.270 WInchester ???

[Ruger 77/17]

I was just curious about this caliber I have always prefered short actions but can anyone give me info on one

[mstarbird2000]

I was just curious about this caliber I have always prefered short actions but can anyone give me info on one

Like the .30-06 (its parent cartridge). Its a pretty good all around cartridge. Its an excelent deer cartridge and can cleanly take Moose and Elk if kept with in its limitations. Its chambered in about 99% of production firearms. The only mordern line I can think off the top of my head that doesn't have it listed if the Marlin lever actions. The .270 is flat shooting, with good velocity. Recoil of the .270 win really isn't all that bad. Thats why a lot of people opt to get one as thier 1st rifle. Ammo for the .270 is avalible dang near everywhere just like the .30-06 and its pretty cheap when compaired to other cartridges.

My opinion if for a deer hunter (at least in my area of the country) is that they would really never need anything else if they had a .270 already, unless you wanted to change things up alittle. I currently don't have one. Because for some reason I'm on a .30 cal diet right now (.30-30, 2 .30-06's and a .300 win mag). But I wouldn't pass one up for the right price.

[rooster52]

I have a NEF Handi Rifle in 270 Winchester an it shoots great. Not bad for recoil and took one of the biggest whitetails I have with a 270. I shoot 130 grain ballistic tips and they are deadly on deer.I use the 270 single shot when hunting from a tree stand,because of the over all length ,it handles good from the tree stand.
My brother has hunted with a 270 for years and loves it.He has taken a couple of elk and several deer with this cal.

[C. Schutte]

The .270 Winchester is one of the best all around cartridges out there, still. As a deer rifle it is my opinion that it is superior to the 30-06 when using 130 grain bullets due to their greater S.D. than the 150 grain .308 bullet. (Tdd, it is not superior to the 30-06, only the 130 gr. .277 is compared to the 150 grain .308 cal.) Properly loaded the 130 grain has a MV of approximately 3100+ fps or greater. The factory loadings have been dummied down to make the .270 short mags look impressive. Loading up to the 150 grain bullets which have a S.D. of over .270 and a MV of 2850 fps. they make a great elk or moose round. Many have said that it has limitations when shooting elk. I have never used one for elk but I have heard of 400 yard shots on elk with no issues so I would think that it's limitations are right along with other elk cartridges. In the old days many hunters in Alaska would load it with 160 grain bullets for the big bears. I'm not advocating that but, many have fallen to that round.

As a cartridge it has taken all North American big game and plenty of Africa's thin skinned game. Do some reading about the late great Jack O'Connor and you'll see why it is such a great cartridge. There are a few elk hunters on this forum (I think Coelkhunter) that perfer this round for elk. For a non-magnum cartridge you get magnum performance with very reasonable recoil. chs

[cstink]

There is nothing bad that can be said about the .270 winchester. Light recoil, flat shooting, hard hitting, inexpensive ammo. I should go buy a couple more.

[tddeangelo]

I usually try to stay out of the "30-06 vs _____" discussions, but you're fine here. CS. Each round has its own merits, neither really having a usable advantage over the other for all intents and purposes.

I hunted with a .270 for a while (5 or 6 years, I think). It was fine. I like my '06 better, but the .270 was ok. The '06 seems to put deer down with more authority for me than the .270 did, but I'm sure there are plenty of folks who can say the exact opposite.

I used to be the staunch defender of the '06. Now I'm more the staunch defender of not evaluating rounds based solely on infinitesimal differences in ballistics listed in a manual. And that seems to be the trend these days.

I should just stick to my policy and stay out of the discussions altogether. =)

[ARduxnbux]

It is a fantastic, yet very popular round with alot of commercial loads on store shelves, and is a solid choice for deer-sized game. Like others have told you already, it was developed from the .30-06 casing.

If you're into short actions and the .270 caught your eye, trying looking at the 7mm-08. It was developed from the .308 case, and is a great chambering as well.

[Vaultman]

I was just curious about this caliber I have always prefered short actions but can anyone give me info on one

The first thing that came to my mind was "are you kidding!". The 270 is the "Benchmark" caliber in my opinion. Especially for deer hunting. Everything else needs to be measured against the 270.

[oldpilot]

You didn't mention the exact application you were wanting a .270 for, but it is a great all-around caliber capable, if not perfect, for most all N.A. big game. I think it really shines, however, as a caliber for virtually any type of deer hunting. Need a long range antelope/deer rifle, use a 24" barreled .270 and also add 130gr LM ammo if you'd like. Want a great carry or tree-stand rifle, get a 22" or 20" barreled carbine and shoot 150gr at 2600 FPS+ and you have a very handy, potent close cover rifle. I think it's the ideal deer caliber. If you really prefer a S/A then a 7/08 (as mentioned), .284, .270 WSM, or even the plain old .308 will pretty much duplicate anything the great .270 will do, but maybe not quite as good as an all-around caliber for deer. I don't believe any true rifle collection is complete without at least one example of the time honored .270, IMO.

[Cam]

This was in some of the old Jack O'Connor books..Jack killed several grizzly bears,I think 6, and said two were one shot kills,both with his .270.

[Ruger 77/17]

How does this caliber compare with a .280 or a short action

[oldpilot]

The .284 is pretty much a S/A .280. I own one (of each) and if anyone takes the time to look, it is an equal. The .270 and .280 are so similar as to be indistinguishable, period. Perhaps the idea of a 175 or 180 gr bullet might lean you towards the .280/.284, but the true ballistic difference between a 270 and .280 is completely lost after a shot is fired, IMO.

[JimT]

It is a great round. Everyone has summed it up so I do not need to babble on. I had a .270 and will have another or a .280.

[citori]

Other than the 270 topping out at about 150 grs for bullet weight with cheap and easily found ammo while the 280 has the option of going up to 175 grs with ammo that is not overly common, they are about the same performance wise. I have a preference for the 280 as I have other 7mm guns so have bullets on hand and, if hunting larger game, the option of heavier bullets ia a plus to me. The 270s I have owned did nothing for me and they offered me nothing I didn't already had covered with a 7mm or 30 caliber cartridge. Those guns are now owned by nieces and nephews who love them. For a person buying their first big game rifle and doesn't handload, the 270 is one of the chamberings I strongly recommend along with the 30/06, 308, and to a lesser extent, the 7mm/08.
As far as I am concerned, action length in a standard issue big game rifle is a non-issue. the couple of ounces and inch of length one theoretically saves is inconsequential to me. Whether a Remington 700, Winchester 70, or other such production gun, the weight savings won't be noticed on the typical 7 1/2+ pound gun. Now, if you are getting one of the near custom built light weights, you may notice a difference but I still feel it is mostly in the mind.
O'Connor shot interior grizzlies with the 270 as the were "targets of opportunity" while other game were the priority The pictures I've seen of the interior bears seemed to show bears of under 600 pounds at tops. For them the 270 would be on the right side of adequate for a shooter who can keep their head together and place their shots well on a mostly unsuspecting animal at relatively closer range. When he hunted much larger coastal bears he carried a 375 H&H if I remember correctly.

[oldpilot]

Your memories are correct, reference J.O. I have spent a great deal of time this year ('09) reading some great work from the "masters" (well over 250,000 words). I get a tad annoyed at those who claim to "know" that any big game animal in N.A. can be harvested with a 30/06 or .270, because someone said they could. I Strongly suggest you all actually read what Jack, Elmer and someone who has likely shot more big game than both of them combined, Craig Boddington, have to say in their books.

Just buy one, read it, and see what they truly felt about big game hunting in North America. I've done a good bit of hunting with a good number of cartridges and find their findings (especially Craig's) absolutely spot on. Think about what is "proper" rather than what has been ....done.... and learn a bit, perhaps. Off my soap box for now.

[Ruger 77/17]

What is a .280 recoil like compared to a 308 or other short action

[C. Schutte]

What is a .280 recoil like compared to a 308 or other short action




You won't be able to tell any difference between the two different cartridges. The weight of the rifle and the design of the stock have more to do with it. My 13 year old son shot my 300 win mag last weekend and thought nothing of it because it weights over 9 lbs. with the scope attached. Even if you are looking for light mountain rifle the .308 or .280 will be manageble. chs

[tjen]

The 270win is great for deer through caribou thats 100-400lbs animals hands down and it has taken so many elk and moose since it came out 1927it can't be denined its completly adaquit for them as well with good bullets. Bullets come in 130-160grs pick the heavier bulllets for larger game and its a winner.

I have shot moose and seen a few more taken with the 150gr partition it dose the job. Andfor just two hunts the 270 did better than the 30-06 for the quicker kills but each moose is different and the differance was say 2-4 seconds and on the ground for the 270 and 4-10 seconds for the 06. None went any where but in a circle any way.

I have the 270win and a 35 whelen same case necked up to 358 cal so if the game is bigger than caribou I use the whelen but would use either on anything except bears. But if I had an shot on a interior grizzly someting under 600lbs I would take it. Now let define a good shot as a shot under 150 yards and with the bear clueless to my even being in exsistance. Same as I would do with a bow except in would be under 25 yards for that.

Most people will in time have more than one gun but if its the only gun you ever get its absolutly fine for all but big bears. And if you haven't hunted much you don't start with the largest and most dangerous game anyway. Get a gun like the 270win or 30-06 or even a 308win hunt for a decade and then when you know just what any where your going to hunt set up to a bigger cartridge. A 270win/338win is a great N.A. battery. Same thing with taking shoots out to 300-500 yards hunt closer lost of years be for you get into a true long range magnum rigg.

[Oldtrader3]

For me (Jack O'Conner notwithstanding) the .270 is the penultimate deer rifle, particularly Mule deer. I have killed 50+ deer in my long hunting career and probably 35 of those deer were one-shot kills with my Model 70 Winchester .270. Every .270 that I have ever owned or have shot at the range grouped well and my faithful Winchester rifle has served only (2) owners for over 60 years. This rifle still shoots groups under one inch all day long!

[beretzs]

It would be hard to find fault in the guy who chose a 270/280/30-06 for his only rifle. I know some others would be better, but those three will handle the majority of shots most of us are good at taking. I like alot of others more, but those three would handle about anything the thrown at them with class. As a Marine I like the 30 cals more, but I love my 270WSM and would not feel undergunned carrying for much on this continent. Scotty

[beretzs]

Yes Sir! Sure am. Scotty

[Shooting Fan]

I'm coming late to this thread, and just read the entire shebang.

One point no one has made is the flat trajectory of a .270 Winchester.

The .270 is fast, showing about 3100 fps with the 130 gr. bullet and about 3400 fps with the 100. This translates into flat shooting over a distance.

Why is this important? Picture an antelope at 300 yds or more. What is the kill zone of this small quadruped -- perhaps half that of a good-sized mule deer, since antelope are small animals. Six inch circle? Your rifle has to attain MOA just to hit the kill zone.

The flat trajectory of this rifle means less guessing in the vertical hold. This is the real merit of the .270. This is what really sold the rifle when Winchester brought it out in the Model 54 bolt action in about 1934. Original cartridge choices when the 270 was introduced were the 130 gr and the 100 gr. bulleted loads. This suggests what Winchester was trying to sell the public. Speed.

For antelope I always loaded the 110 grain -- I think it was Sierra. This is a compromise between the flat shooting of the 100 grain and a little better ballistic coefficient and maybe a little more robust bullet. Still fast.

For elk and mule deer, I always used the 130 gr. in a bonded core premium hunting bullet.

Many will write about the .270 and insist on the 150 grain bullet, and probably would choose a heavier if such would stabilize in their rifle.

These hunters -- IMHO -- do not really understand the situation -- they want to try somehow to convert the .270 into a kind of 30-06 variant. "Heavier bullets are better." Their heavy bullet preferences slow the rifle down, arc the trajectory more. In other words, they undercut the very purposes for which the cartridge was designed. Why not just leave the .270 at home and take your 30-06?

I tend to choose mid-weight bullets because I want the speed and flat shooting of the .270, which is why the cartridge was first made. I trust the bullet design and composition -- a good bonded core -- to ensure that a well-placed shot will kill the animal.

You will find persons who can argue for either side of these arguments -- but this is my strongly held viewpoint.

[beretzs]

Shooting Fan, I agree with your stance. I load about the same idea and thought behind my stuff. I load the middleweights for my guns, for the most part part. 130's, for the 270WSM, 154's for the 7mm, 165-180 for the .308, 225 for the 338, and 225-250's for the .358's. Those seem to have the best mix of speed and velocity and will penetrate well for their intended purpose. You wrote it out much better than I could have written it. Scotty

[Harry B.]

Sir;
The 270 is a prime choice and don't worry a second about a "short action".
Harry B.

[beretzs]

There are way more guys that shoot only a 270 or only a 30-06 in this world than most guys like us that have many different calibers for anything we want to hunt. Most guys with a 270 have made it work for them from whitetails to moose. Most guys would rather put their money towards hunting, rather than towards new guns and ammo. Scotty

[.358 MAN]

I was just curious about this caliber I have always prefered short actions but can anyone give me info on oneIf you want a deer cartridge the .270 win is where its at !!!!!!!!!!!! The Beat all around deer cartridge !