Why not .270Win?

KeithB

Resident Half Fast Machinist
I see a lot of posts on 6.5mm, 7mm, .30 and .35 caliber rounds. For those that like challenges there are the .22 casters. Sometimes its a proprietary type round, sometime its not, but I rarely if ever see anything on Jack O'Conner's favorite the .270 Win. How come?

I might mention that a few years ago I bought a lightly used (5 rounds out of first box of 20) model 70 in .270 W with a plastic stock and a 3-9 scope, (don't remember brand). Bought a RCBS mold and gas checks, dies, etc. Never got a chance to shoot it again after I used up the fifteen rounds that came with it due to health issues. Been reading with interest the stuff on low node shooting.

Any comments?
 

Pistolero

Well-Known Member
My wife has a .270, used it in Africa to take a gemsbok, and a lot of practice before we went.
Hasn't used it since. Nothing wrong with it, but we only have used jbullet loads with it.

Bill
 

462

California's Central Coast Amid The Insanity
Not being a hunter, I'm not qualified to voice my opinion. However, a neighbor used to use one, to hunt Washington Elk, but switched to a .30-'06. Unfortunately, he hasn't killed an Elk with either cartridge.
 

Brad

Benevolent Overlord and site owner
Staff member
My 270 Win accounted for 11 heads in Africa. Thee zebra and kudu are large animals and went down easily with a 130 gr Barnes TSX.

I have shot cast in the 16-1800 FPS range and accuracy was good enough to keep it interesting.

Haven’t shot it in 11 years as I left the scope with the PH when I left RSA.

Too many other guns that are better/easier with cast and that is about all I shoot
 

RBHarter

West Central AR
For me it's about the limited bullet weight choices , although that has changed a little bit on the light end with the 6.8 staying alive and growing in popularity .
The 7mm just have so many more bullet choices and moulds available . I'm still looking for a 150-160 for the 6.8 and it's been 4 years . I thought I'd found it with the Cramer B4 ....... Yea another 130 7mm .....now if I just had one of those unicorn 1-11 284 barrels ....

I like the 6.8 and it does quite well with cast and jackets and I get 21-2200 fps with cast 130s and 2400 with jacketed 120s . That's about what the 270 does with 150s at start loads .
 

fiver

Well-Known Member
waay back when I was a kid I would sit and read the entire book, not just the data or the stories.
back then the 7 mauser was listed right below the 270 Winchester on the charts because there wasn't 72 other overlapping rounds cluttering things up.
I could clearly see the 45-K pressure for the 7mm [which is how most of the brass was marked since it was pretty much the only one other than the upstart 7magnum]
I could also clearly see 140-154grs of bullet weight for the 7mm and right above it 150grs of bullet weight for the 270 and 30-06.
it took me until I was maybe 7 or 8 to decide I'd just build a modern 7x57 and boost the pressure up to the 270's status and just outrun it by a couple hundred fps.
not quite 10 years later I met Parker Ackley and learned a little bit more about case design in between our just talking about life, sports, and school stuff.
I didn't know he was somebody, and I was just a kid he met once that somehow managed to show up from time to time to B.S. for an hour or so.
anyhow that once again changed my attitude towards the 7mm versus the 270 making me decide on more case capacity.
until then I was pretty much stuck using the 25$ mauser I had.
I still remember riding my 10 speed a few miles through town to go show him the rifle.
he took it in the shop and asked me to leave it with him for a few days to check it out, I was kind of reluctant but agreed.
I went back a week or so later and he handed me just the barrel and said look down there and gave me a lesson on what was wrong with it.
I probably looked like I was gonna cry or something but he reached inside the door and brought out the rifle with a new replacement barrel of some sort on it and gave it to me.
I figured I owed him something but he wouldn't accept any money [like I had any] and he refused my offer to come work it off.

wow, well I rambled down memory lane for a bit there.
anyway I owned a 270 for like 10 years after loaning my BIL some money, he come reminded me I still had it one day and paid me off.
I just never had any interest in the 270, I can see how it would be popular, iv'e shot one, my best friend had one he hunted with, and I shoot a 25-06 pretty regular.
the 270 would be pretty much the same I guess.
 

RicinYakima

High Steppes of Eastern Washington
Great hunting cartridge, but it is boring for a rifle crank. Factory ammo is really slow if you shoot it over a chronograph, not what is listed.
 

Ole_270

Well-Known Member
270 was my first and only centerfire for around 20 years. I used it for everything, deer, coyotes, varmints, and paper. That's why the M700 BDL is on it's 2nd barrel and 3rd stock. I used a Lyman 473 mold for a while with light Red Dot loads for practice, that spitzer wouldn't handle much in the way of velocity. Not long after getting the Pac Nor barrel I bought a 257 Roberts and the 270 took a back seat for quite a while. Since then a couple 250-3000, a 243 and others have needed work so the 270 really got stuck in the back of the safe. Brought it out a couple years ago to see if it would still kill a deer, a 162 B&C Whitetail showed it still worked.
By the way, John Barsnes has stated several times in print that the 150 Partition out of the 270 will penetrate with the 180 out of a 30-06. I don't have any experience with the 30-06 and the only time I used the 150 Pt was on a raghorn bull that a companion had gutshot. It stopped well down the hill and I managed to drop it with a high sholder shot.
These days the ol' 270 is my "big" rifle, it only gets use when I go elk hunting and at my age that may be over with.
 

Ian

Notorious member
Some people just don't like Jack O'Conner.

Two problems with cast in the .270: Lack of good moulds for high-velocity and too large of a case for low-velocity. NOE has one now that looks like it would be decent for the mid-2K fps arena and down. The sillywet moulds are universally terrible for anything more than about 1800 fps IME. The RCBS 130 and 250 are both responsive to Titegroup at 12-1400 fps and Unique (with muzzle elevation before each shot) up to about 1600.
 

RicinYakima

High Steppes of Eastern Washington
Well, Jack was a hunter, not a gun crank really. Talked with a bunch of people who knew him in the later years in Lewiston and they have all said that it if was not about hunting, he didn't have much interest in the subject. I have several of his books and books of his articles. He was articulate and enjoy reading his works. He had no interest in handguns, and liked a pretty rifle better than an interesting one. Hated old guns.
 

Bret4207

At the casting bench in the sky. RIP Bret.
I enjoyed O'Connors writing. I don't know how much was entirely factual, but you get that with any gun writer. I knew a couple guys that knew him and said he could be kinda nasty if crossed. Whatever. As far as the 270 it was always an odd duck to me. The 7mm seemed to have so much more going for them for heavier stuff and the 6.5 wasn't far behind and was better for lighter stuff. If you liked it and used it, there was nothing wrong with it. But like the 6mm rounds, it never got me excited. The 25's, 6.5's and 7mm were far more interesting to me.
 

Winelover

North Central Arkansas
The 270 W was my first centerfire purchase. I'm a lefty so choices were limited to the Ruger MK II left handed action. I used it for deer hunting in Michigan. Boringly accurate with jacketed bullets.

I never considered using cast.............in the smaller bore centerfire rifles. Just don't shoot them that much. First rifle that I transitioned to cast was for, was the 338W. Reasons were cost savings and obtaining lower recoil.

Next rifle was my 308 AR-10...............just because I wanted to see if I could.

Started my casting career with making pistol/carbine bullets. To this day, that is what I shoot the most. My main deer rifle is my Marlin 1894 chambered in 44 Magnum. Probably, cast and fire more bullets in 9 mm and 38/357 than any others.
 

Pistolero

Well-Known Member
When I was a kid reading all the books, it seemed that the limits on the range of bullet weights in the .270 diam (a total oddball)
was a big problem compared to 7mms. I bought my first 7mm for $10 mail order......with a garbage barrel. Lesson learned.
Second was a MINT (NRA Excellent condition, and it was) Chilean 1895 7x57. It was and is a good shooter, and didn't kick me
silly like my friend's Dad's '03 Springfield did. So, I was and still am a 7x57 guy.

I used the 7x57 with a handload of 160 Nosler Partition at 2750ish on kudu, impala, blesbok, one shot each. Used .44 Mag revolver for
two wart hogs and .45-70 Marlin for zebra and wildebeest. Nothing needed a second shot.

Not against the .270, it is what I recommended for my wife. OTOH, I think the .280 is a bit better choice, overall.

Bill
 

Rcmaveric

Active Member
270 Win was my first riffle that I bought. I got it to be different as all my friends have 308 and 30 06. Its a Savage Axis II with weaver 3x9. I got it when i was in California. Ammo prices lead me to reloading. Price of bullets lead me to casting for that gun. So, thanks California. I started reloading in 2014 and casting in 2016.

Bullets mold selection is dismal. I have been using the Lee mold for velocities up to 2050Fps. Contemplateed getinf the RCBS mold, but it is just a heavier version of the Lee mold (is that backwards). Moa accuracy that is repeatable. Oddly this is the gun i learned to cast and reload on and i have never leaded it. I have tried paper patching and PC and all work for accuracy at 2050fps. Often contemplated barreling it with a slower twist like a 1 in 10 to see what happens.

I use this gun to hunt with but have yet only havested a turkey with it at 75 yards (all my deer have been taken with my shotgun and buck shot). Havent shot a deer with it yet. The lee bullet isnt my first choice of a hunting bullet, knowing what i know now it shouldnt be a choice but its all i have. I would love a custom bullet. I have my chamber dimensions memorized. I have a laundry list of things to buy first but after those are bought and i get a couple hundred bucks saved i plan on emailing one of the mold manufacturers to see if they can take one of those 7mm hunting designs with 65% meplate [either the LFN style RNFP style] and adjust the diameters to fit my. 270. My throat is .280, slight lead angle and .270 bore and a .277 grove. Thise is close to 7mm dimentions and if the molds are lathe cut might be doable for cheap.

I am all ready on one group buy right now. Was actually thinking about starting a group buy discussion for a .270 Winchester hunting bullet at NOE, but i didnt want to make the wife mad if it turned into a group buy and i havent paid for the first group buy. I also thought of email Accurate molds or MMP but there is no point if i dont have the money in hand. I do not have bullet design software so i cant make my owne designs.
 
Last edited:

Brad

Benevolent Overlord and site owner
Staff member
Well, Jack was a hunter, not a gun crank really. Talked with a bunch of people who knew him in the later years in Lewiston and they have all said that it if was not about hunting, he didn't have much interest in the subject. I have several of his books and books of his articles. He was articulate and enjoy reading his works. He had no interest in handguns, and liked a pretty rifle better than an interesting one. Hated old guns.
To many a rifle is just a tool.

We are not the norm of shooters or hunters. In the shooting world we, as remodels and casters, are the freaks.

I’m ok with that
 

Pistolero

Well-Known Member
Brad, I figured out that being "normal" was pretty boring and got past that a LONG time ago.

I like 'chinery, all kinda, all sizes. Old and new. It's the way my brain works and I decided to go with it
and enjoy it a LONG time ago. Being "odd" doesn't phase me in the slightest. Cars, airplanes, guns, mowers,
engines, ships, gearboxes, reloading machines, all of it. Architecture, esp old stuff is also interesting because
to make a big building, made with wood, stone and little else is quite difficult, yet the ancients did magnificent
things with these very limited capability materials.
And the Romans had very complex water works and water mills for grinding grain. All this machinery, up to
the Colt revolvers and beyond just tickle my brain. An making melted lead into projectiles that will follow
a ballistic path for 100 or even 200 yards and land right next to each other.....pretty amazing stuff.

Bill
 
Last edited: