Reply With QuoteProbably because 243 and 7-08 are so close performance wise?
I have always wondered why there was no mainstream market, or a MFG never made these two chamberings, a 25 cal based on a 308 or a 25-08, and a 270 cal or a 270-08 especially the latter, and based on the 308 you can't go wrong, I know there are some wildcats like the 25 cal is called a souper but with the popularity of the 270 I am surprised, I know nowadays you can't get good BC bullets in either cal, but if they would have been more mainstream maybe there would more selection, and it's not like these are obscure calibers, that are at they extreme ends of popular spectrum there right in the middle of all the staple calibers, just one of those things that makes you wonder.
Tanks Dean
RUMs are like woman in Stiletto heals, you know they are going to put you in the poor house, but that has never stopped anyone from pursuing them.
Probably because 243 and 7-08 are so close performance wise?
What about this one...
http://www.chuckhawks.com/6-8mm_SPC.htm
It would have been they other way around, due to the fact that the 277 and 257, were in the market first, before the 6mm and 7mm.
Dean
RUMs are like woman in Stiletto heals, you know they are going to put you in the poor house, but that has never stopped anyone from pursuing them.
the 6.8 SPC holds 30grs of powder, so not really a contender, and anyways doesn't SPC stand for special purpose cartridge.
Dean
RUMs are like woman in Stiletto heals, you know they are going to put you in the poor house, but that has never stopped anyone from pursuing them.
Well the 243 was the first commercial offspring of the 308 way back in the 50s and was a hit. After that people must if figure why compete with that popularity for a modest gain in bullet weight and probably worse bc bullets. As far as why not the 277-08 over the 7-08 well the 7 has been around 30 years. Thanks to the 7x57 and 7 mag the 7 bore has probably had better bullet choices. It also seems that the older parent case (30-06) used older bore sizes and the newer parent (308) tended towards the more modern bore sizes.
No need for the 25-08 since the 250-3000 has been around since the early 1900s
You defiantly have a point on that one which leaves the 277.
Dean
RUMs are like woman in Stiletto heals, you know they are going to put you in the poor house, but that has never stopped anyone from pursuing them.
Originally Posted by scope eye
Ya mean like these'ns?
L-R 270-08, 270-08 Imp and the 270 Win. for comparison.
BTW, this is my original load workup for the improved version.
The duplicate bars (44-45) were due to different lots of powder.
Bill
Last edited by BillPa; 02-25-2013 at 07:32 PM.
I knew there were some wildcats, but I was talking a sammi bonafide version,
Dean
RUMs are like woman in Stiletto heals, you know they are going to put you in the poor house, but that has never stopped anyone from pursuing them.
It does seem like there would a standardized version of the .25-308. Maybe the .257 Roberts and the .25-06 may have something to do with it?
I'd like to see a 125gr match bullet in .257 cal.
It's rare to get a smaller capacity case when a larger one is already established, particularly amongst hunters. Neither 25Souper nor 270/08 fill any niche nor have an application amongst any competitive segment (lack of target pills as well), so it will compete right away against the 250Savage/257Roberts (and their history), 260Rem (competitive cartridge), 6.5x55 (competitive plus hunting nostalgia), 270Win (also has history) and the 7/08 which still has a reasonable following.
I really wish Savage brought out a Predator rifle in 250Savage, I'd be all over that, but will most likely have to build one. The 270/08 I will also eventually build on a Stevens 200 as the concept of a lightweight rifle that will throw a 130gr at 2850fps is attractive ... but nothing 'new' so to speak. Why the 250Savage hasn't been brought out in some nice youth rifles, predator rifles, lightweight factory offerings I don't know ... much nicer than its savage on the ears 6mm cousin the 243Win.
Cheers...
Con
Hear hear i could not agree more. The 250 will do anything the 243 will do yet less recoil and less noise. The 250 ackley is still on my list to build but that will probably be on a beautiful ruger. What also want to do is build a custom AR in 250 savage talk about the perfect set up for just about anything including kiling terrorists over in the sand box.
The .260 Remington is most likely the reason -- Trajectories about match the .270 Winchester when same sectional density bullets are used. Game harvesting is better than one of the world's classic big game cartridge, the 6.5X55.
The caliber is neatly half way between 6mm (.243) and 7mm.
Further, there are more than 100 different bullets one can choose from when using the .260 (6.5mm).
Until a couple years ago the .260 was almost extinct. Remington made the only brass and ammo was a seasonal offer. When built my first .260AI I considered myself blessed when I found 200 pieces of R-P .260 brass. It beat the heck out of forming from .243 or .308 brass.
...and then came the 6.5 Creedmoor...
The increasing interest in long range shooting along with folks looking for alternatives to the 6.5-284 helped also.
Anyway, back on track. I'd love to be able to shoot long range with a quarter bore though.
on paper they dont look that good but i hav (2) 25-308 imp 30deg and is one of my favorit rounds. great performance on big whittails and good for coyotes. as for 270-308. i will build one to same dim as the 25 it should be close to 270 win vol with mid range bullets. the 25 will shoot with the 25-06 with 100 gr and less bullet weights.
Look into the 270Sabi if a 270/08 floats your boat. I've got a take-off Rem700 270Win barrel slated for fitting to a Stevens 200 eventually chambered to 270/08. Friend is looking into doing a 270/22-250 as a mild cast pill performer. The newer projectiles for the 6.8SPC make the small capacity 270s kind of interesting.
Cheers...
Con
If you look at the 308 based cartridges that are successful, there is a lack of good 30-06 based cartridges in that caliber. 243, there is no commercial 30-06 version. 260, no 6.5-06 commercial cartridge. 7mm-08, the 280 was handicapped by Remington in its beginnings, it was lower pressure than the 270 and had a disadvantage in performance, so there was a vacuum the 7mm-08 filled. The 338 Federal is a new cartridge but so is the 338-06. The only exception to this is the 358 Win, but it is still no where near as successful as the 35 Wheelen. In the 25 and 27 calibers we already had great "standard" cartridges.
If someone started making high BC bullets in 257 and 277, do you think there's a market, I seem to think so.
Dean
RUMs are like woman in Stiletto heals, you know they are going to put you in the poor house, but that has never stopped anyone from pursuing them.
There are some pretty good options in high BC bullets for 257 and 277 now, much better than 10 years ago! Berger has several as does nosler, Sierra, hornady and a few high dollar semi-custom bullets makers out there
The Berger 115 works great but I would love to see a 125.
I assume you are talking about .257" in 125gr? That would indeed be a nice addition to the lineup. I wonder if the limited selection of heavy for caliber bullets is due to the standard twist rate for a .257" being 1:10" which wouldn't be too good for the heavier bullets??
Just a thought...
Yes, the twist needed to stabilize a streamlined 125 grain bullet in .257 would be tighter than 1-10 inches.
Tighter twist barrels are made (see, e. g., http://www.pac-nor.com/barrels/), but in not many factory rifles. The availability of stock barrels in tighter twists implies that some heavy bullets exist and that some people shoot them. We need a modern Jack O'Connor to pick up the banner and demonstrate why a .25 caliber cartridge with heavy bullets is enough better than 6.5's, 270's, 7mms, and .30 calibers to switch over.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks