Johan, Have a 7mm Dakota. It's a great caliber but a bit on the expensive side. Brass is about $1.50 per round. It's also a .284 and not a .277. Don't know why Dakota didn't make a 270 Dakota. It won't work in a short Action and is a bit tricky to get to work in a Remchester type needs custom magazine box and follower.......DJ

I ordered my T3 Lite/stainless in the 270WSM not because the extra velocity was such a big deal, but because I wanted another round to load in that class. I have a 270 in a Ruger M77 I can use if I wan't but since I enjoy the whole process of finding multiple loads for multiple situations, I thought I'd go with the new kid on the block. The extra velocity is just a small bonus. I'm no longer a one rifle hunter and find myself getting bored with a rifle after a couple of years.

Dies and brass for this round are not hard to find here in B.C. and are only a little more expensive.

For the people who say that the extra velocity is not that much really so why bother, the same can be said for those who use the 270 Weatherby. The gap is about the same but there is hardly a gap at all with some rifles when the two are shot out a 24" barrel.

Is 200fps a big deal or not? Reloader shrugs off the gap between the 270Win and the WSM but goes on to say why not the Weatherby?? Why bother when you have the short mag.

You have a good point in the cost issue.

The only thing that I really like about the Weatherby is the Super Smooth Bolt and Short Bolt throw.

I know Weatherby has Mark Vs in Standard cals but, I dont know if they will make them in WSM cals?

All of the Mark Vs That I have experimented w/ were remarkably accurate. They would usually group better than a inch at 200.

Reloader

For the cost of two decent rifles, they better group.

I keep hearing how the weatherby is faster than the wsm, but isn't weatherby specs out of a 26" barrel? I just built a wsm w/26" barrel, but haven't had a chance to chrono yet. I also own a "regular" 270. I didn't buy a wsm because it was faster. I bought it because it is a 270. I think you should buy what you want whether it is 200 fps faster or slower than what everyone else is shooting and don't let anyone tell you different!!!!

djpaintles,

Let's get to the real heart of the matter. What was the weight difference between the Berreta and the Kimber? What about overall length? I suspect the apparent recoil might be higher, but probably not much.

The whole idea behind the short mags is to stuff high (perhaps not the highest) performance in a shorter, lighter rifle. Also, when you shorten and flatten out the powder column you get more effective barrel length, which adds to the apparent "efficiency" of the WSM cartrigdes.

I don't yet have a WSM, but a Kimber 8400 Montana in 270 WSM is on my wish list . My current battery is a 6mm (soon to be .260 Rem), .308 Win, .300 Win Mag (bought before the short mags came out), and a recently aquired .375 H&H for that Africa deal in 2008 .

Jumpalot;
You're absolutely correct!
Most all printed data for the Wannbee's, opps I mean weatherby's , is with a 26" barrel!
Where the 270WSM really shines is in the 140 grain bullet catagory, myself and quite a few others are getting 3400+fps, with Magpro Powder.
All this in a nice compact, non-belted, less expensive case, Ammo, or gun for that matter!
270 weatherby's have had their day in the sun it's time to step aside.

Redlander, The Kimber is a good bit lighter and so recoil is a bit sprightly but not too bad. They both have 24" barrels but the Kimber is noticably more compact. They both shoot great though. I'll probably take both on a hunt, take the Mato when it rains and the Kimber when it's nice out......DJ

[url="http://www.hunt101.com/?p=131882&c=500&z=1"][/url]

I can't wait until the 8400 Montana's come out. I've felt the stock on a 308 Montana and it was very nice. I'm thinking a 8400 with a similar stock will be awesome...I just can't decide which caliber............

dj,

The Kimber Montana's are calling me also. From shooting the 7mm WSM with just 140's I don't think that we are going to see 3400 fps out of a 270 WSM with 140 gr bullets. The AA data shows 3275 with 74.2 grs of MagPro. Since I have not got over 3250 out of the same weight bullet from the 24" barreled 7mm WSM it seems out of reach over a calibrated chrono.

As of now I am going with the .270 WSM in the Montana to keep the recoil down. If I need magnum velocities out of bigger bullets then heavier rifles in various 300 mags are a dime a dozen around here.

Marsh,

You will never beat the performance of a Weatherby Magnum rifle w/ any gun (make or model) in a WSM cal.

Reloader

Reloader your probably right. But as you said I think in past posts, the difference won't make any difference. But still to to live with a large intentionally freebored caliber. To each his own.

You know, thats a good topic too. It seems that we spend alot of our "Accurate Reloading" time getting our bullets just the right distance off of the lands. And then, you have Weatherby w/ their freebore but, They still acheive the accuracy we look for. Seems kind of strange?

Reloader

I used to chase my tail with getting right up to the lands. I quit that a while ago. These days, I use my stoney point to know where the rifling is and monitor thoat errosion. Then adjust my bullet to fit in my mag.

I have not had that great luck reloading Weatherby however. I load for a friend in his mark for 300Weatherby. I found loads that give hime 1.3" accuracy or so. But it wasn't straigt forward or easy. Still never had those clover leafs I was looking for like in my custom RUM.

The Tikka T3's action is smooth as it gets for an out of the box rifle and the single colume magazine defies the reputation the short mags have for their problematic feeding. This has been confirmed by several other owners I've talked to.