As in all things, matching the bullet to the game and delievering it to the proper point is most important. This of course assumes there is sufficient energy and accuracy to accomplish same. The .270 has stood the test of time in the North American game fields and on many other continents as well. So why the question???

Maybe we can ask this question in a different way. Can You Shoot? Yes or No

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:
Maybe we can ask this question in a different way. Can You Shoot? Yes or No

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:
Maybe we can ask this question in a different way. Can You Shoot? Yes or No

True story from today: I was at a hunting shop checking out their used rifles and I met a moose guide who was telling me that he just bought a 7mm RUM because it took him 5 shots last year to kill his moose with a .270 win. He proudly pulled a 7mmRUM artridge from his pocket and showed me (rust spots and all)-I didn't have the heart to tell him that it will probably take him 10 shots with his 7mm RUM this year given the added recoil and rut spots on ammo!!!!!!!

Sad enough................but true....Canadian lefty comments regarding going to "bigger" seems to be a common reaction from hunters when they screw-up in the field.

I have used the 270 to shoot hundreds of African game animals, from duikers, impala, kudu, sable, zebra, waterbuck and many others.

I only used two bullet types. The 130 grain Barnes X and the 140 grain Trophy Bonded Bear Claws.

The Barnes X seem to penetrate more than the TBBCs.

About 20 years ago, I was sighting my rifles at Baily's House of Guns in Houston, Texas, when 3 gentlemen turned up with an 8mm Remington Magnum.

They fired several shots, and were not able to get the bullets on the target frame!!

When I asked them why they are shooting such a large caliber, one said "we are going deer hunting, and we don't want to chase our wounded deer across the County line?"

I bet they didn't need to chase their deer, as I suspect he was quite safe from them.

I have shot about everything in NA with the 270 short of Alaskan bear..Have shot about everything in Africa short of the big 5..I like the 270 and 30-06, prefer the 30-06 I suppose...

I have to agree with Saeed although my experience is much less. I only use my .270 on whitetails here in Northern Idaho and Eastern Washington and the 130 grain X bullet ( XBT, XLC or TSX-you choose)has brought down the last 8 whitetail I have shot with the first shot at ranges varying from 25 yards to 450 yards. Certainly, shot placement is the most critical and most of these kills would probably have been as likely to occur in the manner in which they did with any good centerfire and a strong bullet, but I believe accuracy coupled with confidence (if a .270 gives you that confidence or a .338 RUM- it doesn't matter) is usually the most lethal combination I have observed in my hunting circles......

IV

I agree with the title of your post 100%, it is adequate.

Always has been, Always will be

My first hunting rifle was a Interarms .270, that was back in 1975. The rifle I use now is still the Interarms .270 same gun always used federal factory ammo, very happy with the performance

I've taked over 80 African trophies with it including a 2000 pound Eland bull, took me one bullet for that one, took off the arteries to the heart! Taken Kudu, Zebra, Leopard, wilebeeste to say a few...

In North America it's taken Caribou, bears, deer, pronghorn, elk all with the .270

I don't know what that small pecentage is saying, that isn't enouph gun!

I'm also w/ Fjold on this, it is adequate, but ideal???? I think it's just about the perfect deer/antelope round, although I like the .280 better. For elk & moose, I like bigger bullets so if a magnum isn't desired, a .338-06 or .35whelen would be my choice. If I coulf only have one, it would probably be the good ole .30-06.

I didn't vote because the question is not clear! I guess what I'm saying is the key words here are "ADEQUATE", and what you consider to be "BIG GAME"!

I don't consider anything smaller than Elk, Moose or Brown bear to be BIG GAME, so I would say it is ADEQUATE for elk, Moose, but just barely, and on Brown bear you are seriously undergunned, IMO!

I believe the 270 Win is a good choice for deer, and antelope, and black bear, as long as heavy for caliber bullets are used for big black bear! I think the 280 is a better cartridge, but one of the 300 mags , or 338 would be a much better for what I consider to be North American big game, or small, to large plains game in Africa.

Will the 270 take anything in North America, absolutely! It is ADEQUATE for some of them, and chancy on the others! It is simply not the best choice for all NA, or African PG,and none of the dangerous game,outside Leopard over bait, in my view!

Sure seen alot of Elk killed with the .270 and 130 grain Noslers.It must be adequate?

Jayco

Pretty sure the same of all of the positive points above could be said for the 308 - in fact the 308 is probably more versatile given the wide choice/availability of projectiles.

I got both but would take the 308 out of the two any day.

But thats just my preference.

As long as you place your shots well everytime, it's adequate for everything except for big bear I would say. Although on elk I think something in the 30 cal. would be a wiser choice.

A lot of deer have been killed w/ various .22 calibers but I would hardly call tem adequate.

Do you consider the .270 Win to be an adequate big game cartridge?



That is the STUPIDEST question I've ever heard!!! Duh!

I haven't had any first hand experience with the 270 other than watching my dad use it for some 25-30 years with no trouble on everytthing from antelope to elk. That seems like a great all around big game gun.

7mm. guy

It's adequate when not loaded with them damn lousy shooting prone to failure Partitions.

Mac said what I think. It's great for deer and antelope. The rest can be done but not with the authority I prefere.

If I had to choose only one rifle for N.A. "big game" it would be a .338 WM. Even with all the "new" rounds that are available. Nate

quote:

Originally posted by BigNate:
Mac said what I think. It's great for deer and antelope. The rest can be done but not with the authority I prefere.

If I had to choose only one rifle for N.A. "big game" it would be a .338 WM. Even with all the "new" rounds that are available. Nate

Big Nate is spot on..........

I don't like the way big stuff walks around sometimes making up its mind whether its hit with a .270 on board....

BigRx

Believe it or not, I have actually seen animals, upon being shot with the 270, stand there trying to decide what they were hit with, so they knew if they should fall over and die or not.

Believe it or not, I've actually seen animals, upon being shot with the .30-06, .308, .300mag, .338, 7mm, stand there trying to decide what they were hit with, so they knew if they should fall over and die or not!

I've owned shot and hunted with three different 270s over the years and still own two of the rifles. They are just right for critters between varmits and deer.

"They are just right for critters between varmits and deer."

And perfect for everything else. The idiots who "think" they need something with more power are just that, IDIOTS. I would happily roam the planet with my 270 and never feel under-gunned, with little exception. Go ahead and shoot a cannon and learn to flinch, blink and miss. I am content with a 270. It worked for 70 years and it works even better today given advances in rifles, powder and bullets.

I was raised on moose and caribou (1 moose & 2 caribou every year) that my father killed with a .270. My bro killed a moose at just under 500 yds and I was amazed at the damage that round did at that distance. Mind you, I would not take a shot at that range (out of my personal capabilities), but my bro is an expert at long range (USMC shooting team & a box of gold & silver) shooting. He also harvested a caribou 2 years ago that his wife passed on due to the extreme range-550+ yds, 1 shot, dead caribou. I have also witnessed numerous clients as well killing moose and caribou at more reasonable ranges with no signs of a lack of effectivness or power.

I only mention the shots my brother took to illustrate the potential of the .270 in extremely capable hands. You are not under gunned with a .270 for moose sized game and smaller excluding grizzly/brown and polar bear from the list, though you could certainly kill any of them with a .270.

With all that said I do most of my hunting in AK with my .375 H&H including deer, but know that the .270 will kill as cleanly in most situations.

Hunters loose (wound) most game because they are not honest with themselves in assesing their own abilities not because they are under gunned.

-Ron

I would not be inclined to judge the .270 as I have but a few that have more paper power and none that have such a wide following...in public.

I was amused to read Seyfried's article on his latest elk hunt report in DGJ. It is relevant to this post only because he used a .455 Webley in an old English falling block for this one. IIRC he used an LBT mould(modified), and further modified the bullet by trimming the base off to leave a bullet of about 280 grains, chugging along at somewhere in the 800-900 fps range. About like a .45 ACP load more or less. Heart shot did it, so it's still where, not what.

I think that it is, I have owned a .270 and then got a 30/06 and I felt the 30/06 recoils less

I liked the 270 better for lighter game with 130 gr bullets.

quote:

Originally posted by Grizzly1:
....I only mention the shots my brother took to illustrate the potential of the .270 in extremely capable hands. You are not under gunned with a .270 for moose sized game and smaller excluding grizzly/brown and polar bear from the list, though you could certainly kill any of them with a .270.

With all that said I do most of my hunting in AK with my .375 H&H including deer, but know that the .270 will kill as cleanly in most situations.

Hunters loose (wound) most game because they are not honest with themselves in assesing their own abilities not because they are under gunned.

-Ron

Watch out, someone is using cool, level headed logic. Well said Ron.

quote:

Originally posted by mousegun:
It worked for 70 years and it works even better today given advances in rifles, powder and bullets.

Make that 80 years.

RSY

The 270 Winchester still is and always has been enough gun. Loaded with a great premium round like the Nosler partition IMO you can't do any better.
The 270 Winchester....One Planet, One Rifle !

AGNTSA!

Yep! TSA

People who continue to preach that the .270 is good for the whole planet have yet to go there. If the .270 was the end all of rifles the developement of new rounds would have gone stagnate long ago. Nate

Yeah, TSA; and for a damned good reason.

"One planet, one rifle" is obviously a bit much. But, why is it that every time someone mentions shooting jumbo with a 7x57mm/.275 Rigby, everybody, including the .270 Win. naysayers, gets a collective stiffy??? However, mention the .270 Win. for anything bigger than deer and you're suddenly a moron.

People who can't seem to quit dogging the .270 Win. fall into one (both?) of two categories:

1. Personal agenda that doesn't include the .270 Win.

2. Ignorant

There's nothing wrong with either condition, as long as they're recognized and admitted to.

RSY

Man! Lots of opinion here!

There is a thread just above this one on favorite "hunting one liners" I figured mine better fit here.........

The year was either '58 or '59. Bill Kirkendahl hunted elk more than anyone I knew (and probably have known) He worked at the same place as my father and I. Bill sometimes hunted three states for his annual quest of elk.
One of his hunts that year was in Colorado. He had hunted with a doctor friend and others for several years there.
The doctor had a then brand new .338 Win Mag.
Bill was with doc when doc shot his elk opening morning. The next day Bill was hunting with the doctor's new gun. Bill got his elk, a six point bull. Bill and the doctor were so impressed with the performance that the new .338 got passed on to others in the group. All told, five hunters bagged their bull with the doctor's gun.

Upon returning home and to work, Bill ran onto my father and excitedly told him the elk story. My father's comment would plague me for about the next year...............
"My boy has one of those .338's."

The Model 70 in .338 was hard to find when first out I guess, and Bill "pounded" me to sell him mine! The closer to hunting season the worse it got. he finally found one before Colorado!

I will never forget his one liner we all grew so tired of hearing that first year in 58 or 59 when Bill had his first "taste" of the .338 on elk....

"Man, that .338 hits elk like my .270 does deer."

That's how it was 50 years ago; that's how it is today.......

BigRx

I never said the big animals wouldn't die.

I don't think the .270 is as much of an elk/moose/big bear rifle as the .338WM, or .375 H&Hand never will be.( the list of what works better is a big one, I pick only two very popular choices)

With perfect placement it (.270)works, but I've witnessed what happens when it isn't just right. A bigger bullet does help do more damage, and when shot placement isn't perfect, the bigger hole often times will be the difference between a recovered animal and a lot of tracking.

If you've never used one you'll not know how it works. This thread started out asking a question that included ALL N.A. big game. If you choose to use the .270 for ALL big game thats your choice, but I'd never recommend it. There are eskimos using .22 Hornets for Polar Bear, that doesn't make it a good choice.

Notice the original poster goes by Magnum 308? Suppose this was nothing more than a meens to stir the pot?

I think it's funny how heated this debate remains after 75-80 years. Some love it, some loathe it, most could really care less! Nate

quote:

Originally posted by BigNate:
Notice the original poster goes by Magnum 308? Suppose this was nothing more than a meens to stir the pot?
Nate

Either that or "his" real name is "Norma"...

One gun for all NA game, .338 WIN MAG.

BigNate,

The .338/.375 H&H is not the deer or sheep cartridge (yes I use my .375H&H for deer too.) that the .270 is, not saying alot as the end result is the same with a well placed bullet.

Sounds like you may have been a witness to a poor shot by the trigger man.

You may be right, this thread might just be a guy stirring the pot.

All the best-Ron