PISSED OFF IN TEXAS (270 fans only)

[razmuz]

In the November issue of "Outdoor Life" there is an article, "The 270 Mystery." On page 36 they say that this is the most exhaustive investigation of the 270's accuracy ever conducted. It's a good article and well worth reading, however, they share very little data. I've emailed them twice to see if there's going to be a follow up. They don't answer their email. I may cancel. Maybe one of you guys can get a response from them.

[Gil Martin]

I posted a few questions in the Outloor Life Forums. I never knew my .270 was inaccurate until I read the article. The folks the reponded disagreed with the author's premise. All the best...
Gil

[PJgunner]

Who was the author? I don't read Outdoor Life anymore.
Paul B.

[L. Cooper]

Why bother getting pissed off? It is just more proof that writers have to create lots of "issues" to discuss in order to fill the pages of most magazines. So many articles arguing so many things that are so irrelevant to actual shooting and hunting with my guns.

Another "How many angels can dance on the head of a pin" article. Ignore it and go shooting.

Oh, and take the magazine with the grain of salt it deserves from now on whether it is talking about the accuracy of a cartridge or the efficacy of scent blocking suits.

[hofts]

so they built a nice rifle, put a bunch of rounds thru it from factory to handloads, with different weights and got accuracy from sub moa to over 2 inches. wow. what an exhaustive experiment.

to the author: i already knew that as all my rifles in different calibers will do the exact same thing. hello:confused: :eek: :rolleyes:

[8X56MS]

Gunzine writers have to write about something. I sure dont agree though. I have always found my .270 rifles in general , and my 1952 Mannlicher-Schoenauer rifle to be very accurate.