The .270 win for long range. Why not ?

[me?]

Hi all,

I have an an old Remington 700 in .270 win that my Dad gave me that I want to make into a long range rig, shooting out to 800 to 1000 yards at deer. I am going to true and square the action, bed it in a Mcmillan stock, work over the trigger and put on a 27" Shilen barrel. Matrix Ballistics is making several bullets for the .277 that have really nice BC.

Caliber Inches: .277
Weight, grains: 165.0
Core Density, lb/ci-in: 0.4097
Core Weight, grains: 118.3
Jacket Density, lb/ci-in: 0.32
Jacket weight, lb/ci-in: 46.7
Ogive Radius, calibers: 13.0
Meplat Diameter, inches: 0.06
BC (static): 0.7381

Caliber Inches: .277
Weight, grains: 175.0
Core Density, lb/ci-in: 0.4097
Core Weight, grains: 126.3
Jacket Density, lb/ci-in: 0.32
Jacket weight, lb/ci-in: 48.7
Ogive Radius, calibers: 13.0
Meplat Diameter, inches: 0.06
BC (static): 0.7828

Is the old 270 going to be able to push these heavy pills ?
How fast do you all think I could push a 165 gr or 175 gr ?
Will I need a 1-8 or 1-9 twist to keep the VLD's stabilized ?
I am at 950' elevation.

If I can get 2850 fps out of the 165 gr bullet, my ballistics calculator says that with a BC of .650,(lower than the calculated .7381), the bullet is still supersonic till 1600 yards and at 1000 yards has 1017 ft-lb of energy.
If this info is correct than this would hit harder than a .260 rem with 142 gr bullet and would have almost the same BC as 7mm mag with 180 gr Burgers (.659).
The question is, how accurate is the .270 win with 165 gr or 175 gr bullets at 1000 yards?

I am not using this rig for punching paper in F-class or sniping mall ninjas, I just need it to be minute of deer vitals at 1000 yards.

If the shooter, spotter, gun, optic, bullet, and load all do there part is the .270 win capable of consistent 1000 yard hits ?


YES-------------------------------------------NO

 

[Bluejazz]

Re: The .270 win for long range. Why not ?

I don't see anything wrong with your plan.
With BC'c of over .7 seems very doable, since you already have the action for it.

 

[jhopkins]

Re: The .270 win for long range. Why not ?

I have both the win & wsm, I like the wsm better. I recomend looking at the WSM for the extra case capacity. Just have the bolt face opened up and the long action will be perfect for the 165's.

 

[flyrodder]

Re: The .270 win for long range. Why not ?

We have three .270s in the family, and I think it is a great cartridge. I've taken sort of an opposite approach, with 110-grain Sierra Pro-Hunters at 3,395 fps for a maximum point blank range (plus or minus 3 inches) of 322 yards at my elevation of about 4,700 feet. Four mule deer this year, one through the heart at 295 through and through (my wife), mine through the lungs and out the far shoulder at 375 yards, a doe through the neck at 120, and a huge buck (my lucky son) in the base of the neck at 140 that lodged in the skin on the far side.

Since I am seeing some flattened primers and craters, I am now considering at least a powder change (Reloader 17 or Superformance - I'm using Varget now since I have a bunch for my .308s and it is not temperature sensitive) but have been eyeing the heavier bullets for a better ballistic coefficient if I can push them fast enough. As I do my research, I think the .270 has tremendous potential for everything between where I am now and what you are planning. That long barrel will help, too - I have one 24" and two 22" barrels to work with.

Good luck!

 

[a_bishop]

Re: The .270 win for long range. Why not ?

if you are going to rebarrel why not just switch to a caliber thats better suited for long range. .284 win?

 

[tylerw02]

Re: The .270 win for long range. Why not ?

I'd keep the 270 as is for sentimental reasons and pick up a nice used or Wal-Mart Special 700 to build from. You can rebarrel to virtually anything you desire.

 

[threetrees]

Re: The .270 win for long range. Why not ?

because it is for hunting ... is that bullet any good for hunting? i'm not talking about bc, or weight ...

a) for hunting, we tend to discuss about a suitable bullet (expanding, bonded, etc) - because we want to make sure the animal does not suffer.

b) we have a required minimum energy for a bullet at a certain distance ... how much energy do your bullets have at 800 yards? probably enough for paper, but enough to pass through a shoulder at that distance and provide a nice exit wound so that you can follow it with a dog?

while i fully appreciate the skill to hit small targets at these distances ... i'm a bit hesitant about the 'terminal suitability' of a bullet on deer at these distances. especially when talking about 270win.

 

[jhopkins]

Re: The .270 win for long range. Why not ?

Matrix bullets are a bonded, high bc, hunting bullet.

 

[josephberry]

Re: The .270 win for long range. Why not ?

that's what I did. Much better bullet selection.<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: a_bishop</div><div class="ubbcode-body">if you are going to rebarrel why not just switch to a caliber thats better suited for long range. .284 win? </div></div>

 

[sandwarrior]

Re: The .270 win for long range. Why not ?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: me?</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hi all,

I have an an old Remington 700 in .270 win ... Matrix Ballistics is making several bullets for the .277 that have really nice BC.

