.270win V .303brit

rbasm

Member
Rating - 85.7%
12   2   0
Location
vancouver island
I've read a lot about the versatility of the .270 but I have the opportunity to pick up a .303 for quite a bit less then I would spend on a .270 so I was wondering if the .303 is a worthy option for deer hunting.
 
Most .303's are Lee Enfileds. Capable guns but they are old and in varying quality these days. And hard to mount a scope if it isn't already drilled and tapped...

However, on the Island, your shots are probably 50 yards due to the thick terrain, so it should work fine.

If you are planning on 300 yard shots, the .270 in a modern hunting rifle may be a better option.
 
Both are very capable of moose, with the 303 having the edge, 270 gets there fast and does the job. 303 is slower, but hits harder.

Ah.... no.

Of the two cartridges, the .270 is the more capable hunting round.

The .303 is certainly a decent deer cartridge, but, as has been pointed out, the old Enfields it usually comes in are a real hit and miss proposition. Unless you can have the gun checked out by someone who knows about headspace, you may be buying yourself a wall hanger. Safety, reliability, and accuracy need to be carefully assessed before I would recommend an old Enfield.
 
In practical terms the .270 is a more versatile cartridge which ballistically eclipses the .303 when factory ammo is compared. The .303 handloaded in a modern strong rifle, such as a P-14 Enfield or the upcoming Ruger #1 is another matter entirely and would be the equal of the .308 and a .308 driving a 150 at 2800 is nothing to sneeze at.
 
I've read a lot about the versatility of the .270 but I have the opportunity to pick up a .303 for quite a bit less then I would spend on a .270 so I was wondering if the .303 is a worthy option for deer hunting.
Why ask?

The one I've been offered has a cheap bushnell on it. Maybe I'll pick it up and hit the range. can't hurt.
Sounds like you've already decided.

.
 
My first few deer were taken with a .303. I've also taken a few with a .270. As with any calibre/rifle/scope/bullet comparison, the only true variable is the hunter. If you can hit what you're aiming at, then it doesn't matter what you're shooting. Get what you want and spend the extra money on ammo and practice.

Erik.
 
When I 1st started the hunting lifestyle and went to but my 1st rifle (Newcastle NB) I went right past the typical L.E. used rifle rack and went straight to a Swede 38 6.5x55.
I had my share of .303's and IMHO although they have taken thier fair share, the Lee Enfield needs to be retired. There are too many deals on centerfires these days to consider a .303 as a 1st rifle etc etc.
My .02 cents
 
I've read a lot about the versatility of the .270 but I have the opportunity to pick up a .303 for quite a bit less then I would spend on a .270 so I was wondering if the .303 is a worthy option for deer hunting.
Buy the .303 if it's $200.00 or less with the scope. it's a good deer + moose caliber out to 200 yards.
 
Take it from an old guy

A few decades ago, nearly anyone who started hunting began with either a 303 or a 30-30.
With these two rifles you would hunt Deer, Moose, Bear... whatever.
However we didn't commonly have 4 wheel drive either, or gortex, or gps, or camo for that matter!
Point is we have progressed.
If you want a 303 because it's a cool old gun...GREAT! buy it, it will kill.
But, you can't buy premium bullets for it, and as hunting improvements go that is a huge one!
You owe the animal the cleanest kill you can deliver, pay the extra $200 (you'd spend more than that in gas in one hunting season anyway) and get something that was not designed in the 1800s... then later when you want a second firearm buy a 303 cause they're kind of cool!
Just my opinion.
 
I highly doubt that a moose or deer would be able to tell the difference between being shot with a .270 or a .303. Either would make a fine first (or fiftieth!) rifle.

If you want premium bullets there are several options available for .303, including Barnes TSX, Woodleigh Weldcore, and Rhino Solid Shank (I'm sure that there are others as well). Are they really necessary? I don't think so. I've seen lots of game felled to the basic Winchester/Remington/Federal Wal-Mart special ammo but they're out there if you want them (I've had great success with the Barnes TSX in my 6.5x55, and have heard good things about it in .303).

Over the lifetime of the rifle the price difference is inconsequential. The only way that price should factor in is if the price of entry on one rifle would prevent you from buying a rifle at all. Either rifle will readily take any game in this country short of bison or big bears (though in a pinch they would do for that too). I would suggest that you try both rifles and buy the one that you like the best, or save yourself the decision and buy both!
 
if you want the .303 cause its cool, get it . but if you are looking scope it for hunting, save your pennies and get a hunting rifle. you have a good factory drilled and taped gun right out of the box for about G note. but the time you bubba another .303 with a stock, tap and drill job, mount, bedding, scope, barel shorting( or custom). you will have spend at least a G note( i have a very nice expenice one myself). My rem 700 is a good 4 pounds less then my custom enfield( im not 16 anymore 4 LBS after 8-10 hours of hunting make's a big difference).
 
One can sporterize a Lee-Enfield quite cheaply if one desires, and without the aid of a gunsmith.

http://ww .thecountryshed.com/enfield_scope_mounts.htm

http://ww .brownells.com/.aspx/pid=79/Product/ENFIELD_MONTE_CARLO_SPORTER_STOCK
 
270 or 303

I guess im an old guy. I shot my first and many deer with one. At one time I was a 303 slut constantly trying to get better accuracy, reloading to get better velocity etc. :(I found I coundn't improve velocity and stilll have accuracy). I had a gunsmith friend who was a 2nd ww vet and he helped me with my projects. Eventually, on his recommendation, I bought a winchester featherweight, and then a rem 700 both in 270. Out of the box both the remington and the winchester were a far better hunting rifle than any of the projects that I had spent a lot of money on. In my case they were more nostalgia than practical. The new sporters have a better trigger, feed better and will have a more practical safety for scope use than the 303.
 
Back
Top Bottom