I have loaded once fired factory Weatherbybrass fired in a Weatherby rifle that had loose primer pockets after that single firing.Case head expansion was around .002".Either that batch of ammunition had very soft brass,or the chamber pressures were excessive.So while the factory Weatherby loads may make their velocity rating,I wonder about the chamber pressures that they sometimes develop while doing so.
270 or 7mm Rem mag
- Thread starter Yamnuska
- Start date
I have loaded once fired factory Weatherbybrass fired in a Weatherby rifle that had loose primer pockets after that single firing.Case head expansion was around .002".Either that batch of ammunition had very soft brass,or the chamber pressures were excessive.So while the factory Weatherby loads may make their velocity rating,I wonder about the chamber pressures that they sometimes develop while doing so.
Jordan Smith
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Calgary, AB
The 7mm RM is loaded quite a bit tamer than in the past. For example Jack O'Connor in "The Rifle Book" (1964) notes the following performance for factory 7mm RM ammo:
175gr @ 3020fps
150gr @ 3260fps
He says, "When I chronographed a factory Model 700, I found the velocity to be just about what the factory claimed".
New loads for the 7mm RM are quite anemic:
for example Federal
175gr 2750 - 2860 fps
150gr 3025 - 3110 fps
Winchester
175gr - 2860 fps
150gr - 3090 fps
Interestingly the velocity listed by O'Connor for the 7mm Wby Mag is:
175gr - 3050 fps
154gr - 3260 fps
Today's Weatherby loads? Take a look:
175gr - 3070 fps
154gr - 3260 fps
Even Hornady's Superformance ammunition doesn't make up for the reduction of 7mm RM loads:
154gr - 3100 fps
162gr - 3030 fps
On the other hand, the .270 has also been mildly neutered since O'Connor's days as he lists the muzzle velocity with the 130gr at 3140 fps while most loads today are listed a 3060 fps. However, Hornady's Superformance does make a difference here:
130gr - 3200 fps
140gr - 3090 fps
Given that info and the fact that you do not reload, I'd go with the .270 Winchester. All things being equal it will have less recoil than the 7mm RM but will kill deer and elk just as dead.
I should point out that I have owned 3 .270 Winchesters and 2 7mm Rem Mags - and only the 7mm RM remains in my safe. But I reload so the mild factory ammo doesn't matter to me.
Amen to this post. And the fact that the rifle is lightweight and has a crappy recoil pad.
If limited to factory ammo in a T3 Lite with factory recoil pad, there's no question in my mind that I'd by running a .270.
- Location
- Eastern Edge of the Foothills
The .280 is definately the right answer. Unfortunately the T3 isn't offered in .280 though. The X-bolt is, and the Rem 700 Mtn LSS is.
If the OP is unwaivering on the T3 decision, then I'd say go .270.
If the OP is a handloader who wants the best cartridge in a rifle that will shoot the lights out, get a X-bolt in .280
Barnes used to make a 180 gr 270 bullet if memory serves. As a handloader I would still prefer the 7 Mag though. - dan
BC Bigbore
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- BC's Peace Country
.270 for me.
I can't help but wonder. If he was going to handload, he could tame the 7mm down to 270 power to save the shoulder. That would theoretically extend barrel and brass life too. To the guys that know about calculating barrel life. Would it make enough of a difference to be worth getting the 7mm and firing light loads?
Thirty years ago I decided I would only buy one rifle in my lifetime for big game in Canada (financial issues at the time). After about a year of research (before the internet) I picked the 270 over the 3006. O'Conner's articles on the 270 and me not enjoying the kick of a 3006 was a major points on the decision. The down side of the 270 at that time was bullet weight availability ie. 130 to 150 gr, however, Nosler came out with the Partition and Barnes had a 180gr bullet available for reloading if I was going to hunt something larger than whitetails in the future. I have had no regrets with the decision.
Since I retired last year, I have picked up a 223 for paper punching and a 243 for shooting the black tail deer here on Haida Gwaii. The 270 still does the job, but, I like the 243 as it has even less recoil than the 270.
Good luck with your choice.
Since I retired last year, I have picked up a 223 for paper punching and a 243 for shooting the black tail deer here on Haida Gwaii. The 270 still does the job, but, I like the 243 as it has even less recoil than the 270.
Good luck with your choice.
- Location
- Somewhere on the Hudson Bay Coast
For the life of me I don't know why people wring their hands over the difference of .007" of bullet diameter between a .270 and a 7mm. Both .277" and .284" bullets can claim 7mm status. Given bullets of similar design and construction, impacting at a similar velocity, there is nothing one does better than the other. If you need more, you need a bullet of larger frontal area with greater mass, not one that is faster. Faster reduces the importance of errors in range estimation, though not as much as you might think, and the often claimed advantages of increased velocity on wound volume is grossly exaggerated. If I was contemplating the purchase of a 7mm rifle, I would choose a .270 over a belted 7mm magnum, and I would choose the .280 Remington over either. In truth I might stick with a 7X57 as the .275 Rigby has panache the other rounds lack. Besides it provides the ballistics I can use, rather than a hypothetical advantage I cannot. IMHO, the .243 is an excellent round for game up to 100 pounds.
I agree right up to the 7x57, Not a fan of the chambers most 7x57s possess.
If it were me! since the 280 is not available, the most viable option would be a boring old 30-06. Does everything all the above does with 150gn bullets + with the option of a choice among the most common bullets available in 180 weights for moose-elk size game.
- Location
- Somewhere on the Hudson Bay Coast
I can't argue with that logic. Some people seem to have an aversion to the ole '06; not me though, it remains my favorite cartridge. I did have a few 7X57s that were pretty good, including my current one; an unaltered military Oberndorf Mauser, but my favorite was a Brno 601.
Having shot lots of both elk and moose, and being in hunting parties for the past near 40 years where literally over 100 moose and elk have been shot, elk are far tougher than moose. Moose are like the boxer with a glass jaw. Elk with fatal lung shots run like nothing has happened (until they pile up). Moose go down like a hockey player faking to draw a cheap penalty.
That said, I have several rifles in both 270 and 7mm. It is all bullet selection. Use a Nosler Partition or Barnes TSX (0r substitute in your favorite premium bullet) and you will have a great cartridge. Put the wrong bullet and you will be damaging meat or worse, losing wounded animals. Of course it goes with out saying shot placement.
Personally if let to choose 1 of the 2, I would go to the 270 if for no other reason than the late Jack O'Connor had me convinced as a child that i would be holding the hammer of Thor if I had a 270.
A 150 Partition with a stiff load of R19 works for me and is my go to load in several 270's i currently own. My newer 270 WSM likes the 130 TSX with lots of R22. My current 7 RM likes R22 in front of any weight of partitions but an R77 i flogged off could not manage a "minute of barn door" but that was the rifle, not the caliber.
Good luck. If you like rifles, you will probably end up owing both over the coming years. Welcome to rifle hunting!
Why "never never never" hunt moose?
.
Because it takes 4 years to get a draw now? 3 nevers then 1 year of yippee, yahoo!
powder burner
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Alberta, Canada
Sounds like you need a tikka t3 in 7mm08 or .308
Any animal shot by either will not know the difference if the shot is placed right at up to 500 yards, saying that i would go with the .270 because it wins in two areas hands down.
1- noticably less recoil than the 7mm mag.
2- Cheaper to shoot factory ammo, and reloaded ammo. If you did reload the 7mm dwn to 270 levels you will still have to use MORE POWDER TO GET THE SAME RESULT. Simple physics dictates such as to create the same pressure in a larger case you need more powder.
By the way any elk hit with a well placed shot from a 270 with a 150 partition will drop very quickly and the extra 25 grains of bullet weight or .007 diameter increase in bullet size will mean squat to making it fall any faster.
1- noticably less recoil than the 7mm mag.
2- Cheaper to shoot factory ammo, and reloaded ammo. If you did reload the 7mm dwn to 270 levels you will still have to use MORE POWDER TO GET THE SAME RESULT. Simple physics dictates such as to create the same pressure in a larger case you need more powder.
By the way any elk hit with a well placed shot from a 270 with a 150 partition will drop very quickly and the extra 25 grains of bullet weight or .007 diameter increase in bullet size will mean squat to making it fall any faster.