...

<span style="font-size: 11pt"><span style="font-weight: bold">Will I need a 1-8 or 1-9 twist to keep the VLD's stabilized ?
I am at 950' elevation.</span></span>

...




YES-------------------------------------------NO



</div></div>

The rifle you have won't stabilize the super heavy bullets for that caliber. No matter what elevation. that doesn't have anything to do with it.

However, if you rebarreled it, you would be able to stabilize those bullets with a standard .270

I. for one. am all for you pushing the envelope here for yourself. Matrix bullets are very good but do need the tighter twists. They will have plenty of energy left downrange to kill any deer you can properly gauge range and windage for. If smaller cased 7mm's and 6.5's can shoot to a mile then a .270 can easily shoot to 1k and have plenty of energy left to kill a deer.

Bottom line. If you want to push this envelope, I say go for it by rebarreling with a tighter twist barrel.

 

[sandwarrior]

Re: The .270 win for long range. Why not ?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: threetrees</div><div class="ubbcode-body">because it is for hunting ... is that bullet any good for hunting? i'm not talking about bc, or weight ...

a) for hunting, we tend to discuss about a suitable bullet (expanding, bonded, etc) - because we want to make sure the animal does not suffer.

b) we have a required minimum energy for a bullet at a certain distance ... how much energy do your bullets have at 800 yards? probably enough for paper, but enough to pass through a shoulder at that distance and provide a nice exit wound so that you can follow it with a dog?

while i fully appreciate the skill to hit small targets at these distances ... i'm a bit hesitant about the 'terminal suitability' of a bullet on deer at these distances. especially when talking about 270win.</div></div>

I don't know why people all of a sudden think the .270 can't do it. Think of it this way. With the same short ogives of other hunting bullets, and all the other things that make hunting bullets 'not-so-aerodynamic', they still have several bullets in the .500 or better BC range. That's without extended ogives and boattails, contoured bearing surfaces... Seriously, .500+ in it's natural state.

Believe me, now that I've gotten around to studying and comparing the ballistics of this caliber to others, I think it is going to have huge potential. That is once barrelmakers give it a tighter twist and we start seeing longer, more aerodynamic bullet shapes for it from bulletmakers.

 

[Beef82]

Re: The .270 win for long range. Why not ?

The .270 is a fantastic hunting round, but it has always been somewhat limited by bullet selection. Which would give me pause before commiting to a build premised on one maker's bullet. Will the demand be there to justify them continuing to make it in years to come? If mainstream rifle manufacturers don't rifle their barrels for the long heavy bullets and get consumers to purchase them, the general shooting public won't be likely continue to purchase the bullets since they'll likely shoot awful in their trusty old deer rifle.

 

[fdkay]

Re: The .270 win for long range. Why not ?

I like your idea, though I'm not a big .270 guy.
It is a very good cartridge that works.

If it were me, I'd look to a .270AI to bump up the velocities of those heavy pills.

 

[George63]

Re: The .270 win for long range. Why not ?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: me?</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hi all,

I just need it to be minute of deer vitals at 1000 yards.

If the shooter, spotter, gun, optic, bullet, and load all do there part is the .270 win capable of consistent 1000 yard hits ?


YES-------------------------------------------NO



</div></div>

8 inches at 1000 yds / .8 moa at 1000 yds consistently? can you do this at even 500yds now? are you willing to practice to the tune of a couple thousand rounds per year? should a more realistic distance be in your plans? on the last ? I think the answer would be yes

 

[Zanshin]

Re: The .270 win for long range. Why not ?

800 to 1000 yard shot at a deer? We talking white tails? Where do you hunt? That is a long shot for a deer. 270 is one of the all time top deer hunting rounds in this country, but as the people above said at that range you need to worry about your force on impact.

If you are really taking 1000 yard shots at live game you should probably consider a magnum. Don't push the envolope on a hunting round. Its your responsibility as a hunter to harvest in a humane way. Bring enough gun.

 

[VKC]

Re: The .270 win for long range. Why not ?

For those ranges, I would pick a mag for more energy on impact. But I personally like the 7mm mags better because of more and better bullet choices.

 

[threetrees]

Re: The .270 win for long range. Why not ?

thanks for the comment on the matrix bullets. haven't seen them before.

the non-vld matrix bullets seem to be similar to what ballistic tips and accubonds do. vld is a totally different story ...

on the magnum version/suggestions - how about 270 wsm?

 

[BoilerUP]

Re: The .270 win for long range. Why not ?

If you're gonna rebarrel that rifle anyway, I'd throw a 284 tube on the long action and call it good, throwing high BC 160-168gr 7mm bullets at or above 2900fps.

Also, a short Google search shows at least one guy who had to input a 0.6 BC to match actual drop for his .277 165 Matrix. To get the velocity you want/need, you'll have to run a barrel longer/heavier than I'd ever want to use for hunting, use RL-17 and push it pretty hard which will probably beat up 270 Win brass.

All that said, it sounds like a nifty project...if you do it keep us advised how it goes!

 

[me?]

Re: The .270 win for long range. Why not ?

Thanks for all the info,
I called Shilen and thay said that a 1-9 twist would "probably" work, but I am going to go with 1-8.5 just to make sure, I also want to try the 175 gr Matrix bullets just to see what happens, (BC .782)

If I don't get the desired velocity I'll just rechamber in 270AI.

I just can't shake the idea of a 1000 yard .270 win killing machine, better ballistics and knock down power than .260 rem, 6.5-284, 7mm-08, .308 win and would have close to the same, or better BC as 7mm mag with 180 gr Burgers (.659), with less recoil and powder. I can also use all my Dads .270 reloading equipment.

Well now I play the waiting game, my gunsmith has a 3 mounth back log.

 

[BoilerUP]

Re: The .270 win for long range. Why not ?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: me?</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Well now I play the waiting game, my gunsmith has a 3 mounth back log.</div></div>

Simple solution that will take less than 3 hours.

Buy a used beater Savage 110 (a blue million of them out there with .473 bolt face, and can probably be had for less than gunsmith fees), call Shilen and have them make that barrel a Savage pre-fit, buy a barrel wrench and a 270/30-06 go gage, and put it on yourself in your garage or basement.

Keep your heirloom *and* get a second gun right quick!

 

[*Nine]

Re: The .270 win for long range. Why not ?

As has been alluded to, the BC figures advertised by Matrix have been found to be a bit "optimistic." Don't count on seeing the results that you get if you plug the advertised BC numbers into a ballistic calculator. For instance, their 7mm 190VLD has an advertised BC of .807, but Bryan Litz measured it at .673

 

[okrebel92]

Re: The .270 win for long range. Why not ?

I say why not? A faster twist rate and I dont see why it wouldn't work. Personally I wouldn't go the .270 route but I like your way of thinking and that you did your homework!!! Go for it man and post your results.

 

[VKC]

Re: The .270 win for long range. Why not ?

I agree that Matrix bullets BC are "optimistic". They are however very consistent, and I don't have to weight sort within the lot.

 

[Zanshin]

Re: The .270 win for long range. Why not ?

If you are going to AI it anyway and don't want to go to something like a 7mm RM or 300 WM (which would require bolt work) you might want to consider 280 Rem (which is a 7mm on the '06 cartridge). That way if you punch it out to 280 AI you can get factory 280 AI brass. A 270 AI is going to be fireform all the way.

280 Rem and 270 Win are close to the same thing but with a 280 you get better bullet choices and the option for better factory brass if you go AI.

I own a 270 Win myself but for your needs if I were in your position I would probably just order a 7mm tube and have it built as a 280 AI from the get go. Actually I would buy a 7mm RM.

 

[markwente]

Hi all,

I have an an old Remington 700 in .270 win that my Dad gave me that I want to make into a long range rig, shooting out to 800 to 1000 yards at deer. I am going to true and square the action, bed it in a Mcmillan stock, work over the trigger and put on a 27" Shilen barrel. Matrix Ballistics is making several bullets for the .277 that have really nice BC.

Caliber Inches: .277
Weight, grains: 165.0
Core Density, lb/ci-in: 0.4097
Core Weight, grains: 118.3
Jacket Density, lb/ci-in: 0.32
Jacket weight, lb/ci-in: 46.7
Ogive Radius, calibers: 13.0
Meplat Diameter, inches: 0.06
BC (static): 0.7381

Caliber Inches: .277
Weight, grains: 175.0
Core Density, lb/ci-in: 0.4097
Core Weight, grains: 126.3
Jacket Density, lb/ci-in: 0.32
Jacket weight, lb/ci-in: 48.7
Ogive Radius, calibers: 13.0
Meplat Diameter, inches: 0.06
BC (static): 0.7828

Is the old 270 going to be able to push these heavy pills ?
How fast do you all think I could push a 165 gr or 175 gr ?
Will I need a 1-8 or 1-9 twist to keep the VLD's stabilized ?
I am at 950' elevation.

If I can get 2850 fps out of the 165 gr bullet, my ballistics calculator says that with a BC of .650,(lower than the calculated .7381), the bullet is still supersonic till 1600 yards and at 1000 yards has 1017 ft-lb of energy.
If this info is correct than this would hit harder than a .260 rem with 142 gr bullet and would have almost the same BC as 7mm mag with 180 gr Burgers (.659).
The question is, how accurate is the .270 win with 165 gr or 175 gr bullets at 1000 yards?

I am not using this rig for punching paper in F-class or sniping mall ninjas, I just need it to be minute of deer vitals at 1000 yards.

If the shooter, spotter, gun, optic, bullet, and load all do there part is the .270 win capable of consistent 1000 yard hits ?


YES-------------------------------------------NO

I have been wanting to build a 270win. 700LA with 1-9 twist 26" Heavy Target Barrel. Unfortunately i punch more hole in paper than animals. What are the longest distances you have shot with 1MOA where you didn't feel like they were hail mary shots?

 

[b6graham]

this thread is 12 years old

 

[The D]