308 Winchester or 270?

You cannot go wrong with either, but ammo is more readily available for the .308. Having said that the 270 can drop anything and can be used in caliber restricted area like Southern Ontario.
 
I've radar'd factory 27 Win 140gr Interlock ammo from Hornady @ 2895 fps from 24" Remington 700. Subtract 60 fps for a 22" barrel and that bullet would hit 400y with 2100 fps / 1375 ft lbs, and that would be at 2500' above sea level. It gets worse the lower you go
 
todbartell said:
I've radar'd factory 27 Win 140gr Interlock ammo from Hornady @ 2895 fps from 24" Remington 700. Subtract 60 fps for a 22" barrel and that bullet would hit 400y with 2100 fps / 1375 ft lbs, and that would be at 2500' above sea level. It gets worse the lower you go
Click to expand...

That isn't factory ammo, this is from my reloads using Hornady bullets, shot from my 24" barrel. The information I posted is from the hornady ballistics charts, and I chronied my loads as well. Im at sea level. Its easy to get 3100 fps with a 130 gr bullet as you already know and 3000 fps is doable with 140 grainers.
 
My shoulder disagrees! ;)
But, if you want to compare recoil, you should have the same weight gun.

Ardent said:
Actually in most loads a .308 has fractionally more recoil than a .270. A 7.5lb .308 shooting a 165gr at 2,700fps has 10% more recoil than an 8lb .270 shooting a 130gr at 3,140fps. The .270 load will be more impressive on game too.
Click to expand...
 
LarryG said:
My shoulder disagrees! ;)
But, if you want to compare recoil, you should have the same weight gun.
Click to expand...

I took that to reflect the often cited advantage, characteristic?, preference?, feature? of the .308 being available in short-action rifles that might weigh a bit less, plus have a bigger hole in the same barrel.
 
dogleg said:
i took that to reflect the often cited advantage, characteristic?, preference?, feature? Of the .308 being available in short-action rifles that might weigh a bit less, plus have a bigger hole in the same barrel.
Click to expand...

x2...
 
hoytcanon said:
x2...
Click to expand...

Well, you're losing me here. I said the 7-08 had the least recoil, 308 had more and 270 had most of the three.
This was correct in the same weight gun, typical loads.

IMHO, If you want an accurate comparison of everything between the two or three choices being discussed, you'll need to use the same weight gun, bullet weight and types, then compare drops, velocity, energy, etc. There are online calculators for all this. Since the OP didn't ask, I didn't bother taking it that far.

The action length, overall weight and length, bore size, hydrostatic effects of a faster bullet etc are all different issues.

My point is a that a lighter, shorter gun with a recoil that I can handle is my preference. The one I mentioned is my preference. That's it. I had a 270 Tikka T3 and sold it, because even with a recoil pad, it was too close to my recoil limit after a few shots. It is unlikely I'll buy another.

If you like the 270 more and prefer it's performance etc, that's your choice. And that's ok. I'm out.
 
LarryG said:
Well, you're losing me here. I said the 7-08 had the least recoil, 308 had more and 270 had most of the three.
This was correct in the same weight gun, typical loads.

IMHO, If you want an accurate comparison of everything between the two or three choices being discussed, you'll need to use the same weight gun, bullet weight and types, then compare drops, velocity, energy, etc. There are online calculators for all this. Since the OP didn't ask, I didn't bother taking it that far.

The action length, overall weight and length, bore size, hydrostatic effects of a faster bullet etc are all different issues.

My point is a that a lighter, shorter gun with a recoil that I can handle is my preference. The one I mentioned is my preference. That's it. I had a 270 Tikka T3 and sold it, because even with a recoil pad, it was too close to my recoil limit after a few shots. It is unlikely I'll buy another.

If you like the 270 more and prefer it's performance etc, that's your choice. And that's ok. I'm out.
Click to expand...

Take a deep breath Larry... it was a comment on the rationale behind comparing rifles of differing weights. Personally I prefer the .308... don't own anything in .277"... but if you have to make a choice between .308 and .270 based on recoil, something is amiss.
 
Quote Originally Posted by LarryG View Post
Well, you're losing m e here. I said the 7-08 had the least recoil, 308 had more and 270 had most of the three.
This was correct in the same weight gun, typical loads.
Click to expand...

Another way to look at it is that if you walked into a gun store and bought three rifles of the same model in 7-08, 308 and 270 Win they wouldn't all weigh the same. The .270 is going to weigh more than the .308.

I have no real love for any of three, although I have them all. 4 308s, 2 270 Wins and a single 7-08 that my daughter shoots. As far as recoil goes, none of them have enough to mention. 30s and 7s dont start to get interesting when you load 20-40 grains more powder in them.
 
177 posts and no one has mentioned luck or superstition!!! I believe that hunters have been superstitious for hundreds of years. What we do just prior to the hunt, what we wear, what knife, and yes, what caliber is "lucky" for us. The internet provides us with technical data with touch of a finger or two, but I am thinking that most of the 177 posts above try to justify choice based on data when in reality we are likely to choose between 308 and 270 based on our luck with either caliber. I know that I have been way more "lucky" with 270 rifles than 308 rifles. This based on over 50 years of shooting both calibers in more than a few rifles in each caliber.The last 30 years have been pretty much 270 years.......some custom Hiptmayer rifles, some Tikka model 65 DL, some tang safety 77 Rugers, and quite a few older Remington model 700 rifles. Mostly eastern Canada whitetails with a few Saskatchewan whitetails mixed in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom