270 win vs. 270 wsm

RE: Feeding Problems with the 270WSM

The most notable problem with feeding and extraction came from the Remington 700s. Cartridges simply would not feed from the magazine and polymer tips were busting off as the cartridges in a staggered magazine were turning too far to one side or hitting anywhere but centre and butting into the flat surface of the barrel face. Extraction was painful. Casings or cartridges were lucky to be withdrawn from the chamber. Much of the feeding/extraction problem with the 700 was the geometry of the receivers not being compatible with the case design. Even the traditional 700 extractor did not suit the WSM case. This problem was further complicated by some of the quality-control issues experienced around the time of the WSMs appearing on the market as Remington screwed over many of their long-term employees on the production line. There are 700s that cycle the WSMs but they are not in the majority.

The Browning X-bolt did a better job than Remington with the WSMs but the bolt was quite stiff and clunky. The Controlled Round Feed from a Winchester style Mauser Claws handled the WSMs well so the actions like the Winchester 70 and its many custom clones maintained positive feeding and consistent extraction. Sako also handled the WSMs well because of their many action lengths available for their receivers. The Sako75 was the first to turn out a ShortMagnum (SM) receiver specifically to handle the 270 and 300 WSMs and the company has continued to build the SM action for the 85 and 90 rifles. I have owned several 85s in WSMs and none had any problems with feeding or extraction. I can't comment with any experience on the 100 but I do not believe it supports the WSM cartridges.

I was an early fan of the 270WSM and it was my first Gucci-Ferrari cartridge. I could not get my hands on the Sako 75 in a WSM, I have always hated Browning rifles, Kimber was still unreliable and inconsistent in making good barrels and parts that did not break, Winchester was still making their crappy push feeds, Weatherby were ridiculously heavy, and I won't go anywhere near Savage or Mossberg, so I went through several Remington Alaskan Ti rifles. Each one had to be sent back as none would feed reliably and extraction simply did not happen. I remained focused on the 270WSM, pouring over ballistic tables and bullet designs and Sako turned out the 85 with many hitting our Canadian market quickly. My wife was nice enough to get me a Finnlight as an anniversary present.
 
yidava25 said:
The pros and cons of both Win. and WSM have been well thrashed out here but I do have one thing to say that DogLeg alluded to:
Yes, handloaders can get a .270 Win to nearly equal the performance of (factory) WSM loads. But that’s not exactly an apples to apples comparison, is it? The question then should be, what can a handloader do with a WSM? I haven’t run the numbers and haven’t loaded enough of either to say for certain but my guess is that a WSM handloaded to the safe limit will leave a handloaded Win. in the dust, just like factory vs factory.
If you’re handloading your Win and feeling like you’ve cheated the system because you’re saving a few bucks and nearly getting factory WSM performance you’re kind of missing the point.
Click to expand...
I have handloaded for the 270 Win, the 270 wsm and the 270 Wby. Each is a slight step up in velocity, but at similar pressures you're not going to make a 270 Win into a wsm, or a wsm into a wby. - dan
 
I have not tried to buy any of these - they came re-formed to 7 mm Weatherby in somebody's pile of hand loads that I bought - I noticed the head stamps were not the same as the others in the batch. Three different weights of bullets. Two different colours of powders. I presume someone actually knew what they were doing - was no notes, at all, so I pulled all down for the bullets and brass.

EB60229A-09DC-490C-AC05-5751955A1029_1_201_a.jpeg
 
I've only owned and shot game with a Sako AV 270. I looked into the 270 WSM but decided to stay with the 270 Win as it hasn't disappointed me on any hunts I've used it. I've shot 130, 140 and 150 grainers out of it.
 
270 Win is versatile. As has been noted, you can load it to close enough to the WSM that in all practically, its hard to imagine really needing the difference. On the other hand, you can download it to near indistinguishability from 6.5x55, which has a cult following for punching above its weight class and mild recoil.

Or you can have no time and buy a box of Federal blue box for $39.99 on the drive home last week and kill with that just fine lol.

Hard not to like it.
 
Unless you're into long range hunting, I see no reason to go with a 270wsm over a 270win. The 270 will kill #### dead out to 500yds - for example, the Federal Premium 140gr Trophy Bonded Tip factory ammo is going 2000+fps at 500yds and still has over 1200ft/lb of energy. I also don't care about the other "advantages" for the WSM - I would rather than extra round in the magazine than a slightly shorter action. Plus most long action rifles will leave you with plenty of room to seat your bullets long in a 270win, I don't think the same can be said about the WSM and short action magazines.

If I don't think the 270win is going to get the job done, I don't think a faster 270cal is going to do it either; I'm looking for a bigger diameter bullet at that point.
 
If… I wasn’t firmly an advocate of the “Dirty 30s Club” and I was to entertain a .270 variant of some sort, I’d say d**n the powder, brass costs and availability and go Gucci/Ferrari (as mentioned previous) and grab the 270Wby. Just to be different.

That said.. I’m more apt to take a serious look at a 6.5PRC however these days based on component availabilty..
 
Suther said:
Market saturation. There are a lot of 7mm options out there compared to 270cal options.
Click to expand...
Yeah, there’s too many 7mms, the pie is sliced too many times so everyone starves.

Historically metric calibers struggled to succeed, even when named in inches. For a long time the joke was the surest ways to make a cartridge fail was to name it metric or stamp Remington on the casehead. The Rem Mag is the exception that proved both rules.


The 300 WSM had a chance; because Americans love their 30s and more than a few of them wanted a magnum in a short action. The 270 WSM checked off
a couple boxes being a magnum from a major manufacturer that fit in a short action; it didn’t really have any competition. The. 325? Who needs an 8 mil? Doesn’t mean theres anything wrong with it, but it was dead before it started.Mediums have their fans but they are few, and they handload. Handloaders don’t keep cartridges alive unless life support counts.
 
Dogleg said:
Yeah, there’s too many 7mms, the pie is sliced too many times so everyone starves.

Historically metric calibers struggled to succeed, even when named in inches. For a long time the joke was the surest ways to make a cartridge fail was to name it metric or stamp Remington on the casehead. The Rem Mag is the exception that proved both rules.


The 300 WSM had a chance; because Americans love their 30s and more than a few of them wanted a magnum in a short action. The 270 WSM checked off
a couple boxes being a magnum from a major manufacturer that fit in a short action; it didn’t really have any competition. The. 325? Who needs an 8 mil? Doesn’t mean theres anything wrong with it, but it was dead before it started.Mediums have their fans but they are few, and they handload. Handloaders don’t keep cartridges alive unless life support counts.
Click to expand...

That metric curse has been lifted though, judging by the popularity of the creedmoors and PRCs in 6/6.5/7mm.

Creating the 325WSM will never make sense to me. Personally I think its fantastic, but I'm the kind of person who likes unusual stuff. From a marketability perspective it just doesn't make sense. I understand the reasoning - Winchester couldn't get 338 win mag performance with heavier bullets in the short WSM case but they still wanted SOMETHING bigger than 30cal, but trying to get an 8mm magnum to take off in North America feels like (and evidently is) a fools errand. Just ask Remington. lol

I have no first hand experience, but it feels like a 35 WSM would have been a better choice.
 
Last edited:
So… where does/would a fast twist 270Win fit into the equation? Viable alternative to push 150-160grs better than the standard 1:10 twists?
 
ShrtRnd said:
So… where does/would a fast twist 270Win fit into the equation? Viable alternative to push 150-160grs better than the standard 1:10 twists?
Click to expand...
It would stabilize heavier bullets. I don't know how much better it would work with 150 (never had an issue with that bullet weight being unstable in any 270 I've ever owned), but if you were shooting heavier bullets it would probably help. All the 160 gr bullets I have are not very slippery, but maybe with some of the new bullets on the market. You're not going to push those 160s very fast though. - dan
 
Last edited:
People (in person) dislike when I say things like this, but here we go. Are you a good enough shot for the wsm to be “worth it”? 270wsm isn’t going to drop as much as 270 at 500 yards and under that distance the drop starts to become negligible for the majority of people. What I am about to say is not about you, but most hunters are not that skilled of a shooter.

Once again I am not questioning or doubting your ability, however do you shoot at that long distance? I don’t like shooting much over 200 yards anymore. Mostly because the area I hunt makes it difficult to recover animals at that distance and I am not what I used to be because of switching my priorities to trying to be a good dad.

With all this being said I have only shot my deer with a 243 and 7mag. The 7 mag is the only one I grab while deer hunting and the shots in my area (this year) are not over 150 yards so even that is overkill in my opinion.

If I am wrong please correct me.
 
RightWingIndian said:
People (in person) dislike when I say things like this, but here we go. Are you a good enough shot for the wsm to be “worth it”? 270wsm isn’t going to drop as much as 270 at 500 yards and under that distance the drop starts to become negligible for the majority of people. What I am about to say is not about you, but most hunters are not that skilled of a shooter.
Click to expand...
What do you mean by "under that distance the drop starts to become negligible"?
 
Suther said:
What do you mean by "under that distance the drop starts to become negligible"?
Click to expand...
He means that, when sighted 3.0" high at 100 yards (Jack O'Connor's and my favorite sighting-in setting for long-range shooting), a 130-grain .270 bullet will be down about 2.25 inches more at 350 yards from the .270 Win. than from the WSM, and about 3 inches more at 400 yards. At 300 yards, the difference in POI is a mere 1.50 inches. I think I'd agree that this can be considered pretty negligible.
 
Last edited:
South Pender said:
He means that, when sighted 3.0" high at 100 yards (Jack O'Connor's and my favorite sighting-in method for long-range shooting), a 130-grain .270 bullet will be down about 2.25 inches more at 350 yards from the .270 Win. than from the WSM, and about 3 inches more at 400 yards. At 300 yards, the difference in POI is a mere 1.50 inches. I'd agree that this can be considered pretty negligible.
Click to expand...
Ahhh that makes sense. I was thinking drop at 400 is like 16" with a 200yd zero, thats plenty enough drop to require a rangefinder, as a 50yd mistake in estimating range at that distance can change a perfect shot into a clean miss or worse, a grazing shot that wounds but doesn't kill quickly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom