The 270 Winchester and old myths.

I do have to laugh over arguments about the 270.

Not enough bullet weights. Give me a 110 V-Max and a 130TSX, what else exactly do I need?

It's not as versatile as a 7mm, see the last paragraph.

It doesn't shoot as flat as a "whatever". How many guys on here can hold in the field for the difference? If it's long range, you need to KNOW the range and have a way of compensating whether that be a BDC type reticle or turrets. You know the distance and have a way to compensate, the 270 is as good as any. If you're holding some guesstimated number of inches over an animals back at long range, then dollars to donuts you're a slob hunter who doesn't practice enough. Anybody I know who is serious about long range shooting has a way to compensate for bullet drop.

"It's not that hard hitting." A good bullet like that 130TSX is going to expand and penetrate through anything you point it at. What do you think some hot 7 or 30 is going to do that a good 270 bullet won't?

WSM's, SAUM's, whatever. If you can't do it with a 270 Win you're unknowingly admitting your lack of experience or competence. If you can't get anything short of grizzlies down with a 270, ###ier initials in the name of the cartridge won't help you.
 
the 270 Win is a good one...back before the intraweb and I knew less about rifles and ballistics than,...oh maybe ever...I bought a 270 Win as my first real deer rifle....a 24" Vanguard, that was in 1990...bought it in Houston TX for $299...NIB....brought it home and killed maybe 8 or so deer with it before a friend told me it wasn't a 300 Win Mag.....shoulda kept the 270...I'm going to give it a go on deer with a 270 next year...I think it'll still work....picked up a Rem 721 in 270 last weekend for a really decent price...and do still have a Pre'64 Model 70 in 270.
 
Well, I didn't say there was no selection. I said there was better selection with 7mm products. Especially if you want to shoot multiple disciplines from one caliber.

No response, probably didn't get to reading it again as quick as others do.

Nothing wrong with the .270, have one here.some 7mm, some 30 cal.

Simply stated that there was more stuff out there available. It is no myth, there is more bullet selection available in 7mm than .270, Fact, go do a search.


Why not? said:
I submitted the following post in a thread recently, where a member had posted an old myth about the 270 Win:



Amazingly, there was no response. It seems that every time this is pointed out to detractors of the 270 Win, there is never an answer. I am wondering if the guys who post such stuff have ever used the 270 on game, or are just repeating what they have heard over the years?

Really, when it comes right down to where the rubber meets the road, the 270 Win is such a fine performer on game, that even if there were only half the bullets available, that would still be enough to cover all the bases. This is true, of course, of most cartridge selections.


With regards to its effectiveness on truly big game, here’s another post that received no response:



In more than 40 years of using the 270, in have rarely needed a second shot. And, not just myself, but I know several guys whose experience is the same with this ancient old cartridge. My neigbour is one, who uses nothing but factory 150 gr loads for years. A good friend of mine decked a huge grizzly, while on a caribou hunt two years ago, with a single 130 gr Nosler Partition in the lungs, and this not being the first time he has done so.

Again, I wonder how many guys who perpetuate these myths have ever actually used the cartridge?

Ted
Click to expand...
 
RickF said:
I do have to laugh over arguments about the 270.

Not enough bullet weights. Give me a 110 V-Max and a 130TSX, what else exactly do I need?

It's not as versatile as a 7mm, see the last paragraph.

It doesn't shoot as flat as a "whatever". How many guys on here can hold in the field for the difference? If it's long range, you need to KNOW the range and have a way of compensating whether that be a BDC type reticle or turrets. You know the distance and have a way to compensate, the 270 is as good as any. If you're holding some guesstimated number of inches over an animals back at long range, then dollars to donuts you're a slob hunter who doesn't practice enough. Anybody I know who is serious about long range shooting has a way to compensate for bullet drop.

"It's not that hard hitting." A good bullet like that 130TSX is going to expand and penetrate through anything you point it at. What do you think some hot 7 or 30 is going to do that a good 270 bullet won't?

WSM's, SAUM's, whatever. If you can't do it with a 270 Win you're unknowingly admitting your lack of experience or competence. If you can't get anything short of grizzlies down with a 270, ###ier initials in the name of the cartridge won't help you.
Click to expand...

:pGood one:p. You've made my whole evening. I gotta' remember that one.
 
the 270 is too small for moose.

yukon2010029.jpg



i havent shot a 270 since i was 16. ive only seen two guiding in the mountains and both shot 150gr noslers.
 
I picked up a Parker Hale 1100 Classic years ago. It was 270 but destined to be my 338 platform. Until the smithy was ready for it I shot it as is using the 160gr Partition on a coyote and then a 140gr Barnes X on a Muley. Yup, I did actually try the barnes if you can believe it! Caliber worked pretty good but at the time I had no interest in it.

Now years later I sit down with my Grampa and he starts to telling me of being just a kid and how his uncle's would pack up an old army truck and take some rough back country trails from south east of Calgary all the way to the Ya Ha Tinda. His Uncle's rifle was a Winchester 54 in 270 WCF. Didn't have a scope, just the irons or maybe a receiver sight as seems to be common on them.
I think one day that will have to be added to the list for my stash. After all once my wife gets to shooting my 7x57 much more, it will be hard to get it back from her.
 
In my experience, the .270 win is fine for any big game I've ever hunted. And with all the new fancy shmancy bullets we have nowadays, it's that much more effective.
I hunted for years with mostly 150gr BT's, but now I picked up some 130gr ETips and they'll likely be my new "go to" bullet for this caliber, if they shoot well.
 
I think it is interesting to compare the .270 to the .300 Winchester Magnum. Now, I can hear the objections already so hear me out because it is an interesting comparison.

I my .270s I'm shooting 150 grain Nosler Partitions (BC of .465, SD of 270) with enough H-4831 to move them out at 2970 fps average. If I had a 300 Win Mag I would likely use 180 Partitions (BC of .474, SD or .271). Now since I don't own a .300 I'm relying on Nosler's data to tell me that the best load they have shows 2983fps. To provide these levels of performance the .270 and the .300 will produce 19.7 and 29.7 ft/lbs of recoil respectively when fired from 8.5 lb rifles.

Now, if we have two rifles shooting bullets of equal construction, BC, SD, velocity and trajectory the one with two-thirds of the recoil is likely a helluva good round when you think of the respect 300 Winchester Magnum has earned. If I was to fail at my job as a rifleman with a .270 I don't see how an extra .030" and an extra 30 grains would save the day.
 
martinbns said:
I actually think the old myth is that is is a great cartridge.

It's in too heavy in recoil to be considered with light cartridges like the 6.5 swede or 257 Bob, it's not really hard hitting like a full jam 30-06 load with similar recoil, and it's not really all that flat like a 257 roy or even a 25-06.

Tell me, you are returning to your moose kill in the bush and at thirty yards you discover there is a large grizzly on your moose. What would you rather have in your hands, a 257 Weatherbey, with your choice of bullet, a 25-06, with your choice of bullet, or a 270 Winchester with 150 grain Nosler partition bullets?
Click to expand...
 
Chuck said:
I think it is interesting to compare the .270 to the .300 Winchester Magnum. Now, I can hear the objections already so hear me out because it is an interesting comparison.

I my .270s I'm shooting 150 grain Nosler Partitions (BC of .465, SD of 270) with enough H-4831 to move them out at 2970 fps average. If I had a 300 Win Mag I would likely use 180 Partitions (BC of .474, SD or .271). Now since I don't own a .300 I'm relying on Nosler's data to tell me that the best load they have shows 2983fps. To provide these levels of performance the .270 and the .300 will produce 19.7 and 29.7 ft/lbs of recoil respectively when fired from 8.5 lb rifles.

Now, if we have two rifles shooting bullets of equal construction, BC, SD, velocity and trajectory the one with two-thirds of the recoil is likely a helluva good round when you think of the respect 300 Winchester Magnum has earned. If I was to fail at my job as a rifleman with a .270 I don't see how an extra .030" and an extra 30 grains would save the day.
Click to expand...

exactly...I don't own a 300 Win Mag anymore,....no need for cannons like that on deer especially.
 
Chuck said:
I think it is interesting to compare the .270 to the .300 Winchester Magnum. Now, I can hear the objections already so hear me out because it is an interesting comparison.

I my .270s I'm shooting 150 grain Nosler Partitions (BC of .465, SD of 270) with enough H-4831 to move them out at 2970 fps average. If I had a 300 Win Mag I would likely use 180 Partitions (BC of .474, SD or .271). Now since I don't own a .300 I'm relying on Nosler's data to tell me that the best load they have shows 2983fps. To provide these levels of performance the .270 and the .300 will produce 19.7 and 29.7 ft/lbs of recoil respectively when fired from 8.5 lb rifles.

Now, if we have two rifles shooting bullets of equal construction, BC, SD, velocity and trajectory the one with two-thirds of the recoil is likely a helluva good round when you think of the respect 300 Winchester Magnum has earned. If I was to fail at my job as a rifleman with a .270 I don't see how an extra .030" and an extra 30 grains would save the day.
Click to expand...

You just pissed all over the nay sayer's parade :D
 
I did a quick search because I tend to trust what Ted has to say and wanted to see if there really was a glaring difference between the availability of .277" and .284" bullets. And I don't believe in picking on the elderly.:p

I checked the major North American manufacturers Barnes, Sierra, Speer, Swift, Nosler and Hornady and what I found was that from the 6 major manufacturers there are 58 bullets available in .277" and 75 in .284". So on one hand there are 17 more .284" bullets on the market than .277".

That said, Ted's point was that there is more than ample variety and supply of .277" bullets available. That's worth investigating. There is everything from a 90grain Speer TNT to the 150 grain A-Frame available in .277 and everything from the 110 grain TNT to the 175 A-Frame in .284". You do get a bit more SD with the 7mm and 175s than you do with the 270 and 160s, but I don't know that .012 is much to argue over (that said we are debating 7 thou difference in bullet diameter).

Anyone who claims that having 58 different bullets from 6 manufacturers isn't enough selection has a serious case of being overly picky. If 58 different bulelts isn't enough variety then you need to stick to 30 caliber and be done with it. You'd likely go into a catatonic state if you ever went shopping for .366" bullets. 8 bullets is slim pickins. 58, not so much.
 
many moons ago, I was quite poor (now I'm just poor), and I only owned a .303Br. I was invited to go to Utah for an elk hunt. Knowing that my poor old .303 was not up to the task, I did some research and discovered that the .270 was the rifle of choice for Elk. Flatter shooting than the .30-06 (which was king in my day) and less recoil. Not having the money to buy one outright, I borrowed a used one from a friend who owned a gunshop, on the basis that I would use it and if I damaged it in any way, it was mine and I would work off the cost.
The rifle worked fantastically, totally shaming my old .303 and making me into a wonderful shot who was talked about all through that 2 weeks in camp.
Alas, when I came home, I had to give it back and when it came time to actually buy another rifle, a nice Mauser K98 in .30-06 fell into my hands. Since then I have collected several more .303's, another .30-06, a .308, a couple of SKS's, and a 91/30 Nagant. The only one outside of the .30 cal range is my wife's .243.
I have vowed to shoot only .30cal stuff since it tends to keep my bullets and choices down to minimums. Although now, I am thinking of that .270 again...damn you guys!! New rifle, new brass, new dies, new bullets. Although I could just go with one bullet as was stated earlier. Nah! What fun would that be. NO, Ruger #1 in .303 first, maybe...or maybe not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom