270 win vs elk

[58thecat]

Originally Posted by fps plus

Scratch a line in the dirt and let’s line up and start ****ing .

Jack O”Connor wrote about the 270 and wrote a lot of hunting stories young guys dreamed of.

yup...took his pet load and ran that in my 270 for years

compressed load of H4831 60 gr....put a Hornady 130 grain pill on top 1/2" groups or less all day long and deadly on four legged critters...sold the rifle to fund the 7mm STW that Layne Simpson had developed prior to becoming commercialized....

[270person]

Originally Posted by Coiloil37

I don’t want to derail the OP’s thread so if you want to go back and forth with this let’s start a new thread.

I say that because for pretty much exactly the same amount powder, shot from rifles I’ve owned with 24” barrels the numbers look like this.

130’s
.270 ~ 3100 FPS
‘06 ~ 3400 FPS

.270 with 140 ~ 3000 FPS
‘06 with 165 ~ 3000 FPS

.270 with 150 ~ 2900 FPS
‘06 with 180 ~ 2860 FPS

Those are the numbers my rifles produced. I would rather shoot a 165 from my ‘06 then a 140 from my .270 if I’m burning 52-55 grains of powder and getting 3k FPS muzzle velocity. If we go bullet weight for bullet weight the ‘06 has more velocity across the board.
The numbers got a lot worse for the .270 when I shot a 22” barrel. I could only get 2800 from a 150 grain and 3000 from a 130.
Overall the rifles are the same weight, recoil is close enough I couldn’t tell the difference, bolt throw is the same, reloading costs a wash, bullet diameters are close enough and I don’t think they truely matter but in the context of killing stuff a bigger hole is always better... This is to say nothing of the fact the .270 has three common/good bullet weight options being 130/140/150 grains. The ‘06 has a much wider range of options. When I evaluated the two, my hypothetical list went on a bit further but the end result was the .270 got sold.

My old 25-06 lost the same argument to my .270. It was a nice rifle but didn’t do anything the .270 didn’t do better. I stopped at the ‘06 cause I was to lazy to have something built bigger but the 338-06, 35 whelen and 375/06 get even more from the same case. The thing the bigger bores lose to the ‘06 is they need heavier bullets and your asking a lot from that sized case when your shooting 225-300 grain bullets. The BC is low on the 160-200 grain options, bullets built to expand within that velocity window start to become more of a challenge to find and the overall versatility of the cartridge pales in comparison to the .308 options.
It’s tough to argue with the math when the radius is squared. A smaller bore always comes at a price.

358 w/ 225 AB's outperforms the 06 with same bullet in 180 and hits with a boatload more smack. I quite like it. Far bigger step up than going 270 to 06.

My experimenting with 150's lead to different results than yours but that's moot. Whole point being 06 does not "vastly" outperform the 270 and if you're serious about bigger holes then it makes sense to use the 06 brass for bigger bullets that outperform the parent, i.e. the 225gr AB's and Partition 358's. If you like big holes from the same brass they definitely provide them.

[Coiloil37]

Originally Posted by 270person

358 w/ 225 AB's outperforms the 06 with same bullet in 180 and hits with a boatload more smack. I quite like it. Far bigger step up than going 270 to 06.

My experimenting with 150's lead to different results than yours but that's moot. Whole point being 06 does not "vastly" outperform the 270 and if you're serious about bigger holes then it makes sense to use the 06 brass for bigger bullets that outperform the parent, i.e. the 225gr AB's and Partition 358's. If you like big holes from the same brass they definitely provide them.

I didn’t say anything about vastly outperforming. I said the .270 doesn’t do anything the 30-06 can’t do better. They’re in the same class but the ‘06 gives up nothing and gains in a few areas when compared. That’s why I’ve got a 30-06 and no .270’s.

Give me either rifle and an elk tag and I’ll happily go fill the freezer. They’re both more then capable.


I’m of the opinion the .358 is a necked up .308 case. The way your talking your using a 35 whelen no? I agree it’s got max performance from that case in spades. However, it’s got less bullet options, less range before considering hold over or dialling turrets, less factory chambered rifles. That takes very little away from it and I would be happy to own one but never bothered to have a rifle rebored or rebarrelled. The cost for performance gained never got past the start line for me.

When I want a bigger hole or more penetration I take my 338 marlin or 338 win mag depending on if I want a lever or bolt action.

[Stinky Coyote]

not totally true, the ott six gives up in one area for sure, recoil, it's gonna pound you quite a bit harder running 165/180's at full boat than a .270 running 130-150's full boat

match up the bc/sd range and sure they will be close but argument always remains the .270 likely easier to shoot well as its not going to hit you back as hard but agree you are splitting hairs between them

in a lighter rifle and the recoil energies both can produce, it won't take much to make the 06 fairly intolerable where the .270 can still be shot ok with 130's-140's in a pretty dang light rifle

not a chance in heck i'd run an ott six with 165's full out in my 5 lb 7 oz blaser k95, 6 lb 9 oz sccoped, with the .270 and 140's i'm still looking at 22.7 ft/lbs recoil energy and it is my personal limit while still running +/- 1/4 moa of 1 moa in field conditions for 3 shot groups

with todays bullets, the .270 is a serious cartridge and not a lot of fat on it, 140 accubonds or the lightweight ttsx type stuff that hold their sd and great bc while not beating the absolute pizz out of you in lighter weight rifles give very modern performance that run with the new cartridges really well

and to really see modern performance out of 30's you're looking at 210 grains and up, which then take them into different leagues than they ever used to be, you just have to deal with the recoil of that, safe to say most people shooting 8-9 lb scoped rifles for general hunting are not going to be able handle ott six and 210/225 grain...and are factory twist rates even doable, obviously reloaders cartridge when you try to take an ott six to modern performance

said it for awhile, if you wanted to blend all the attributes of the .308 and 30-06 based cartridges into one mutt of a cartridge just get a 6.5 Creedmoor (i can almost hear the cringes through my screen right now), outside of a super flat pbr that some of the faster options can offer like the .243/25-06 the 6.5 CM with it's big bc/sd can get done what almost the whole shebang can get done and better in many instances...the .270 win is likely the closest to that level of versatility in all the choices of those two cases

[Jamie Black R/T]

Ive been through a lot of different cartridge/rifle combos over the years and the only one I keep coming back to is my old 270 win running a stout loaded 140gr accubond.

Taken deer, elk and moose with it from 15 to 500 yards and never skipped a beat.

[Coiloil37]

Originally Posted by Stinky Coyote

not totally true, the ott six gives up in one area for sure, recoil, it's gonna pound you quite a bit harder running 165/180's at full boat than a .270 running 130-150's full boat

match up the bc/sd range and sure they will be close but argument always remains the .270 likely easier to shoot well as its not going to hit you back as hard but agree you are splitting hairs between them

in a lighter rifle and the recoil energies both can produce, it won't take much to make the 06 fairly intolerable where the .270 can still be shot ok with 130's-140's in a pretty dang light rifle

not a chance in heck i'd run an ott six with 165's full out in my 5 lb 7 oz blaser k95, 6 lb 9 oz sccoped, with the .270 and 140's i'm still looking at 22.7 ft/lbs recoil energy and it is my personal limit while still running +/- 1/4 moa of 1 moa in field conditions for 3 shot groups

with todays bullets, the .270 is a serious cartridge and not a lot of fat on it, 140 accubonds or the lightweight ttsx type stuff that hold their sd and great bc while not beating the absolute pizz out of you in lighter weight rifles give very modern performance that run with the new cartridges really well

I’ll break this into two parts.

Personally I can’t feel a difference in recoil between the two. Nor can I feel a difference in recoil between a 130 grain from my 30-06 or a 220 grain from the exact same rifle. I’ve also got a load with a 200 grain accubond at 2730 FPS that I like too and the recoils a non issue. Mines a shade over 6lbs all up and is a kimber Montana so I’m not masking the recoil with a 10lb rifle. I’m just not recoil sensitive like you are.

Heck my 338 win mag is under 7lbs all up and I shoot full throttle 225 ttsx or 250 grain accubonds and it’ll put three like this at 100 off a bipod.




Now the second bit. If your one of those people who has issues with recoil you can always load a ‘06 down to .270 levels. They’re burning the same amount of powder so it’s easy enough to load the same weight bullet down to .270 velocity and get similar recoil. You can’t however load the .270 up to match the ‘06

I guess if your REALLY recoil sensitive and find it’s to hard to hunt with your rifle strapped into a lead sled you could always hunt with a 6.5 grendel. To each their own.

[catnthehat]

I don't really worry about recoil in a hunting rifle , and have kill and kd with no issues with heavy kickers but the rifles I use at the range and compete with are all smaller than the '06 case snc .277 caliber .
Cat

[Alberta Bigbore]

In 2006 i used a 270win and 150gr Bear Claw..... dropped that bull elk like a sack of poop

[Twisted Canuck]

It's just too much argument when the obvious answer is to stick to the .308 parent case, and use a 7mm08 with 140 TSX, and a .338 Federal with a 200 gr Partition . You don't need two rifles, but it's always nice if you can....so thems the cartridges to shoot.

https://www.rifleshootermag.com/edit...8_101207/83415

And now.....

[270person]

Originally Posted by Coiloil37

I didn’t say anything about vastly outperforming. I said the .270 doesn’t do anything the 30-06 can’t do better. They’re in the same class but the ‘06 gives up nothing and gains in a few areas when compared. That’s why I’ve got a 30-06 and no .270’s.

Give me either rifle and an elk tag and I’ll happily go fill the freezer. They’re both more then capable.


I’m of the opinion the .358 is a necked up .308 case. The way your talking your using a 35 whelen no? I agree it’s got max performance from that case in spades. However, it’s got less bullet options, less range before considering hold over or dialling turrets, less factory chambered rifles. That takes very little away from it and I would be happy to own one but never bothered to have a rifle rebored or rebarrelled. The cost for performance gained never got past the start line for me.

When I want a bigger hole or more penetration I take my 338 marlin or 338 win mag depending on if I want a lever or bolt action.

Fewer bullet options mean nothing to me. Its a 358. 180, 200, 225, and 250 Nosler AB and PT's + 180 -200 Barnes cover a lot of ground and the smaller two just don't perform as well. Every cartridge has a sweet spot and the 225 is it. Why argue with what performs best?

Dialing turrets mean nothing to me either when 90% of the game shot in a typical season are at 250 yds and under. I prefer shooting to dialing and I know what the rifle does to 300.

My whole point was 06 brass is great. Lots of great cartridges derived from it, but to think the 06 is something special vs a 270? I'm not buying it. Both are fairly vanilla when it comes right down to it. Good vanilla but still. When I want middle ground a bit above the 270 I use 7mm. Lighter ground it's 25-06.

Good to hear you shoot some 338wm though. Out to 275 -280 yds with 225gr you cant separate it and 35W with a paring knife so we're on the same wavelength at least. My brass is cheaper though.

[Bushmaster]

Here's a pic of fps's elk.

[fps plus]

Thx Bushmaster
My son was pretty happy and was honoured that he was able to harvest the elk.

[fps plus]

His 270 is mated with a 2x7 leupold from the 80s that I had . No tactical knobs or 50 mm objective . I feel his rig is a solid “hunting “ outfit .

[coxy95]

[QUOTE=Bushmaster;4240156]Here's a pic of fps's elk.

Good looking bull right there! Congrats!

[Stinky Coyote]

Originally Posted by Coiloil37

I guess if your REALLY recoil sensitive and find it’s to hard to hunt with your rifle strapped into a lead sled you could always hunt with a 6.5 grendel. To each their own.

Ha, I shoot the .270 just fine and enjoy it. Have plenty of kills with it and it’s in my top few of favorite cartridges so…

Only enjoyed my .270 wsm in a 7lb all up with a brake(not enjoyable without brake), and even shot some cloverleaf groups with Dad’s old 300 wm with 180 ab’s out of mod 70 but a few groups of that was plenty for the day. My braked custom 300 wm was easy to do 3” groups at 520 but closed in on 10 lbs all up, a beast and a tank. Not my thing, and overkill squared. My savage 99eg in 358 woke you up a little but was also fun. I've tried all sorts of cartridges and rifles, had a 308 savage 99 that was great too still not my think, should have kept that .358 though, the perfect safe queen. My first big game kills as a kid were from a rem 700 shortened stock with iron sights in 30-06, was deadly with that. So i guess 300 wm has been the hardest hitting i've owned a couple of...also a couple .270's, couple .243's, .308, .270 wsm, 30-06, several .204's and i think a .223.

