Hi guys !

Mi current rifle battery consists of 22 LR .223 rem. 25-06 rem. .300 win .338 win mag and 9.3x62. The thing is that all of them are let’s say “Classic rifles†that is wooden stock and blued barrel. Now I won’t to buy my first synthetic stock “light weight†stainless steel rifle and I have decided to purchase a Tikka light T3 stainless steell.

Now the question is ….what caliber ? I have narrowed it down to .270 win or 270 WSM. So what should I pick ? Is the 270 WSM going to kick to much in a light Tikka T3 ? It weighs less than 6.5 lbs. I’ve heard that the Tikka in .270 WSM is really accurate ……!
Thanks,
Ingvar Johann

quote:

Originally posted by Ingvar J. Kristjansson:
Hi guys !

Mi current rifle battery consists of 22 LR .223 rem. 25-06 rem. 30-06 .338 win and 9.3x62. The thing is that all of them are let’s say “Classic rifles†that is wooden stock and blued barrel. Now I won’t to buy my first synthetic stock “light weight†stainless steel rifle and I have decided to purchase a Tikka light T3 stainless steell.

Now the question is ….what caliber ? I have narrowed it down to .270 win or 270 WSM. So what should I pick ? Is the 270 WSM going to kick to much in a light Tikka T3 ? It weighs less than 6.5 lbs. I’ve heard that the Tikka in .270 WSM is really accurate ……!
Thanks,

Ingvar Johann

I test fired a 6.5 lb rifle yesterday in .270 win, the kick was, well, pleasant. The .270 win has always been pretty darn accurate. Personally, it would be my choice.

I have both of these calibers and have to say that I definitely use my wsm more often than my 270 win. I am not saying that is the choice you should make though. The only reason I use the wsm more is that it is an ultimate shadow with a synthetic stock and my 270 win is a near mint featherweight M70 classic which I still have the box and papers for.

The wsm itself is a good round but is only marginally better than the original 270. I don't think you can go wrong with any of the 270 rounds from the winchester, wsm, or weatherby. Even the 6.8spc is supposed to be effective on cxp2 class game under 200 yards.

Sorry for probably just muddying the waters for ya. My two cents says get the wsm to be honest.

The .270 round has always been a very good chambering for many uses, and I will never knock it. My WSM beat it hands down, for speed and accuracy, if those matter to you. I shoot so many chamberings larger the kick of the WSM seems like a pip squeak to me with no recoil to speak of. My Model 70 Ultimate Shadow will shoot a 130 grain bullet 3450 fps and a 140 grain 3250 to 3300 fps. That in my opinion is more than marginally better than the .270. A .277 bullet at 3300 fps is a real versital round in any shooters vault. Good shooting.

I have a Tikka M65 in .270 win.

It shoots fantastic and its a great caliber for anything up to deer. Very little recoil and flat shooting as well.

Mine stays a lot in the closet after the bad combination of big wounded moose, bad angle and wrong bullet choice.

270 Win, but I am a huge 270 Win fan, not that it accomplishes anything other similar cartridges do.

I am not a magnum fan of any type. I feel that "magnum" was a marketing push to stroke egos that started with Weatherby's and continues today.

The WSM is by far a better cartridge when looking at paper ballistics. But with that comes more powder and recoil.

If you are not a handloader, I'd lean toward the 270Win. Lots more choices and lots better prices for factory loads.

If 200fps means something to you (for whatever reason) or you just want something different...the WSM is a lot of fun, and IME generally pretty accurate! Can't go wrong either way.

Either one really. Both are accurate and shoot very flat with little recoil. I've had both and like both but it came down to not liking the rifle I had in 270 wsm so i went with a 270 win this time. I like it better myself. Look at ballistics, the cartridge itself(loaded cases) and see what you think. The rifle it comes in makes a difference to, like how it balances with whatever length barrel. Just my two cents

quote:

jimmywax posted:
The wsm itself is a good round but is only marginally better than the original 270.

Thats how I feel if you can't kill it with the .270 Win you can't kill it with the .270 WSM. My .270 Win is a beat up old Parker Hale but it is one of the best shooting rifles I've ever owned. If I had a nice little rilfe I was afraid to shoot as well I'd probably buy a newer WSM, I just don't have to.

if you want classic go 270 winchester.
the 270 wsm is the new kid on the block
played with one last year, and was very impressed. yes that 6.5 lb 270wsm is gona kick more its burning more powder, its your choice good luck,
900ss let that m65-270 run-wild shoot some tsx barnes through her barrel,and stack em like cord wood
regards

In any caliber.. if I had a choice between one that has been around since 1925 or one that was a recent one, that its major purpose was trying to start a new trend.. then the creator went out of business.....

well I'd take the one made in 1925 with a long successful track record.......

40/65s and 40/82s were popular once upon a time... but try to find components for them nowadays...

You can't go wrong either way. I load for a couple of both and really like both rounds a lot.
The WSM is about 150-200fps faster which really isn't a huge deal. To me the biggest advantage to the WSM is the Short Action which I prefer. This advantage is lost however with the Tikka, since they use the same length action for both.
I'd buy whichever one I found the best deal on........................DJ

I would opt for the standard .270 WCF, it is still one of the finest calibers out there and will be 50 years from now...

As to the advantage of a short action, I just can't see that extra 1/4 of an inch bolt through is critical in any way. the actions are the same weight and length.

I'm getting there jjmp. But my .375 robbed its scope. I'm trying TSX's in 35 whelen on moose this year and if I like them the .270 probably gets some too. Presicion seems to be top.

And Ingvar, as I think of it get a .270 win. With good bullets 130 - 150 grain you can aim in the middle up to 300 meters, on pretty much anything, and hit. And if your game is to small for that use the 25-06. It looks a lot better than belted rounds.

What the hell is a .270WSM anyway?


Just kidding.

Terry

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
As to the advantage of a short action, I just can't see that extra 1/4 of an inch bolt through is critical in any way. the actions are the same weight and length.

They are the same length and weight on the Tikka's but in other rifles such as M-70's, 700'
s, M-77's and Kimber's the Short action versions are physically shorter and lighter than the std. length versions.
I'm a stock crawler an I can comfortably work the bolt on a short action while some long actions tend to bump my face when working the bolt shouldered. It's not a huge difference but some people might find it a signifigant one. As with most such differences it's best to just try both and see if it makes a difference for you, yourself.

Hi:

If this is your first and only 270 go with the 270 WSM.... faster, shorter, fatter.... and I LOVE this caliber.

My 270 WSM was my first 270 caliber, I like the WSM so much I bought it in a Sako Finlite. Both my Model 70 ss and Sako Finlite 270 wsm shoot sub MOA factory ammo, Winchester ballistic Silvertips 130 grain @ about 3250 FPS... boom...flop... six buck so far.

Accurate, deadly, and dependable. As the song goes who can ask for anything more.

PAHunter...

900ss
10-4 bud good luck moose hunting
post some pictures.
regards

Totally agree with djpaintles!! Have the 270 WSM in a NULA and its my "go to" rifle for all deer size game and a tack driver. Nothing against the 270 Win., but prefer the short action in a lightweight.

You need to buy the one you prefer, regardless of our opinions.

I have 3 270s and 1 270 AM.

I have been fortunate to take cleanly several deer at ranges with a plain jane 270/130 grain bullet that some hunters would tout that only a magnum can do.

The WSM is no doubt a fine caliber and I may just have to own one someday since I love the .277 calibers. But, inside of 400 yards, you may not gain much advantage with the WSM.

If you are a good, well disciplined shooter/hunter, then there's no reason you can't figure out quickly just what a 270Win will do, and what its trajectory characteristics will be with various loads.

The WSM removes some guesswork when you are concerned about hold-over.

Here's an idea, buy both. No more decision making.

I like them both. Have been playing with a 270 WSM lately though, and like it alot. I would personally go with the flatter shooting WSM. If it ever goes obsolete as the harbingers of doom on this thread predict, you can always pick up 270 Win then. I fail to understand why people get so worked up about new cartridges. This cartridge loyalty stuff is crazy....who cares how long one has been around for??? Do these same people swear by abacuses (sp?) because they were around long before Pentium processors? They still add like hell! Or 19" black and white televisions since they pre-date 50" plasma screen TVs? Luddite alert!!

And will the world end if you can no longer get brass for one of your rifles?? ooohhhhh.....rechamber or rebarrel and move on. Big whooop!

Cheers,
Canuck

quote:

Originally posted by Canuck:
I like them both. Have been playing with a 270 WSM lately though, and like it alot. I would personally go with the flatter shooting WSM. If it ever goes obsolete as the harbingers of doom on this thread predict, you can always pick up 270 Win then. I fail to understand why people get so worked up about new cartridges. This cartridge loyalty stuff is crazy....who cares how long one has been around for??? Do these same people swear by abacuses (sp?) because they were around long before Pentium processors? They still add like hell! Or 19" black and white televisions since they pre-date 50" plasma screen TVs? Luddite alert!!

And will the world end if you can no longer get brass for one of your rifles?? ooohhhhh.....rechamber or rebarrel and move on. Big whooop!

Cheers,
Canuck

And the way brass is getting softer, the WSM will give you actual old syle 270 ballistics, easily..................without undue pressure.

I don't know about Iceland, but here in the USA, everyone and their brother has a .270 win., and for good reason. An excellent accurate well balanced cartridge. But if you don't want to be one of the crowd, (even though the crowd makes good sense) the .270WSM is a good option.

It can certainly do anything the standard .270 Win. can, and more, ballistically. And it can fit in a short action, and be loaded down to 7mm-08 ballistics if recoil bothers you. I think that if a guy owned a bunch of "classic" rifles in "classic" calibers, and wanted to add a newer "state of the art" rifle in stainless with a synthetic stock, the .270WSM would be a great choice.

Especially if you handload, as it makes the rifle much more versatile and removes some of the "scarce ammo" worries. Just order in your dies, a bunch of brass, bullets, primers and powder and you are all set. That would also address the "higher ammo cost" some use to put down the short mags.

I have owned a .270 Win, and currently own a Model 70 Super Shadow in .270WSM and have been thrilled with it. I typically load it to standard .270 Win ballistics, and what is wrong with that? If I do my part, it can put 3 Nosler 140 gr Accubonds in less than half an inch at 100 yards from the bench with tolerable recoil and a muzzle velocity in excess of 3000 fps.

No question, with your battery the .270 WSM.

Without checking data, there's maybe 100-200fps MV difference between a .270Win and .270WSM.

So I don't think it matters a hill of beans.



Personally, I hate the .270 caliber.

my brother had a tikka t3 lite in 270WSM. shot half moa. now being a younger person id go with the WSM.


isnt the action in the 2 different cartridges the same? except there is a bigger bolt stop in the "short actions" with the T3?

I reload for my friend's 270 WSM browning A-bolt. Very picky rifle, took awhile to get a decent group. Very accurate now, but I find recoil sucks for the slight benefit you gain. Muzzle blast is up there as well.

Performance wise, you can't go wrong with either, but if you don't reload, your factory choices are better with 270 Win.

Well, I'd say the good ol' 270 Win should do the trick nicely. I don't understand the appeal of the WSM when the regular 270 has proven itself time and time again to do whatever anyone wants. I just broke mine out for the first time in a little while yesterday, and the near total lack of significant recoil is such a pleasure to shoot. Ammo is also cheaper and more widely available than the WSM. Get a .270 and just go hunting!

I went through the questions you are asking and ended up going with the Tikka T3 lite stainless. I've tried 5 different bullets and three powders so far and still haven't got any decent groups. Factory Frontier amo groups in at 2.5 inches. I have also bought some winchester ammop loaded with 140 grain Accubonds that I'm going to try this weekend. So don't think that your going to get a really accurate rifle because it'd a Tikka T3 or because it's a 270 WSM. I have 6 more loads to try this weekend also.
Take care,
Dave

IJK,
Don't know if you handload or using factory ammo but the 270 Win. would probably be a whole lot easier to find. The 270 WSM may have a little more speed it's still not enough to make a big difference in trajectery. I've had as many as four 270 Win. in the safe at one time, I'm down to two at the moment. Both are Mod 70's and both are down right accurate.

I’m a reloader so factory ammo availability is not a big concern for me. My primary thing in a rifle is Accuracy and that it is comfortable to handle and shoot. I read on a different forum that some guy’s where changing out the recoil pad on their Tikka .270 wsm for a Limbsaver recoil pad ! Is the recoil that bad with .270 wsm in a light rifle like the Tikka lite ? If so than maybe it’s wiser to buy the good old standard .270 win…..

In most cases I think they are putting on the limb saver to gain length of pull. The Tikka T3 lightweight stainless has a bit of a short LOP and the Limbsaver will increase it. The recoil on the 270WSM is less than a comparable 30-06. I find it very light especially with the Limbsaver pad. Just make your choice and go with it you will be happy with either cartridge. Recoil is so light it shouldn't even be a consideration.
Take good care,
Dave

quote:

Originally posted by Ingvar J. Kristjansson:
I’m a reloader so factory ammo availability is not a big concern for me. My primary thing in a rifle is Accuracy and that it is comfortable to handle and shoot. I read on a different forum that some guy’s where changing out the recoil pad on their Tikka .270 wsm for a Limbsaver recoil pad ! Is the recoil that bad with .270 wsm in a light rifle like the Tikka lite ? If so than maybe it’s wiser to buy the good old standard .270 win…..

I'm not really familiar with a T3 but I have handled a few. Personally I have replaced or supplemented every factory recoil pad I have. I am 6'5" and I do prefer a longer LOP, but I also find most factory recoil pads are lacking. Until just recently most factory recoil pads were akin to a farm tire lug. If you can handle a 30-06 180gr high energy load then you can handle any of the short mag's excluding maybe the 325.

Go with your heart on this choice. The facts say the WSM will kick and blast a little more but a soft recoil pad is what you want in any case.

A buddy bought the Tikka in 270 WSM last year and it very accurate. He got his going a lot faster than I got my Kimber 270 WSM to shoot well.

quote:

Originally posted by Ingvar J. Kristjansson:
I’m a reloader so factory ammo availability is not a big concern for me. My primary thing in a rifle is Accuracy and that it is comfortable to handle and shoot. I read on a different forum that some guy’s where changing out the recoil pad on their Tikka .270 wsm for a Limbsaver recoil pad ! Is the recoil that bad with .270 wsm in a light rifle like the Tikka lite ? If so than maybe it’s wiser to buy the good old standard .270 win…..

If you can handle the 30-06, .338 Win Mag and 9.3x62, the .270WSM should pose no problem for you, even in a lightweight rifle. My Super Shadow is no heavyweight, but Winchester provided their equivalent of a Decelerator recoil pad on it and it was much more comfortable to shoot than my old Model 70 lightweight carbine in 30-06 with the 1/4 inch hard red rubber butt pad. Even the factory 150 gr Power Points at 3100 fps aren't bad at all. And with you being a handloader, you can always tailor your loads to whatever recoil level you choose. I put together some 130 gr Nosler Ballistic Tips at about 2800 fps with okay accuracy, about an inch and a half groups at 100 yards. The recoil was less than a standard .270 Win. For really light loads check out the reduced loads with H-4895 on Hodgdon's website. They show the 100 gr Hornady bullet at around 2500 fps that my 14 year old really enjoyed shooting.

270 WIN. Just dont feel that the WSM significantly outperforms the venerable old 270 WIN and unable to justify additional costs for ammo or components.

Ingvar:
I have both a .270 Win. and a .270 WSM. Guess I'm just nuts for having both. Anyway, I've used the .270 Win. on sheep & caribou here in Ak. since I arrived here 40 years ago. I just got the .270 WSM last spring and it wouldn't shoot worth beans. Replaced the stock, shot better but not good enough. Sent it out to Hill Country Rifles & I'm supposed to get it in a couple of days - then we'll see. Anyway, I handload 150 gr bullets in my .270 Win and get 2920 fps. If you handload the WSM, you're not gonna get appreciably more velocity. From my perspective, the only advantage of the WSM might be in a lighter weight rifle. My Pre-64 .270 Win. has a fiberglass stock & shoots like a house a fire. The drawback is that with scope, it weighs in at a hefty 9+ lbs. Bad for a sheep rifle.
My suggestion is that you look at a Cooper Mod. 52 in .30-06, or .270 Win. Coopers have a reputation for accuracy right out of the box.
Just my thoughts. Bear in Fairbanks

Though I am a huge fan of the WSM's, I would/did go with the standard 270 Win. As I posted in another thread, I just picked up a Sauer 202 lightweight in 270 Win, and it weighs about the same as the Tikka you are looking at. I shot it this morning and recoil is not light but very manageable. I have been shooting a 270 Win for 25 years and have killed nearly a hundred deer and many hogs with the caliber, and I have never lost a deer or hog.

My bullet of choice for a 270 Win is Winchester Supreme 140 gr Accubonds which have performed flawlessly on game.

Can you send us some photos of your new Sauer 202 lightweight ……is it the Outback model?

post deleted by Savage99,

This forum is anti American