While considering a light, short rifle for some smaller shooters in our extended family, someone suggested reconsidering the 270 Win.

It is definitely worth a re-look.

First, some lightweight rifles like the Tikka use the same action as the 243-7mm08-308, so there may be little advantage in a "short-stroke" rifle.

Secondly, it will be strictly a non-dangerous game rifle, so there is no need to double-duty as a back up a 416 or 375.

The ballistics are stunning. A 129 grain LRX (Barnes) can be shot at 3100fps in a 22.4" barrel. That gives as much range as ever dreamed of in Africa. Sighted-in at 1.9"/100 yards, it only drops -4.1" at 300 yards, and still hits with 1900 ftlbs way out there (or -4.5" and 1850 ftlbs, if launched at 3050fps).

It can also be reduced to 2600fps, for reasonable hunting to 275-300 yards, perhaps limited to impala-size at that load. Recoil would be like a 243. But I suspect that it may be best for the shooter to learn to handle the full load.

It struck me that there may be a lot of experience here with using a 270 on larger-size game. What points should be watched? Pictures are welcome.

Well, the recoil isn't particularly punishing, especially with lighter loads.

There are a few disadvantages, however:

1. The action will have to be a "full length" action which will weight about a quarter of a pound more than the "mid length" actions for 243/308 etc.

2. The action will be .75 to 1 inch longer, adding to the overall length of the rifle (given the same barrel length). Small-framed shooters have difficulty with the muzzle heaviness of even light rifles, and this length adds to the problem.

3. The larger case capacity, particularly in a shorter barrel, will generate some bit more muzzle blast. In my experience, young shooters are impacted more by muzzle blast than the actual recoil.

The .270 is certainly a dependable killer for the smaller and medium sized big game species; it will typically down an elk as quickly as the larger magnums. However, something like a 7mm/08 would have a bit of advantage in the physical package of the rifle for small-framed/young shooters.

quote:

1. The action will have to be a "full length" action which will weight about a quarter of a pound more than the "mid length" actions for 243/308 etc.

2. The action will be .75 to 1 inch longer, adding to the overall length of the rifle (given the same barrel length). Small-framed shooters have difficulty with the muzzle heaviness of even light rifles, and this length adds to the problem.

Yes, those are real disadvantages, but they don't apply to the Tikka T-3.

In a Win70 Compact Featherweight, the 7m08 and 308 would have advantages over the regular Featherweight. But in the Tikka T-3, they are all cut from the same barstock.

And the Tikka has an extra 2" over the Compact Win70, so the muzzle blast is probably similar. You are right, of course, that muzzle blast is more distracting than actual recoil.

416Tanzan,

Having to provide several young hunters in my family with rifles, I have a little experience with smaller frame shooters. First and foremost, the rifle has to fit. The LOP matching the shooter is paramount, 13 inches is probably the longest you want to go. My wife's LOP is 12.5, my nephew's is set at 12.25 and my niece is 11.75. As long as the stock fits them they should have no problem with a 270's recoil. That being said stonecreek has a point, a shorter action will also aid in the rifles overall balance. I would recommend the following calibers:
7mm-08
6.5 Creedmore
300 Savage
284 Win
30-30

A 270 Win is seldom a bad choice.

I bought my wife a Ruger 1A in .270 Win and had it cut down to 12.5 inches. It still balances great with that length of pull and is a great little rifle for small-framed shooters.

I have tikka t3 hunter in .308w it isnt heavy at all 3,1kg, a t3 light is 2,7kg. 23" barrel for all standard cal. A 6,5*55 or 7mm08 is a option for medium to big game and smaller shooters. I think recoil may be sharp in a max loaded .270. I have shot 500p carcass weight moose with my 6,5 and they drops like a 3006 (or like a 270).

quote:

Originally posted by 416Tanzan:
While considering a light, short rifle for some smaller shooters in our extended family, someone suggested reconsidering the 270 Win.

It is definitely worth a re-look.

First, some lightweight rifles like the Tikka use the same action as the 243-7mm08-308, so there may be little advantage in a "short-stroke" rifle.

Secondly, it will be strictly a non-dangerous game rifle, so there is no need to double-duty as a back up a 416 or 375.

The ballistics are stunning. A 129 grain LRX (Barnes) can be shot at 3100fps in a 22.4" barrel. That gives as much range as ever dreamed of in Africa. Sighted-in at 1.9"/100 yards, it only drops -4.1" at 300 yards, and still hits with 1900 ftlbs way out there (or -4.5" and 1850 ftlbs, if launched at 3050fps).

It can also be reduced to 2600fps, for reasonable hunting to 275-300 yards, perhaps limited to impala-size at that load. Recoil would be like a 243. But I suspect that it may be best for the shooter to learn to handle the full load.

It struck me that there may be a lot of experience here with using a 270 on larger-size game. What points should be watched? Pictures are welcome.

416T,

First thing I'll say is that in my previous residence in the state of Idaho, there sure were a lot of elk killed with the .270 Winchester and that was primarily using Remington Core Lokts and Nosler Partitions. I have nothing but good to say about the caliber.

That said, I thought I'd share with you my recent experiences in kid rifles. With an antipated safari in 2013 that I just returned from in RSA, I bought my then nearly 14 year old a Tikka T3 Lite in .308 Winchester. At the time he was very scrawny and much shorter than he is now. But, I already had one in .300WM and he was able to shoulder it and reach the trigger with still a bend in his arm. So I gave it a go. He had already been shooting a junior model Savage in the same caliber with very light loads.

I think it's a great caliber to get them started on, just go with light bullets and light powder loads. My now 10 year old second son is doing the same and the loads I have him shooting just give a gentle pop both recoil and muzzle blast wise.

Back to the older son, as he grew and shot more I slowly increased the loads. And really within a reasonable amount of time, I had him shooting full power 165gr loads. The Tikka has been a dream to develop loads for. The only 165gr pill that it wouldn't shoot well was the Barnes TSX/TTSX. I think that this is due to the length of the bullet not getting along with the 1:11" twist. It shot the 150gr version quite well.

Eventually I settled in on 165gr North Fork bonded cores with 44gr of Varget behind it and a CCI BR-2 primer. Bullet was cased in Lapua brass. Dead nuts accurate round.

Off to RSA we go. We hunted out west first in the area wedged between Namibia and Botswana in the Kalahari. This is longer range shooting country. He decked his Springbok in one shot, a 220 yard shot to boot. Back near Kimberley, his next animal was an impala that he hit with a frontal shot at 50 yards. The ram ran about 40 yards and dropped dead leaving an easy to follow blood trail. Okay, no big deal, these are animals sized properly for the little .308 Win.

Now on the list for the boy was a Kudu, but the bulls just would not cooperate. The evening before our last day I told him it was time to make a plan, that I wanted him to shoot one of the larger species...Kudu, Waterbuck, Gemsbok or even an Eland. He already asked to shoot my .375 and now that he's 15 and a bit bigger, I was willing to. So off first thing in the morning we go, and we spot a nice Kudu bull up on a hillside. We start the stalk and up the hill we go. The bull goes over the top and down into a bowl. When we reached the top, we looked for that bull but could not find him. Our PH though spotted 3 mature bull Eland about 190 yards off on an adjacent hillside.

So, when we left the truck it was for Kudu, so I left my .375 there....what was I thinking? So now we're faced with choosing to shoot an eland with a .308. The load gave a muzzle velocity right at 2600fps, the quick math at 190 yards told me this isn't a good thing to do. But desperate times call for desperate measures. We had two trackers, the PH and a pair of fearless Jack Russel terriers. So we made the call to shoot. First shot hit him square in the shoulder versus a little behind it like we asked him to do. At the shot the bull bucked and moved a few feet off, now partially screening his front end. 2nd shot missed, 3rd shot was a hit.

The team, less me to stay behind and keep glass on the wounded bull, moved down into the canyon between the hills and back up to where the bull was. About half way there, the healthy bulls moved off with the wounded one lagging behind. When the shot bull cleared the tree I could see the blood coming out of the shoulder from the first shot and that it had broken the shoulder, he could not use that leg. The dogs quickly got his trail and the group moved down the hill, a few more finishing shots and he was down. This is not a story involving hours of chasing a wounded animal, from start to end, no more than 10-15 minutes.

Now I certainly won't advocate using the .308Win on eland, it's just not a good choice. But with the proper load and shot placement, it can be done. So having done, I can't imagine the caliber being a bad choice for any of the other smaller PG species.

Just one guy's experience, best of luck to the new shooters/hunters whatever you decide.

I have a Remington M-700 Mountain rifle in a 7X57 original chambering. It came from the factory in a standard Remington "long" action and 22" barrel. It is the best balancing and handling rifle I own. It is light also due to the thin barrel contour. My Savage Axis rifles are about the same regarding balance. They too have long actions for short stubby cartridges.
A Mountain rifle chambered in a 270 Win. Would be equally so and be a good flat shooter that can handle almost as much as a '06 if the right bullets are used.
Using factory Remington or Winchester velocity equivalent ammo, muzzle blast shouldn't be much of a problem even for a young'un. As they get older, it can be loaded up to do what ever you want.
Just my thoughts.

With some tinkering I came up with 4 loads that all shoot to the same point of impact at 100y - 2.5 inches high...

A 90g Sierra HP at 3350fps. A very mild load that is awesome on small and medium thin skinned game.
A 130g Hotcor at 3100fps, a great all rounder for pigs and deer.
A 150g SST and or NBT at 2950fps. Also a bit of an allrounder but these are better for bigger pigs and deer.
And a 160g Partition at 2820fps. I haven't had much cause to use them on game yet, but having seen what they do in wet newspaper, I would like to know what they wouldn't kill.

This round offers great versatility in a light recoiling and easy to load for package.

The .270 Winchester isn't as "easy recoiling" as many would like to believe.....it offers a pretty severe jab but it isn't seriously painful like a .300 magnum can be....even a .30-06 can offer some shoulder discomfort.....but the .270 will make you wake up and take notice.....it's not at all like a .243 or better yet a .25-06.....but some youngsters manage to cope with it.....it can also cause a youngster to get a serious case of "flinch" mostly from the noise......the .270 isn't at all quiet and earphones or other hearing protection is highly recommended.

Life without at least one .270 and one 30-06 would be horrible.

However, for a youths first gun, recoil and blast can ruin his desire to ever become a hunter, and that has happened so many times that its unbelivealbe..Young parents jsut get in too big a hurry to make Junior a hunter..

I think a youth should first of all be taught to shoot a .22 Long Rifle and shoot it well, then progress to a 222 or 223 for his first couple of deer hunts and under the tuteledge of his parent and keep the range in the 50 yard range or whatever his ability is on the range is the guiding factor..

Unfortunately many parents are not qualified to do this themselves much less teach their offspring, hopefully they are aware of this and take advantage of the available firearms school put on by Fish and Game and other good organizations is appropriate. In Idaho kids must attend a one week firearms school put on by volenteers and Idaho fish and game to be able to purchase a hunting license. I think they must be 12 or older to get a license..'

All of my children and grand children were taught to shoot my me, and started at age 6 or 7 with a 22 and killed their first deer at 6, 8 and 12, depending on their shooting skill and desire, I never pushed them and let them go at their own pace..I only had one that didn't like to hunt or shoot and that was my grandaughter and she is totally into high school rodeo and horses, and thats fine..

quote:

Life without at least one .270 and one 30-06 would be horrible.

Agreed.

Maybe a quick run down on other options will help:

243 - - - available in common rifle models, but on the light side for Africa.

257 Bob - - - less available, also on the light side

260 Rem - - - less available, getting better for hartebeest and up

6.5x55 - - - less available in USA, getting better for hartebeest and up

270 Win - - - commonly available, providing more punch and a good hartebeest gun

7m08 - - - commonly available, (insignificantly) less reach/punch than a 270

7x57 - - - less available in US, an oldtime sleeper

280 Rem - - - less available, 270Win's sister

308 Win - - - commonly available, similar to 270 energy.

30-06 - - - commonly available, probably the max that can be called "light-moderate recoil"


For Africa, 270Win, 7m08, 308, and 30-06 would be pretty nice in Pachmyer/Limbsaver-padded light, short rifles.


PS: These are for short adults, and guests, not grade-school kids, if that makes a difference.

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
Life without at least one .270 and one 30-06 would be horrible.

However, for a youths first gun, recoil and blast can ruin his desire to ever become a hunter, and that has happened so many times that its unbelivealbe..Young parents jsut get in too big a hurry to make Junior a hunter..

I think a youth should first of all be taught to shoot a .22 Long Rifle and shoot it well, then progress to a 222 or 223 for his first couple of deer hunts and under the tuteledge of his parent and keep the range in the 50 yard range or whatever his ability is on the range is the guiding factor..

Unfortunately many parents are not qualified to do this themselves much less teach their offspring, hopefully they are aware of this and take advantage of the available firearms school put on by Fish and Game and other good organizations is appropriate. In Idaho kids must attend a one week firearms school put on by volenteers and Idaho fish and game to be able to purchase a hunting license. I think they must be 12 or older to get a license..'

All of my children and grand children were taught to shoot my me, and started at age 6 or 7 with a 22 and killed their first deer at 6, 8 and 12, depending on their shooting skill and desire, I never pushed them and let them go at their own pace..I only had one that didn't like to hunt or shoot and that was my grandaughter and she is totally into high school rodeo and horses, and thats fine..

The so called "advice" above by Atkinson is absurd and wrong.

Remember that Atkinson is the person who shot deer with a .22 LR and then rode off to let them die!

The .222 and 223 are not good deer guns! I go back to 1953, 60 years ago, with the tiny .222 and it's a failure on deer.

Those tiny rounds are not legal in most places and result in slow kills and unnecessary suffering by the poor animals.

The 6mm's are the legal minimum and even then only with the best of bullets within range as well.


Use Enough Gun!

Alzheimer's kicking in again?

I know I'm going to take a beating on this but I have two Sako Finnlights in 308 and 270. Both are identically scoped. It seems to me the 308 with 150 grain bullets recoils less sharply than the 270 with 130s. I am a big fan of the 308!

I went through the same exercise when Mrs Blacktailer needed a hunting rifle. Admittedly I am biased to 308 cal so take this with a sack of salt but there are so many bullet weights available in 308 that you can buy/load for virtually any situation.
Bought her a Kimber Super America. It is light and fits her. Started her on 110gr loaded very light. Worked up to 130gr with a little more powder. In Africa she used 165gr at 2700fps to take her zebra.
I'm picking up my first 270 tomorrow so maybe I'll change my tune.

quote:

Originally posted by Blacktailer:
I went through the same exercise when Mrs Blacktailer needed a hunting rifle. Admittedly I am biased to 308 cal so take this with a sack of salt but there are so many bullet weights available in 308 that you can buy/load for virtually any situation.
Bought her a Kimber Super America. It is light and fits her. Started her on 110gr loaded very light. Worked up to 130gr with a little more powder. In Africa she used 165gr at 2700fps to take her zebra.
I'm picking up my first 270 tomorrow so maybe I'll change my tune.

I just did a comparison of light rifles 270Win, 7m08, 308 and 30-08. I used the "most accurate load" for different weights in the Barnes "5th" for comparison. The only surprise might be in the 7-08 and 308. They come in 20" barrels in the Compact Featherweight, which meant that I deducted 140 fps for those loads. The 270 and 3006 come in 22.44" barrels in the Tikka and weigh the same as the WinM70 Compact Featherweight (6.8 pounds to 6.75 in Compact Featherweight).

What did I learn?

First of all, all four rifles would adequately handle light and medium African plains game out to 300 yards. No surprise there. However, the sleeper was . . . the 270 Win.

bullet - - - length - - SD - - BC - - fps - - Stability - - powder - - vol%
129 LRX - 1.344” - .240 - .463 - - 3076 - - 1.507 - - H4350 - - 93 - -

ballistics - - distan - - drop” - - wind - - velocity - - energy - - recoil ftlbs - - recoil vel
- - - - - - - - - - 0 - - - - 0 - - - - 10mph - - - 3076 - - - 2710 - - - 17.5 - - - 12.0 - - -
- - - - - - - - 300 - - - -4.3 - - - - 5.3 - - - - - 2566 - - - 1885 - -
- - - - - - - - 400 - - - -15.0 - - - 9.7 - - - - - 2408 - - - 1660

Compare the 30-06 in the similar SD 165 grain bullet:
bullet - - length - - SD - - BC - - fps - - Stability - - powder - - vol%
165 TTSX 1.388 - .248 - .442 - 2744 - 1.698 - - IMR4064 - 95 (50gn.)

ballistics - - distan - - drop” - - wind - - velocity - energy - - recoil - - ftlbs - - recoil vel
- - - - - - - - - - 0 - - - - 0 - - - - - 10 - - - 2744 - - - 2758 - - - 19.2 ftlb. - - - 12.6fps
- - - - - - - - 300 - - - -7.5 - - - - 6.6 - - - 2247 - - - 1850
- - - - - - - - 400 - - - -22.2 - - 12.2 - - - 2094 - - - 1606

In terms of flatness and wind resistance, and thereby reaching the target on longer shots, the 270 was significantly better, 3.2" less drop at 300 yards and 7.2" less drop at 400yards. Granted, someone may want to load the 30-06 to 2800 ftlbs. with the 165 grain bullet. I simply chose the 'most accurate recommendation', and there would still be a significant difference in drop at 300yards.

I can't argue the ballistics, but are you wanting the kids to take 300 yard shots?

quote:

Originally posted by 7MMNut:
I can't argue the ballistics, but are you wanting the kids to take 300 yard shots?

Well, technically, they're the wives.
And no, I don't expect them to take shots over 200 yards at the beginning. Ironically, though, the greater distance tends to give more time for the shooter to setup and get comfortable.

Like I said, all four, 270, 7m08, 308 and 3006, would do well for plains game hunting. And if anyone wanted to take a 300 yard shot, or borrow the rifle for a 300 yard shot, the 270Win would be exceptionally flat. But I would certainly enjoy the hunt if limited to the 7m-08 or 308. I just might use a rangefinder if things push 300 yards. To be honest, that is not very common in East Africa, but it certainly happens.

Remington makes reduced recoil factory rounds for the 270 as well as other caliber that will be good for deer sized game. The 270 round is 115g at 2700 fps similar to a 257 Roberts. For elk sized/tough animals I'd consider a 130g Partition at 3000 fps a reasonable minimum.

Sorry for going off topic, but . . .

quote:

Originally posted by Savage_99:

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
Life without at least one .270 and one 30-06 would be horrible.

However, for a youths first gun, recoil and blast can ruin his desire to ever become a hunter, and that has happened so many times that its unbelivealbe..Young parents jsut get in too big a hurry to make Junior a hunter..

I think a youth should first of all be taught to shoot a .22 Long Rifle and shoot it well, then progress to a 222 or 223 for his first couple of deer hunts and under the tuteledge of his parent and keep the range in the 50 yard range or whatever his ability is on the range is the guiding factor..

Unfortunately many parents are not qualified to do this themselves much less teach their offspring, hopefully they are aware of this and take advantage of the available firearms school put on by Fish and Game and other good organizations is appropriate. In Idaho kids must attend a one week firearms school put on by volenteers and Idaho fish and game to be able to purchase a hunting license. I think they must be 12 or older to get a license..'

All of my children and grand children were taught to shoot my me, and started at age 6 or 7 with a 22 and killed their first deer at 6, 8 and 12, depending on their shooting skill and desire, I never pushed them and let them go at their own pace..I only had one that didn't like to hunt or shoot and that was my grandaughter and she is totally into high school rodeo and horses, and thats fine..

The so called "advice" above by Atkinson is absurd and wrong.

With respect, it may, in your opinion, be incorrect, though I agree with him. But even if we are incorrect, that doesn't make our opinion absurd.

quote:

Remember that Atkinson is the person who shot deer with a .22 LR and then rode off to let them die!

First off, that's an ad hominem attack. It is a cheap shot intended only to smear someone, and is irrelevant to the topic at hand.

Second, I remember that thread. I'd invite those interested in some perspective on what you're implying to read what Atkinson and I both wrote there. They can agree or disagree as they like, but at least they can have the benefit of having read what was said themselves.

quote:

The .222 and 223 are not good deer guns!

In your opinion. I could agree that it might not be my first choice, but if I were shooting one of the heavier .224 Barnes or NP bullets fired from a .222, .223 .225, I don't think I'd be too much handicapped. Especially within 150 yards. Feel free to disagree.

quote:

I go back to 1953, 60 years ago, with the tiny .222 and it's a failure on deer.

I'm unclear on what you mean here . . . are you saying you yourself shot deer with a .222?

If so, which bullet did you use? I ask because the construction of .224 bullets has changed a great deal in 60 years, and the bullets you had available probably weren't as robust as those you can obtain today.

quote:

Those tiny rounds are not legal in most places and result in slow kills and unnecessary suffering by the poor animals.

True, .22 CFs are not legal in many places. I suspect that might be because too few hunters appreciate the differences between a bullet built for varmints and one constructed for larger game. So that's a wise policy, IMO. (If most of the factory ammo for a .270 were loaded with 90 grain Sierra varmint bullets whipping along at 3500 fps, it might be wise policy to make hunting deer with a .270 illegal.)

Question: if a Barnes or NP shot from a .222 or .223 is properly placed (heart, lungs) within, say, 200 yards, would that necessarily produce slow kills and unnecessary suffering? I don't know, though a lot of venison seems to have been put in the freezer by people using just such calibers, but I know that a poorly placed shot from a .270 certainly could. (My thoughts on deer pain and suffering can be found at the link above.)

quote:

The 6mm's are the legal minimum and even then only with the best of bullets within range as well.

In many states the 6mms are the legal minimum. But, as you correctly point out, they must be used with an appropriate bullet and the shot must be taken within the caliber's limitations. Just, I would argue, like the .224 calibers.

Again, as with the .222 & .223, a 6mm wouldn't be my first choice for deer.

quote:

Use Enough Gun!

quote:

Originally posted by 416Tanzan:

quote:

Originally posted by 7MMNut:
I can't argue the ballistics, but are you wanting the kids to take 300 yard shots?

Well, technically, they're the wives.
And no, I don't expect them to take shots over 200 yards at the beginning. Ironically, though, the greater distance tends to give more time for the shooter to setup and get comfortable.

Like I said, all four, 270, 7m08, 308 and 3006, would do well for plains game hunting. And if anyone wanted to take a 300 yard shot, or borrow the rifle for a 300 yard shot, the 270Win would be exceptionally flat. But I would certainly enjoy the hunt if limited to the 7m-08 or 308. I just might use a rangefinder if things push 300 yards. To be honest, that is not very common in East Africa, but it certainly happens.

Noted on the wives, somehow I had the impression it was more for kids. Loading up some Accubonds of the 150gr variety in the .308 may overcome the 300 yard concerns, faster and better BC.

By the way, I was at the range this morning with my 10 year old and his junior rifle. I had loaded up some 150gr projectiles with light powder loads. His first shots with a legitimate hunting load. He had a great time with it. The rifle has a Limbsaver pad on it and I put a PAST pad on his shoulder.

It'll be a little while before he moves up to full power loads but this was a good start. I will have to caveat this however. He has been with me countless times to the public range where there's some 40 odd benches. He has therefore become quite accustomed to sounds of muzzle blasts.

I'd say Ray's post is spot on.
Introduce the kid to shooting gently and with short sessions. Graduate to greater cartridges slowly as the child's ability and STATUE grows.

Tikka T3, particularly the Lite Stainless is a great choice (I don't own one BTW, but have experience with them).
Light, compact, well balanced, very accurate, cheap.
Any of the calibres mentioned will work, BUT I would go for your choice of 270, or possibly 30/06. I simply have an aversion to using short cartridges in 06 length actions. Just seems a waste of potential to me.
The whole short action thing is overblown. True short action rifles are usually lighter and more compact, but most of this lightness and compactness is achieved by a a shorter, sometimes lighter, barrel and a slimmer, shorter forended, stock.

For a perfect example, look at the Kimber Montanas. The actual action in the short 84M weighs bugger all less than the long action in the 84L, maybe 2oz max. Similarly the difference in length of the action is only around .5"The rest of the 6 to 8 oz difference is elsewhere in the rifle.
I suspect that a similar situation exists with the various action length Sakos

Stick with your plan, particularly as you handload. I personally don't like the noise of a fully loaded 270, but that's easily avoided with handloading if necessary,and you have the extra speed available if you wish to load for it. Good 130 and 150gn bullets are plenty for your planned use of the rifle.

If you were to choose the synthetic stock, it may require a bit of cunning to shorten the LOP, if you wanted to shorten it, but that is not an insurmountable issue.

Since you're talking reloads than a 6.5x55 or a .260 using a a 120 to 129 grain bullet in a good fitting light rifle might be the right compromise roger

quote:

Originally posted by bartsche:
Since you're talking reloads than a 6.5x55 or a .260 using a a 120 to 129 grain bullet in a good fitting light rifle might be the right compromise roger

Darn right.....the 6.5s are very good stuff.

Savage 99 is our token anti, a liberal in every respect, its his way or the hiway..

That said, I was a kid of 14 years old doing what my rancher father told me to do. Not doing what he told me was never an option..I was taught by a local Mexican how to shoot deer with a 22 as he had done for years to feed his family. Every family in Mexico on the Texas, Arizona border that are not of the elite shoot deer with 22s and successfully. I was feeding a fencing crew..Not one deer escaped and they died as quick as many I have shot and seen run up to perhaps half a mile..when not desturbed after two shots with a 22 at close range in the heart or lungs they will do two things, lay down and die or continue eating and fall over, much like a moose shot with a 338 or 375 on ocassion..

Savage 99 lives in a different world, and is simply surmising what he thinks happened and he does not know...

The bottom line is any rifle caliber will kill cleanly on big game if use within its power range and the shooters ability..Lord knows lots of big game has been wounded with big bores or every caliber by those that don't abide by that law...I suppose in Savage 99s mind, all deer shot with say a 30-06 die on the spot and never feel the shot. We have all seen deer run a long ways with a vital hit..

So Savage 99, don't send me anymore personal emails if you dont' mind. Your boring me to death, and you make no since at all. Every one here knows I don't shoot deer these days with a 22...but I could and successfully at that..I suppose you will attack the Archery clan next.

People spend way too much time worrying about cartridge and recoil with smaller framed shooters and not nearly enough time worrying about fit. Find a rifle that fits the shooter first, second and third and then worry about chambering. That said, the 270 is never a bad choice.

quote:

Originally posted by sheephunterab:
People spend way too much time worrying about cartridge and recoil with smaller framed shooters and not nearly enough time worrying about fit. Find a rifle that fits the shooter first, second and third and then worry about chambering. That said, the 270 is never a bad choice.

Words of wisdom to be sure. Once the fit is achieved, however, there is substantial reduced recoil to be gained from a 250-3000 with a 100grain bullet at 3000 fps. vs a .270 with a 150grain bullet at 3000fps. roger

A "real" 270 (270 WCF) with a 130 gr TSX will kill anything you would want to use a 270 for.
The 150 gr Nosler Ballistic Silvertip is also an excellent bullet. 150 TSX is too long unless you have 1 in 9 or faster twist.

Max loads of 4350/4831 shoot 3/4 MOA FIVE shot groups in my bone stock NH WRA M70. Rifle is <8 lbs all up and remember the scope should always cost more that the rifle !

JOC knew what he was doing.

quote:

Originally posted by 7x7royal:
A "real" 270 (270 WCF) with a 130 gr TSX will kill anything you would want to use a 270 for.
The 150 gr Nosler Ballistic Silvertip is also an excellent bullet. 150 TSX is too long unless you have 1 in 9 or faster twist.

Max loads of 4350/4831 shoot 3/4 MOA FIVE shot groups in my bone stock NH WRA M70. Rifle is <8 lbs all up and remember the scope should always cost more that the rifle !

JOC knew what he was doing.

Yes he did.

I've got a .270 but it wouldn't be my first recommendation.
If shooting deer your choices are vast. If you want something you can go bigger with later I'd recommend a 7-08 or .308 either with managed recoil to start with or lighter handloads. More than anything though, if the rifle fits them and it's comfortable it will not be hard for them to get used to and as the confidence level increases so can the charge weight and bullet weights.
Starting with plinking loads or varmint weights and moving up would be no big deal.

416 .....

Well I imagine you asked so you could obtain a broad perspective and IMO you've received it in Spades



I am a Hunting Instructor; we do 2 courses annually with @ 50 students and perhaps 5-6 women. Believe me when I relate the first thing virtually every novice female huntress remarks on is the weight of a rifle, period. Followed shortly thereafter observations concerning the wood grade, engraving, etc. sorta the shoes, hat & scarf matches the handbag routine ......

They all, my wife included (it's now her rifle); gravitate straight to the Blaser K95 Stuzen because it's light, short and in 7x57R doesn't slap 'em. Actually, the muzzle blast is what gets their attention outa the 19.6" tube, but ear protection is paramount at the range - in the field no one notices.

Secondly, for those who fell asleep in biology class; there are several subtle anatomical male/female differences; and not primarily all about shoe size either - so go figure ...... I've cut more pitch changes to stocks for females than anything else that includes @ .5" in stock length to accomodate this strange anatomical difference .....?)



The Toe of the stock is what jabs' em; left or right handed (?) and that in the wrong spot ..... after that is fixed, cartridge/chambering is actually of little relevance.

In a current vanilla-flavored brand name mass produced .270 Winchester you may have to lop 1/2" off the stock and personally; I can't imagine a better cartridge chambering for the purpose you intend; if one was available the Tikka T3 would be my first choice primarily for weight, but any of today's current Remchester models will actually suffice, the trusty but usually heavy Mausers don't get alot of affirmative females nods.

For the cost consious I've fitted several Savage 110/111 series rifles in .270 Winchester (suprise!) in the past couple of seasons and the female Nimrods are happily whacking European sized game.

Load with 150 grain Nosler Partitions and you'll have a rifle which will be comfortable for them to shoot, carry & handle and they'll be tipping over any Plains Game quite handily.

Have fun with their - or your choice but get 'em out hunting quickly!

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
Life without at least one .270 and one 30-06 would be horrible.

However, for a youths first gun, recoil and blast can ruin his desire to ever become a hunter, and that has happened so many times that its unbelivealbe..Young parents jsut get in too big a hurry to make Junior a hunter..

I think a youth should first of all be taught to shoot a .22 Long Rifle and shoot it well, then progress to a 222 or 223 for his first couple of deer hunts and under the tuteledge of his parent and keep the range in the 50 yard range or whatever his ability is on the range is the guiding factor..

Unfortunately many parents are not qualified to do this themselves much less teach their offspring, hopefully they are aware of this and take advantage of the available firearms school put on by Fish and Game and other good organizations is appropriate. In Idaho kids must attend a one week firearms school put on by volenteers and Idaho fish and game to be able to purchase a hunting license. I think they must be 12 or older to get a license..'

All of my children and grand children were taught to shoot my me, and started at age 6 or 7 with a 22 and killed their first deer at 6, 8 and 12, depending on their shooting skill and desire, I never pushed them and let them go at their own pace..I only had one that didn't like to hunt or shoot and that was my grandaughter and she is totally into high school rodeo and horses, and thats fine..

+1

The 270 is a very under rated caliber IMO. Between that and my 223, I could take anything I would want to hunt in North America (Elk or Moose) (Deer with 223 or 270).

quote:

The Toe of the stock is what jabs' em;

Gerry

what do you do or recommend?

do you round off the bottom of the point so that the bottom of the recoil pad is fairly straight/parallel with the ground?

How small does the backend of the recoil pad become?

quote:

Originally posted by Gerry:
416 .....

Well I imagine you asked so you could obtain a broad perspective and IMO you've received it in Spades

First, I am especially interested in the toe modifications mentioned in my previous posting immediately above.

And yes, all of the responses have been helpful. Thank you all.

In the meantime, I was also hoping to get some pictures and discussions of wound channels on '3/4 away' shots and other issues as relate to the 270. It's been a long time since I've used a 270 on larger antelope, and I don't have any old pictures. This would be an opportunity for hunters on the forum to help out by posting pictures and discussing bullet wound channels, from either positive and negative viewpoints.

416,

I re-cut the entire buttstock on a band saw (fine tooth high speed blade with tape over the cut so the wood doesn't splinter), synthetics cut easily; for neagtive pitch = less angle. You have to tape some pieces of wood to the stock to mantain all the right angles so it doesn't wiggle around when the cut is made but for someone who knows how to operate a Band Saw it's a 5 minute set-up and 10 second cut.

In a pinch I've cut with a hand-saw and miter box but you gotta do some cleaning of the cut to ensure it's perfectly flat for the Pad installation.

Either re-install the original pad and re-grind or install a new Pachmayer Old English Recoil Pad in whatever thickness the rifle owner desires; either .6" or 1" so the Toe of the stock doesn't jab 'em in the inappropriate spot. Actually no rounding of the Toe of the stock and little sanding involved other than grinding the Pad after installation.

Go to Savage Arms and take a gander at the 11/111 Lady Hunter and you'll immediately notice the negative pitch of the stock, very comfortable for a female to shoot.

quote:

Originally posted by Gerry:
416,

I re-cut the entire buttstock on a band saw (fine tooth high speed blade with tape over the cut so the wood doesn't splinter), synthetics cut easily; for neagtive pitch = less angle. You have to tape some pieces of wood to the stock to mantain all the right angles so it doesn't wiggle around when the cut is made but for someone who knows how to operate a Band Saw it's a 5 minute set-up and 10 second cut.

In a pinch I've cut with a hand-saw and miter box but you gotta do some cleaning of the cut to ensure it's perfectly flat for the Pad installation.

Either re-install the original pad and re-grind or install a new Pachmayer Old English Recoil Pad in whatever thickness the rifle owner desires; either .6" or 1" so the Toe of the stock doesn't jab 'em in the inappropriate spot. Actually no rounding of the Toe of the stock and little sanding involved other than grinding the Pad after installation.

Go to Savage Arms and take a gander at the 11/111 Lady Hunter and you'll immediately notice the negative pitch of the stock, very comfortable for a female to shoot.

Aside:
Wow, that's an interesting site. Savage has come out with the equivalent of the Ruger Hawkeye alaskan at the same time that Ruger dropped the Alaskan. Go figure.

Now on stock modifications, let's see if we're communicating correctly.

what I see is a change in angle of the recoil pad. Instead of being more or less vertical to the ground it has its toe forward toward the trigger and the top is rearward toward the collar bone. About a 2/3 recoil-pad difference in starting points. I can't really tell if there is a "cant" difference, and there wouldn't be a lot that one could do to modify that without building a new stock.

They didn't mention length of pull on the Savage site, though I would assume that they would drop 1/4" to 1/2".

The other question that arises:
What does that rearward projecting recoil pad feel like when some hombre borrows the rifle? the same? Or somehow uncomfortable? If it is not the same, we might consider a partial re-angle, giving the veto to the ladies, of course.

quote:

what I see is a change in angle of the recoil pad

416,

Yup, that's what you were supposed to notice.

Do a Google on "Pitch + Stock + Fit" and you'll discover some very helpful Websites that explain this alot better than I possibly can.

Most all will discuss shotgun fit but I've found that women, overweight men or a huge Olympic-Class Weightlifter with massive chest & shoulder muscles all required similar Pitch adjustment(s).

While rifle shooting is generally considered "static" vice "fluid" shotgun mounting & shooting, for both rifle & shotgun shooting comfort & fit, the combination of stock length & Pitch is crucial. If the Toe of the stock "bites" these persons in the upper breast it will not only cause discomfort but as we already know result in an uncoordinated mount, too much time to aquire target (eye relief, trigger control, forearm hold, etc.)

You easily measure this by placing your rifles with the buttstock flat on the floor next to a wall and can see quite plainly the difference in "Pitch" (angle of the buttstock) measured now as distance from the muzzle to the wall. All will probably be different; some will have a huge amount of pitch; those causing probably the most discomfort to your loved ones.

Then have them try the rifles, at the bench & standing and you'll easily perceive the required angle change for comfortable shooting. Remember the idea is to reach the optimum angle for mount, sighting, recoil & comfort.

Now, the real easy part; if you or your carpenter (doesn't have to be a gunsmith although may be helpful) are handy with Tools; the rifle could be cut accordingly for the womenfolk and a simple spacer made to bring the rifle back to original specs so you could use it as a loaner. Or ..... you could just loan it to Fatties, Ugh, Weight Challenged Persons and Olympic Class Weightlifters (there my be a Niché Market there .....).