Winchester 270 for moose?

One thing that is rarely thought of in NA is sectional density. We focus on calibre then bullet weight. However, history has shown us that even 'small' cals have enormous killing power if the bullet can drive through the vitals.
Click to expand...
Very true...S/D and Ballistic-Coefficient are often misunderstood and more often not considered by many hunters when choosing a bullet. :idea:
 
stubblejumper said:
If you use a premium bullet,it will certainly do the job.However I was amazed when I recently recovered a 150gr partition from the neck of a moose that we were butchering.The bullet had barely penetrated the neck vertebrae which was surprising for a partition. The 270 will work,but I do prefer larger calibers for moose and elk.
Click to expand...

I feel the same way, I consider it a marginal caliber for moose, I would prefer something bigger.
bigbull
 
bigbull said:
stubblejumper said:
If you use a premium bullet,it will certainly do the job.However I was amazed when I recently recovered a 150gr partition from the neck of a moose that we were butchering.The bullet had barely penetrated the neck vertebrae which was surprising for a partition. The 270 will work,but I do prefer larger calibers for moose and elk.
Click to expand...

I feel the same way, I consider it a marginal caliber for moose, I would prefer something bigger.
bigbull
Click to expand...

Wonder what distance the moose was shot at? That would certainly make a difference.

I use a 375 H&H for moose most of the time, but have shot some huge bulls at very long distance with the 270 Win. If anything it hits harder at long range than some of the big bores. (Okay, bunker suit on.) :roll:

Ted
 
I think the 270 with a good bullet is very capable of taking moose cleanly. You mention the ranges will be relatively close because of heavy bush. One thing to be cautious of when seeking advice about hunting in heavy bush is that bigger bullets punch through bush better. I realise you or nobody else here has said/inferred anything like that. Just that when I started hunting I can recall some fellows with the big boomers used to claim that as a huge advantage their gun had over everyone else's. It only takes once to learn that all bullets deflect/fragment unpredictably after striking bush. I've found also that even when hunting bush, one can sometimes be surprised with a lot longer shot then planned. A long range capable rifle is a real plus at those times.
 
Well, I own two,a 270 Win and a 270 Wby, but the bullet diameter really hasn't ever done anything for me. Couple that with the single toughest moose recovery I ever had came from a 270 Win shot moose and I guess you can understand why I think it is highly over rated. Good deer gun, antelope, caribou, yeah ok, but I really want bigger holes through my moose. Just an opinion tho', and we all know about those. - dan
 
Both our moose were taken with a .270 this year, one at over 300 yards with a 150 grain Nosler Partition, and one at 75 yards with a .270 WSM loaded with a 140 grain Fail Safe. Both moose dropped on the spot and never moved.
 
I used a 270 Win for years, just recently going to a 7 mm RM. I wouldn't hesitate going back to the 270, it's a great cartridge with the right bullet and placed shot.
 
my moose this year fell to one well placed shot from a .270 win. 160gr semi-spitzer @ 170yrds. bang flop.

a .270 winchester is a fine moose rifle with good bullets in the 150gr class. one of our clients took his moose with a .270 as well, it didn;t go far. the folks I hunt with in Quesnel, BC have been taking moose for over 20yrs with only a .270.
 
One thing to be cautious of when seeking advice about hunting in heavy bush is that bigger bullets punch through bush better.
Click to expand...
good point.... 8)
All things being equal (bullet construction) a larger bullet deflects more than a mid size bullet... the 6mm bullets were the best in the dowel test and the .270 cal was a very close second :shock:
 
BIGREDD said:
One thing to be cautious of when seeking advice about hunting in heavy bush is that bigger bullets punch through bush better.
Click to expand...
good point.... 8)
All things being equal (bullet construction) a larger bullet deflects more than a mid size bullet... the 6mm bullets were the best in the dowel test and the .270 cal was a very close second :shock:
Click to expand...

I didn't realize that the bush down your way was made of dowels. :lol:
 
Gatehouse said:
Amphibious said:
there are trees in ontario? :p
Click to expand...

Lots of trees. Noty many hills! :D
Click to expand...

I used to love it when people refered to the escartment as "the mountain"

ah.... Ontario....

trees? you must me thinking of Northern Ontario! once you pass temagami it's not "really" ontario anymore is it? :p
 
Interesting about the sectional density thijng, good shot placement, long distance shooting , etc.
The 270 has been seen to be a "marginal " bullet by reputation here, but the 6.5X55 has a reputation for killing moose very well! :shock:

I think maybe that the 150 grainer that Stubblejumper pulled out of his animal was put there from either WAAY too long a shot, or maybe deflected from somewhere else, or maybe it passed through another animal first?

All I know is that the 270 winchester, (although I hate the caliber for some reason) has more velocity that a 6.5X55 ( which I like), and I always recommend shooting the 160 grain bullet from the 6.5X55 for everything.
But then, I am not what you call a "velocity first" type of guy.

Yes , I do own a couple of fast cartridges, but most of my arsenal is somewhat lacking in the speed demon department.
I like big bullets travelling at a reasonable velocity, put where tha are supposed to.
I really don't see anything wrong with a .270 for moose as long as it is used properly.....
Cat
 
Good points cat.... I agree and also take exception to the people who think a .280 is a great moose cartridge but slam a .270 as being not enough gun :roll:
The other line that bugs the sh__ out of me is... the .270 is fine as long as the bullet is properly placed... well DUH :!:
A poorly placed shot is bad regardless of caliber... and no caliber can make up for a bad hit :!:
 
This comming from someone living in Peterborough? pot calling the kettle black.... :roll:

and picking on spelling really is scraping the bottom of the barrel isn't it :?: :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom