Are .270s inherently accurate?

Skinnersblade said:

Thank you major don't trouble yourself over it. We have lots of time as I don't believe that particular deer will run away.

Click to expand...

Skinnersblade
If the chital deer in OZ is the same as the cheetal deer in Bangladesh then it's slightly bigger than a fallow.

We have two Remington BDLs in 270 and they are very accurate. One is 60's vintage the other late 80's vintage. I think build quality was better then. I have a Rem XCR II in 375 H&H (now a 375 Weatherby) that had a lot of quality control issues that I had my gunsmith sort out. The older one still shoots nickel sized groups (edge to edge) at 100 yards with 150g Nosler Partitions. Go with a good mono or bonded bullet, most factory loads are pretty tame now. The original spec was a 130g bullet at 3150 fps. I get 3000 fps with the 150g Partitions with my handloads. Factory ammunition is a lot slower. I don't think the 270 is inherently any more accurate than a 243, 308, or 30-06, but it is powerful, flat shooting and doesn't kick much, a good combination.

130 gns @ 3150 was the touted factory load velocity until private ownership of chronographs became common.
my own loads with 130 gn bullets did 3050 to 3100 with good case life fron 24" barrels.
bruce.

Good point. My loads of a 150g Partition at 3000 fps were "max" in the late 60s early 70s reloading manuals. They got progressively more conservative. I get 10 loads per case before I throw them out even though they look fine. No loose primers, bright marks on the head or hard extraction. It's a great bear and elk load. I use it for mule deer as well because I'm too lazy to have more than one big game load.

The .270 Winchester was inherently accurate.....Just ask Jack O'Connor. Well, I guess you'll have to read him.

Don't know if the 270 is more inherently accurate or not by its design, but my experience with the caliber is very good! I've had and loaded for three different 270s. A pre-64 Win 70 DOM 1950, a commercial FN Sporter DOM early 50s and a Win 70 DOM 1970. Every one has been excellent for accuracy. Good quality hunting bullets like the 110 gr Barnes TSX and the 130 gr Nosler Partition have proven most accurate in all three rifles. Every 150 gr bullet tried has been somewhat less accurate by a small but measurable amount... but obviously more suitable for larger game like elk. And I've kept the 130 gr velocities down around 2900 fps.

Nice I have a great varmint load somewhere in my notes Sierra 90g HPBTs at 3500 fps using IMR 3031. Nice fast power to reduce throat erosion. Shot a lot of prairie dogs with that load.

colorado said:

Nice I have a great varmint load somewhere in my notes Sierra 90g HPBTs at 3500 fps using IMR 3031. Nice fast power to reduce throat erosion. Shot a lot of prairie dogs with that load.

Click to expand...

Colorado
Try the 110 Hornaday VMax and Hogdon 4350 or 56.3 grains of CFE223 both these gave me 0.3 inch groups out of my Stevens 200.
Cheers mate Bob

Wow nice

colorado said:

Nice I have a great varmint load somewhere in my notes Sierra 90g HPBTs at 3500 fps using IMR 3031. Nice fast power to reduce throat erosion. Shot a lot of prairie dogs with that load.

Click to expand...

Colorado

Cheers mate Bob

All things being equal it may come down to recoil sensitivity. If you tried magnum calibers and you were very aware of the recoil it can effect your accuracy.

I shoot a 500 Jeffery, so with anything from a 375 H&H down recoil isn't a factor lol. Appreciate your advice

Once any rifle is proofed for its accuracy then comes time to proof the shooter for his.

Other than off a bench rest have the two ever been the same.

A 7 pound .22 rifle that shoots a 1/2" group at 100 yards off a sled seems to never be matched by any shooter no matter how well he thinks of himself with the iron when he's making noise offhand.

So how many guys here who have professed to not owning a rifle that shoots more than a 1" group at 100 yards can actually shoot as well as the rifle. How many might be damned lucky to shoot a 12" group offhand at 100?

I have friends at both ends of the spectrum. One from Alabama who offhand will shoot things in the eye at 100, and one from Pennsylvania who's lucky to hit any part of anything at 30 yards offhand.... even if the animal is sleeping.

The guy from Alabama doesn't piss and moan about anything, he just hits what he aims at and drops it. The guy from Pennsylvania rides "The Blame Train" each and every time he shoots cause it must be something that he can't control............or maybe it's just because he sucks?

Skinnersblade said:

I to was suprised with the results I had bought it with the entent of caniblizing it for components to build a .338-06. At this point I don't think I can bring myself to tear it apart.

Click to expand...

Skinnersblade..... My first bolt action rifle was a .270win as well, mine was a Ruger 77MKII Stainless and I topped it with a Leupold Vari-xIII 3.5-10x40

That was 22 years ago I dragged my mother into the local gunshop to fill out the paper work so her 14 year old son could spend $900 saved up from mowing lawns all summer for that rifle and scope (reminds me I'm glad her mothers day gift has already arrived); and would use it that rifle later to kill my first white tail deer on my grandfathers farm.

Since then I have owned rifles alone that cost many times more than I paid for my first .270 & scope, but few of them have shot any better, as that rifle would shoot under an inch with every factory loaded or hand loaded round I ever tried in it, with the exception of the 140gr Hornady SST - for some reason that rifle doesn't like that bullet.

For terminal performance on game I found the 140gr. Nosler Accubond to be the best choice for my general hunting, likewise the 140gr. Hornady BTSP which I believe would be the same projectile loaded in your 140gr Hornady loads from the posted target picture, shows outstanding performance on wild pigs and whitetail; and both loads will clover leaf 3 shots @ 100yds.

I load my own ammo and have also found the 140gr Accubond & 140gr Hornady BTSP; both shoot to the same point of impact when using my load of .5gr under max of Reloader22 powder; allowing me to practice, pig hunt and cull doe with the cheaper Hornady projectiles and switch to the Accubond as needed without having to re-zero the rifle.

I have a few 270's (BRNO 600, SAKO Hunter, and soon to be a Win M70 Ultimate Shadow Stainless). The first new centrefire rifle I ever bought was a Remington 700 BDL in 270. Really regret having to sell it. Quite accurate but more so for the fact it was my first "big game" rifle. The rifles I have now shoot as well as I can shoot them. I think comes down to:
Are you comfortable shooting it?
Will it group consistently with loads you have come up with?
Can you make ethical shots at whatever distances your game will be at?

@Skinnersblade. In your first post you have 3 rounds touching and what looks to me like 2 flyers to the left. From first glance it tells me that your barrel is heating up to the point where the barrel touches the wood which affects accuracy (if rounds were shot repeatedly with no cool down between shots). If doing quick shooting of strings at 100 & 200yds probably wont matter as it is a hunting rifle not a match rifle. After 200yds your groups may not be what you want. When hunting no more than 1-3 shots are generally required (again depends on situation).

8x68 said:

I have a few 270's (BRNO 600, SAKO Hunter, and soon to be a Win M70 Ultimate Shadow Stainless). The first new centrefire rifle I ever bought was a Remington 700 BDL in 270. Really regret having to sell it. Quite accurate but more so for the fact it was my first "big game" rifle. The rifles I have now shoot as well as I can shoot them. I think comes down to:
Are you comfortable shooting it?
Will it group consistently with loads you have come up with?
Can you make ethical shots at whatever distances your game will be at?

@Skinnersblade. In your first post you have 3 rounds touching and what looks to me like 2 flyers to the left. From first glance it tells me that your barrel is heating up to the point where the barrel touches the wood which affects accuracy (if rounds were shot repeatedly with no cool down between shots). If doing quick shooting of strings at 100 & 200yds probably wont matter as it is a hunting rifle not a match rifle. After 200yds your groups may not be what you want. When hunting no more than 1-3 shots are generally required (again depends on situation).

Click to expand...

Sense I made the original post I've done some shooting with a veteran whom was an armourer for many years he explained the same thing to me. With the light barrel on that rifle it requires time to cool to get the tightest group possible. Like you mentioned above it's of little consequence on a hunting rifle as one doesn't offer fire a large volley.

Thank you for sharing your knowledge.

I would not necessarily say the barrel is walking as it heats up.
I would however make sure there is clearance between barrel and forend.
without wanting to question the shooter's ability, it is not uncommon for particularly the last shot in a good group to be a flyer due to expectations and technique.
sideways shots can also be due to wind.
there are many things that can cause this other than walking barrels.
another issue is poor bedding.
this will shift zero in a surprising way.
certainly the gun wants to shoot.
bruce.

bruce moulds said:

I would not necessarily say the barrel is walking as it heats up.
I would however make sure there is clearance between barrel and forend.
without wanting to question the shooter's ability, it is not uncommon for particularly the last shot in a good group to be a flyer due to expectations and technique.
sideways shots can also be due to wind.
there are many things that can cause this other than walking barrels.
another issue is poor bedding.
this will shift zero in a surprising way.
certainly the gun wants to shoot.
bruce.

Click to expand...

I have no problem questioning the shooters abilities I've done so many times.

" inherently accurate" ? If the 270 is truly that, what cartridge is "inherently Inaccurate "?

the definition of accuracy is connected to the accuracy requirement.
all cartridges are inaccureate compared to 6 ppc for short range benchrest, but that same cartridge is inaccurate compared to 284 win at 1000 yds.
and then there is the platform that delivers the bullet from that cartridge.
the 30/30 was always sneered at as inaccurate, but that was in reality the m94 win rifle.
the 30/30 case was being worked on bigtime for benchrest as an improvement on the 222 rem for benchrest just before the 6ppc was discovered.
no one argues the accuracy of benchrest or fclass rifles, but look how they are shot.
those same rifles are harder to shoot with accuracy when you have been running uphill and have to shoot offhand fast at a running target, than a win lever action.
I won a 300 yd egg shoot with 10/10 using an fclass rifle against 6 ppc benchguns which would have cleaned me up at 100 yds in a group match at 100.
accuracy is relative, and is also related to the size of the target.
ultimately the shooter has to deliver what is required, at the range required, with the power required, for the job in hand.
bruce.