The 270 is a hot, flat shooting round with a case to bore ratio that loves slow burning powders with sectional densities from .240 to .300...more like a 300 Win Mag than an '06.

In fact, you will find that the velocity and trajectory of the 130 gr 270 is the same as the 165 gr 300 Win. These bullets have the same sectional densities and penetrate the same. Same for the 270 with 150 grainers vs the 300 with 180s. For varmints, the 270s 90 gr speer easily clocks 3600 fps same as the 300 with a 110 grainer.

The '06 is a fine round, but is about as different from the 270 as it is from the 300 Win. Sure, if you put a lot of stock in kenetic energy, the 270 ain't no 300 winnie, but for thin skinned game sectional density and velocity are better predictors of lethality because of the overriding importance of penetration in killing on bad angles in the field.

Up through Elk, there really is no difference in lethality when comparing the 270 with the 300 Win. A 160 gr partition at 2900 fps from a 270 is just like a 200 gr partition from a 300 Win in trajectory and penetration with 160/200ths less energy, but that doesn't mean squat. You need a full blown autopsy to find the actual difference in wound channels.

The comparison between the '06 and the 270 is old and tired...it really should be between the 270 and the 300 Win.

bbruce,

For one reason and one reason only - because it works!

Tom

I normally stay out of these, ............but since I've used a .270 to kill over 100 whitetails, I think I can speak with some credibility regarding the caliber. For me this is an exceptional deer cartridge. As Ray said, there are alot of good calibers in this bracket. Would a 7mag have done as well? Yes, I believe so. A 30-06? Probably - at least for 95% of my kills. But for the size deer I hunt and the places I hunt them, I cant imagine a "better" caliber or better performance.

While many successfully use the .270 for elk or black bear, I go with a larger hole - usually a much larger hole. So...why the .270? Because in the right situation it is a fine killer.

I have used caliber like the 30-06 300 Win mag, 338 Win mag, 9.3x62 and 375 H&H and in 99% of the time the 270 Will work just as well, I have shot from Eland to Springbuck with it and it gets the job done, it is easy on the shoulder cheap to shoot and at the end the job is done, I prefer myne over the 30-06, but I will not think twice to take my 30-06 out of the safe and take it hunting, If you do good shot on large game with any of the above game you will not see much of a difference.

My 270 win M70 with 150 grain bullets worked like a charm on the last Kudu bull I shot, it hit him behind the shoulder and he only went about 30 yards before going down.

Why?

Light recoil (I'm too much of a ninny to shoot Mags, I bruise like a peach ). Less flinch means....
Accurate. It hits where I aim it. Not saying its better than all the rest, though.
Knocks 'em down just fine, NEVER had a problem. Sorry, you're going to have to load up your mag with some really heavy bullets to make any difference between a .270 and a (bow, scrape) Mag. Heavy recoil in most people (non on this board, of course , only non-AccurateReloading members) reduces accuracy.

All that said, I'm looking forward to getting a .300 Win Mag some day and trying it out.

Why? Its about as simple as simple can get. It works plain pure and honest. Its got a name and a reputation behind it. My grandfather, who is about to trn 78 has hunted deer and many other things since he was 19. The first gun he ever got was a winchester 270. After 516 deer 4 elk 1 pronghorn and a litlle over 1,000 wild pigs, he still shoots a 270. Because it works and will never quit working, despite all the new hype about the ultra long and super short and totaly pointless magnums. If you think you need a magnum to kill a whitetail, take this advice: get a 270 and learn to be pin point acurate. then go and shoot all the deer you want. just my 2 cents

One reason only - because it works!

I for one am immune to this discussion, for I have no .270. Always manage to get distracted by some other cute little curiosity of wood and steel, dunno why. When O'Connor was still alive and I was young I read his every word and LUSTED for a .270! In the background though were his words about his wife's exploits with the 7X57, and their trips to Africa, shooting lions with a .375 H&H. I no longer lust for a .270 Win. because I've rifles that will do more, and those that do less. Maybe a few that do about the same. About anything you care to use will kill a deer if you do your part, so I never cared much about the cartridge. I do get a bit dizzy now and then when I see a fine rifle or shotgun, an old well cared for thing full of tales and memories, or even a new one not yet blooded and still devoid of character.

Imagine if you had a brand new just delivered, just out of the box, D'Arcy Echols creation in your hands...would the chambering matter that much? Or maybe would you say, "I don't think it will reach XXX yards, so I'll get closer."

My last buck almost got powder burns under his chin, maybe I'll do better next year.

From my own standpoint I like to have something different. That's why I've never had a 270, don't currently own one, and have no plans in the immediate future to get one. That big reputation it has is what has kept me from sampling that flavor. I'm sure it's quite a useful little cartridge. Should perform nearly identical to my 284 win, but with a rather generic, pedestrian facade. I think I'll add a 280 Rem to my safe long before a 270 win, but who knows what deal my catch my eye before then.

Sabot:

Great insight, there. I've always condsidered the .270 Win. a beltless magnum, of sorts, for the very reasons you cite.

Quote:

---

Should perform nearly identical to my 284 win, but with a rather generic, pedestrian facade.

---

tdobesh:

I understand where you're coming from relative to having something different. But remember, once the trigger is pulled it's no longer a specific cartridge, but simply a bullet of given diameter and weight traveling at a given velocity. That being said, the 7mm's are much more "generic, pedestrian" than the .270 could ever be.

Let's see:

.277 major offerings - 3 chamberings.
.284 major offerings - I stopped counting at 6.

Looks like the "generic" award goes to the 7mm's.

RSY

RSY,



Say that's a pretty good insight! I never thought about it that way. You know a 270-284 win might be just the ticket!



Now see what you've done, you've gone and given me a really bad good idea!

Now you're talkin'! Count me in.

RSY

Now guy's I started this. How about this for an idea .22-270. or .20- 270 0r better yet .17-270. Notice Ive never heard about any round built off it. Why because the 30-06 is useful,AND THE BASE OF MOST. Im going to stand my ground on this.

Obviously your disdain for the 270, has also clouded your ability to think and read! Ever heard of the 243 Catbird? Kenny Jarrret built this hot rod on a 270 Winchester case.

Check this out in cartridges of the world.

Jerry

Bbruce:

Just for the sake of argument, and since you want to stand your ground, here is another 270 Winchester wildcat, the 303-270Win. You can find this on huntingnut.com's web site.

That is if you care to look it UP!

Jerry

The .050 difference in case length means nothing I guess, so we may as well call the catbird a 6mm-06

Jerry

Having read about a jillion topics just like this one, I have about concluded that it just doesn't matter what cartridge you use as long as it's designed in the smokeless powder era. All the big game I have ever shot was with .30 calibers, 150 to 180 grain bullets. I suspect there would have been no difference with a .270, 7mm Magnum, .338 or whatever. Except some kick more and make it harder to shoot straight.

Indy:

You are so right, most of these threads are started to, I think troll and stir up the pot. My defense of the 270 Winchester, is based on the fact that it is a "good" cartridge. Heck this thread could be about the 338-06, or the 25-06 for all I care, for they are "good" cartridges as well.

I find an interesting thing happens when people buy a gun, especially if they can't afford a number of them, the argument becomes Ford/Chevy.


Jerry

You got that right Jerry. It always seems to be a "Mine is Better than Yours" arguement.

Reloader

Sabot,

What a great post. New insight for me. I still haven't come down off my high from my recent Africa trip with the .300 UM. I took it and a .243, because with certain loads they were almost ballistic twins. So I was thinking of trying to find a light/medium rifle that was a little better (heavier) backup to the .300 RUM in case of rifle failure, but still had similar ballistics. And now, after considering your post, I'm looking for similar bullet SD for similar penetration to the vitals. Also, I'd like to find a DGR load that's similar, but that may be stretching too far. .270 WSM may be the ballistic twin for the .300 RUM, but I'm setting myself up for further ammunition scarcity, I fear.

Steve

Smart thinking...you don't want to sandbag yourself with the ammo availability issue. I think you can pretty much solve this and almost duplicate the 300 UM by getting a 338 Win mag.

For thin skinned game at long range the 338 Win will push 180 gr ballistic tips 3280 fps from a 24 inch bbl. If the drop in SD is a problem, work with Barnes X bullets in the same weight range. The Nosler 210 gr partition will break 3000 fps, and is the best mid-weight 338 out there.

By the time you get to DG, trajectory is a moot point because they really are taken in close, and are not all that "dangerous" 150 yards away. The 338 Win Mag will launch several excellent 300 grainers near 2475 fps with an SD of .375.

Finally, both Federal and Hornady make 250 gr High Energy loads that ove the classic 250 grainer along at more than 2800 fps.

My guess is that there is a lot of 338 ammo available over there, but the caliber may be too small in diameter for DG in some areas.

Well just to add my 0.2 cents. The .270 was my first deer rifle and used it for goats and deer with great success. Then I went away from it for a long time because I was swayed by alot of other calibres. However I have come back to the .270 in the Blaser R93 and have once again realised just how effective a calibre it really is. I like it for its high velocity, flat shooting ability with a modest amount of recoil.

Can't see much point personally in the 7mm Remington Magnum. Actually, I've hunted with guys who had the 7mm RM when I've been shooting the .270. Ballistic tables may show that the 7mm shoots flatter and hit harder than the .270 but in the field none of us could tell any difference.

I have a custom 300WSM that I am getting back from my gunsmith at the end of this month. I think to see any difference between the 7mm RM and the .270 is minimal based on my observations and that the .300 is a definate jump up power wise.

I'm not trying to bash the 7mm RM, I think it is a fine round.

quote:

Originally posted by bbruce:
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.

My question to you is: Why would you have or prefer a 7mm over the venerable 270? It will do anything a 7mm will do, and why does a 7mm NEED a 175gr bullet? Just go up to 30 cal and use a 180gr bullet in my opinion.
The 7mm was/is a ploy by Remington to hack into sales of the 270 with their own signature calibre. Guess what, it didn't even nudge the sales the 270 has had, and never will.
Food for thought.
416RigbyHunter.

i have owned a .270 sold it years ago for a 7MM-08.. best move i made. yes a 7-MAG is over rated and so is a .270 But now i do most of my deer hunting with my .260

I agree with the folks who say that it is because it just works. I have used the 270 loaded with 150 grain Nosler Partitions on bear, deer and moose for the past 30 years and have no complaints on its performance on game.

I have to agree that the consistency of its performance gets boring and l am currently working on a 6.5x55 swede for a bit of a change.

quote:

Originally posted by bbruce:
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.

Back to your original question. I'll give you a very pragmatic answer. During this whole ammo crisis mess, .270 is the only caliber of ammunition that I've found available everywhere.

A loaded .270 beats the heck out of an unloaded .340 ...

quote:

Originally posted by analog_peninsula:

A loaded .270 beats the heck out of an unloaded .340 ...

or a .223 or .45 acp and the list goes on. What is this a 3rd world country?

Anywho no more words from the original poster in a while.

quote:

Originally posted by Wayfaring Stranger:

quote:

Originally posted by analog_peninsula:

A loaded .270 beats the heck out of an unloaded .340 ...

or a .223 or .45 acp and the list goes on. What is this a 3rd world country?

Anywho no more words from the original poster in a while.

Well considering the OP started this topic FIVE years ago is there any surprise! I'm a fan of the .270 Win as well so I don't mind reading an old post on it every now and then.

quote:

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'Connor) wrote about it. Very limited mid-bore, shoots flat but give me a 7mm anytime.

Only one good reason, well two and two others. But one "design fault".

1). It is a non-military calibre available off-the-shelf therefore legal and obtainable ALL OVER the world from gun shops to garages to bait shops in the largest city to the smallest "one horse dorp".

2). It gives a magazine capacity of ONE MORE than the 7mm Remington Magnum. And having a larger case is a better lower pressure cartridge than any 7mm-08 trying to achieve equal velocity.

3). It doesn't have a pretty pointless belt!

4). It is a lot cheaper and more widespread than its nearest "continental cousin" the 7 x 64. Try getting that calibre in say Scotland or Canada!

And, in truth, a 24" barrelled 270 probably for all practical purposes is as good as any 22" barrelled 7mm Remington Magnum.

FAULT. But if it were 280 Remington it would be better. Unfortunately 280 Remington is virtually moribund. Which is a great pity as that calibre also offers 175 grain bullets.

And that is the 270's only fault. That when Winchester designed it they didn't make it shoot a .284" diameter bullet.

I am now trying Sako's 155 grain bullet in my 270s. One a Parker-Hale M81 Classic and the other a BRNO ZKK 600 with its contemporary Zeiss-Jena 'scope and BRNO one piece mount.

If I knew how to post a picture...or someone could host it for me...I would!

I like the effectiveness, light recoil and availability. I've hunted with bow, crossbow, 12 ga. rifled slug, .243, 7mm 08, .270, 30'06, and 7mm Mag, but I use my .270 90% of the time now. I've kept records on @85 deer I've killed with various firearms. The last time I looked carefully 3 of them were far enough out (350+ yrd.s) that I was more comfortable with my 7mm Mag. If, perish the thought, I had to cut back to one rifle it would be a .270.

Good question bbruce.

The .270 Winchester is available in beautiful factory Mauser rifles. The .270 Winchester is the top dual purpose big game/varmint cartridge. With 100 gr bullets it is a superb 500 yard varmint cartridge. It is a fantastic mountain and whitetail cartridge milder than the 7's.

The .30-06 is not a big gun. The .270 has better BC and SD bullets until you get to the .308 200 grain bullets that really bring the .30-06 velocity down.

The .270 Winchester and the .375 H&H are a fantastic classic battery.

I love these discussions! IF not "Why the .45 over the 9mm" it's something like this one "Why the .270." He must have been really bored!

Why do I use the .270? 'Cause I like it.

I also like the 6.5 x 55, the 7 Mauser, 8 Mauser, .243 Win, 7 RM, '06, .257 Roberts, and a few others I could mention, but wont.

All good cartridges that do good work, if the operator pays attention.

It's been fun reading the comments, thanks guys!

My wife's uncle had one ,it was the first centerfire i had ever shot.It was a hoot to shoot at coyotes at extended ranges and hit them.My wife got it for me and i used it for 12 years with no regrets,although i have a 7x57,35whelen,and 8x57 and others based on the 57mm case if i had to choose just one to keep it would be it.I have no qualms about taking it hunting for elk or bears.I have TRUST that it will get the job done and done well.That said it's fun to shoot other cal.Good Luck

Because I happened on a browning safari in 270 about 20 yrs ago and it shoots 150gn partitions like they were a match made in heaven. And on whitetail its bad thru the bone. It has never failed me....Jerry

My experience with the .270 is very long and extremely thin. I got my first one (I have 4) from a co-worker who was shot on cash. it was back around 1973 and it had a cheap Simmons scope on it. It was all of $75 and was an FN action rifle imported by F.I.E. Apparfently he had accuracy issues and the glass bedding and free floating of he barrel was a total disaster to lok at. The stock was about as ugly a stock as I'd ever seen and to quote the late Jack O'Connorwas "Ugly enough to abort a lady crocodile." I bouht mot to get the action than anything else. You know what they say about shooting a donor, right? That gun put three 130 gr. Winchester Silvertips in a group under a dime. DAMN! Well, I took it out deer hunting that fall, again loaded with that Winchester ammo and due to being in the wrong place for the shot was forced to shoot left handed rather than try to get into a position where I could shoot right handed. The buck dropped at the shot but due to the wrong handed shot, I hit it too far back and it was a gut shot. The deer was only about 50 yards away, but by the time I got to it, it was dead. Kind of a messy clean up but the gun did the job. Since then I have gone to the heavier 150 gr. bullets as I've found them to be a bit more accurate in all my .270 Win. caliber rifles. Since that fist one, I've run into some decent deals on an original FN mauser made in 1951, a Ruger #1A and the last one, a Winchester M70 push feed that came with a McMillan stock shaped like Winchester's Featherweight. The only rifle that does not shoot MOA or less is the Ruger and it's a 1.5" gun at 100 yards. I'll have tinker with that one a bit one of these days.
If I draw a deer tag this year, I'll probably take one of those .270s out just for the hell of it. I still have that mangled up FN that shot so well. I took it out a while back with a box of ammo that I loaded up when I first got the gun just to see if they would still shoot. Not only did that ammo shoot well but the groups were just as good as when I first loaded the ammo.
Paul B.

I think I will start a thread on how over-rated the 7mm mag is, on second thought my hunting buddies will see it and complain,again.