.270 win or .270wsm....bought one....pics!

I've shot both. I can say they do kick more. The law of physics says so. If you push an equal weight projectile out of the same weight gun at higher velocities means more kick. If the rifle is capable of '100' yards more range, I can almost garuntee most shooters are not. The WSM does give you added velocities, but I promise that a deer shot isn't going to care. What kind of range are you talking about in Ontario? I've never been there, but I know it's covered in tree's. Out here, you can see a long ways off, but 300 yards is my maximum where I know I feel comfortable enough hitting somthing. I've practised out to 400, but that's just for fun. And inside those 300 yards, a .270 Win, a .308 Win, a 6.5x55 or a 7mm Ultramag will all do the same job. With a 200 yard zero, hold on hair. If your too far, get closer. With that being said, I don't feel a wsm is worth arguing over. What they did is give the shooting industry a shot in the arm and us as shooters more choices. That's what makes this fun. You can choose whatever your little ol' heart desires, and nobody can say otherwise. If you do go the Wsm route, the fellow I know who shoot's one almost exclusive swears by Barnes triple shock bullets. For my regular .270, none of my handloads shot better than Federals cheapy load with the 130 grain softpoint. Good luck.
 
The .270 win. is one of those calibres that can really benifit from a 26" barrel. check it out and you will be surprised what an extra 2" can do through the chrony.
 
I was shopping for a .270 as well this winter. I settled on the .270 Winchester for a couple of reasons. First and foremost I traded for a gorgeous little Husqvarna Model 1000 in .270 Winchester:) I also hunt with the same group of guys every year and in both groups there are several .270 shooters so should I ever forget say a box of shells:bangHead: at least some one in camp has some. I personally think the Tikka T3 in 270WSM is an awsome set up but the same rifle in a .270 Winchester would be equally as cool... I reload so I it really wasn't an ammo issue more that I found a rifle I liked. One of my buddies picked up a Model Seven CDL in .270 WSM and I must say that is one nice little rifle.............
 
I picked up a Kimber 8400 in the 270 WSM last year and loved how it performed on the 2 whitetails I shot this past fall. Since then I have sold off my 7mm mag and have another Kimber Montana 270 WSM otw. I love this calibre and I am sure it is here to stay.
 
BIGREDD said:
Now that you have succeeded in another hijack... how about gettin back on the thread topic with some of your extensive first hand knowledge and experience with the .270WSM Super?
Click to expand...
Yea .... lets get back on topic. Sorry for the hijack while cracking a couple of jokes. :)

There's no doubt in my mind whatsoever that the WSM gets more velocity than the standard Winchester round, but if velocity alone was the deciding factor, why not buy a 270Weatherby?

I doubt that if all things being equal the WSM would be more accurate in a modern firearm than a Win, and I also doubt very much that the WSM would recoil less at higher velocity. Basic phyics wouldn't support this theory.

So there you have it ......... The WSM is a better round in some respects, but how much of that advantage really translates into everyday hunting, not the hunting found between the pages of an advertising based hunting magazine is not that much. I never did say it wasn't a successful cartridge. Only time will tell that and the 270Win is approaching 100yrs and still going strong.

You like it? You need the small advantage it offers? ...... Go buy it? I got not problem with that.

I'm serious ...... :wave:
 
For 99% of hunting, who cares what the cartridge is. If you can shoot it well, and hit your target, it won't matter if its long, ultra long, short or super short. I didn't buy one because it was short, but because I like it and the price was right. :cool:
 
BIGREDD said:
You got one thing right... I am right.:p
Kinder gentler internet personality...... that is just boring.:rolleyes:
And copying my sign off... could be construed as a sign of limited imagination on your part. But hey if it gets you some points on the leaderboard... why not.:rolleyes:
Now that you have succeeded in another hijack... how about gettin back on the thread topic with some of your extensive first hand knowledge and experience with the .270WSM Super?
Damn I forgot... you got nuthin.:rockOn:
I really am serious... not a pretender. :popCorn:
Click to expand...

Here we go again :rolleyes:

Trolling%202.jpg


I wonder how many pages Bighead can carry this one on for. Considering he pretty much starts arguing with himself before it is all over :rolleyes:

:popCorn:
 
I had both and sold both and am now goin back to a 270 win. Why? Ammo is more available, it's more common and I thought it had less recoil than the wsm (in my experience), it kills quite effectively (both did). Plus I found a dandy used one in a win m70 for way less money than I could find a used wsm.
 
If I had use for a rifle chambered in a .277 caliber cartridge, I woudl get the 270WSM, although i have always liked the 270 Win.

Why? It interests me more than the 270 WIn, it's not any more expensive to load for, and possibly the tooling used to build the rifle may be more modern and less worn, which may result in better fit.

They are both good cartridges, if you are one of the weak and use facotry ammo, you may find the WSM a little more pricey. It's up to you if extra cost of ammo is important or not.
 
OK, I'll bite :wave:

BIGREDD said:
The Short Mag is faster and flatter and will add well over 100 yards to your effective kiling range on big game, considerably more on varmints.
Click to expand...

.270 Win (130 grain)
MV: 3,140
Drop at 300 (zeroed at 150): -8.9"
MPBR: 305 yards
Recoil: 16 ft/lbs

.270 WSM (130 grain)
MV: 3,285
Drop at 300 (zeroed at 150): -8.2"
MPBR: 320 yards
Recoil: 18.7 ft/lbs

So in exchange for burning 18% more powder and suffering a 17% increase in recoil over the .270 Win, you're getting less than 5% increase in velocity, less than 5% increase in MPBR and a reduction in drop @ 300 yards of less than an inch.

