.270 at close range
- Thread starter Stefan
- Start date
Quoting the info blasted sabre found:
The holder of a small game licence may not use a rifle of
greater calibre than .275, except a flintlock or percussion
cap muzzle-loading gun, for hunting small game in
the counties of Brant, Elgin, Essex, Huron, Lambton,
Middlesex, Northumberland, Oxford, Perth and
Wellington and the regional municipalities of Chatham/
Kent, Durham, the former regional municipalities of
Haldimand-Norfolk and Hamilton-Wentworth, Halton,
Niagara, Peel, Waterloo and York and the City of Toronto.
The regulations state a .275 caliber, being as the 270's bullet is .277, I would be careful of a fins and feathers officer having a bad day and using you to make him feel better. Common sense says a 270 is smaller than 275 but some of the officers throw common sense out the window when it comes to writing up tickets. Just my $0.02 on that based on a different situation I've had occur to me.
The holder of a small game licence may not use a rifle of
greater calibre than .275, except a flintlock or percussion
cap muzzle-loading gun, for hunting small game in
the counties of Brant, Elgin, Essex, Huron, Lambton,
Middlesex, Northumberland, Oxford, Perth and
Wellington and the regional municipalities of Chatham/
Kent, Durham, the former regional municipalities of
Haldimand-Norfolk and Hamilton-Wentworth, Halton,
Niagara, Peel, Waterloo and York and the City of Toronto.
The regulations state a .275 caliber, being as the 270's bullet is .277, I would be careful of a fins and feathers officer having a bad day and using you to make him feel better. Common sense says a 270 is smaller than 275 but some of the officers throw common sense out the window when it comes to writing up tickets. Just my $0.02 on that based on a different situation I've had occur to me.
The regulation prohibits "a rifle of greater calibre than .275." While the bullet is .227, the rifle measured land to land is below .275 and is therefore fine in the restricted counties/municipalities.
I've always wondered about how they would react to a .275 Rigby. The regulations say "not greater than .275." A .275 Rigby says .275 on the rifle and caseheads but the .275 Rigby is just another name for the 7x57mm.
Hmmm, maybe I need a Rigby.
The reason why Winchester introduced the 150 grain load was too many hunters complained of meat damage from the 130's. I think if you were looking for close range shots, 150 or even 160 grain bullets would suit you fine.
- Location
- Ontariariario
Since meat destruction seems to be a common complaint and it is apparently directly related to bullet impact velocity, I'm wondering if anyone has tried those "managed recoil" loads in the .270? (or are they available in .270?)
If not, reloads loaded to a lower velocity level would do the trick , I would think.
Eric
If not, reloads loaded to a lower velocity level would do the trick , I would think.
Eric
Use the 150gr Exclusively in mine and at close range it does do alot of damage!!
Hit a small bull moose once in the backbone at about 30 yards...Took out a golf sized chunk of spine!
150 Gr Core-Lokt
150 Gr Super-X
Use a better bullet and there wouldn't be as much damage (ie nosler partition or barnes tsx)
- Location
- Chilliwack
I droped a black bear at 70yds with the .270 wsm 150gr, and indeed devistating, meat damage however was quite minimal. But in my opinion the .270 shines when it comes to those longer range shots.... and I was using the noslers for that particular bear
