.270 Win and the legendary Swede.
- Thread starter philthygeezer
- Start date
Personally I'd like to see how many hunters here in Canada would do in such a test.
How many provinces still have any shooting test as part of their hunter certification? We eliminated the test several years back, and I think it was a bad move.
This thread started out comparing the 270 to the 6.5x55.
I have shot deer, moose, elk, caribou and goat with a 270 and I can assure you, the bullet used is everything.
My first elk was shot with a "standard" 130 grain hunting bullet. A perfect side shot and the bull elk took off. I searched for forty-five minutes on a cloudy day in the bush before I found him, stone dead.
The bullet completely blew up before it got into the lung cavity. The only thing that killed the elk, was a piece of the jacket, the only part of the bullet that penetrated to the lung cavity, cut an artery next to his heart and it took some time to bleed to death.
Went to well advertised "standard" 150 grain hunting bullets. A 150 grain bullet also blew up completely on a long shot on a goat, also, eventually killing the goat.
Bottom line, 150 grain Nosler, bang flop with an elk, the bullet found on the far hide, after a bit of angle through the body.
Jack O'Connor shot a lot of big game with 130 grain bullets, as someone has mentioned. In 1975 he wrote a long article, which I have, on the 50th anniversary of the 270. He states that the 130 grain bullet that Winchester developed for the 270 was the best 130 grain bullet he ever saw, and it was that bullet that accounted for so many of his big game kills. he said the bullet was too expensive to make and Winchester eventually discontinued it.
O'Connor once stated that all of his game shot with 130 grain 270 bullets were shot with premium bullets.
I have shot deer, moose, elk, caribou and goat with a 270 and I can assure you, the bullet used is everything.
My first elk was shot with a "standard" 130 grain hunting bullet. A perfect side shot and the bull elk took off. I searched for forty-five minutes on a cloudy day in the bush before I found him, stone dead.
The bullet completely blew up before it got into the lung cavity. The only thing that killed the elk, was a piece of the jacket, the only part of the bullet that penetrated to the lung cavity, cut an artery next to his heart and it took some time to bleed to death.
Went to well advertised "standard" 150 grain hunting bullets. A 150 grain bullet also blew up completely on a long shot on a goat, also, eventually killing the goat.
Bottom line, 150 grain Nosler, bang flop with an elk, the bullet found on the far hide, after a bit of angle through the body.
Jack O'Connor shot a lot of big game with 130 grain bullets, as someone has mentioned. In 1975 he wrote a long article, which I have, on the 50th anniversary of the 270. He states that the 130 grain bullet that Winchester developed for the 270 was the best 130 grain bullet he ever saw, and it was that bullet that accounted for so many of his big game kills. he said the bullet was too expensive to make and Winchester eventually discontinued it.
O'Connor once stated that all of his game shot with 130 grain 270 bullets were shot with premium bullets.
Alex : how dead is dead ???!!!
something i alreaday wrote.
as a guide and hunter i ve seen a lot of animals taken and i cant see the differences in killing by a bullet whatever the kind is ...
when the bullet placement is there nothing can make a better kill that the bullet placement.
even if premium bullet is a good step, it doesnt mean the hunter cannot do his own job as a shooter.
Alex : how dead is dead ???!!!
something i alreaday wrote.
as a guide and hunter i ve seen a lot of animals taken and i cant see the differences in killing by a bullet whatever the kind is ...
when the bullet placement is there nothing can make a better kill that the bullet placement.
even if premium bullet is a good step, it doesnt mean the hunter cannot do his own job as a shooter.
So what your telling me is if I hit a caribou in the shoulder broadside with a 458 win mag and premium bullet it won't make up for not hitting him in the kill zone?
So what your telling me is if I hit a caribou in the shoulder broadside with a 458 win mag and premium bullet it won't make up for not hitting him in the kill zone?
G.,
caribou is maybe not the best example ... especially with a 458 ....
Phil.
I would guarantee that there is no difference in killing performance between the two with today's bullets. Shoot any animal with a quality 140gr from either cartridge and the drop, and penetration differences will be absolutely negligible.
Both need a 30-06 length action and the .270 has more powder capacity, where the BC and SD of the 6.5 is slightly higher. It's nearly a wash.
Both need a 30-06 length action and the .270 has more powder capacity, where the BC and SD of the 6.5 is slightly higher. It's nearly a wash.
- Location
- Haliburton County, Central Ontario
Excellent statistical breakdown of S.D, B.C., and ballistics here. Yawn... Problem is, that not all bullets are created equally. Bullet construction and terminal performance are big factors. Very big factors. H4831's extensive experience with good vs poor bullets (and his timely reference to Jack O'Connor's findings) should make this clear enough. A .270 with a premium 130 gr. bullet (my choice would be the Barnes TSX) vs the Swede using a poorly designed 160 gr. bullet would be no contest. The .270 wins.
Specify equally good bullets in both and start this thread over again please.
Specify equally good bullets in both and start this thread over again please.
Alex : how dead is dead ???!!!
something i alreaday wrote.
as a guide and hunter i've seen a lot of animals taken and i cant see the differences in killing by a bullet whatever the kind is ...
when the bullet placement is there nothing can make a better kill that the bullet placement.
even if premium bullet is a good step, it doesn't mean the hunter cannot do his own job as a shooter.
Last moose my cousin shot with a 300 WM, took 3 shots the first blew up on the shoulder joint, would have probably eventually been fatal, teh second hit the already damaged leg, and the 3rd went in behind the rib cage, thru the liver, and into the lungs. They bullets were 150 gr silvertips, now he handloads nosler, no problems with penetration since, since he hasn't recovered any yet, they shoot clean thru last one broke both shoulders.
- Location
- The Conservative part of Ontario
So finally, bullet placement put the moose down.
Fancy bullets rarely compensate for poor placement.
I think that the low starting velocities of the 6.5, particularly with heavy bullets, would largely negate any benefit that a premium bullet would give. You aren't going to see jacket separation on a 160 roundnose started at 2400fps. You may indeed separate the jacket from a 130 grain .270 bullet though.
N.B. did have a shooting test for moose but ability wise it was kind of a joke.
You had to hit a 16in.x 16in. square at 50 yards, 2 out of 3 shots! And you could even shoot from prone!! It was more in response to non hunters entering the moose draw with the intention of letting someone else shoot the moose. That being said I remember watching some older guys who had a lot of hunting under their belts actually fail the test. Just got really worked up with having an audience for their shooting.
- Location
- Haliburton County, Central Ontario
Didn't realize you owned a Krag. Get out the loading manual sometime and look up the Swede loaded for a good gun
If the bullet had held together, round 1 would have been enough. He is a cheap bugger, so buys whatever is cheapest, that has changed at least wrt bullets.
during the post mortem the bullet was found to have impacted the scapula around the base just above the leg joint, the angle of entry would have severed the top of the heart, and penetrated into the far lung. So the bullet placement though less than ideal would have been fatal if the bullet held together.
http://www.google.ca/imgres?q=moose+internal+anatomy&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=yUf&rls=org.mozilla:en-US
fficial&tbm=isch&tbnid=rariHdQyA9uZXM:&imgrefurl=http://www.hunter-ed.com/akm/course/ch4_vital_shots.htm&docid=j8bbuFqWDTEC2M&w=500&h=366&ei=lIpnTo3XEdO80AGFybmKDA&zoom=1&iact=rc&dur=365&page=1&tbnh=140&tbnw=191&start=0&ndsp=14&ved=1t:429,r:2,s:0&tx=96&ty=60&biw=1024&bih=590- Location
- Eastern Edge of the Foothills
So my brother has been living in Sweden for the past few years, and has been out hunting moose. They way the people around him do things is a bit different than here in Alberta. They all party hunt. They have to. It's the law. The hunting club gets a certain amount of tags, and you must be a member of the club to hunt. All the country is divided into management units, but only the club members of that unit can hunt there. So if you're not a member of a hunting club, you're not hunting. So the whole club works together to fill the tags.
They also have to use dogs. It's considered unethical to hunt without dogs. So a few people handle the dogs and get the moose running. The dog handlers might get a shot, but not likely. The idea is to get the moose to run in the direction of where all the other shooters are placed. Basically the shooters are placed in a line, and are up in tree huts, or hidden in blinds. All in a line with shooting lanes and each spot is within sight of the adjecent spot. They clear away the thick brush to have shooting lanes, and each spot is like 100 yards or so apart.
So the moose is running towards the line of shooters, and everyone is communicating with radios. So you're ready when the moose runs by your spot. You do have to make a running shot, but the distance will be at the most around 80 yards.
So if you can hit a running moose at 80 yards [which they do practice], then you're good to go. And you don't need long range ballistics for that. A 6.5x55 with 160 round nose will do just fine. But more and more people are moving to what they call "the NATO round" [.308] or .30-06.
So this is the info I've gotten from my brother who has seen it first hand. I think they do it like this all over sweden, but I don't know that for a fact.
So, in answer to the OP's question, they do kill moose with not much problem with the 6.5x55... they just do it a bit differently.
They also have to use dogs. It's considered unethical to hunt without dogs. So a few people handle the dogs and get the moose running. The dog handlers might get a shot, but not likely. The idea is to get the moose to run in the direction of where all the other shooters are placed. Basically the shooters are placed in a line, and are up in tree huts, or hidden in blinds. All in a line with shooting lanes and each spot is within sight of the adjecent spot. They clear away the thick brush to have shooting lanes, and each spot is like 100 yards or so apart.
So the moose is running towards the line of shooters, and everyone is communicating with radios. So you're ready when the moose runs by your spot. You do have to make a running shot, but the distance will be at the most around 80 yards.
So if you can hit a running moose at 80 yards [which they do practice], then you're good to go. And you don't need long range ballistics for that. A 6.5x55 with 160 round nose will do just fine. But more and more people are moving to what they call "the NATO round" [.308] or .30-06.
So this is the info I've gotten from my brother who has seen it first hand. I think they do it like this all over sweden, but I don't know that for a fact.
So, in answer to the OP's question, they do kill moose with not much problem with the 6.5x55... they just do it a bit differently.
