GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-19-2012, 12:56   #51
SCmasterblaster
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Hartford, Vermont
Posts: 15,846
.30-'06 neck length

Is long enough to secure a 220-gr bullet, and the case capacity is big enough to drive the long bullet at 2300 FPS. This leaves the .270 Win way behind.
__________________
Gun Ownership Offers Freedom in Many Dimensions
SCmasterblaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2012, 18:07   #52
ADK_40GLKr
Senior Member
 
ADK_40GLKr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: RFD NY Adks
Posts: 2,130
Blog Entries: 2
Surprised no one has mentioned the history of the .270. IIRC, Wasn't it developed to get higher velocity & longer range by just necking down a .30-06 case? I think case volume behind the bullet is the same, is it not? So you can "reach out and touch" smaller targets at greater distance!

I'm certainly not a ballistics authority, but I believe I read that somewhere BEFORE the Internet. (Sports Afield or the like)
__________________
Luke 22:36 He said to them, “... if you don’t have a Glock, sell your cloak and buy one."

NRA, GSSF, IDPA, NY voter.

Last edited by ADK_40GLKr; 11-19-2012 at 18:09..
ADK_40GLKr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2012, 19:38   #53
oscarthegrouch
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 176
"There ain't many problems a man can't fix, with $700 and a 30-06."
Lindy Wisdom
oscarthegrouch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2012, 11:36   #54
2bgop
Senior Member
 
2bgop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: In the SEC
Posts: 5,679
I have both and hunt with both. For someone of average skill who takes shots at average ranges, they both work just fine for me.
2bgop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2012, 12:32   #55
countrygun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 17,068
Quote:
Originally Posted by ADK_40GLKr View Post
Surprised no one has mentioned the history of the .270. IIRC, Wasn't it developed to get higher velocity & longer range by just necking down a .30-06 case? I think case volume behind the bullet is the same, is it not? So you can "reach out and touch" smaller targets at greater distance!

I'm certainly not a ballistics authority, but I believe I read that somewhere BEFORE the Internet. (Sports Afield or the like)
You have to look at the marketing strategy to understand the .270, really, ballistically, it doesn't make a lot of sense. You do not gain effective "longer range" with a lower ballistic coefficient. You might gain a flatter trajectoy which translates to a slightly longer PBR but not as much as one would think. put a 130 gn bullet in a 30-06 and see what happens.

The ability to hit targets at long range is much more in the hands of the shooter and their knowledge and skill than in a realtively few FPS. But shrewed marketers would have you think otherwise.

At the time America was "30-06'ed" to the max. There was considerable interest still, in rounds like the .257 Roberts but Americans would not accept a "foriegn caliber" with things like "8mm, 7mm, 6.5mm" in the title or based on "Odd" bore diameters. "If we are going to have an odd caliber, it will be one our own making" was pretty much the sentiment.

When it comes down to it, and with the benefits of todays projectiles, the wildcat "6.5-06" is a giant leap above the .270 in versatility. But in the day "All American" "with more velocity" is what sold new guns.
countrygun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2012, 14:29   #56
Zombie Steve
Decap Pin Killa
 
Zombie Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Old Colorado City
Posts: 19,934
They just hadn't adopted the term "magnum" yet...

Caliber Corner


Imma do the .277 Nabuchadnezzar although the Methuselah sounds pretty potent.

Last edited by Zombie Steve; 11-20-2012 at 14:29..
Zombie Steve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2012, 20:09   #57
dougader
Senior Member
 
dougader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: OryGun
Posts: 3,316
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredj338 View Post
I am not a fan of either round, but the 06 can handle heavier bullets w/ enough vel to take anything that walks the planet.
With 220gr solids, it has taken all the DG in Africa as well as the largest bears. I prefer a 280 & 338-06, but I am just a bit on the odd side.
I started with a 30-06 because that's what my Dad had and I inherited all of his ammo, bullets, powder, etc. If I started from scratch, I'd probably go with the 280 Rem for deer and antelope, 338-06 for elk, bear, moose.

As it stands, I have the 30-06 and 338-06.
__________________
Doug

"In St. Louis, armed Homeland Security agents monitored Tea Party members protesting the IRS. Good idea. When people think their government is out to get them, the best response is to send the government out to get them." -Fred Thompson
dougader is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2012, 20:16   #58
dkf
Senior Member
 
dkf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,308
Quote:
Originally Posted by ADK_40GLKr View Post
Surprised no one has mentioned the history of the .270. IIRC, Wasn't it developed to get higher velocity & longer range by just necking down a .30-06 case? I think case volume behind the bullet is the same, is it not? So you can "reach out and touch" smaller targets at greater distance!

I'm certainly not a ballistics authority, but I believe I read that somewhere BEFORE the Internet. (Sports Afield or the like)
From Wiki

"While it is true that a .270 Winchester case can be formed from a 30-06 Springfield case, the case length of a 30-06 is 2.494 inches (63.3 mm) while the case length of a .270 is 2.540 inches (64.5 mm), the same as a .30-03 Springfield. It is recommended that .270 Winchester brass be formed from .35 Whelen or .280 Remington cases.[11]"

.270 - "Case capacity 67 gr H2O (4.355 cm³)"
30-06 - "Case capacity 68 gr H2O (4.42 cm³)"

So sounds like the extra length on the .270 is neck.

A bigger diameter bullet gives more area for the burning powder to "push" against the bullet and more room in the bore to burn. For example a .338-06 can push a .338 220gr bullet with more "authority" than a 30-06 can push a .30 220gr bullet.

Last edited by dkf; 11-20-2012 at 20:20..
dkf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2012, 20:22   #59
countrygun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 17,068
Quote:
Originally Posted by dkf View Post
From Wiki

"While it is true that a .270 Winchester case can be formed from a 30-06 Springfield case, the case length of a 30-06 is 2.494 inches (63.3 mm) while the case length of a .270 is 2.540 inches (64.5 mm), the same as a .30-03 Springfield. It is recommended that .270 Winchester brass be formed from .35 Whelen or .280 Remington cases.[11]"

A bigger diameter bullet gives more area for the burning powder to "push" the bullet and more room in the bore to burn. For example a .338-06 can push a .338 220gr bullet with more "authority" than a 30-06 can push a .30 220gr bullet.
This is an important, and often overlooked point.
countrygun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2012, 21:40   #60
RWBlue
CLM Number 120
Mr. CISSP, CISA
 
RWBlue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 27,365
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zombie Steve View Post
They just hadn't adopted the term "magnum" yet...

Caliber Corner


Imma do the .277 Nabuchadnezzar although the Methuselah sounds pretty potent.
Reminds me of the story of a wildcat cartridge maker. He had come up the ultimate varmint cartridge. It was suppose to have an extremely flat trajectory and because of the speed it would not have to worry about wind drift as much.

He had take a 50BMG cartridge and necked it down to .45. Then he took that cartridge and necked it down to .40. At this point he had to thin the neck because the brass was getting too thick. Then he took the case and necked it down to .308. Then he necked it down to .264. Again he had to thin the neck. He was finally able to neck it down to .224.

He then put a gun together with with a barrel chambered in his special round.

His test loads were with with the same powder as normally loaded in a 50BMG.

He said that he was only having one issue with the ultimate varmint cartridge. It was vaporizing the bullet before it reached the end of the barrel.

__________________
One day, I shall come back. Yes, I shall come back. Until then, there must be no regrets, no tears, no anxieties. Just go forward in all your beliefs and prove to me that I am not mistaken in mine.
RWBlue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2012, 13:03   #61
SCmasterblaster
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Hartford, Vermont
Posts: 15,846
Quote:
Originally Posted by dkf View Post
From Wiki

"While it is true that a .270 Winchester case can be formed from a 30-06 Springfield case, the case length of a 30-06 is 2.494 inches (63.3 mm) while the case length of a .270 is 2.540 inches (64.5 mm), the same as a .30-03 Springfield. It is recommended that .270 Winchester brass be formed from .35 Whelen or .280 Remington cases.[11]"

.270 - "Case capacity 67 gr H2O (4.355 cm³)"
30-06 - "Case capacity 68 gr H2O (4.42 cm³)"

So sounds like the extra length on the .270 is neck.

A bigger diameter bullet gives more area for the burning powder to "push" against the bullet and more room in the bore to burn. For example a .338-06 can push a .338 220gr bullet with more "authority" than a 30-06 can push a .30 220gr bullet.
Thanks for the good info!
__________________
Gun Ownership Offers Freedom in Many Dimensions
SCmasterblaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2012, 11:01   #62
omega48038
Senior Member
 
omega48038's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Detroit, Michigan USA
Posts: 840
Quote:
Originally Posted by SCmasterblaster View Post
C'mon now. No amount of bullet and gun development can ever turn the .270 into an elk or moose cartridge like the .30-'06 easily is.
Let me guess, you own a 30.06, right? Do you have any experience at all with the .270?
The .270 win has long been considered a premier elk cartridge by plenty of people who know what they're talking about.

Sure, an 06 may be marginally better when both are pushed toward their limits, but within their intended scope (CXP2 & thinner skinned CPX3 sized game at medium to long range), they're too close to matter much at all. I'm not denying the OP's claim that the 06 is more versatile, but you are claiming that it's better at everything.

Last edited by omega48038; 12-04-2012 at 14:16..
omega48038 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2012, 12:45   #63
dkf
Senior Member
 
dkf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,308
There are many different opinions on the "perfect elk cartridge". Some say .338-06, some .300win mag, some .300rum, some 30-06, some 7mm, some .338 win mag and etc. The 30-06 is a more versitile cartridge than the .270 hands down due to many factors, I really don't know how someone can argue otherwise. Is the .270 a bad cartridge? Nope. If I would come up on a big bull I just would prefer a little more bullet than what the run of the mill .270 provides. Opinions vary.

Last edited by dkf; 12-04-2012 at 12:46..
dkf is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 00:40.



Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 775
232 Members
543 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 11:42