Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Tissue Damage - .270 vs. 6.5x55

Fellow Campfire Hunters;
Top of the morning to you all, hopefully this finds you well and your hunts thus far this fall have been good ones.

As a bit of a background to my query, I'll quickly state that we cut our own game and used to help out friends at our place, so we've been able to look at what has to be 150-200 animals over the last 25 years.

Our eldest daughter shoots a 20" barreled 96 Swede in 6.5x55 that I'd modified for my late father originally, so its been responsible for about 20 deer more or less. Lately she's been shooting 130 TSX at 2750fps, but for Dad I used a mixture of 120gr Sierra Pro Hunters, Nosler Solid Base, 140 Hornady and Partions.

For the last few years my walking around rifle has been a parts 98 in .270 with a 22" barrel that will push a 130 GMX or TTSX to about 3000fps and a 140 TSX to 2900fps or so. I've shot one whitetail buck with the 140 TSX and a mixture of whitetail and mulie bucks with the 130 GMX/TTSX - I'd say without looking likely 8 in total.

Anyway, overall I've seen more tissue damage with the 6.5x55 hit deer than the ones hit with the .270. This is at a mixture of ranges, shot angles and shot placements - though we are lung/scapula breakers here if we are able to.

I was curious if anyone else out there at our cyber 'Fire has noticed the same thing?

Though I've already spent way too much cash building the parts 98, I'm having visions of scrounging a 1:8 twist .264 barrel for it sometime, as the Swede kicks less, seems to shoot almost as flat as the .270 and frankly seem to knock the snot out of deer sized animals a wee bit better.

Anyway folks, just some idle curiosity getting the best of me as I down a cup of coffee before heading up onto the mountain behind our house for a morning hunt for whitetail or if I'm lucky a bull elk.

Thanks in advance for any who'd like to comment and all the best to you in your remaining hunts this fall.

Dwayne

I'm thinking that most likely the difference in bullet selection is where you are witnessing the biggest difference.

Bullets mean more than headstamps, try the 130 Sierra Pro Hunter in your 270 and you'll see a lot more tissue damage than the TSX.

Shod

Shodd;
Thanks for the reply, that's very likely a true statement from what I recall of the Pro Hunters....... and why we quit using them in the Swede as well.

Perhaps I should have better articulated that I'm seeing more damage from the 6.5 with the 130 TSX vs. the .270 with a 130 TTSX/GMX.

The .270 loads start out almost 250fps faster, so it's counter intuitive to say the least - but so help me that's the overall trend we're seeing.

Thanks again and all the best to you this fall sir.

Dwayne

Agreed. The bullet/placement/impact velocity is the key. Not the slight difference in caliber.........

Dwayne,
Good morning to you! Hope all is well with you and your family.

The leaves are well into their turning down here, and the recent rains have been causing quite a few of them to come off the trees. It never fails that when this happens, my mind starts to wander through my reloading manuals and the rifles in the safe.

As we have always butchered our own deer as well, I've had the opportunity to see first hand the effects of a handful of different cartridges and bullets for each.

Like the other posters have already mentioned, I see more difference in the type or brand of bullets than I do in the various cartridges. (Unless you introduce a wide variation in bullet diameter or velocity)

That being said, I still enjoy the mental exercise of trying to pinpoint "the most bestest" cartridge for whitetails.

'Tis the season!

Dwanye,that is interesting. Would figure that the .270 would do more tissue damage as it is faster. Could be that the .270 130 gr TSX/GMX are made a little stouter.

Got a question though,by "tissue damage" do you mean bloodshot meat or turning the heart/lungs to mush?

Dwayne, could it be the difference in the twist.......faster twist in the 6.5?
Just a swag on my part...

Looked in the Nosler #7 manual and they list a 1-9" twist for a 6.5x55 and a 1-10" for the .270 Win.

Good morning to you Dwayne, I can only report results from the .270, but on our smallish Texas whitetails, either the 130 Sierra Gamekings, or the 130 Nosler Ballistic tips are devastating. I'm usually launching them over 3100 fps out of a 26" barrel Ruger #1.

The buck I shot last year with a 130 BT certainly did drop in his tracks, with much carnage in the chest, but there was almost no external blood. He would have been a problem to track, had he run off. I'll probably start using either Accubonds, or Partitions, when it goes out again, especially if chasing larger animals.

i used the 130 BT as well season before last. killed 3 bucks but none had a blood trail. lucky they didnt go far but one ran off about 30 yds into the woods and took a while to find him.

Dwayne, good morning to you sir. Thank you for the clarification. It is interesting the results your seeing and it sounds like you've found a great combination that works better than average results for the 6.5 x 55.

Less recoil yet better terminal performance I think is the holy grail most of us are seeking in our hunting loads.

I would be curious to see if you dropped the velocity on the 270 load if it might start to mimick your 6.5 X 55 load.

Shod

For the last few years I've switched from my 270 (130 gr BT's) to my 260 (120 gr and 100 gr BT's). With the 120 grainers it seems like the 260 kills every bit as well as the 270. As to tissue damage, I haven't really paid that much attention to which one makes a bigger mess, but I have thought that the 270 did. But that's just my thinking and isn't necessarily right or wrong but more of a half-A____ observation.

I don't think that the 100 grainers are as effective on deer as the 120's, but they still are effective enough and are what I use for coyotes and pigs (and usually for deer).

Unless multiple deer, of exactly the same age and size, are shot at the exact same spot on their bodies and at the exact same angle of entry, under controlled settings to ensure repeatable results, using the same model bullet in each cartridge, over a chronograph to ensure a known exact velocity in each case--- only then can a question such as ".270 vs. 6.5x55" or something equally vague be answered. Otherwise, it is guaranteed to devolve into yet another Campfire debate about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

No insult intended. Just trying to point out the impossibility of comparisons based upon uncontrolled experiments.

Very true statement from Shodd. My friend used one of those darn pro hunters in his 8mm mauser (since we are talking modified mausers here ...). The carnage was not pretty, unless you like grapefruit sized exit wounds. I wouldn't use the pro hunter, even if they were given to me..

I don't know what you expected, Dwayne. Everybody knows the 6.5X55 is the deadliest cartridge ever invented, really no need for anything else As for the .270, well, enough has been said about the .270 on the 'fire that everyone knows it's, well, you know.....

Did you ever see what the 243 85gHP does?

Hi Dwayne,

Eileen and I have a fair amount of experience with the 6.5x55 and .270 with X-Bullets, of various sorts from the "plain old original X's" onward, as well as other bullets.

I would guess the difference you're seeing is indeed due to the rifling twist, which definitely affects bullet expansion. As I recall, the Swedish rifles have a fairly fast twist, faster than the 1-9 found in many American rifles.

But even the 1-9 in the Ruger 77 Mark II 6.5x55 I used for several years really made some impressive holes and quick kills on deer and antelope when using the 120 X-Bullet at 2950 or so. Probably the kill that surprised me the most was a pronghorn at almost 400 yards. With a pure broadside long shot, no bone other than ribs involved, he went down within a few feet. Can't remember any animal hit with that load going more than maybe 35 yards, while several shot with the .270 and the 140 TSX at 3000 fps went more than 35 yards, and one pig went close to 100 yards.

As always, however, shooting stuff isn't an exact science!

Good hunting,

elkhunternm;
Good morning to you sir, I hope this finds you folks well and thanks for your thoughts on the question.

By "tissue damage" I meant both the length and width of the wound - combined with the number of broken bones. Strangely I've found one 130 TTSX and GMX from the .270 and we've found none of the 130 TSX from our daughter's Swede.

The Swede projectiles seem to give us better penetration, while breaking as many or slightly more bones in the process. The diameter of the blood shot meat around the wounds is pretty close actually, but again that strikes me as counter intuitive taking the slower initial velocity of the 6.5 into account.

While I'm cognizant this all smacks of some mental gymnastics that could well never have a clear conclusion - it still is (to me) an interesting result and I thought I'd share it here.

Our clan did another "test" over the years loading 165 Hornady BT Spires in a .308 carbine, an '06, a pair of .308 Norma's and a .300 Win Mag at their respective optimum velocities and went out and shot as many whitetail and mulie bucks as we were allowed to with them.

In that instance, I found that while the increased initial velocity of the magnums did result in more tissue damage - even when the impact velocity would have been roughly equal - so say the .308 at 150yds and the magnums at 300yds - there wasn't as much difference as I'd expected to find.

Anyway sir, again it's all meant to be as educational or entertaining as the reader chooses to make it and nothing more than that.

Thanks again for the reply, all the best to you folks and good luck on your remaining hunts this fall.

Dwayne

John;
Thanks for the informative reply sir, I was about to send you a PM on this question as I knew you'd done a fair bit of shooting with both cartridges.

I had/have a hunch that it must be the twist, though I'll admit to being surprised at seeing any difference whatsoever.

We've seen our daughter's Swede have more of a "reaction" from deer than our other daughter's .250AI for sure and overall I'd have to say the 6.5 "rocks" a deer a bit more than my .270 load when it lands.

Again taking the initial velocities into account it surprised me is all. As you likely know about me already, I'm the poster child for "inquiring minds" when it comes to most things related to hunting.

Thanks again for taking the time to reply John, Happy Canadian Thanksgiving to you and Eileen and all the best in your remaining hunts this fall.

Dwayne

Again,interesting,all I will say is,as long as the bullets are killing deer,I would not change a thing. Learn something new everyday.

And We down here are doing just fine,Thank You for asking.