And as a third data point:

7mm Rem Mag (140 grain)
MV: 3175
Drop at 300 (zeroed at 150): -8.4"
MPBR: 310 yards
Recoil: 19.3 ft/lbs

...
BIGREDD said:
It has no more recoil than a standard .270 in rifles of the same weight and in many cases less recoil!
Click to expand...
:slap:

BIGREDD said:
Many rifles chambered for the short Mag... will invariably need less barrel length to develop their advertised speeds!
Click to expand...
:slap:
 
Weigh out the positives with the negatives and make your decision as game will not know the difference and in the real world most will never appreciate any marginal gain. If OTC ammo is a source of concern for the 270wsm where you live and hunt then why subject yourself to this limiting factor, if not handle both and pick the one that makes your heart pitt a' patt r'!

I already have 2 270win and see no need for a wsm in lieu or as well. If starting from stratch I may consider the 270wsm but it'd be more of the "new/cool" factor then terminal performance related (based on in field experience between the 2 - "hill of beans" comes to mind:rolleyes: ).
 
I haven't seen anyone mention any accuracy traits for either of these cartridges, I understand that when the 270 Win came out that rifle manufacturers had to be a little more exact when it came to building the chambers themselves since this wasn't a military round that had been beaten to death for accuracy like the .308 & 223.

How true does this follow the above statement? and how do those of you that have used either or either cartridge find these to be for accuracy as a cartridge.

I saw something here mentioned about the tooling used would be newer for these newer WSM's, hence a better fit. That could be true, but even tooling wears out and I would assume that QC would have it replaced when tolerances reached their max, so some guns could be a better fit than others.

I know that the 270WSM does have a slight increase in velocity and case capacity, being that it is newer, I would think that after some time it could be loaded up a bit more than what theses reloading books say (since the books seem to be rather conservative on the their load data), I would have to say that the 270 wsm does have the edge over it's father cartridge, I also see that most magazines will still hold just as many rounds in the 270WSM as the 270 Win , unlike some of the other wsm's.

There definitely will be an increase in ammo cost with these little fatties, but only by pennies (reloads) factory selling stuff is marked up over the existing stuff, again because it's new and the tools used in the factory are new and cost more then they did years ago, plus the marketing hype.

I believe that the 270WSM will be here for years to come, it seems that any rifle cartridge that has been around for decades have had the opportunity to be put through the tests time after time after time, leaving very little room to improve without drastic or mild changes to the design, these little fat cases have some testings still to face for many years to come by the manufacturers as well as the shooters themselves before there is little left to tell. (about 85% has been told already it's the 15% that is the long test of time to be figured out still - like anything).

I also believe that some of these WSM's are not going to be so popular, but won't fall of the face of Earth either, wildcatters might be having a hay day with these new cases, who knows what might come from them. How about a 6.5-270WSM ????

But really what are the accuracy traits of these two cartridges in comparableness to one another?
 
B.Ruddick said:
I haven't seen anyone mention any accuracy traits for either of these cartridges, I understand that when the 270 Win came out that rifle manufacturers had to be a little more exact when it came to building the chambers themselves since this wasn't a military round that had been beaten to death for accuracy like the .308 & 223.

How true does this follow the above statement? and how do those of you that have used either or either cartridge find these to be for accuracy as a cartridge.

I saw something here mentioned about the tooling used would be newer for these newer WSM's, hence a better fit. That could be true, but even tooling wears out and I would assume that QC would have it replaced when tolerances reached their max, so some guns could be a better fit than others.

I know that the 270WSM does have a slight increase in velocity and case capacity, being that it is newer, I would think that after some time it could be loaded up a bit more than what theses reloading books say (since the books seem to be rather conservative on the their load data), I would have to say that the 270 wsm does have the edge over it's father cartridge, I also see that most magazines will still hold just as many rounds in the 270WSM as the 270 Win , unlike some of the other wsm's.

There definitely will be an increase in ammo cost with these little fatties, but only by pennies (reloads) factory selling stuff is marked up over the existing stuff, again because it's new and the tools used in the factory are new and cost more then they did years ago, plus the marketing hype.

I believe that the 270WSM will be here for years to come, it seems that any rifle cartridge that has been around for decades have had the opportunity to be put through the tests time after time after time, leaving very little room to improve without drastic or mild changes to the design, these little fat cases have some testings still to face for many years to come by the manufacturers as well as the shooters themselves before there is little left to tell. (about 85% has been told already it's the 15% that is the long test of time to be figured out still - like anything).

I also believe that some of these WSM's are not going to be so popular, but won't fall of the face of Earth either, wildcatters might be having a hay day with these new cases, who knows what might come from them. How about a 6.5-270WSM ????

But really what are the accuracy traits of these two cartridges in comparableness to one another?
Click to expand...


the 308 and 223 came out along time after the .270
 
Before I bought a .277 rifle last winter, I tried both the 270win and the 270wsm in Tikka's. I found the 270 was super accurate and more comfortable to shoot. Although the wsm looks better on paper, it was clear the 270win was better for me.

For anything my 270 can't handle, I'll be looking for a larger caliber, not just an extra 150fps.
 
I really have no use for the 270's. I think that they are betwix and between, to small for some applications and to large for others. There are to many rounds on either side that do the job better.

just my opinion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom