Long vs Short Action??????

thanks for the help everyone. i plan on visting the local gun shop and handling both the win and wsm in 270 and see which one feels better. i will also check the availability of ammo for both.

i am leaning towards a win.....no one i know owns a wsm....and if i am in need of some extra rounds in the bush it would make things easier. i beleive the win is cheaper also.

please do not hesitate to continue this discuusion....i am new and just learning so all the info is greatly appreciated.
 
.270win/wsm is an excellent choice. Deer, Moose, Bear, Elk, pronghorn. you can do it all.

we've had very good luck with the 150gr Hornady SP and 150gr Nosler Partitions.

beware the factory loads with the 150gr Sierra Game Kings. they are explosive! shot a bear at 270ish yrds with one last year. bullet didn't exit and was found in approx 10 little peices.
 
Amphibious said:
oh I'm a naysayer alright. don;t have anything against shortmags, but have EVERYTHING afgainst rookies getting opinion when at that stage in their sporting development they should be getting realistic advice!
Click to expand...

Apparently I'm a naysayer too. Too bad, it appears that 20+ years handloading experience with over 70 rifles, 15 or so custom on long and short actions pales in experience to the "cut and paste" experts so prevalent here.

If you want a short mag, great. But to brow beat others because of your opinion and rhetoric gets old. Show me an animal that will ever know the difference between a 270Win and the 270WSM, and we can talk. Even better, we can compare the mighty WSM to my 28" custom barreled 270Wby on a Ruger #1. Might be illuminating, but would hate for empirical results to get in the way. Cartridge arguments can be entertaining, but make damned little difference once you drop the computer mouse and go to the field.
 
reeler said:
i am leaning towards a win.....no one i know owns a wsm....and if i am in need of some extra rounds in the bush it would make things easier. i beleive the win is cheaper also.
Click to expand...

You should always have enough ammo with you. Different brands and different weight bullets (even of the same brand) will shoot to a different point of impact. You will need to do lots of testing to determine which ammo shoots best in your rifle. You may get lucky and not have to try more than a few different boxes. Then always make sure you have enough ammo. You will also need to practice lots to become proficient enough to dispatch game. Everyone misses or wounds animals at some point, but why increase the likelihood by using someone else's ammo?

You wouldn't go for a hunt without your rifle right? In the same way you shouldn't go hunting without ammo. This will be my 21st year of big game hunting. I have NEVER "forgotten" my ammo.
 
Reeler,

Kind of side tracked there. I load for a couple of friends here in central BC, and they have taken deer, moose, bear and one elk with standard bullets in 270 Winchesters. In this case the 150 Hornady spire point. Either case, WSM or the older Winchester with a 270 bullet is very hard to beat for a hunting rifle. In fact, if it wasn't for grizzly here chances are good that is all I would carry.

Pick the rifle you like, and go hunting! ;)
 
Well, *all else being equal* a short action shoudl be more *accurate* than a long action.

This is not to say long actions cannot be accurate, all mine are. And it is unlikely htat in a sporting rifle anyone could tell the difference.

I've shot both the 270 and 270WS< and the recoil difference isn't extreme. FWIW, the 270 WSM I shot was very accurate, right out of the box, with facotry ammo. (MDL 70)

For anew hunter, that does not handload, I'd suggest the 270 WIn, simply for ammo reasons- but nly if cost is an issue.

But there is not questiont hat the 270 WSM is a higher velocity cartridge, and if I was in the market for a 277 cal rifle, I woud get the 270WSM.
 
Good for you reeler!

Never depend on someone else, even a good buddy, to have what you may forget to bring hunting. Aim to have what they might have forgot instead.
 
Here goes......
One deer rifle, either 270 Win or 270WSM and you don't reload, right?
My advice is go the 270 Win.
Ammo is very easy to get and cheaper, not to mention the myriad amount of premium ammo available from different companies for this cartridge.
Difference in performance in the real world, at least until you become more experienced, is negligible.
My own preference is for a 270WSM, but I reload, already own a number of rifles and hanker after something a little different.
 
Amphibious said:
purely THEORY. you're forgetting so many Variables! like Barrel Quality, action design, etc.


if the above quote was true one of those little Norinco Bushmasters in 7.62x39 would be more accurate then my .270win. doubtful!

there is nothing the shortmags can do that wasn't being done before. except fit in a smaller rifle.


if you want to buy a short mag, buy a shortmag. but Don't get sold on the belief that a .270wsm will kill any better then a .270win in 99.9% of hunting situations.

oh I'm a naysayer alright. don;t have anything against shortmags, but have EVERYTHING afgainst rookies getting opinion when at that stage in their sporting development they should be getting realistic advice!
Click to expand...

THEORY... DID YOU SAY THEORY....:rolleyes:

You kill me Phib.... in your world you are right... and thousands of benchrest shooters that use short fat PPC cartridges for thier inherent accuracy are wrong. :confused:
Never mind the fact Lazzaroni, Winchester, Remington in thier quest for shorter lighter and faster rifles that are more accurate have all used this PROVEN Short Fat Technology to develop thier new generation cartridges.:D

You keep giving advice to the rookies Phib... you sound like one yourself lately.:p
 
Amphibious said:
supposed those benchrest shooters are using off the shelf rifles to eh Red? :confused: :rolleyes:

In a factory rifle in a hunting senario, all this short action is better then long action is BULL####.

B U L L S H I T (just incase you have trouble reading this post too)

and don't preach Lazeroni. you forget more then half of his inventory?

http://www.lazzeroni.com/ct_lacart.htm don't look short and fat to me! and if their accuracy was in question you think he would still be chambering them?


Winchester? Rem? Lighter Rifles? again, HUNTING scenario's. Half a pound is a NON-ISSUE. and a new shooter prolly won't be chasing goats.

Nothing wrong with buying a shortmag, if it mkes your willy hard, give'r. But better? time to put down the crack. ;)
Click to expand...

Your argument is baseless... short actions Like the RSAUM ,WSSM and the WSM are stiffer and more accurate than the longer versions of the same cartridges... it is not bull####.... it is a fact! :redface:
Benchrest shooters have proved that the short fat efficient cartridges are THE MOST ACCURATE for competition, I think accuracy is something we all strive for as hunters don't you! And no, you don't have to reload these type of cartridges yourself... the same efficiency and accuracy is available in factory loaded hunting cartridges as WSM, RSAUM and WSSM right off the shelf.... hey another fact! :eek:
Your lame "hunting scenario" argument is without merit... if that was true then we would all be fine with lever 30-30's now wouldnt we...:rolleyes:
Lazzaroni uses the fat, straight case, sharp shouldered design like the short mags in all his cartridges... because it works. He tends to operate way over-bore with case capacity but the theory is sound.... he gets speed energy and accuracy... all of which are desireable for long range hunting... this too is a fact!
Half a pound in weight is a huge issue for many hunters... holy crap you should know the value of a lightwieght rifle living in the wide and wild west. I suppose if your only hunting out the window of a truck it is not important, but I seriously doubt you are a truck hunter bud.:)
STIFFER!... MORE ACCURATE!... LIGHTER!... FASTER!... LESS RECOIL!... BETTER? ... ALL DAY LONG:D

How about a factual argument for your position... you got nothing brother... except deflection and nonsense.:)
Crack:confused: :rolleyes: ... I like to debate with you Phib although it's not very challenging... but lets try to keep it civil.:cool:
 
PEI ROB said:
Don't worry about it. Well, unless you go with a 270WSM. A 270 feeds really well and wsm's are normally feel jumpy due to the sharp shoulder and size difference between the caliber diameter and the shoulder diameter. Put the two in a head to head test and you'll see the difference.
Click to expand...

I have owned both the .270 win and .270 wsm and find the wsm superier to the original .270. I like the fact that I get more velocity and have a short action. Using a 140 gr Accubond will take anything up to an elk and seems to be the standard with the 270 wsm. If you do decide on the .270 its still an awsome cartridge and will do as much as a short mag just not as fast.

Have you considered a .270 Weatherby?? After hearing WhyNot's report on his I think it would be an aswome whitetail gun at real long ranges.

Cheers
 
Bigredd, in your experience with long and short actions just what level of accuracy have you gotten from both, and what difference would you expect of the two in a hunting configuration rifle?

What level of accuracy, velocity and case life are you getting with your short fats?
 
