I agree, performance matters, but as suggested by 1899, the same criticism you make against the .270 can also be leveled against the 7mm Remington by someone shooting a long barrel 7 STW, 7mm-300, or .28 Nosler. Regardless of the name or size of the cartridge you shoot, if you shoot at a range where bullet drop takes you off target, you need to have the knowledge, experience, and equipment that allows you to make an ethical shot on a live target. The cartridge is only one element of the whole. You'll need a laser range finder to accurately measure the range, a correctable ballistic solver and/or a record book of your adjustments for elevation and wind for your rifle and load at the range you need to shoot from, a scope that has repeatable elevation and windage adjustments, or has hold offs in the recticle, and you have experience making long range, cold bore shots in a variety of conditions, from field positions. You also need the wisdom not to attempt a marginal shot at any range on a live target. Then there are considerations of the moment, you need a solid position to shoot from, good light, a clear unobstructed view of the target, identify mirage, and have an accurate assessment of wind strength and direction, relative to the direction of the shot. 500 yards is only "long range" to someone who doesn't regularly shoot long range, but its far enough that a successful shot cannot be made in a thoughtless manner. To summarize, attempting to make a case for the superiority of one cartridge that is ballistically similar to another, based on typical performance resulting in a difference of a couple of inches in trajectory, at whatever range we're talking about, misses the point entirely.
RJ
