Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles 270 WSM vs. 270 winchester

Thought provoking indeed...........

I also own a couple 300WSM's and it would very likely be my "if you had to own but just one gun/cartridge", answer.

Both the WSM's we've mentioned are very popular these days. Their demise is as assured as is our POTUS's "Stimulus Package" actually working. I see their sales becoming more brisk in the future, not less.

Both the 270WSM and 300WSM have found favor amongst many hunters/shooters, experienced and those less so. These "new" cartridges offer us more choices, whether really necessary or not, whether if fills a gap or niche or not. The general public gets dictated to enough with even more of the same on the way. Having and then making our own choices for our own reasons is a positive thing, no matter the reasoning or even the outcome. All a learning experience.

Great to have choices and so far.....no regrets.

Assuming ammo manufacturers test using the same parameters, IOW all things being equal, for comparable cartridges, such as barrel lengths, here's a side by side comparison chart from Federal, using Nosler 140 gr. Accubonds...





At 100 yds, no elk or moose is going to know the difference.

At 350 yds, maybe so, as well as in the hit or miss dept.

Relatively small margin, but little things add up...which seems to fuel the (to me, inexplicable) craze over Ackley Improved wildcats.

If they didn't, we'd all still be hunting with 30.40 Krags or 303 Brits, eh?

I agree...good to have choices. I have and enjoy both the 270WCFand the WSM.

But it seems to me the argument regarding the difference is essentially the same as the discussioins about the 30/06vs300WM, 280vs7mmRM, 25/06vs257WM, etc. The mags have about 15% to 25% more capacity. According to JB's rule of thumb, that means an apples to apples advantage of 4% to 7% velocity potential. Or about 150 to 200fps.

Significant difference? Is it worth it? We each have to decide for ourselves. No right or wrong, IMO.

I'll bet half the rifles purchased start off at the sporting goods counter like this...

"So, what's the best all around caliber these days for deer, and capable for elk, too, if I ever get the chance?"

"You would want one of these then, these are outselling everything else by leaps and bounds, and everyone seems to love 'em!"...

And then the clerk hands him a XYZ brand rifle in 300 WSM.

"Does everything a 30.06 or .308 will do, but better. Every bit as good as a 300 Winchester Magnum, without the kick! Notice how light that puppy is?"

"You don't say? Hmmm..."

Cha-ching! Cha-ching!

That simple. Once that snowball gets rolling, there's no stopping it.

Once upon a time, it would have been a 30.06, almost hands down, 19 times out 20.

IMHO, this is like asking which flavor of apple is better. I own, and have killed with both. I absolutely LOVE both. Mostly because of the rifles they are in. Both rifles are absolutely tack drivers, capable of producing one hole groups, ifin' all goes well (ie I shoot like I should). I reload for my WSM, and it LOVES the 140 NAB's. I shoot factory for my WCF, and it LOVES the 140 NAB's.

Give me one gun to grab, for anything and I will feel 100% confident with either one.

Actually, I'm a bit surprised at the difference in energy on that chart. Averages between 400 and 500 lbs all the way out to 400 yds!

That's quite a bit of difference in thump, about a good 20% or so.

I agree...no right or wrong, IMHO as well........

From my own experience with the 140gr. AB out of my 270WSM, I'm getting a bit over 3,200+ fps. As the graph clearly shows (and I'd expect that Federal would have no reason to promote one cartridge over the other......sales a sale), the 270WSM outpaces the standard .270 by 250 fps, which my #'s reflect as well.

Now............the question (even though we ALL see things a bit differently). Where, as you say, does the "significant difference", start? It surely starts somewhere, on that I'm sure that we can all agree, but where?

As I said earlier, almost every post comparing cartridges seems to use the 100-150 fps difference as a template for "not significant enough to make a difference". OK, I can easily live with that. But we're not talking about that here. We're talking about 250 fps difference, all else being equal, especially while using Federal's own #'s, more importantly, not a 270WSM advocates #'s nor a .270WIN advocates #'s.

Whether JB's rule of thumb applies or not or is even a good indicator at all of such things, I surely don't know.......I'm just stating the fact that there is clearly 250 fps of difference between these 2 cartridges and that seems pretty significant, IMHO.........what say you? If not (and we're talkin' nearly the full length of a football field per second faster), where would we now draw that "significant line"? Since the 100-150 fps template now no longer really helps to bolster a particular set of people's beliefs regarding these 2 cartridges.......where to now?

It would seem unreasonable to argue the #'s as this and other graphs clearly show, but I'll bet that the 100-150 fps "insignificant difference" fallback line will covertly move it's way on up another 100 fps or so..........

But you're exactly right.....we each need to decide for ourselves. Obviously you have......you've got both!!

Well, I can't resist sticking my 2 cents in on this. I own & shoot both, a pre-64 mod. 70 for the .270 Win. and a Kimber Montana for the WSM. My .270 Win. is all I've ever needed here in Ak. with the exception of my .338 for moose, big bears or perhaps elk. I think it's perfect for sheep, caribou, etc. Anyway, what I've found is that using 150 gr. Partitions in both (sorry, don't use 130's or 140's), I get 2930 fps from the chrono with my .270 Win. and a 57 gr. charge of Rldr-22, one gr. under max from the book. This rifle will consistantly group into less than an inch. My .270 WSM with the same bullet & 69.5 gr. of Retumbo, gives 3166 fps. I get around 1" groups with this rifle.
The .270 Win. has been re-stocked in an H-S Precision fiber glass stock - Yes, the stock had to be modified some. This rig weighs a shade over 9 lbs. as I recall. Kinda heavy for sure. The Kimber weighs what? about 7 1/2 lbs. with scope? I have the same scope on both rifles so no diffeerence there. The feeding in the Kimber is fine and except for some other problems initially, the function and accuracy are at least satisfactory for me. Now that the "problems" with my Kimber have been ironed out, I'm probably gonna use the rifle on our annual moose and perhaps a short caribou hunt this year. We won't be going after sheep this year but I want to see what it'll do in the field. I personally would use my .270 Win. on moose but I want to try this rifle.
I originally bought the Kimber to see what all of the "hullabaloo" about the WSM's was about. As a kid, I'll freely admit to reading and listening too much to Jack O'Conner.
From my experience, limited thought it is, I don't see either the .270 or .300 WSM's just dying out. 7mm WSM may be another question. I do think that the cost of WSM ammo is ridiculous and that loading for them should be seriously considered.
WOW! What a diatribe. Off my stump for now. Just my thoughts tho.
Bear in Fairbanks

I think that 250 is a significant difference. But I also think that the factories load the WSM at higher pressures than the WCF.

But, even with that I think there is a significant difference in the two cartridges. When I'm going to hunt where there is a reasonable chance of the range of a shot being close to my person limit, I'll take the WSM. But having said that, it's hard for me to imagine a shot wthat I would take with one that I wouldn't take with the other. Bottom line for me is there is a LOT of overlap in all the various cartridges we can choose from. And that's a good thing.

I totally agree...........

BTW - I just purchased a new 270WSM and will be tryin' it out with the new 130gr. TTSX's. A bit too windy and cold here lately, but when she hits about 55-60 degrees, I'm on it. Shooting in colder temps can be a bad thing, especially during load development.........

As I said earlier, my other 270WSM usin' 140gr. AB's gave me 3,200+ fps. I'm not sure what to expect with these 130gr. TTSX's, but I'm thinkin' I should get close to 3,300 fps. Have you or do you use 130 grainers in yours? If so, any recipes? I am very much a RL22 guy, for most of my rifles/cartridges. Thanks.


Take care.........

Same analogy I've always used. Hard to figure when guys get excited about a velocity difference similar to a thrown rock. Same when thinking in percentage terms. Is even a 10% difference ever meaningful? I mean would it feel any different if the car that hit you was going 30mph vs 33mph?

If 150fps isn't a meaningful difference nobody would have ever developed magnums. Most certainly not Ackley Improved versions.

Shooting the same bullets and same powder my results mirror the velocities recorded by others posters on this thread. The 270 WSM is 150-200fps faster than the 270 Winchester.

I still think that the bigger difference between the WCF and WSM is the rifles that they come in. I can work a short action from the shoulder looking through the scope with no problem but with a long or long magnum action working the bolt either hits me in the face or comes too close. Now this might be just do to my shooting stance but you might try for yourself if you find the same difference. I also prefer a shorter, lighter handier rifle for most hunting. The reasons for a lighter rifle are obvious when walking but I also find a shorter rifle handier in a tight tree stand etc. where it doesn't bump as many branches etc.. A short action does make a bit of a difference here. Here's a pic of 2 24" barreled rifles, a 270 WSM Kimber and a 270 WCF Beretta Mato side by side:




Both are nice rifles and shoot well but the Kimber is certainly handier.............................................DJ

You guys could always upgrade to a .25!

I don't doubt there's a heck of a lot of people out there who THINK a 150 fps of extra bullet speed at the muzzle is important. My point was - that - on game - I would bet the difference could NEVER be quantified.

A lot of great posts with good input. Velocities with your 140 AB also match the difference of what I get with the Win and that bullet, 2950 fps. But here some food for thought....if what Waters and O'Connor found is typical, that could put my velocity to around 3050....150 less than the WSM. Basically the velocity difference of what a man can throw an object. One day I'll get a 24" barrel and see if I get similar results. I doubt Federal has a preference either way, but I believe when ammo companies do velocities for their ammo (as in the graph), 24" barrels are used for non magnum cartridges and 26" for magnum FWIW.

I think it's a really tough question on where a significant difference starts...how do you quantitate that? Esp when the speeds are in the 3k range. I can say I don't think it's unreasonable to say 250, but based on my rock test, I tend to think 300 is a good solid start but in reality will it make a difference in same weight/caliber bullets? But I think we all agree if someone had neither and went to buy one a 270 caliber rifle, they could not go wrong with either regardless.

I personally don't think 150 fps is meaningful. Remember we're talking a velocity difference of what a man can throw an object. I shot deer with different loads and same weight bullets with 250 fps difference and did not see any difference I could quantify. I agree it is safe to say with same length barrels, 150-200 fps difference is typical and it really boils down to personal choice. If I liked a rifle and it was a WSM, I'd buy it. BTW, nice rifles you have there...esp the Kimber.

magnumb:

Haven't tried the TTSX's. My WSM makes itty bitty groups with 130 Accubonds pushed by IMR7828. Four shots last fall at 4 deer from 140 to 280yds. None took a step. All exited. Pretty much duplicates what my pet 264 does with 125gr Partitions.(Dang it, more overlap! )

Let us know how the TTSX'x work!

Can't resist here either. Of all the "short fats" developed in the last ten years, the WSM's will survive easily above all other. The 7WSM may suffer, but that is not the fault of its ballistics. The "M" in WSM sells the cartridge. You can post all your charts, graphs and assorted ballistics, it is the "M".
The average rifle buyer doesn't post here. For us loony's, we tend to analyze, rationalize and maybe even let our emotions guide us.
For me, I have and like both. The Kimber Montana 270WSM, is a handier package than the 8400. The extra 150fps is a bonus. You can have your prejudice against one or the other but the WSM's aren't going anywhere for a long time.

I will! Thanks for the input. Congrat's on all your deer, especially the way that they met their demise.....impressive.

BTW - Don't mean to bother you again and only if you choose to, but what velocities are you gettin'? PM me if you like. Not lookin' for charge weights.....I don't go there and don't offer mine up as well.

I understand that accuracy trumps all, but it's nice to know ball park stuff. As I said earlier, I use RL22 in all 3 of my WSM's as well. I've found that in most instances, I can get a little more speed with RL series powder over most all others, plus the accuracy I desire. Again, we all have our own ideas on such stuff, but since I have a bunch of jugs of RL22 (all the same lot#), it is my go to powder.

I must admit that I recently sold off some 14 boxes of the 140gr. AB's that shot well in my 270WSM, as well as some 12 boxes of the 110gr. AB's that also shot lights out in my 25-06. All with their respective, same lot #s as well. Why? To be quite honest, but a bit embarrassed as well, holding such large quantities of the above with all the "no-lead" issues circulating and getting much more press these days, I became a little freaked out about taking a big hit if all of a sudden WA state also follows suit with what CA has done......not good. I may be over reacting, I certainly hope so, but I was not willing to take the chance. I've also had spectacular results on a couple elk with my 300WSM while using 180gr. TSX's....so I'm confident in my bullet selection anyway. I opted for the TTSX's for these 2 deer cartridges as I'm wanting to ensure, as much as possible, quicker expansion on deer given their less hardy disposition, all the way 'round. We'll see............

I always keep 100+ handloads for each cartridge I own anyway, so I could probably hunt the rest of my life on those loaded AB's I kept, but I do find plenty of time to be at the range......so there's no stash ever really large enough. I bought 7 boxes each of the TTSX's for my 25-06 (100gr.) and 270WSM (130gr.). I had 2 boxes already for the 25-06 and they shot well. I'm working on the bullet seating depth for that particular bullet/cartridge combo now, as I just recently figured out the best charge weight. I hope that the 270WSM likes the 130gr. TTSX's all on it's own, if not, I don't mind taking the time to make it work. Of all the long guns I've ever owned, only one finicky 25-06 sometime back just wouldn't ever cooperate with anything I tried.....no loss I guess. My current 25-06, a Sako 75, made that sole, failed experience much easier to take.....

Thanks for your response......

magnumb:

sounds like you've got this disease real bad! velocity on the 130AB's is about 3250. Not max but enough for me. And I prefer working below max and not stressing things too much. Would not ba at all surpised if RL22 could improve the speed, though. And I understand that TSX's can be pushed a little faster, correct?

I'm curious to hear how the TTSX's work, both accuracy and terminal ballistics! Regards,