Thread: .270 or 25-06

Originally Posted by Beavis

True but you wouldn't pic the shittest apples in the bunch... I'm pretty sure an A max spat out a 280 would be more than capable. A helluva lot more exciting than what .270 offers anyway. Your view may differ.

And if you rifle didn't shoot this magical bullet?

Who cares the amount of people shooting animals over 500m would be how many that it wouldn't matter what it was . . . .

Sent from my GT-I9300T using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Gibo

Out of curiosity, what is the best cal and projectile with best bc?

50

Originally Posted by Toby

50

Ok should have narrowed that down to one thats practical for jo average

Originally Posted by R93

What velocity?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I used the max velocity quoted for each cartridge in the ADI manual for a 24" barrel. I realize that each one may be able to be pushed faster, but I was trying to get a reasonable comparison.

The OP was looking at .270 Win compared to 2506 Rem

I have, and use either/iether, there is nothing in NZ other than scrub bulls that I would not use my 2506 on inside 400m, but my velocities and projectiles are selected for the intended game, I run dual loads to suit: 117 Sierra Pro hunter at 3100 and 117 SST/110AB at 3250, it is my go to mountain rifle, Mk5 Wby Utralite,Truflite 25".

I also have a 270, M70 Winchester, there is nothing in NZ I would not use it on out to 500m, again, dual loads, 130 TTSX at 3250 AND 150 Sierra Pro Hunter/150 Berger at 3000, it sits in the locker and waits........it doesn't do much that the 2506 won't do- it really depends on intended purpose, the only advantage the .270 holds is with heavier stout bullets at close range on big tough animals, or soft heavy frangible bullets on big animals at really long ranges.

The average hunter/shooter will not notice the difference in terminal effect between them at any sensible range assuming range, shot selection and projectile choice are reasonable.

At unreasonable distance or paticularly tough critters, in the "planes trains and automobiles" catigory, neither is really it, got a 338 Lap for that. SMK or TTSX out of that stops anything, anytime.

Originally Posted by PerazziSC3

I haven't looked at data but I would imagine a 162grain from a 280 would be pushed at the same speed as a 150grain from the 270 at the same pressures. Same speed, better bc = more energy and less wind drift...

Check the case capacities.

Originally Posted by Beavis

True but you wouldn't pic the shittest apples in the bunch... I'm pretty sure an A max spat out a 280 would be more than capable. A helluva lot more exciting than what .270 offers anyway. Your view may differ.

I am not trying to champion the 270 or any other calibre. I am saying the 270 and 280 are so similar that to choose one over the other for huntig in nz is not a practical choice, rather an emotional one, as your reference to excitement illustrates.

Originally Posted by Shearer

I am not trying to champion the 270 or any other calibre. I am saying the 270 and 280 are so similar that to choose one over the other for huntig in nz is not a practical choice, rather an emotional one, as your reference to excitement illustrates.

At lighter projectile weights, they are similar in SD and BC, but the balance starts to tip in the .280 favour at 150gn/145gn and really shows at the heavier weights unavailable to the .270, the 175gn 7mm projectiles leave the .277 offerings for dead if hunting big game, huge SD and good BC, but the best avantage for the 7mm is the projectile range available to the handloader, add to that, if you have a .280 Rem, a simple ream job and you have .280 Ackley or Gibbs, then you can nearly match the mighty 7mm Mag, and can hunt stuff you simply should not with a .270 (yes, nearly every animal on the planet has been killed by someone with a .270, does not make it the smartest option.)

Is 25-06 a barrel burner?

Originally Posted by tui_man2

And if you rifle didn't shoot this magical bullet?

Who cares the amount of people shooting animals over 500m would be how many that it wouldn't matter what it was . . . .

Sent from my GT-I9300T using Tapatalk

True but people are getting all touchy about there being no difference between the cartridges, when there kind of is. If your gonna go long action and burn more powder and fret about 500m shots, then to me it only seems logical to go for a caliber with better bullets. Even if you only hunt normal ranges why not go for a more efficient round anyway? That's just how I look at it, I'm a pedantic cunt over things like that.

Have used both. More recently bought a 270 and can't fault it mate. Yeah sure if you're target shooting then go buy a .338 or some hella big cal but for hunting medium/big game in NZ I can not fault the 270. Nice and flat, enough punch in the round to drop ANYTHING in hits and a huge range available in NZ. The ammo isn't horrendously expensive either. Every cal has is pros and cons but you asked our experiences and mine have been that it is robust and hard to fault in the field.


Sent from my Browning

Very hard to find a factory offering in .280 rem now from a major US or European rifle manufacturer. I use both the .25/06 and the .270, and find the .270 seems to have more knockdown on larger medium sized game.