Has anyone shot both? Any major difference?
Thanks for any input.

Never noticed any difference in 700's , shouldn't be in Kimbers either.

You'll notice the difference with 150's and heavier in the 270.

Do you honestly think if I loaded a 130 and a 150 in the mag box and didn't tell you which one was on top in that 270 that you could tell me which grain bullet just left the barrel and which grain was still left in the magazine?

I absolutely can...

nice.

No way could I just sit down with my .308 and shoot a 130 TTSX at 3000 fps or a 180 at 2600 and tell you which one I just fired.

My shoulder just isn't nearly calibrated enough to sense a 5 ft/lb of recoil difference without shooting one and then the other first.

Shooting them back to back maybe (maybe not)

Let alone a 2 ft lb difference between a 130 at 3100 fps or a 150 at 2900 fps with any confidence at all without shooting one and then the other and trying remember which one kicked harder.

But shooting a round right when I first begin a shooting session it'd be nothing more than a guess.

Talk about a calibrated shoulder to know a 2 ft lb of recoil difference without even feeling the other round.

That's like being able to tell cold turkey if it was a min book load for a 150 grainer at 2675 cold turkey from a max book load at 2900.

For me such a little difference would likely be the difference between shooting in a t shirt vs a hoody.

I am impressed for sure.

For me there is a noticeable difference in recoil between a 25-06 and a 270 in same weight/stock design guns.

25-06 with a 100gr will have much less recoil compared to a 270 w/130.

Me too

Me three. I have shot deer with 3 different 270s and 2 different 25/06s and I have seen what every deer did when I shot it with the 25 but I have never seen what the deer did when the bullet from a 270 hit the deer. And the 25 I have been shooting the last 6 yrs. or so is a little Marlin xl7 so it is pretty light but still have seen the 15 deer or so I have shot with it.

No need to be impressed, just to be reflective... reflective that we're all different, and that how a young guy perceives recoil, vs a lot older guy who's shot a lot more and is getting less enamoured with recoil, and therefore notices its subtleties more, might be two different things.

I guess I'm fairly qualified to know since I've put around 300 rounds in the last 1.5 months through my Kimber MT 270. Had it out last Sunday. Only loads I shot were 130's and 150's. To this nearly 56 yo guy, the difference is readily apparent switching between them as I did.

Will add, a 6lb 270 does make the difference more apparent than an 8lb 270.

Yeah I am still impressed. I only shoot 300 rounds a year max. So I find that you can feel a 2 pound recoil difference that's all.

Why even bother with the 150s if they recoil so noticably harder than the 130s?

I never said the difference bothered me, only that the difference is noticeable. It's primarily a BP elk rifle, and will eventually get carried more than shot. Right now I'm fixated on finding an ideal load centered around the 150 Partition. It's part of winter time rifle nuttery

Haha I hear that!! I have some winter projects I am working on now as well just to pass the time.

If you still have a 30-06 Montana that you won't be using much let me know as I would like to have another.

Thanks for the discussion

This sounds way too much like the princess in the pea story!

If you are sweating recoil look at a 257 roberts, or a 7mm-08. Basicallly a low powered version of the same calibers you mention, the rifles lose about a half pound, and recoil is not a concern...

Using Fed Fusion data - [email protected]@3050
theres nearly 14% difference in recoil... or a little over 1/7th more

Heck, sometimes you can tell the difference between two different powders loaded to the same velocity with the same bullets. I have a 7mm rem mag that I loaded 140 gr accubonds to 3200 fps over my chronograph using imr7828 and RL25. The charge weights were within a couple of grains of each other but the RL25 load felt like it kicked harder The recoil impulses were different & it made the 25 load seem to kick more, though I suspect the total recoil was the same.

You guy's are way more recoil sensitive than Me, I am impressed!.....heck, I barely notice any difference in the recoil of my 30-06 T3 and My .300 Win T3.............Hb

I've often heard people say they can feel a difference between a .270 and .30-06 in the same model rifle or that they can tell a 150 from a 180 out of a .30-06. I can't.

I got rid of my last 30-06 MT a couple years ago, though the darn things are multiplying here, currently a 257 Rob, 308, 270, and a 7-08 arriving tomorrow. More winter projects!

Thank you too.

You answered your question by the qualifier "major difference". There isn't any. You could run some ballistics through a "recoil equation" and see what the numbers tell you. Those of us who shoot in winter wear layers which also mitigate felt recoil.
Most importably may be what you plan to use the rifle for? If you only shoot factory stuff, I would venture that the cost of a box of .270 Win. is less than 25-06. The variety and availability of .270 Win. ammo is inherently greater too. But you asked about recoil so I digress. Good luck.

Funny Joe, but I've found "running recoil numbers" isn't the same as shooting them.

Recently I was shooting my 308 MT with 165's and alternating with my 270 MT with 150's... they weigh nearly identical. The "numbers" say they should recoil the same, my shoulder tells me differently. The 270 definitely bucks more. There's got to be more to the "Rocket Effect" in the 270 than the numbers can relay. Though a lighter bullet, it has a smaller bore and more powder.

Most miserable rifle I've ever shot was a 1st gen Ti 7-08 w/ factory blue box 150 ammo. Kicked like a mule. 120s, tame as can be.

I've owned/shot 270 Ti and 25/06AI side by side. Can't compare the recoil. 25/06 very tame. But, these are light rifles. In heavier rifles it might not be as noticeable.

Never owned 270 or 25/06 Montana's but have had them in 7/08.257,300WSM, 270WSM, and 7mm WSM.

Have however fired a bunch of other 270's and 25/06's and found the 25/06 a skosh lighter kicking due mostly to light bullets and lighter powder charges.

In truth they are both pretty lightweight in the recoil department.

Having owned Montanas in 25-06,.308,30-06 and 300 WSM I've found all of them to be a little snappy simply because they are all such lightweight rifles. But I can't say that any of them had recoil that was uncomfortable. I've always thought that there was some juju to the Montana stocks as they absorb recoil very well. IME and FWIW in the recoil dept, the same caliber rifle with the same load is much more comfortable to shoot out of a Montana vs a Tikka (I've owned a bunch of them too) and this is with the Tikkas weighing nearly a lb more.

Thanks for all the comments and input. This gun, 25 06 or 270, is going to be for a teenager who already has a MT 7mm 08. He handles that rifle well. No issues w recoil at all. Just want something new, without overwhelming him with unnecessary recoil.

The Montana is a great stock but I found it snappy in a few chamberings.

I disliked the 300 and 7mm WSM (this last gave 3260 with a 160 factory load and that may have been the reason), It got better when I hand loaded a 160 to 3000 fps but by then I was disenchanted.

I like the Montana stock in 7/08,257,;probably be fine in 270 or 25/06. Nothing bigger. Too much snap.

Having 25 years experience behind a Brown PoundR I'll take that.

Major differences are based on how YOU feel recoil. Recoil in Montana's can be a bit snappy. IMO, you will notice a difference between the 25-06 & .270. Significant difference will depend on the load. 100-115 grainers out of a 25-06 will feel nothing like a 150 grainer out of the .270 based on how "I" feel recoil.