The Grendel is just one of those, take a friend shooting put a hundred rounds through it and think nothing of it for barrel life or otherwise, super fun and easy to shoot for anyone. It covers all my needs of a centerfire from plinking, practice, introducing people, the kids, big game and predator hunting. Don't think i'll be able to wear a barrel out of one which appeals and makes one want to shoot it more and more, also makes hunting a lot easier than with my bow, but never had much trouble with that either. 😉

[270person]

Originally Posted by Stinky Coyote

Ha, I shoot the .270 just fine and enjoy it. Have plenty of kills with it and it’s in my top few of favorite cartridges so…

Only enjoyed my .270 wsm in a 7lb all up with a brake(not enjoyable without brake), and even shot some cloverleaf groups with Dad’s old 300 wm with 180 ab’s out of mod 70 but a few groups of that was plenty for the day. My braked custom 300 wm was easy to do 3” groups at 520 but closed in on 10 lbs all up, a beast and a tank. Not my thing, and overkill squared. My savage 99eg in 358 woke you up a little but was also fun. I've tried all sorts of cartridges and rifles, had a 308 savage 99 that was great too still not my think, should have kept that .358 though, the perfect safe queen. My first big game kills as a kid were from a rem 700 shortened stock with iron sights in 30-06, was deadly with that. So i guess 300 wm has been the hardest hitting i've owned a couple of...also a couple .270's, couple .243's, .308, .270 wsm, 30-06, several .204's and i think a .223.

The Grendel is just one of those, take a friend shooting put a hundred rounds through it and think nothing of it for barrel life or otherwise, super fun and easy to shoot for anyone. It covers all my needs of a centerfire from plinking, practice, introducing people, the kids, big game and predator hunting. Don't think i'll be able to wear a barrel out of one which appeals and makes one want to shoot it more and more, also makes hunting a lot easier than with my bow, but never had much trouble with that either. 😉

Interesting post. I was tempted to reply with "I'd like to own a Grendel but my hairs not long enough for a man bun," but since you gave me a deal I refrained. Seriously tho, I'm tossing around buying one because of your influence. It's between a Grendel and a really well kept Daisy Red Rider I've had my eye on. Ha.

All in fun. Interesting you brought up the 270 wsm. Been thinking about getting one. I've held back due to hearing some negatives about short action magnums but others will say zero issues whatsoever for years. The more I read about the cartridge the more I like the thought of one but damn. Does a guy really need a 270, 270wsm, and a 7mm mag? Ok dumb question.

Good thing we weren't comparing the wsm version to the 06 though. Blows me away what it's capable of. Might even ditch both 7mms to buy one and that's about the last thing I thought I'd ever say.

[Coiloil37]

Originally Posted by 270person

Interesting post. I was tempted to reply with "I'd like to own a Grendel but my hairs not long enough for a man bun," but since you gave me a deal I refrained. Seriously tho, I'm tossing around buying one because of your influence. It's between a Grendel and a really well kept Daisy Red Rider I've had my eye on. Ha.

All in fun. Interesting you brought up the 270 wsm. Been thinking about getting one. I've held back due to hearing some negatives about short action magnums but others will say zero issues whatsoever for years. The more I read about the cartridge the more I like the thought of one but damn. Does a guy really need a 270, 270wsm, and a 7mm mag? Ok dumb question.

Good thing we weren't comparing the wsm version to the 06 though. Blows me away what it's capable of. Might even ditch both 7mms to buy one and that's about the last thing I thought I'd ever say.

I’ll get my flame suit ready.

I don’t see what the 7mm rem mag does over a 30-06 besides burn 10-20 grains more powder and offer zero to very marginal returns for that pleasure. It does have better sectional density and BC which might matter to the long range punters but it also gives up frontal diameter which probably amounts to almost nothing.

It certainly out paces the old war horse with the lighter bullets but with 24” barrels and 165 to 180 grain bullets they’re so close performance wise your fooling yourself if you think the 7mm is in another class.


Let’s compare powder burned and velocity for the 168 as the ‘06 doesn’t have a 160 grain option.















Now on the 165/168 bullets and powder burn,I get a hair over 3k from my ‘06 with 52 grains of 4064. I worked that load up with 165 accubonds first then went to the Barnes starting at their 50 grain max and got to 52 grains with no pressure signs and the velocity and accuracy I wanted. Could be on someone’s version of the fringe with that load but it works for me. I’m also aware the ‘06 is held to 60k psi in manuals because of the older rifles in circulation which I’m not shooting and I don’t get scared going a hair over a listed max.

And the heavier version and no this isn’t quite apples to apples because the 7mm is running a 5 grain heavier version so I’ll include the 190 grain load for the ‘06 just because.











My ‘06 will spit a 180 tsx or scirocco at 2850-2860 FPS with 55.5 grains of IMR 4350. I got the load from hodgdon, worked up with a different brands of bullets and again I’m happy with the results but it’s not a listed load.

I’m perfectly aware I’ve got my rose coloured glasses on but I don’t see the 7mm rem mag as an improvement.

I’ve never bothered with the WSM line but if I was chasing a .270 of that flavour I would be looking hard here. Both of these kimbers are .270 WSM

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Coiloil37

I’ll get my flame suit ready.

I don’t see what the 7mm rem mag does over a 30-06 besides burn 10-20 grains more powder and offer zero to very marginal returns for that pleasure. It does have better sectional density and BC which might matter to the long range punters but it also gives up frontal diameter which probably amounts to almost nothing.

It certainly out paces the old war horse with the lighter bullets but with 24” barrels and 165 to 180 grain bullets they’re so close performance wise your fooling yourself if you think the 7mm is in another class.


Let’s compare powder burned and velocity for the 168 as the ‘06 doesn’t have a 160 grain option.















Now on the 165/168 bullets and powder burn,I get a hair over 3k from my ‘06 with 52 grains of 4064. I worked that load up with 165 accubonds first then went to the Barnes starting at their 50 grain max and got to 52 grains with no pressure signs and the velocity and accuracy I wanted. Could be on someone’s version of the fringe with that load but it works for me. I’m also aware the ‘06 is held to 60k psi in manuals because of the older rifles in circulation which I’m not shooting and I don’t get scared going a hair over a listed max.

And the heavier version and no this isn’t quite apples to apples because the 7mm is running a 5 grain heavier version so I’ll include the 190 grain load for the ‘06 just because.











My ‘06 will spit a 180 tsx or scirocco at 2850-2860 FPS with 55.5 grains of IMR 4350. I got the load from hodgdon, worked up with a different brands of bullets and again I’m happy with the results but it’s not a listed load.

I’m perfectly aware I’ve got my rose coloured glasses on but I don’t see the 7mm rem mag as an improvement.

I’ve never bothered with the WSM line but if I was chasing a .270 of that flavour I would be looking hard here. Both of these kimbers are .270 WSM

Your comparison using the same weight of bullets is why you see no advantage to the 7mmremmag. If you use bullets of the same SD, the extra velocity produced by the 7mmremag does provide a bit of advantage, especially when using monomental bullets like the TTSX.

[Coiloil37]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Your comparison using the same weight of bullets is why you see no advantage to the 7mmremmag. If you use bullets of the same SD, the extra velocity produced by the 7mmremag does provide a bit of advantage, especially when using monomental bullets like the TTSX.

I know what your saying I’m just not buying. Seems like a straw man argument to me or at best a perspective that only has relevance if your experiencing penetration issues or shooting very large animals.
I might be by myself here but I don’t put much emphasis on SD and I don’t feel like writing a thesis on the subject so I’ll paraphrase. SD may have had more relevance in the past but with the bullets we have now if I want/need penetration I’ll get it by choosing the type and weight of bullet I need. Let’s say on one end of the spectrum are the Berger VLD types and the other end might have the ttsx, partition and A frame. You pick what you need for the animals your hunting at the ranges you plan on shooting them with the types of angles you want to be able to shoot them at in the back of your mind. I also consider the amount of damage I want to inflict in between because some bullets create more trauma and permanent wound channels then others.
I’ve driven 130 grain .308 ttsx through a broadside moose’s shoulder (bone) and achieved an exit wound. I don’t need more penetration then that. I’ve also had cup and core 180 grain bullets from a ‘06 stop on the front shoulder of a bull elk and not penetrate the rib cage. The issue wasn’t a lack of SD but simply the construction of the bullet.

I’ve pretty well completely derailed this thread so I’m out unless the OP wants it to continue.

Tell your son congrats on the elk, it’s a great looking bull. This is the second September of my life I’m not out chasing them and I miss it. Elk hunting and my dog were the two hardest parts of leaving Canada.

[sns2]

Originally Posted by Coiloil37

I know what your saying I’m just not buying. Seems like a straw man argument to me or at best a perspective that only has relevance if your experiencing penetration issues or shooting very large animals.
I might be by myself here but I don’t put much emphasis on SD and I don’t feel like writing a thesis on the subject so I’ll paraphrase. SD may have had more relevance in the past but with the bullets we have now if I want/need penetration I’ll get it by choosing the type and weight of bullet I need. Let’s say on one end of the spectrum are the Berger VLD types and the other end might have the ttsx, partition and A frame. You pick what you need for the animals your hunting at the ranges you plan on shooting them with the types of angles you want to be able to shoot them at in the back of your mind. I also consider the amount of damage I want to inflict in between because some bullets create more trauma and permanent wound channels then others.
I’ve driven 130 grain .308 ttsx through a broadside moose’s shoulder (bone) and achieved an exit wound. I don’t need more penetration then that. I’ve also had cup and core 180 grain bullets from a ‘06 stop on the front shoulder of a bull elk and not penetrate the rib cage. The issue wasn’t a lack of SD but simply the construction of the bullet.

I’ve pretty well completely derailed this thread so I’m out unless the OP wants it to continue.

Tell your son congrats on the elk, it’s a great looking bull. This is the second September of my life I’m not out chasing them and I miss it. Elk hunting and my dog were the two hardest parts of leaving Canada.

This is the talk of a crazy person. ^^^ I thought you would have known that a 6.5 Grendel is better than both. Plus, it sounds like you get to wear a man bun.

See what a guy can learn if he reads carefully???

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Coiloil37

I know what your saying I’m just not buying. Seems like a straw man argument to me or at best a perspective that only has relevance if your experiencing penetration issues or shooting very large animals.
I might be by myself here but I don’t put much emphasis on SD and I don’t feel like writing a thesis on the subject so I’ll paraphrase. SD may have had more relevance in the past but with the bullets we have now if I want/need penetration I’ll get it by choosing the type and weight of bullet I need. Let’s say on one end of the spectrum are the Berger VLD types and the other end might have the ttsx, partition and A frame. You pick what you need for the animals your hunting at the ranges you plan on shooting them with the types of angles you want to be able to shoot them at in the back of your mind. I also consider the amount of damage I want to inflict in between because some bullets create more trauma and permanent wound channels then others.
I’ve driven 130 grain .308 ttsx through a broadside moose’s shoulder (bone) and achieved an exit wound. I don’t need more penetration then that. I’ve also had cup and core 180 grain bullets from a ‘06 stop on the front shoulder of a bull elk and not penetrate the rib cage. The issue wasn’t a lack of SD but simply the construction of the bullet.

I’ve pretty well completely derailed this thread so I’m out unless the OP wants it to continue.

Tell your son congrats on the elk, it’s a great looking bull. This is the second September of my life I’m not out chasing them and I miss it. Elk hunting and my dog were the two hardest parts of leaving Canada.

The point is that a 140gr 7mm bullet will penetrate like a 165gr .308 bullet, or a 110gr 7mm monumental will penetrate like your 130gr .308" bullet, if you like light monometals.

[rem338win]

The big difference between a 7 RM and a 30-06 isn't even SD. I can get 4' of penetration out of either using 160-168 grain bullets.

Its wind drift and in the mountains, foothills and prairies that can matter a lot.

Having shot enough out at the practical ranges we shoot down here I use 7mm bullets because it makes a significant difference.

And anyone claiming 3000 fps with 165s is running hot or a 28" barrel. That's 75k of strain easy and if I run that I can get. 277 150grs to do the same.

[Coiloil37]

Originally Posted by rem338win

The big difference between a 7 RM and a 30-06 isn't even SD. I can get 4' of penetration out of either using 160-168 grain bullets.

Its wind drift and in the mountains, foothills and prairies that can matter a lot.

Having shot enough out at the practical ranges we shoot down here I use 7mm bullets because it makes a significant difference.

And anyone claiming 3000 fps with 165s is running hot or a 28" barrel. That's 75k of strain easy and if I run that I can get. 277 150grs to do the same.

So much for me bowing out.

3k is achievable with a 165/168 and 24” barrel at 60k psi. Look at noslers data above, you think I wrote that and fudged the numbers? I’ve gotten it with two different powders and book loads myself from four 30-06’s.

[Coiloil37]

Originally Posted by sns2

This is the talk of a crazy person. ^^^ I thought you would have known that a 6.5 Grendel is better than both. Plus, it sounds like you get to wear a man bun.

See what a guy can learn if he reads carefully???

Now that could of been derived from what I wrote so yes I see how you did that. However, totally below the belt. I won’t own a 6.5 of ANY flavour on principal alone, yuk.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Coiloil37

So much for me bowing out.

3k is achievable with a 165/168 and 24” barrel at 60k psi. Look at noslers data above, you think I wrote that and fudged the numbers? I’ve gotten it with two different powders and book loads myself from four 30-06’s.

So you achieved 3k, how do you know that it was at 60kpsi, and not 70kpsi? I have run into pressure signs well below some of Nosler's published velocities. And often pressure signs don't become evident until pressures are over 70kpsi.

[Coiloil37]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

So you achieved 3k, how do you know that it was at 60kpsi, and not 70kpsi? I have run into pressure signs well below some of Nosler's published velocities.

Best guess because I used noslers data with their bullets and achieved the same velocity they did with no pressure signs.

How does anyone know what pressure they’re getting? Are you running a strain gauge? Probably not, most of us assume if we stick to book loads we expect to be at or under saami pressures and we monitor velocity and check for pressure signs along the way.

Trying to undermine the discussion by dismissing the validity of published data doesn’t seem very productive. Should we assume the 7mm rem mag data is incorrect as well?


There’s a stigma that the ‘06 is good for 2700 with a 180 and about 2850 from a 165. Those lines got blurred in the past twenty years with the development of new powders. Not being up to speed with these changes and wanting to be stuck in 1980 doesn’t make them less real.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Coiloil37

Best guess because I used noslers data with their bullets and achieved the same velocity they did with no pressure signs.

How does anyone know what pressure they’re getting? Are you running a strain gauge? Probably not, most of us assume if we stick to book loads we expect to be at or under saami pressures and we monitor velocity and check for pressure signs along the way.

Trying to undermine the discussion by dismissing the validity of published data doesn’t seem very productive. Should we assume the 7mm rem mag data is incorrect as well?


There’s a stigma that the ‘06 is good for 2700 with a 180 and about 2850 from a 165. Those lines got blurred in the past twenty years with the development of new powders. Not being up to speed with these changes and wanting to be stuck in 1980 doesn’t make them less real.

Like most other people, I don't run a strain gage, so I can't put a number to the pressure my loads are producing. If the primer pockets are still tight after five firings, and no pressure signs appear, I call a load safe in my rifle. But I don’t assume that all loads listed in manuals are at or below SAAMI pressures, because I have seen pressure signs appear, at velocities lower than the book velocities, using the same components listed in the manual.

[Howard Hutchinson]

Originally Posted by Bushmaster

Here's a pic of fps's elk.

>>
Thank you for posting the pic. Awesome first Bull...Heck awesome bull any day..Good for your boy..Very happy for him.

[Coiloil37]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Like most other people, I don't run a strain gage, so I can't put a number to the pressure my loads are producing. If the primer pockets are still tight after five firings, and no pressure signs appear, I call a load safe in my rifle. But I don’t assume that all loads listed in manuals are at or below SAAMI pressures, because I have seen pressure signs appear, at velocities lower than the book velocities, using the same components listed in the manual.

Gotcha and that not only makes sense but mirrors what I’ve observed loading for the many rifles I’ve owned. I’ve also seen a lot of loads that didn’t come close to matching book velocity with or without pressure signs. Regardless, it doesn’t change what I’ve found in this instance.
Hodgdon has several other loads/powders that have 165’s running 2950-3000+ FPS and they do list the pressures they recorded of which all are under 60k.
Alliant has several as well. I’m guessing everyone else does too. It’s not just Nosler.

[270person]

Originally Posted by sns2

This is the talk of a crazy person. ^^^ I thought you would have known that a 6.5 Grendel is better than both. Plus, it sounds like you get to wear a man bun.

See what a guy can learn if he reads carefully???

I'd lean more towards heavy drapery smoking, and probably the fiberglass variety which experts say can cause an urge to pick cherries at max arm length. Besides, we know Elmer never had a man bun under that plaid hat.

168 and 185 gr 7RM bullets? I'd guess there might be.. be 2 people using those for hunting in Ab in a typical season? 160gr and 175gr 7mm vs 06 165 and 180gr and call it a day. Simple conclusions are one of these cartridges is faster, flatter, carries more energy downrange, with better SD, less wind drift and the same recoil. No need to discuss the mega cool factor. It's been beaten to death.

And I always figured the biggest advantages of monometals was the ability to run smaller bullets with perceived similar or better results to larger lead? Don't know many 7mm afficianados running 160 gr ttsx down the pipe. Know lots using 140 - 150 though and they seem quite exhuberant about the whole thing.