Last edited:
Buy a 270 Winchester, it will do everything the 270 WSM will do with less fuss, and will be just as accurate. The Short/Long action debate is simply null and void when looking at a hunting rifle's accuracy. The difference between bullets, barrels, bedding job, stock design, and trigger quality will play more of a role in accuracy than action length.

BigRedd... if the Short Mag case design is so efficient, please explain to us common folk how the 280 Ackley Improved gets identical velocities as the 7 SAUM with 1-2 gr less powder... when their case capacity is virtually identical?

By your theory, that super long powder column of the 280AI should be trounced by the 7SAUM?

Oh yeah, BTW - Do you think Winchester, Lazzeroni, and Remington came up with the Short/Fat idea because it was the answer to a problem, or to figure out a way to sell more rifles?

280_ACKLEY
 
280_ACKLEY said:
BigRedd... if the Short Mag case design is so efficient, please explain to us common folk how the 280 Ackley Improved gets identical velocities as the 7 SAUM with 1-2 gr less powder... when their case capacity is virtually identical?

By your theory, that super long powder column of the 280AI should be trounced by the 7SAUM?280_ACKLEY
Click to expand...

Careful Ackley, I asked that a while back with the 300WSM vs the H&H, and was asked, "What has the H&H got to do with anything??"
 
Thanks Ackley for bringing the .280 Ackley Improved into the argument...
Even the "common folk" understand the concept of Ackley Improving to get an improved and more efficient powder burn by straightening the walls and putting more angle on the shoulders... a little more case capacity as well.
Ackley himself was a pioneer of efficiency.
The 280 AI is indeed a match for the 7SAUM no argument there... this is only one obscure example, wildcat data is subjective only and it has nothing whatsoever to do with my claim of Short Action accuracy.
I could counter your redundant statement with the fact that if the AI's were so efficient and accurate then all the bench rest shooters would be using them.
But don't put words in my mouth or call it my THEORY... you and I both know the truth of short actions and short case efficiency.
You fellas can dance around the FACTS with your OPINIONS all you want... you still have not made any credible arguments.
Why don't we call this what it really is... a personal bias between individuals with no basis in reality.
But I will play as long as you want. Is there going to be prizes....:p
 
In a lot of ways I think this debate is pissing in the wind. Short actions, because there's less distance from one end to the other have less tendency to flex. There is no getting around this.
But with the modern machining and metallurgy involved in manufacturing new rifles is there as much flex in an action as there would've been 50 years back? I think not.
As far as a 270 WSM or similar cartridge being more accurate, the potential is definitely there, and on a rifle designed to put 5 bullets through the same hole on paper at every competition then that potential is likely to be realised.
But the same growth in technology that gave birth to the WSM, WSSM & PPC cartridges also has assisted companies in creating better Long Actions and more accurate powders and loads for existing cartridges.
If you purpose built rifles to be astoundingly accurate then the short action would probably win, but when you start dropping the weight, shortening & lightening barrels, and indeed all components, for ease of carrying then your variables widen.
And more than any other factor, if a person bought an "off the assembly line" gun like a Remington, Winchester, Ruger or Savage and expected there to be appreciable differences in accuracy between 2 different cartridges simply because of the choice of cartridge(apart from specific examples of course) they'd be kidding themselves.
Some calibres, like 6.5mm, seem to have a natural accuracy and often fall into a comfortable and accurate load quickly, but in my experience the most accurate rifles, short or long actions, are the result of pure quality workmanship with a little luck thrown in.
Yes, Redd, hunting rifles are built for accuracy, but not for accuracy at all costs and this is when things become more complicated.
For the record, I have no decided opinion or preference on the accuracy of cartridges of one length or another.
I think all should earn their keep and be accurate within reason.
 
catnthehatt said:
My "short action" 1885 with its 28" barrel is a full 3" shorter than a Sendaro in the same caliber with a 26" barrel!
Cat
Click to expand...
For crying out loud Cat... common sense and reason have no place in this debate.:eek:

Thanks though, I started out with this debate talking about weight, recoil and accuracy as reasons for short actions over long actions.... then it all went to hell.:confused:

In a lot of ways I think this debate is pissing in the wind. Short actions, because there's less distance from one end to the other have less tendency to flex. There is no getting around this.
Click to expand...
Thanks Kombi... that is the truth of it....:)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom