Reply with quote #9
Shhhhh... If everybody knew how great a 270 WSM is, none of us that have one and love it would be able to find .277 bullets available. It's hard to beat for a hunting round.
Reply with quote #10
I have a Browning Eclipse in 270WSM that I haven't shot alot, and am still working up loads for. The 26" barrel should help the ballistics slightly, but I agree there is a need for higher BC bullets. If we could get Lapua or Berger to make a 160gr with a BC in the .600 range, we'd be in business.
I'm having a 6mm built in a wildcat based on a RSAUM cartridge, and ran into the same problem there. I have a decent selection of hunting bullets, but the target bullets fall considerably short of the .600 BC range. As a result, this gun will probably be limited to use out to 600 - 700 yds on still days. It is designed as a hunting rifle anyway and will weigh in just under 7 lbs. Not exactly 1K material.
NOW, I've been considering creating a new wildcat by necking down a Dakota cartridge. The .277 diameter would be an ideal concept, since there is only a .007" diameter neck reduction, and the .270 bore is generally at the bottom of most hunter's range of calibers to hunt large deer, such as elk, moose, and caribou. This round would be capable of surpassing the 270 Weatherby, without all that free-bore. Only problem is that the cartridge would be capable of outperforming available bullet selection. This caliber would be more than capable of pushing a 160gr long-nosed bullet about as fast as you'd care to have it pushed. Recoil would likely be milder than the 7mms or 30s, too. This might be a good "speculator" cartridge to build for those of us wanting to dump a large amount of cash into "the next best thing." I like that comment, 22250!
I didn't mean to hi-jack this thread to talk about my personal projects, and I'm still working with the 270WSM. I've threatened to sell it to pay for my other projects, have it rebarreled to a .264 WSM, etc. Actually, I think I'll keep it just as it is and find some good loads for it! I will agree, the .270 bore is about as near a perfect hunting caliber as you could hope for! Cheers, Mr. O'connor (Jack, that is)... you are an inspiration to us all!
Reply with quote #11
other than poor bullet selection is there any other reasons why i should not get a .270wsm?
Reply with quote #12
It's hard to beat the 270 WSM for medium to medium-large game.
My newest loading really blasts the 150 AB into MAGNUM land.
Using 70.3 Magnum powder and a CCI-200, my Chrony says 3155 FPS (average). And accuracy is outstanding for a hunting rifle.
Previously I was using H1000 for 2960 FPS. Since Ramshot powder has become hard to find, I'll be trying Retumbo to duplicate these efforts.
Reply with quote #13
I JUST PUT A 30 INCH HART BARREL IN 270WSM ON MY 700.1ST WE TRIED 110 SIERRA PRO HUNTERS IT DIDN'T LIKE THEM. THEN TRIED 130 SIERRA PRO HUNTERS AND 3 HOLES TOUCHING AT 100 YARDS. NEXT TIME WE WILL TRY 400 YARDS HOPEFULLY BEFORE OPENING WEEKEND.
Reply with quote #14
Friday I had a Tikka Lite stainless/synthetic in .270 WSM in my hands at a local gunshop. This cartridge has a rep in southern Ontario for being the most accurate of the WSMs. But the thoughts of magnum recoil in that light rifle made me wince. The heart was willing but the brain said no. So I am going with the 6.5x55 in the Tikka instead. But I was thinking of this thread while I was handling the .270 WSM.
Reply with quote #15
switching to standard primers seemed to take some of the recoil out of mine and get tighter groups. only problem now is i have some cratered primers with 65grs. of h4831sc.
what happend to the old dirty thurdy for deer killing?
Reply with quote #16
A friend of mine has had a reamer cut by Pacific for a 6.5/270wsm of his own design. He is developing a rifle for F Class that he thinks will be a winner next Summer on the Canadian Army ranges.
So your beloved .270WSM may become the proud parent of a 1000 yard target winner. Time will tell.