « **Reply #14 on:** July 10, 2005, 03:46:14 AM »

Well, you could have Magnum Arms make a barrel for you chambered in .270 Sabi. :wink:
Then have them send you stacks of .270 Sabi brass and some dies and you're set. :mrgreen:
What's more, it's legit.

Leftoverdj · « **Reply #15 on:** July 10, 2005, 05:46:12 AM »

I just don't see it, folks. There ain't a big enough gap between .264 and .284 to need to split the difference.

jro45 · « **Reply #16 on:** July 10, 2005, 07:38:45 AM »

Wouldn't the 270 Sabi have to shoot high to go 200yds or 300yds because a round going that slow couldn't shoot streight. I mean the bullet
would go on a simi circle.

kombi1976 · « **Reply #17 on:** July 10, 2005, 05:46:27 PM »

Actually, I think the point of the 270 Sabi is to create a cartridge similar in power to the 30-30 that makes a smaller hole with a bullet of greater BC, hence greater penetration.
I guess it would be similar to the 7-30 waters if you loaded it with a 150gn.
In fact ADI Powders site lists the 7-30 as being able to push a 154gn bullet at 2308fps, just behind the Sabi.
And if you load the Sabi up you can achieve 7mm-08 performance quite easily.
But again, that load was specific for the "bushveld" hunting spoken of in the link.

Siskiyou · « **Reply #18 on:** July 11, 2005, 07:53:38 AM »

The neat thing about loading cartridges is that you can build what you as an individual wants. The .270 Sabi is a "case" in point. I must admit that I have never thought of a "neutered .270." I have always thought of the .270-308 as being loaded to it's safe potential.

I started out my son with the .270 Win. I created loads that are listed as minimum. Those loads fit into the .270 Sabi picture frame on a long action. kkeetr is currently reloading and has the ability to build loads that fit his "wants."

Will he have a better round then his current 7mm-08. Not likely. The real deal will be in the rifle. He will like one of them more then the other for a number of reasons. At times I believe the one rifle shooter is better off. He does not have to twist and turn to figure out which one to take on a hunting trip.

kombi1976 · « **Reply #19 on:** July 11, 2005, 03:40:42 PM »

Quote from: Siskiyou

At times I believe the one rifle shooter is better off. He does not have to twist and turn to figure out which one to take on a hunting trip.

Having been "the one rifle shooter" not so long ago I can assure you it doesn't make the job easier.
What it often means is that the one rifle you have feels slightly not-perfect for anything.
That said, I didn't have a flexible cartridge like 7mm-08, 7x57 or 6.5x55.
But overall, I'd rather have a locker full of great rifles to choose from than one.

Siskiyou · « **Reply #20 on:** July 12, 2005, 06:44:06 PM »

I cannot disagree that having more then one hunting rifle gives pleasure. I found the .270 caliber very flexible from shooting ground squirrels to deer, and bear. I had been hunting with barrowed retired deer rifles unit my 14th birthday when Dad gave me a new .270 Winchester. Time has added a few others and I am not surprised that a .270-308 would get my attention. It gets to be rather addictive. Last fall I was at my hunting partners house and his gunsafe was spliting at the seams because of rifles he had passed down to him by elderly relatives now in their 80's and no longer able to hunt.

With four 30-06's in his possesstion he went out and bought a new 7mm Remington Magnum. When we went hunting he was packing the dependable 30-06 he purchased back in the early 70's. Such is life.

A brother called a couple of nights ago and we talked about reloading and he stated with pleasure, that he was having a difficult time on settling on a rifle for the up coming deer season. I assure you he could go many seasons without repeating.

My excuse is that something might happen to my rifle. A few years back I took a hard fall and my .270 went down hard. The next day I was hunting with a 6.5x55 my brother gave me as a retirement gifted. Within a few short hours I was gutting a deer.

Between the 6.5 and the .270 Winchester is just enough room for the .270-308. Maybe with one of those plastic stock!

kombi1976 · « **Reply #21 on:** July 12, 2005, 10:49:05 PM »

I'm in kinda a different position.
Normally I wouldn't endorse the the accumulation of possessions just for the sake of having them......well, o.k., maybe it's cool to have lots of particular stuff. :wink:
And let's face it guns are cool to acquire.
So are electric guitar effects pedals and I've got approaching 20 of them, but that's beside the point.
My real reasons behind having a bit of an armoury are 2 two fold and interlinked.
Because of the way gun laws are tightening here in Australia there's every chance that the day may come when we either have quotas or have to justify beyond all reason why we're buying another gun.
Thing is, it's really hard to take off people what they already own legally and have registered.
Additionally I have a 17 month-old son and another child due in November and I'd like to have rifles they can use as they grow up, especially if it gets difficult to buy your own guns, as I mentioned before.
I don't have much at the moment and my wife is less than keen on shooting but I intend to build up enough stuff over the next few years to equip myself and my kids.
But I digress.

Siskiyou · « **Reply #22 on:** July 13, 2005, 12:43:48 PM »

My father did the same for his sons, and I did it for my boy.

cal sibley · « **Reply #23 on:** July 15, 2005, 04:53:33 PM »

I think the manufacturers may be a bit afraid of making a 270/08. There's already a .260Rem. and a host of 7mm, including the excelent 7mm/08. Making a 270 on a .308Win. case wouldn't provide much wiggle room. It's a pretty tightly bracketed area of cartridges. There's not much it could offer us that we don't have already. Just one mans opinion. Best wishes.

Cal - Montreal

kombi1976 · « **Reply #24 on:** July 15, 2005, 08:12:00 PM »

The same reason why 6.5-06 and 8mm-06 never were legitimised as factory rounds despite the fact that they are fairly popular wildcats, especially 8mm-06, since many ex-mil 98s were rechambered to it.
With 25-06, 270 Win and to a lesser extent 280 Rem, not to mention the parent case, there simply isn't the need.
The guy explained later in the thread on THL that 7mm-08 was quite uncommon in Sth Africa, at least as far as he'd experienced.
If that's the case .260 Rem would be practically unheard of.
Here in Australia .260 Rem is still very uncommon and a lot of owners resize 308 brass rather than order Remington ammo or non-primed stuff.