Can you own too many vanilla hunting rifles?

chuck nelson said:
How is this analogy even remotely applicable?
Click to expand...

It is completely relevant expressing a distaste for something you have never tried. With the same case necked to 7mm what really is the point? 0.007" is less than a mouse sneeze.

And then again, why not...

At some point somebody put strawberry and chocolate swirls in vanilla icecream and declared it "Neopolitan," I have even had it a few times when the options were extremely limited... as I have had a few .270's when that happened to be the only chambering in the platform I was seeking.

I have no particular dislike of the .270, neither do I have any particular use for it... and it is usually low on my list of recommendations.
 
chuck nelson said:
I'll take that under advisement when considering your opinions.
Click to expand...

Is there some particular reason that you are baiting me? Have I ruffled your feathers on another thread at another time?

I have stated quite clearly several times that I have an irrational hatred for anything 270...........operative word being "irrational", ballistically it is very ho-hum in my opinion, but certainly it falls right there with the 280, 7X57, 6.5X55, 6.5 RM........and I like these cartridges. It is just my own little private prejudice which has been kicked around on here for a few years now........It's a bit of a game I've had going with Why Not? for abut 30 years...........Having said this, I do truly believe that there is nothing that the 270 is the best at and there are better cartridges for any given application and most certainly much better all around cartridges. For any use someone might choose a 270 for, I would choose either the 264 WM or 7mm RM and be using a better cartridge with either in my opinion. If recoil sensitivity was an issue I would say the 264 which is virtually identical in the same weight and shape of rifle. I personally have for many years used 300 mags for most of my thin skinned game hunting, and I can positively say that the 270 doesn't hold a candle in any category to the 300s.........but then again this is just my opinion which happens to be supported by any ballistic charts you'd care to peruse. Like I have said a few times now "There is no such thing as too dead, but there sure as hell is not dead enough"
 
c-fbmi said:
I have stated quite clearly several times that I have an irrational hatred for anything 270...........operative word being "irrational", ballistically it is very ho-hum in my opinion, but certainly it falls right there with the 280, 7X57, 6.5X55, 6.5 RM........and I like these cartridges. It is just my own little private prejudice which has been kicked around on here for a few years now........It's a bit of a game I've had going with Why Not? for abut 30 years...........Having said this, I do truly believe that there is nothing that the 270 is the best at and there are better cartridges for any given application and most certainly much better all around cartridges. For any use someone might choose a 270 for, I would choose either the 264 WM or 7mm RM and be using a better cartridge with either in my opinion. If recoil sensitivity was an issue I would say the 264 which is virtually identical in the same weight and shape of rifle. I personally have for many years used 300 mags for most of my thin skinned game hunting, and I can positively say that the 270 doesn't hold a candle in any category to the 300s.........but then again this is just my opinion which happens to be supported by any ballistic charts you'd care to peruse. Like I have said a few times now "There is no such thing as too dead, but there sure as hell is not dead enough"
Click to expand...
I'm a long-time .270 user and agree with you. It is nothing particularly special. My reasons for using it are caliber restrictions in the Southern Ontario county where I live and the easy availability of ammunition. It's not easy finding 264 WM at the local gun stores much less CTC.

Jack O'Connor puffed up the .270 to a point where you wondered if he was getting a commission on each round and his influence lingers to this day. Nostalgia is a powerful thing.
 
CB.....................JO'C was indeed being paid to extoll the virtues of the 270 Winchester. He was paid by Winchester, in the form of free rifles and hunting trips and although not as quantifiable as X$ per round he was most certainly paid. Most, if not all, gun writers of the day were writing articles at the behest of some big player and were either paid in perks or cash, for their positive reviews. It was common practice and not considered unethical at all, these writers didn't make much money for their monthly columns, certainly not enough to travel to Africa after plains game or to Mexico after desert sheep. So if Winchester wanted a write up on how their 270 performed on African plains game they sent JO'C over to whack a few on their tab and then to write them a glorious report on how wonderfully it worked....so in essence his articles were in fact commissioned by and paid for by Winchester. And everybody knew it, it was no secret, in fact it was standard practice. Although these articles were touted as independent and unbiased reviews of these products, one did not bite his master and feeder............if one wished to live long and prosper.
The 270 Winchester was and is the single greatest marketing feat in the history of firearms. No better than Mr. Newton's 256, however Mr. Newton had neither the marketing skills nor the deep pockets of the Winchester machine. Not as good in most estimations as the 30-06 as an all around cartridge, which of course was destined to be a big hit because of it's military heritage. Winchester went about creating a niche, which may or may not have existed, but their marketing strategy and execution was flawless.
I give Winchester a huge thumbs up, if not for their mediocre cartridge, most definitely for their branding and marketing skills. Much the same can be said of another design and marketing success of Winchesters, the 300 WM.......a relatively late comer on the belted 30 cal line up, it took over and became the leader of the pack of the 300 mags. Again not that it really does anything better than the 308 NM and certainly not better than the 300 Wby mag, it still outsells both and has over shadowed the original 300 H&H to the point the latter hardly exists anymore. Again it's all about marketing, price point and availability..........
 
Last edited:
Infomercials have been around for a long time in one form or another and are still alive and very well.


I liked reading Jack's stories, esp the ones about the Yukon and the Cassiar Mtns.
 
... "less is more"...two or three great rifles can beat a full safe (or two) of mediocre rifles.



heronfish said:
Ive recently found myself in a situation i never expected to be in. It almost seems as if I own too many plain jane hunting rifles, all of which will do exactly the same job on exactly the same game. 30-06, 308 270 etc etc.
The problem arises and none of these rifles get shot, heck, there is several that have yet to be sighted in, let alone reloaded for. None of these are what you would consider budget rifles, but none are expensive either, and all carry mediocre glass like Leupolds vx1 and vx2s.

Im sure this has been asked before, but would it be preferable to divulge of these in favour of one very expensive set up, or is accumulating without reason perfectly acceptable? Or both?
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom