|
Re: 270? 35 caliber? [message #41220 is a reply to message #41217] |
Thu, 26 May 2016 20:32 |
gemihur
Messages: 309 Registered: March 2012 Location: Ridgelines of Virginia
|
Forum Regular |
|
|
Col. Townsend Whelen would take umbrage to that.
Consider the meplat of the .358 compared to the 30 caliber.
Footprint = Force print
Energy IS everything. Otherwise flip 'em the bird!
I shoot a lot of different size bullets but I have come to give great respect for the energy a little contender can propose to a target chambered in .358X444 Imp.
It is awesome.
To each his own, and I afford you your opinion.
All size of bores/projectiles/chambers available have their place. I have no disdain for any of them.
Thanks,
Jimmy
Think twice...shoot once.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: 270? 35 caliber? [message #41405 is a reply to message #41229] |
Thu, 14 July 2016 14:25 |
rchatting
Messages: 499 Registered: August 2011 Location: Middle Georgia
|
Forum Regular |
|
|
I have a .270 and like it alot. However, I wished the .280 had became popular instead of the .270. The .280 is no better ballistic wise but it has more bullet options out there. But the .270 is everywhere they sell bullets and will be for a long time.
As for the .35, I previously had no .35 other than .357 mag. I just got a CVA .35 Remington last year and hunted with it. It is my new 100 yard deer gun favorite. Nice and light and dropped both 200+ lb hogs I shot with it DRT. Furthermore, when I opened them up, I had zero bloodshot meat, you could "eat right up to the hole" as I have heard others say. I believe the larger meplat contributes to a quicker DRT without needing the velocity of a high powered rifle and at the lower velocity, had no blood shot meat. If I didn't reload, it would be too costly to shoot much as the ammo is virtually non-existent these days.
Unfortunately in the firearm world, much of what is popular isn't based on ballistics but on hype and advertising. I find many that are not as into guns as we are and or do not reload, do not understand the real world differences between cartridges.
Was in a gun store with a sale on Savage 111 in 30-06 and .270. Guy asked if they had it in .308 and they said no. I suggested getting the 30-06 and he said the .308 had more "shock power" and that was why he wanted it. No idea what that was and I decided it was best to not argue with him as he was quite adamant. Someone told him that, he believed it and now it is fact in his mind. There is a lot of that going on.
When you get down to it, there are tons of ballistically similar cartridges that overlap and really are pointless to have made the new one, but marketing thought it was a good idea and it was for awhile. Look at all of the ultra mags and short mags, they had standard counter parts that had stood the test of time. Most of the new ones faded out. Now the cost of those cartridges is 2 to 3 times the standard calibers.
Today, a .280 is a better solution over the .270 for reloading, but not for buying ammo.
The .260 remington is better modern solution over the 6.5x55 but it has not really caught on.
The .308 will almost do what a 30-06 will do, but falls a bit short, yet both are quite popular.
220 swift and 22-250 are dang close, but the 22-250 is the one that is most popular and more common.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: 270? 35 caliber? [message #42114 is a reply to message #42111] |
Mon, 21 November 2016 11:19 |
|
Crubear
Messages: 1796 Registered: March 2010 Location: NW Georgia
|
Top Contributor Forum Moderator |
|
|
my favorite hypes are
1) your puny cartridge will work, as long as you put the bullet in the right place....
--- and yours will work regardless of placement?
2) your puny 20 caliber will drift in the wind more than my bigger 22 caliber.
--- well, my 20 caliber will get there faster, so it won't drift as much. And it won't burn out the barrel while doing it.
Honestly, I have all the barrels I want or could ever need..... wait, look, there's another!!
|
|
|