270 wsm

Over the years I've had quite a few .270 Winchester rifles. For a couple of years I also had a .270 WSM. I found mine to be quirky to deal with and accuracy was no better than any number of earlier .270 Winchesters. Presently I do not own anything in .270. I may have one more before I'm finished and if I do it will be in .270 Winchester in something with a 24 inch barrel. The difference then with a WSM will be small enough to be of no consequence.

Jim
 
I like mine and I was looking for a fast mountain rifle that I could carry and not worry about running into a moose, caribou or a bear. Mine is in a light rifle and it has a sharp recoil which I was not expecting but is okay once you get used to it.
 
I picked up a Finnlite in 270WSM as the first Hunting Rifle I bought after getting my PAL. Perhaps I was drawn in by the hype at the time of and leading up to the purchase. I still have it and use it ... I've stretched it out at the range to 300m-400M even cracked the gong a little bit at 600M for fun but I struggle with my glass at that distance for sure. I've harvested 4 White tail bucks with it all beyond 75m with 2 of them pushing 250-300M.

The rifle itself is very accurate , like many guys it's likely more accurate than I am. it seems to like almost whatever I feeed it .. I had good luck with Federal ammo loaded with 110 grain barnes Winchester loaded with 140 grain Acubonds and Winchester loaded with 130 grain XP3 .... This last one is basically all I've fed it in the last 2 years and I'd use it for any animal in NB.

I am far from an expert but it seems that many of the rifles chambered for short Magnums are not chambered on short actions but rather long actions with magazine spacers so the rifle is not more compact and it doesn't have the stiffer shorter action -- but still has a shorter throw I suppose -- anyway I'm not saying those rifles are shooting these rounds any differently .. I'm just saying that I don't understand how one would get that advantage (percieved or otherwise) if the rifle they buy is built on a long or standard reciever.

I expect I'll keep the rifle , I like it and I like the round .... but it is pricy , and I could have the same rifle in 308 and have something that's cheaper to feed and just as effective.

I do know that for my purposes I don't need another magnum (I likely didn't need this one) .... but what I mean is that if I was Drawn for moose for example I wouldn't change a thing , try and find a 150 grain bullet none of it .

I do think the WSM will be around for as long as I am and the ammo is becomming more and more available in stores every year.
 
tylerjwitty said:
I will bet against you on that . Most of the old fudds will be dead by than and less stubborn people will be willing to use more advanced designs .

Has the wsm not been around for 10 plus years already?
Click to expand...

What have old fudds have to do with the popularity of the WSMs ??
I think I'm probably an old fudd ( 68 ) by your terms and I have probably had more WSM chambered rifles than you without a negative opinion of any, however in the field when I have met other hunters or at the rifle range there have always been negative opinions coming from other much younger men...... and especially those that have never owned or used a short mag. These are the buyers / owners of the future and they decide on the outcome of the short mags..... not me.
 
270wsm seems VERY popular in europe (France in particular) for both running game and long distance stalking...They shoot at running boar and red deer with that caliber all the time! It seems to really stomp them!

Personnaly I would just buy the regular .270 if available in the rifle you want. More ammo availability, cheaper to shoot (almost half price$), uses less powder, less recoil and usually rifle holds extra round in the magazine!
 
tylerjwitty said:
I will bet against you on that . Most of the old fudds will be dead by than and less stubborn people will be willing to use more advanced designs .

Has the wsm not been around for 10 plus years already?
Click to expand...

Nothing really advanced about the cartridge, just another marketing ploy.

Grizz
 
Brad34340 said:
I am far from an expert but it seems that many of the rifles chambered for short Magnums are not chambered on short actions but rather long actions with magazine spacers so the rifle is not more compact and it doesn't have the stiffer shorter action -- but still has a shorter throw I suppose -- anyway I'm not saying those rifles are shooting these rounds any differently .. I'm just saying that I don't understand how one would get that advantage (percieved or otherwise) if the rifle they buy is built on a long or standard reciever.
Click to expand...

This varies by manufacturer/model. I know the Tikka T3 for example has only one receiver size, they just block the magazine for short action cartridges, but others like the Rem 700 and Browning A-Bolt actually have a shorter action with a shorter loading/ejection port and therefore a shorter bolt throw.
 
I bought mine because of the 270 rule in s.ont for small game, and it was bigger and better then the old 270 at the time, and it could play double duty for deer or moose if needed( not my first choise but worthy back up rifle) not sure the pros out weight the cons of the good old 270! But I still have the wsm
 
I have a .270 WSM Tikka T3 Lite for long range deer hunting in open cover.

Its accurate and kicks hard. I had a better recoil pad plus muzzle brake added, and the trigger adjusted for a lighter pull. I use reloads to keep costs down.
 
Last edited:
Must say, my err.. wife's nice little 270wsm Browning Mountain Ti is definitely become my favourite hunting tool.
I've shot elk, deer and a mountain goat all at longer distances with 130 grain Barnes or Trophy Copper (Federal) and she's done well
on deer with the 110 grain. Hardly notice the kick and shoots flat. With the 2.5 - 10 Leica ballistic scope it ranges far and accurate.
So when ever she stays back I always prefer it over the old heavy 300win mag as it feels twice as heavy.
I don't reload yet but feel like i may not need to as the groups are superb.
Al
 
A great little round for deer, elk, moose, sheep n goats, black bear, caribou...everything but the big bears. Does everything the .270 does but with a bit more energy at long range and a bit flatter trajectory. The only drawback is higher price for ammo and not found everywhere.
 
IMO it doesn't offer any practical advantage to a .270 Winchester. And if you need more jam than the .270 Win, you should step up to something with a bigger hole in the bore.
 
1899 said:
IMO it doesn't offer any practical advantage to a .270 Winchester. And if you need more jam than the .270 Win, you should step up to something with a bigger hole in the bore.
Click to expand...

Or move up a notch and get rid of the .270 Win.:p Or if you don't have a .270 Win skip it altogether and start at the .270 WSM.

I'll frequently shoot all my .270s together at my farm range. The 2 Wins and WSM both have B&C reticles and with WSM that simple little system gets me 100 yards farther out. Not bad for adding 8 grains of powder and changing two letters. That's the sort of thing that is very usable in the field. The little WSM gives my .270 Weatherby a run for its money.
 
One of the more interesting new cartridges to come out in the last few years (actually quite a few years now....the 270WSM was introduced 12 years ago!)

I don't own one, but It's a great cartridge, very popular and getting more popular all the time. People seem to be picking it to fufill the roles that the .270Win, .280 and 7RM used to fill. I would use it anywhere I would use a 7RM, 270, 30-06 etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom