I suppose that I'm going to piss some people off, but why would any one use one except that years ago a very good hunter(O'conner) wrote about it. Very limited mid-bore,shoots flat but give me a 7mm anytime. Also it's a long action, why not have a 30-06. at least then you would have a useful gun. P.S I hope that I'm not going to Hell for bring up this.

The only big game rifle I own is a 270 Win. To answer your question, the only good reason to take a 270 over a 30-06 is less recoil. I like to use heavy-for-caliber bullets with high sectional densities, and in a 30-06 I'd be using a 180 for everything, unless the Barnes bullets would shoot in the particular rifle, then I may go to a light 168 grain Triple Shock. Well, with the 270 the 150 grain bullet is similar to the 180 in 30 caliber, so I can get good penentration, a good trajectory, and a lot less recoil. I use the 150 for everything, except I have just begun experimenting with the Barnes Triple Shock 140, and so far it's very promising. Accuracy not quite as good as the Nosler BT's, but plenty good enough for elk out to 300 yards. I am not a fan of heavy recoil, that is why I choose to use a 270. I suppose a guy could ask why use a 7 Mag. or a 30-06, when you can use a 270 and kill 'em just as dead?

I won't argue with a man that only owns one rifle. I bet you can shoot it also. I'm just bored with people that think that its the greatest caliber.

The answer to this question is: Why not?
Unless you are hunting something that bites, a .270 will do it all. It is quiet, has little recoil, is very accurate, easy to get ammo for, and can be had in lighter rifles. There is no detectable difference in killing power between a 7 mag and a .270, but I won't knock the 7mag either.

Oh come on...I wanted a good argument.

I can't think of any cartridges I DON'T like, to tell you the truth. If I had the money, a place to store them, and the time to shoot them all, I'd probably have one of everything. But, I decided on the 270 after hunting with a 264 Win. Mag. for about 14 years, and I figured why not have almost identical ballistics, and half the recoil? (alright, maybe not HALF, but it feels like it) I ALMOST went with the 30-06...as much as many guys hate to admit it, the 30-06 is just about the most ideal big game cartridge ever made. I don't plan on limiting myself to the 270 forever, in fact I think I've decided on my next cartridge, it'll be a 338/06, what else would complement my 270 better than that?

I've got all three of the calibers mentioned above and have killed alot of animals with them.I've yet to see the differance in killing power. The .270 with 150gr bullets and the 06 with 180gr bullets will do anything the 7mag can and do it cheaper and with less recoil.

The 7mmrem mag has to be one of the most overrated magnums out there. Its the magnum for guys who can't shoot a real magnum. Most people that brag on the 7mag,use 140 or 150 grain bullets and yet the same weight in .270 just bounces off animals.

You'll hear about the 7mm mag being light in recoil,which it is. The reason being most loads in the 7mag are only 3 to 4 grains more then the 270 and 06. Which also lends it to the old saying"I liked my 7mag,until I bought a chronograph".

I couldn�t agree more. Give me 2 of everything. Quite a coincidence that the cartridge I have been dreaming of for my next rifle is a .338-06 AI.

I should state that I do most of my hunting with a 7mm-08 I own a 7mm mag and I agree that's it's overrated. I've also owned and shot deer with a 270 win.I wouldn't concider it a low recoil rifle,in fact they kick very much like a 30-06 with 150 grain bullets. Other than someone wanting to recreate history ( Like My dad used one) I still think they are overrated and not of much use.

Sure the recoil of a 270 and a 30-06 with 150 grain bullets will be very similar, but you're not comparing similar bullets. To get the penetration and ballistic coefficient of a 150 grain 270 bullet, you have to go to 180 in a 30-06. Now you're talking about significantly more recoil. The 270 also has the advantage of shooting 130 grain bullets for even less recoil. Both are good, and it's really difficult to say one is better than the other, especially if you're only talking about deer size game. BTW, that 7mm-08 is a great cartridge. I considered it at the time when I bought my 270...the problem with it is the rifle was lighter than what I wanted.

Here's a gun-line history of cartridges I've used for deer....

30-30, 30-06, 257 Wby, 300 Wby, 25-06, 270 Win.

Not nearly as long as most of the folks on this board but hopefully long enough for me. I've really enjoyed shooting the 270 Win the last couple of years and feel like this is a super cartridge to settle on for anything up to deer-sized game.

Ive shot my last two elk with a 7mm 08. Loaded with nosler partitions I would shoot at any thing in north america with a 7mm you can go up to 175 grains

Yep, it's a great cartridge, but a 175 is too big for it. 160 grain Barnes would be ideal for elk. What did you use?

Washington hunter I used a 140 grain nosler partition for the elk. I've used up to 175 grains for other game. This year when I go elk hunting (Idaho) I'm going to use a 308 win. New toy!!! sorry I don't elk are that tough. and I think that all calibers are interesting.

Remember I said I was bored .I would own a 270 if someone would give one to me.

The 270 is one of my favorite hunting cartridges. It is the smallest of my "serious" rifles I take on hunts abroad. My very first centerfire of my own (besides grandads 30-30) was a 280, which worked fine until I got my hands on a used custom 270. This rifle shot better and fit better than my 280. At this time we were living in alaska and I got to take my first moose with my 270, which worked fine with one shot. Around this time I also had a 7mag, which helped with my decision in that between the 270, and 7mag, I could not tell the deference in penetration or dammage... so I kept on shooting my 270. I also had a 300 win mag, which is something the 270 is not.It probably matters little but, I would have just assume to keep on shooting my 280 had I not aquired this custom 270 as they are one of the same.

Some people feel that the 280 is a better choice because it has a wider selection of bullets. Now, it is true that the weight selection is wider, but the 270s have all of the bullet manufactures attention, and every bullet type is made for it. I am not a person who gives a hoot about 60 different weights and feel that the 270s are fine with 130s/140s/150s.

The 270 for me represents the smallest cartridge that can do many many things in my style of shooting, in a broad game spectrum.

In my part of the country, the .270 is more versatile than a 30-06. With the largest game whitetails, the .270 easily handles them, and with 100gr bullets the .270 is a better varmit rifle than the 30-06.

I normally use the 270 because my only other centerfire rifle is a 243.

I "grew up" with a .30-06, always thought anything smaller than that would prove to have bullets of too small a diameter.... That was until I tried the .270 Win, and guess what, it worked just as well. No, it probably was not quite as versatile as the .30-06, but it recoiled a bit less, and on the game I wanted to use it for, it worked very well. So I shot the .270 Win with good results for a number of years. Is one better than the other? Depends on what you are looking for, they are pretty close and cover much of the same ground. Both are great rounds.
- mike

I own both a 270 and 7mm RM - and the 270 is a gem - O'Connor was no fool. I refused to have a 270 for many years because my hunting buddies and everbody else had one in Montana. However, when I shoot over the chronograph the 7mm RM certainly takes the power level up a notch - I would say 200 fps plus faster than equivalent weight in a 270 - about what a magnum should do - For my reloads, the 7mm RM uses about 12-14 gr more powder(RL22)than the same bullet weights (140-160)in a 270 - and you have the 175 gr in the 7mm at 2900 plus fps. In the field, from my observations, the 7mm RM and the first 7mm magnum I used for many years - my dads 7mm Mashburn magnum - hit harder and shoot flatter -and that is an advantage if you shoot well.

bb:
I have 2 hunting rifles, one is my .338 Win. Mag & the other is my .270 Win. I've had a .270 for almost 40 years & it's my "go to" rifle for sheep & caribou. If, for some reason, it was moose season & I could get the meat out, I wouldn't hesitate to use it with 150 gr. Partitions or Northforks. In a pinch, it would also take care of the nefarious grizzly. Wouldn't be my choice for that however.
I do go to my .338 for moose, elk & larger bears when those animals are at the top of the list. I've never had a problem with the .270 on aything I've used it on & I certainly am not going to "change horses in mid-stream" now. Bear in Fairbanks

Starting a thread like this you MUST be bored. Whats not to like about the 270? It comes as close to the total package as anything IMO. Fast, flat, powerfull and a very tolerable recoil level to boot. I dont have one presently, but Ive hunted with them and you can certianly count me in as a 270 fan.



It seems like the need to come up with something "new" or something "different" for so many guys just outweighs the need for what truly fills the bill. I find that unfortunate and I guess that is why the cartridges that were "very" well concieved decades ago are no longer given the credit they truly deserve. Think of the progress that COULD be made in cartridge design if it werent for the need to add frills.



Myself, Ive never really given a shit about what is "trendy" or "in style". Ive always found things that make sense to be much more desirable for my purposes.

Why the .270? Because it is the first true 7mm! Actually I think if you check, that's not quite true. 7mm is actually .278 inches, not the .277 of the the .270.

The .270 is a great shooter, good penetration, light recoil, small enough for black-tail, but large enough for moose & elk (w/ the right bullets and careful shot placement).

Are there larger calibers that are better all around calibers? Almost certainly, but that hasn't taken away from its following. Nevertheless, it is a rifleman's rifle!

Elmer Keith thought it barely addiquate for coyotes. He was a man impervious to recoil (which most are not). The guys who shoot tiny groups w/ their .300 & .338 bore wby and ultras, & don't mind guns that weigh 9, 10 or 11 lbs., have no need of a .270.

Me, 7 Mag is about as much recoil as I can regularly shoot a box of shells (from a bench) w/ consistent precision. O'Connor didn't like recoil. He could shoot anything, but he was noticably a more precise marksman w/ lighter recoiling rifle. Me too. Most, admit it or not, are the same way.

Thus, lots of practice, precise shooting, good bullets, the .270 has to be considered one of the best all-around calibers in the lower 48.

I've got one 270, although I admit I rarely hunt with it. However it does recoil less than my '06, shoots fairly accurately, and will kill just about any lower 48 game you care to shoot at. Sometimes I like to look pretty when I go hunting.

Brad has the right answer.

Jeff

Quote: "Starting a thread like this you MUST be bored."

Wstrnhuntr: bbruce is from the Adironcack Mts. Spring comes late up there. He probably is bored.

To answer his question is simple. I'd use a 270 because it works. It has for a LONG while. Other cartridges have come and gone. You know a 270 will work. I guess that's what you said, too. So have others. My question, bbruce, is why not a 270? Don't dance around some fine points of ballistic charts. Just look at the performance record.

knobmtn

I have had significantly more DRT (dead right there), in-the-tracks kills with a .270 than any other cartridge I have used (not that it's many). 30/06, .243, 7mm-08, 6mm, .250 Ackley.

That being said, I don't even own a .270 right now. Go figure. But, I do have a Remington 721 in the closet waiting to be a donor for my next custom. Hmmmm.......

John

Well, yes, perfection can be a bit boring and taken-for-granted. Kind of like sunlight. Maybe we should get rid of it, too.

RSY

After years of reading that I had to have this, and I better get one of those too, I've settled on just 2. The big one is a 338 Win Mag, my brother lives in Alaska and that gun is just perfect for up there. The other is a FN 98 270. Brad is right, it just works. From Elk to Pronghorn. Just as many others will. But it does it with excellent ballistics without knocking my shoulder all out of whack. I don't need to sit at the bench anymore and punish myself. I have a 30-06 which to me is still the best all around gun there is, but the 270 is easier for me to shoot accurately. I love mine.

.30-06 is a better BIG game cartridge but for the vast majority of hunters who mainly hunt deer and occasionally go on an elk hunt, the .270 offers flatter trajectory and less recoil and I've yet to see the deer that "needed" a larger than .270/130 grain bullet to put it down. If you're comparing it to the 7mm Mag, it offers almost the same trajectory with slightly lighter bullets in a rifle that generally weighs 1/2 to 1 pound less and kicks less. As to the bullet selection, I think that is one of the most over hyped aspects of any cartridge. The .270 with either a 130 or 150 will do just about anything you ask of it within reason. If it won't, a 175 grain .284 is not going to offer substantial improvement. If you need more bullet, you need more frontal diameter as well. When I want more "power" I go on the other side of .308.

If I lived in Alaska or Canada, it wouldn't be my first choice of all around gun but a serious deer hunter with aspirations for a western hunt that might include bigger game couldn't do much better. It is ideal for sheep, pronghorn and deer and totally suitable for elk for the judicious hunter. I carried one for deer and elk for years and though a fan of big bullets for elk, I've never felt like my .270 wouldn't do the job. If I were to go on a $5,000 or more trip of the lifetime for a trophy bull elk, I would probably take something with a bit more oomph but more in the class of a .300 or .338 mag which are not all around guns.

The popular cartridge I haven't found a need for (and I've owned one) is the 7mm Rem. Mag. I just can't figure out what it will do that the .270 won't do as well or the .30-06 better in a lighter package. It certainly works well and is the one magnum that the general shooting populace can handle but I don't see how it is any better on game.

Hey, this kind of thread is fun. Maybe we should start a "Bolt Action Rifles: Why?" one as well. After all they are pretty antiquated...

If there is any difference in killing power in any of the calibers mentioned on this thread, I have failed to notice it and I have shot a lot of game with most of them...

There is no better big game round for NA than the .270 or 30-06 in the medium range of calibers, but there are a lot of calibers that are just as good...

This has been a ridiculas arguement for the last 100 years or so...

Personally I think elk rifles start at 300 H&H with 200 gr. and 220 ge. bullets and 338 Win. with 250 to 300 gr. bullets, that way I can take what ever shot is offered and get to the vitals and in todays elk hunting that is more important than ever as they have gone to the timber and deep holes in Idaho...no more the sagebrush flats it seems....My last 5 or 6 elk were taken going away in the dark, thick stuff..

I shot a lot of elk back when with a 25-35 and a 30-30, but with light rifle calibers you simply have to limit yourself to broad side shots or nearly broadside shots and in todays National Forrests thats not an easy shot to get. Your also limited as to range with the lighter calibers..

How in the world is the .270 very limited compared to a 7mm or even a .30 cal on the same case? For whatever reason, the .270 Win floats my boat. The .270 (and .280) strikes perfect balance to me in a medium game rifle. It has the power to get the job done, the trajectory to make the shot w/out undue stress in guessing range out to over 300 yards, and the light recoil so that I can take an awkward field rest (i.e. something that requires leaning into the scope)and not be afraid to whack myself in the forhead when pulling the trigger. The nice thing is, it can do this all in a trim bolt rifle and manageable 22" barrel. I have several other rounds for big game hunting...actually the .270 is the smallest of the bunch, but my first inclination is to always grab it on the way out the door.

Regards,

Lou

Look at this guy:

Talk about bored!! He loves the 7mm08, probobly thinks the 280 Remington and the 7X64 have no merit either. His new toy is a 308, so the 30-06 is probobly "boring" too.
He is just one of those, ( you know the type), the 51 MM case is better than the 63 or 64MM case, as well as you have to have a short action rifle to be in vogue. Dosen't matter, that you may not be able to seat the bullets out far enough to realize the cartridge's performance.

As far as bullet selection goes, who in the world shoots all the bullet weights that are available in a given caliber? Also if you need a specific bullet weight, buy a rifle that will handle that bullet.

Jerry

Funny, the .270Win is thought of as a "kicker" over here in the UK and people who use it get quite a few side ways glances!



But the reason for that is generally our deer are far smaller than yours and shot at shorter distances.



For use in the States I would say that the .270win is a fine alrounder pretty much anywhere you don't run into big bears on a regular basis. For such a "poor" cartridge it has stood the test of time and is still going strong....

I've never been a .270 fan. All of my uncles & cousins have a .270. Think about it, until the .270wbymag came out & now the .270wsm, there are no other carts. in this bore size. It should have been a 7x64Brennek or a .280. Really, think about it, the .270 was a marketing tool much like the .300wsm is today; an ingenious soulution to a none existant problem.
I probably will never own one but there is really nothing wrong w/ the .270 other than too many people shoot one, for me that's enough.

I like mine!



http://www.groovebullets.com/forum/album_pic.php?pic_id=170

Well It looks like some people still have an opinion. Thank you to all the people who expressed theirs. The snow is still in the yard and a good debate is always welcome this time of year. To the people that get personal, go read mortie. You can state a opinion without personal attacks.It shows no class. I clearly was just looking to get a reaction. Bruce

you meas trolling, don't you!

Jerry

you mean trolling, don't you!

Jerry