What is the 270 Winchester perfect for? Is there a type of big game that it's best suited to?

We've talked about the merits of the .270 Win but what would you be most likely to use a .270 Win for?

Coyotes.........

I have never been a .270 fan (prefer 30 caliber) even though I own three of them but everything I have ever shot with one has died. If a bullet performs bad, animal leaves a bad blood trail, etc you can bet that it was shot with a .270 win.

I seem to kill my biggest animals with a .270 but you can bet that something will happen that make me question using it again. I don't know what it is.

Dink

according to ingwe, field mice, that's it

I've never hesitated to shoot any of the North American big game species with the .270 Winchester, including coastal Alaska brown bear. The caliber performs flawlessly when loaded properly and when used appropriately by someone who knows what they're doing.

I do not know about field mice....but I do know the .270 is bucket loads of fun on rabbits.

That put's an end to an otherwise silly conversation.

It's interesting that some folks can ignore 80+ years of reliable field performance,and (likely by now)dead game animals numbering in the millions....like they are discovering something "new",and their "experience" trumps all this empirical data.

Interesting thread title.

I tot the same..... sooo....

How about ANYTHING with 4 legs???

Elephants??? Well 7x57!!

Cape Buffalo ? ? I GUESS NOT! ! ! !

The only reason anyone buys a 270 is because they're impatient and the store is sold out of 30-06's

Same load you'd use for elephant...175 RN solids

Mav940's glowing praise should seal the deal right there...our resident ex-spurt on everything likes the .270...therefore it is to be avoided...

I started out with a custom FN mauser in 270, took my first 6 elk with it (7 shots) using a 130 gr. Hornady bullet,never had a problem. John Barsness chimed in & said why not use a premium bullet if you are hunting game bigger than deer, I disagreed but actually he was right. Why take a chance on what could be a high dollar, maybe once in a lifetime hunt using a regular cup & core bullet. For just a few bucks more you're giving yourself a better chance.
Good bullets & good placement will get the job done.

Dick

I have two younger brothers with whom I've hunted with a lot over the years. I will soon be 70 and the youngest is 64, so the three of us are not exactly young guys. Over the past several decades the .270Win. was used by the three of us on a lot of North American game. The only BG animal not taken with the .270 is the Alaskan brown bear. The list would include a couple of grizzlies, several of each of the North American sheep species(only two deserts though). Then there's several moose, a ton of elk, dozens of antelope, and literally hundreds of deer. But, I still don"t know what .270 is best for.

Years ago when I drew my Bighorn sheep tag for Pikes Peak here,I built a 6.5 Jap Arisaka into .270. Bought a new short chambered barrel from Gun Parts, for $60, turned and chambered it myself, carved a stock for it, tuned the action, put in a new Timney trigger, turned down the bolt ,drilled and tapped for scope mounts and put a cheapy scope on it..Did everything but a new safety as I could not figured out how to fix that.
It shot darn good except the barrel was a bit oversize and liked to be fouled befeore it settles down.

I shot a nice almost full curl ram with it a from about 300 yards and it worked quite well. One shot kill with 130 gr Siera Game Kings if my memory still works or it could have been one of Noslers BT.

I then gave it to my niece and she still uses it for deer and ground hogs.

I built it up, as back then, the.270 was a traditional sheep chambering.

A few years after that I used a 7 mag to kill a montain goat in southern Colorado, and it didn't work any better than the.270.

My go to rifle now is in 30-06.

On a more serious note I think mule deer and large bodied whitetail is the sweet spot for the .270win. It seems overly powerful for our small Texas deer.

you could do away with every other round in the US and keep the 270 Win only and you would be covered for any Big Game you decided to hunt in the Continental US. The 270 Win does every thing right with the proper bullet. If you can't kill any animal you are hunting with the 270 then you need to stay home and learn how to shoot.

I've shot all sorts of big game with a 270 and 130gr Interlocks, except for big bears, and they all died rather quickly. I have complete faith in it. I find that it's just so easy to shoot well that you can put your shot exactly where it needs to go. By the way, it does make a good coyote round too.

If a .270 floats someone's boat, there is nothing he can't take with it. Good bullets matter most. They all them Partitions....This thread should be more like what CAN'T I kilii with a 150 Partiton from a .270

Likely a VERY short list.

Not true. They are fantastic for donors!

It's a very popular caliber for elk here in the East Kootenays of BC. With the quality of bullets available today, one does his job, this caliber will take care of the rest.

My next rifle will likely be .270 WSM, although I've been giving the .270 Win some reconsideration of late.

I was going to light my pal BobinNh up and say "Rodents and donor actions" too but everyone else got to the trailhead before I did.... Damn empirical data aside....

................I`ve never owned or hunted with a 270. But I`ll give credit where credit is due.

With the right bullet and with the exception of dangerous bears, most if not all N/A big game including moose over the decades has been taken using a 270 and will continue to be taken by the 270.

Sure! There are other calibers like the 7mms and 30s with better bullet selections. But to say that the 270 is somehow inadequate or won`t get the job done is a delusional bunch of crap.

Just to set the record straight, countless "dangerous" North American bears (brown/grizzly) have been killed with the .270 Winchester. Written history during the past decade provide many, many accounts of brown/grizzly bears taken not only on this continent, but others as well, with the .270 Winchester.

Anything up to elk, and elk if you can actually shoot.

Do you have any pictures of elk that you shot?

I waited till I was past 50 when I finally gave in and bought one, should have given in to years ago it is a good killin round.

In my old semi-custom pre-64 270 WCF, 150 gn NPT's @2925 are absolutely perfect for Okleehoma WT deer.

That load really knocks the piss out of 'em.

Gunner

They knock the snot out of elk and moose too. In fact the "quickest deadest" I've seen a bull moose killed was when my wife drew her Shiras permit around 25 years ago here in Montana.

People told her how moose could take a solid hit and just stand there looking at you, and she was actually thinking about using a bigger rifle than her .270. But eventually good sense took over (partly because she'd killed elk with it), and the moose took a step and half before folding up like a cheap card table from one 150-grain Partition in the lungs.

My second Newfoundland moose, fell to 1 shot from a 270 @ 150 gr bullet, I brought the 270 as a back up rifle and when my other gun got damaged in transit. Well it didn't matter none. Come to think about it I stopped shooting a 300 Weatherby right after that hunt. That rifle remained a gun safe queen, till I sold it some years ago when I paired down my collection, Now I just shoot every thing with a 7mm RM and 150 gr bullets. Pretty much a flatter shooting 30-06! I would not think twice in shooting 98% of the worlds big game with a 270.

It's outstanding for long range. The 130 grain bullet has the same BC as 190 grain .30 caliber bullets and can be driven to about the same velocity as a .300 magnum drives the 190s. The .270 kicks a lot less, though, and it's a lot easier to shoot a light kicking rifle than a heavier kicker.

Craig Boddington decided he had to hunt elk with the .270 Winchester several years ago. He'd always advocated at least caliber for elk, but as we all know, gun writers have to PERSONALLY try everything in order to write about it. (This has always seemed a little odd to me, since I've known elk outfitters who've only taken a few elk in their lives, often all with one rifle, but have seen hundreds killed by a bunch of different cartridges. They constantly get asked about elk rifles, but if held to the same standard as gun writers their opinion isn't worth anything.)

Anyway, Craig took his .270 to the Whittington Center and killed a big bull at over 400 yards with one shot through both lungs. He reported the bull went down quicker than any other elk he'd ever shot. The bullet, of course, was a 150-grain Nosler Partition.

Providing a much discussed sample - of - one.

Hi John,

Sure my answer will rise hell but does'nt matter it's pure truth.

One of my friend, an old portugese gentleman of great education and hunting experience explained me one day in Lisbon, that, when he was living in Mozanbique he used for hunting different calibers.
One of them was 270 Winchester, with original Silvertip, sort of controlled expansion bullet of that era. With it he shot everithing up and including buffalos in total safety and without any problem.

His best friend and hunting partner used almost exclusively the 270 Winchester, up and including elephant.
These guys lived and hunted Mozanbique for years, being portugese and Mozambique being under Portugal control.

My old friend used to meet Taylor (of who he had no respect), hunting on his own he shot more than hundred bull elephants, only tuskers and dangerous "cambaco" (raider), who destroyed plantations and sometimes killed people, more than 1500 buffalos, some lions, and the rest...

So when he tell me the caliber can do it, i believe him. No he don't promote it for such hunt but the ammo can can do it if bullet is up to the task and placed in vitals.

For history my old friend developped caliber that were same of A-square but 20 years before, made solids from bronze and copper wire years ahead of Randy Brooks and others that came after. Would he be american he would be as known as some most famous writers and developpers from your country...

My small experience with 270 is nothing to brag when you know such guy but, be it allowded and had only that rifle caliber to hunt i would not hesitate to use it for all big game up to buffalo included.
I would load it with 180grs Woodleigh PP and could give a match to the old 7x57 Spanish Mauser. Then i would train and train again, learn the anatomy of these animals and go out in the wild without any fear.

Regards
Dom

Thanks certainly good to know, would make me feel better about loaning or including a 270 WCF as a back-up rifle on Western BG hunts, Thanks JB.

Gunner

For the OP, anything you or I will likely encounter. However I have a thing for the '06 and that is what I shoot. Being that a 270 is a " true" 7 mm and I'm anti-metric. . You'd be hard pressed to find something it couldn't effectively kill.

The first rifle I ever bought for myself was a used LH Savage 110 in .270win. It served me well through my College years in the UP and I took several big bodied northern whitetails with it. I pretty much stuck with the cheap stuff back then, round nose, corelokt ect. and only had a couple of hard recoveries. One was hit further back than I wanted and split the liver. It went about 180 yds before bleeding out. Another was a good lung shot but headed straight into a cedar swamp, she didnt go far maybe 75 yds but it was the roughest drag of my life.

That rifle got traded in on a new 700 almost 20 years ago now, but I sure wish I had that rifle back.

cmg,

Not exactly a sample of one when added to thousands of other examples of the .270's effectiveness on big game.

No matter how often skeptics are told about the effectiveness of the .270 on game bigger than deer, they refuse to believe believe it until they try it themselves--apparently because of what Elmer Keith wrote decades ago. And unlike Craig, I don't believe Elmer ever shot an animal with the .270. Yeah, he saw game shot with it, but apparently before the Nosler Partition appeared.

This Colorado hunter hunted with me this past spring on the Alaska peninsula and brought his 270 loaded with 150 Partitions. Two quick shots behind the front shoulder dropped this boar where he stood.
With today's bullets and a shooter who can place their shots correctly the 270 is more effective than ever

Naaaaw! -

That bear had to have a heart attack.
Jerry

As quick as it died I would say you are correct. Of course a couple of 150 gr partitions might have hastened the onset of the heart attack.

Is that the first of your bear hunters who's used a .270 Winchester?

That bear certainly looks dead to me

I think that is a pretty big bear.

I would be surprised except three old friends have taken mountain grizzlies and a brown bear with the cartridge...bullets have been the 160 Partition,the 130 Partition,and the 130 Bitterroot.

You see stuff like this (or use the cartridge)and it's hard to fathom how some folks have a hard time killing deer with them.

Hunting lore is to the gills with 270's killing a great many bears ,and Bob Lee used his in Africa for lions.

JB,

please do not count me a skeptic of the .270 Win. I am not.

It is just that that Elk at Whittington comes up almost as inavariably in a discussion about the .270 Win as Bells 1000 elephants do in one on the 7x57.

Anybody involved knows that there are more factors than cartridge concern or even bullet involved to explain why any one animal did not run a very few steps or more steps.

All is well - I would not stay home an take up knitting if all I had was a .270 Win.

I watched a hunting show a while back (actually a good one) where a guy was from KY or TN? In any event, he took a 270 to CO to hunt bull elk. The outfitter was hesistant and stated he "liked to see bigger guns brought out here", which I thought was odd. In any event, said hunter stated that it was his ONLY big game rifle and you could tell it was "well used". I believe it was a push feed M70 FW. He shot his bull at what was stated to be at 225 yards. First, bull took a couple steps. Second shot, bull turned and fell. The hunter never hiccupped, just shot, bolted the rifle, shot again. Now I've never even seen an elk, much less hunted or shot one. I will say this, even if it's an 80lbs backyard whitetail, I'd do the same darn thing. Point is it was GREAT footage of someone knowing their rig and having field experience on game. I have a hard time beleiving that the hunter's headstamp on his brass would have made any difference.

Kinda like the best beer, the one in front of me.

A 270 is a hell of a round but for some reason I just cant get myself to own one

Woodchucks. We all know the 270 Winchester is not any good on deer, antelope, elk, etc. Just stick with woodchucks and mice and you'll be fine.

That bear died of laughter when he saw the 270

Most of the guys I grew up with started at .22. Then a 30-30. Then a 270. From there they went everywhere but most carried a 270 and some still do..... And I agree the best thing about the 06' is it's donor status will never be topped....

W

I would bet if you marked a 270 as a 280 and loaded it up with some 150 PT's, no one would notice a lick bit of difference...

W

What big game is the 270 good for?

I'd suppose it's good for what ever is down range from the muzzle....

Excellent!

I heard that !!

IF Mr. Phil hadn't verified it, I mighta wondered,

woofer,

I once almost made Steve Timm (dogzapper) spray Coca-Cola from his mouth when we were discussing various cartridges. We were on the .280 when I said: "The .280's great. In fact, it's just as good as the .270!"

Roomie,

It was Diet Coke and I believe my response was, "Shiiiiiiiiit!"

:

Your buddy Steve

What's the saying? "Imitation is the best form of flattery" I don't think they could have made the 280 any closer without some legal issues! Just sayin'.

W

Steve - "Oh ye of little faith" "How many times have I told you and you believe me not."

When was the .277" 150gr Partition introduced? I had a few boxes of 160gr Partitions with the old style groove on the bullet. They've been around for awhile, and killing stuff 'right dead for quite a few decades. I guess, contrary to what some folks say, game isn't getting too tough for these proven old combinations!

As a die-hard '06 man I'll say coyotes.

Seriously, stick a 150 gr NPT in a 270 and you're 'bout ready for anything up to and including moose.

Of course its a deer cartridge simply because the #1 big game animal in NA is whitetail.

Well then.... set to music

"rifles for sale or rent, ammo 50 bucks, no returns",
Satisfaction will put a smile on your face.

Obviously I have way more cal/cartridges than I need. NOT NOT NOT

I figure loony-ism dun got us... how many more cartridges do I need? Just a few more... !

When a good buddy of mine who was recoil averse & very practical in his approach (read: NOT a loony) asked me what he should get as a first centerfire rifle I said not an '06 because of recoil, and not a 270 cuz then you'd DEFINITELY never need another rifle.

He has a 700 CDL in .270 Win as his one and only and hunts confidently using reloads I build for him using 130 gr Interlocks & 4831.

efw -

I used to think I needed at least 3 (MINIMUM) cals.

Apparantly -- ONLY 2.

That AIN'T no fun!!

Well, since you asked....

Just an ADL I tossed into a Ti stock and found shot 130gr PP and Fusions into 3/4".
I popped this 48" beastie off hand at about 125yds through some short alder with the Fusions.
It was the 40 something animal I have used the .270 on and its live weight was over 1000lbs. Its four quarters added up at the scale over 650lbs.
Feeds a family of 6 quite well.
When I think of the .270 I think of MD Bucks stotting through bluffs in the coulees and dry land field of southern Alberta. Where I grew up and started hunting with a .270 of course

rem 338win -

Very Nice Good Shooting Meat in Freezer.

You should CHANGE your handle here to 270 Win BC

Only 3?

I figure everybody's gotta have a coupla 22 CFs (an AR & bolt at min), a 6mm target rifle & varmint rifle (those are worlds apart and must have one rep/ea), a couple of quarterbores (I'm a ho when it comes to those!), a 6.5mm something for gravitas (Swede) and LR, a 7x57 for gravitas & 7 mag of some kind as all-round...

you get my drift... but I may have missed a few in there...

270 140 grn does a fine job on bear. it didn't do bad on my last 250 whitetails either

Geez People.... Personal preferences aside is there anyone who thinks there is enough killing performance difference between the 280, the 270, and the 30/06, to buy one over the other?

Oh, now you went and did it.....:




Talk about pissing in everyone's cheerios.....

For most hunting, no, but why own just one of the three?

I do think the .30-06 is more gun than the other two when loaded with 200+ grain bullets. Even then its advantage only shows up in relatively rare instances.

I could go with that:

270 --- 160 or 180

.06 --- 180 or 200

Both's ammo readily available IF needed.

Both get the job done.

You pays your money you takes your pick.

Hmmm. that's an interesting concept...Kind of like these?:

http://www.midwayusa.com/product/87...eter-180-grain-protected-point-box-of-50

.270, .280, .30/06..........everyone should have one of each....just because.

Dave -

Yep, IF I had started yrs ago with a 280, I may not have owned a 270 and if I did, I would not have needed it.

jwall,

Guess I'm failing to understand your point. If you could provide some field examples with all those loads, might be able to comprehend it.

The question was...."What is the BEST big game for the .270?", not what CAN it be used for. The .270 CAN be used (particularly with modern "premium" bullets) on any animal in North America, but that doesn't make it the BEST choice for all game.

The .270 is at it's best when used on relatively small big game at extended ranges in open country. That includes pronghorn, whitetail and mule deer (and possibly "some" instances on sheep).

When ranges are shorter (250-300 yards or less), the .270 has no advantage over multiple other rounds. In heavy cover, the bigger bore rifles do a better job of stopping quickly and leaving better blood trails. When game size goes over about 250 pounds, the .270 just isn't as effective (in EVERY instance) as bigger rounds. It CAN be very effective at close range, in heavy cover and on larger game when proper bullets are used and placed correctly.....but it is no longer the "best" in those instances.

It is NOT the perfect all-around rifle for all game. That title would likely go to the .30-06, 7mm Magnum, .300 Magnum or even the .338 Magnum if the focus was on truly larger game. However, when used at longish range in open country on game in the 100-250 pound range it is hard to pick a better rifle than the .270.

Texas Rick,

As with jwall and the .30-06 with 200+grain bullets, I'd love to hear your experience with the .270 on a wide variety of big game.

JWALL I had an '06 in high school. Mostly I used it to shoot jack rabbits by spotlight....I was pretty fast with it because of the peep sight. When I graduated, I traded it for my 1st FN Mauser .270...loved that rifle and wish I still had it....37 years later I still regret not keeping that .270. I then had a .280 on a VZ24 Mauser. I wound up shooting a bunch of gophers and 4 deer with it. Worked great for both jobs. I was back with an FN Mauser '06 which I still own but don't use much because it weighs about 10.5 lbs ready to go. The go to '06 is a Husky '98 Mauser with a skinny factory tube in a Rimrock stock with 4x Leupold. I have a JC Higgins FN .270 that is going to get a new suit of clothes.....my first Micky Edge.....I'm going to like it a bunch when it's done. I want to spend more time with the .270.

All this to say....I like the 3 sisters....270, .280, .30/06.

I see your point JB... However I bet you'd rather be using your 9.3x62mm instead of a 30/06 with that 200 grain bullet on that Bear!

Nice...I'll bet you are going to love that micky edge...I really like the one on my Extreme Weather...turned that rifle into a totally different animal...

Nothing but good to report overall. That's on some 30 game animals from deer to elk (and observing probably 100 more kills by others). There have been very rare instances where I would have liked to see better blood trails on my personal kills, but mostly it has been entirely adiquite and never lost any animal I fired at.

That's the key.....proper shooting. The few times there was a "failure" by others, it could be almost always traced to poor shooting by someone, but that's hardly a "fault" of the .270. On larger game and thick woods I just have more confidence in the bigger rounds to do the job even if things aren't "perfectly" done. I like the .270, just don't think it's always the BEST tool for every job.

Oh,,,,that was a low blow...

I don't think it was a "low blow"... But John Barsness thinks so I apologize.

bsa....definitely looking forward to the .270. I can tell that it will change both weight and balance.....plus I like how the stock fits me. It will be much lighter and take away the nasty butt heavy clunky feel. It's going to very good.

Sorry MD, I was off the air when you posted this.

Do you mean that I stumped the great MD ? No way.

You understand my point.

Even tho I have no experience with the 160 or 180 270 bullets. You also know that I have only hunted WT in the South so I have had no need for that much penetration.

I have had exp with the 180 30 cal, mostly thru friends and others, AGAIN more penetration than I need.

I am a good student. I've learned to TRUST my GWs who have had experience in MANY things I may never see.

** There is ONE GW that I do not care for and avoid any mention of his name. (obviously NOT YOU) I don't hate him...** he does not participate here.

I don't have any reference mat. here with the BCs & SDs of the 160 Nos or 180 Woodleighs.

Are you saying the 160 NP 270 and 200 NP 30 cal. are not similar in design and performance???

Are you saying the 180 Wood. and 220 30 cal. are not similar in performance?

Unless you're saying those performances ARE NOT similar OR probably are not similar..

I submit my post of comparison is still valid.

I remain your friend. (for now )

That pretty much sums up why you have no business holding the strong opinions you seemingly have about things you've not used on game you've not killed.

Just a thought...

Let me see if I get this right..

Did/Have you not studied & learned from others about which you have had no experience. Doesn't matter, hunting, carpentry, plumbing, sex, autos???

Let's use autos. Have you ONLY formed opinions of cars/trucks that you have used/owned OR have the experiences of others helped you make decisions about an auto, truck or tractor BEFORE you paid $$$.

We hear this idea A LOT, too much, round here. No one has the right to form an opinion about game, rifles, ammo UNTIL he has actually used them MULTIPLE times.

I think something is OBTUSE.

jmo.

Actually, the reality is that hands-on experience trumps speculation, every time.

Will a 10 twist stabilize the Woodleigh 180 grain?

Will the Woodleigh do anything more than the 160 Partition?

everyone has opinions... endless, pointless, academic debate over things that are best experienced is another thing...

Ever used a 150 grain Partition?

Nobody is saying that you can't form an opinion that has no basis in actual experience, that is pretty much the basis for forums like this one. You just can't expect us to take that opinion seriously.

Who's opinion would you trust more about the D-Day invasion; the grizzled old Army veteran that landed at Normandy, or the guy that watched a movie and read about it on the internet?

Chet

It's when opinions that are based on googling and forums are presented as based on experience that the waters muddy. Not all opinions are created equal.

Are you suggesting that learning about sex from others is as good as first hand experience?

I firmy believe in one-on-one female instruction in that particular case. I don't think that is something you would want to learn by yourself while reading the internet.

Chet

Absolutely! In some areas, Google wouldn't cut it, even for some of us older guys.

John W, mav, Brad, et.al.

Alright lunch time here. Before I eat.... (loony?)

Yes, indeed John, experience is much preferred over theory.

Have you all NOT heard of R & P (preparation).

I may never get to Alaska or Africa. If I get to go for Brownie or larger African game.... I'm prepped. I'd get a 375 ouch n ouch with proper bullets.(BTW, I know I can shoot it accurately) For Alaska I have an 8 RM w/200gr NP.

Can anyone tell me I would be ill equipped?

I'm hoping to get drawn for an elk tag in Ark, and I am able at least right now, to go West for Elk or Mule Deer (4 legged).

NOW I promise I am NOT being a S-A nor hateful.

I HAVE ON HAND 270 W with 150 NPs

I HAVE ON HAND 30-06 with 165 HBTSPs AND 180 gr NPs.

I HAVE ON HAND 7mm RM with 154 HSPs AND 160 gr NPs.

I HAVE ON HAND 300 WM with 180 NPs

I HAVE ON HAND 8 mm RM with 200 NPs

I have not mentioned the Swede because I haven't done anything with it but mount a scope (yesterday), appropriate bullets are available for Western hunting.

Can ANYONE tell me I don't have adequate or appropriate cals & bullets for the intended game. Remember I've never been there yet.

How can it be that I could get PREPARED w/o having BTDT?

I'll tell you how. I've READ GWs for yrs. I've bought books and mags with the subjects of game & guns. BTW Bob Hagel's book is not a bad example.

I have learned from the success and failure of OTHER'S experiences. I have LEARNED from MANY of you guys here on the fire as well, even you Brad. I have also used all of these cals on WT for personal familiarity.

Can ANYONE tell me that I'm ill prepared for these hunts or game?

Experience is much prefered, but the experiences of others can TEACH us what/how to do.

So maybe we should not be so quick to tell someone else they can't possibly have accurate or proper opinions about a subject they have had no experience with YET.

I remain Y'ALLS friend.

Jerry

ps - I've had 2 phone calls while posting this, will have to eat while I work.

Best wishes in drawing that coveted Arkansas elk permit, Jerry. And, enjoy your lunch.

Chet - You and I have exchanged several agreeable comments and I hope this does not change.

The quote of Brad above says I had no business having strong opinions.....

I think & hope my previous post today clears up that I am qualified to have reasonable opinions w/o personal exp per se.

My post per Mule Deer about the 06 & 200 NP, I only said "I could go with that."

I did not mention ANYONE else. I was speaking for myself.

No harm, No foul.

Your friend

Jerry

NO, NO, NO, NO, however if ANYONE has not learned from 'videos' er, er, some other venue....... I feel so SORRY for their wife.



Many yrs ago, a fellow deer lease member stated to a group of us that it never took him more than 15 minutes to 'finish'.

I told him that was ONE MORE reason I felt sorry for his wife.

I've always figured the 270 - and single shots- were kid's guns , consequently, I've never killed anything with one.... the 270 anyway. I thought I might get the 'assist' on this one, but the 10-year-old stuck him well and had him doing the circle dance in short order. His date with the alder patch (or my 286 grain Partition) was abbreviated by neat A-Frame hole through the chest and opposite shoulder blade.

Evening Klik -

Dang!! A 10 yr old......has already killed a 'deer' bigger, heavier, & a bigger rack than I have. envy

Can I like him now?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
C O N G R A T U L A T I O N S son, I'm jealous.

Sell 3 of those five and use the proceeds to take the other two on hunts to get some of that experience your interested in. It'll mean more to you in the long run.

Okay .....................Which 3?

Can't believe I've forgotten to post this quote from layne Simpson: "If you can shoot, the .270 Winchester is a great elk cartridge. If you can't, it isn't."

I'd keep the .270 and .300. Or keep the .30-06 and sell the other four.

I bought a small half inch think book by Finn Aagard maybe 20 years ago. In the chapter on cartridges, he stated that he had seen more clean kills with a .270 that any other cartridge.

I have used a few of them and owned a few more, but for the medium game I mostly shot, there wasn't much between it and the chamberings either side of it. If I ever saw a differnce, it was a time when I had both .270 and .30/06 rifles and a bunch of factory ammo, which the majority of Aussies never used, so I popped off a few dozen animals with each and noted the '06 dropped more on the spot between the two.

Having said that, I researched the variety of bullet weights, contruction and velocities which were huge in variation, something like 2620 fps for the slowest .270 up to 3000 + and in the 2500+ range for the '06 up to mu hand loads at again 3000+fps.

What I concluded was that for the 150 - 220 pound game I was culling, the additional caliber seemed to demonstrate a differential over the .270.

Now again, having said all that, I would still use a .270 for just about anything that doesn't "usually" bite back, as I would a 7mm and a volume of other choices.

Becuase there is history of the .270 taking bear, elk and moose, it is not plausible to say it is not suited to the above because our generation has the best bullets in ballistic history.

It comes down to the rifleman. If you are a hunter, it is enough.

decisions, decisions!

I'm being as honest as I can be. I could NOT decide between the 270 W & 300 W
unless I absolutely HAD to

There is no more than 4 ozs between them. Both shoot better than needed
Both are a pleasure to hunt & neither one punish you to shoot. I'm not
talking about bench competition.

There was a time I seriously considered the 7 R M as 1 all around rifle for myself.
Now the Winlite 300 has stolen my heart.

For big game hunting I could easily choose the 300 WM (belts & all) for my ONE rifle.

I have nothing against the 06, it's just vanilla

Pardon posting from my phone. Lunch time.

I HAVE used the 150 grain Partition in the .270. In fact most of my hunting with the .270 has been with various 150 grain bullets as the one "flaw" I've seen with the typical 130 grain/.270 loads is a sometimes lack of penetration due to "excess" expansion.

It "kills" well, but I (personally) want to see a hole in-hole out EVERY time and the 130 grain bullets just don't do that as well as the 150 grain loads in my experience. The "problem" with using 150 grain loads is that it slightly reduces the long-range ability of the .270.....which is one of it's major advantages.

As AussieGunWriter states, I have also found that as caliber increases....so does "effectiveness" on equal size game. The question becomes....How much "effectiveness" is really needed? The 7mm Magnums are just as flat shooting and slightly more "effective" than the .270.....but at the cost of a (generally) heavier gun and increased recoil. On game less than 250 pounds this "advantage" is seldom needed.

Once again, everyone seems to missing the point about the .270. The question wasn't "What CAN it be used for?" (which is nearly ANY annimal in the world), but "What game is it BEST for?". That narrows the field quite a bit. I am not disparaging the .270....I actually LIKE it....but I DO believe that any time someone says he "NEEDS" to use "premium" bullets for hunting anything.....he has just admitted that the chambering IS inadiquite for the job at hand.

"Be Enough Hunter"

Based upon your further reply in this thread...
...I think you answered the question. Keep those two and sell the rest. If you can't decide which to take on a given day, be sure to keep a quarter in your pocket and make sure you're capable of flipping it in the air. Catching it is optional, but does make the final decision easier and would help prevent any back injuries.

You'll remember the hunts more than the rifles anyway.

I have all three. I haven't shot anything with the .280 yet with emphasis on the YET. If I draw a tag this year I just might take it.
Paul B.

What are shooting with it? Mostly deer? In 26 years of deer hunting, I've never seen this "flaw"...in fact I've never shot a deer with the 270 with anything but 130 grn C & C's.... and all have been pass throughs. Maybe on a hard quarter shot I may one day catch one but haven't yet but I don't know why you say they lack penetration....sounds like a bullet choice rather than a cartridge issue to me.

Yes, I certainly could be happy with ONLY those 2 > 270W & 300WM.

'Most' people will not say, "they're overlapping" or "they're redundant". I say the 300 is JUST MORE of a good thing.

Neither one is what I call 'pretty'. The Tikka T 3 SS is nice looking to me BUT both are boat paddles.

I have pretty rifles but they've gotten too FAT for my liking.
My M6, 6mm Rem is very good looking.

Actually, now that I think about it, my 70 FTWT 6.5X55 is both PRETTY & COOL. and NOT FAT. I haven't used it on anything YET; the idea of using it on Brown Bear is not comforting.

TO ME - The 300 WM, 180 OR 200 grns = more COMFORT.

Guys, I just can't help it. I'm in the "and larger category", just the way I was raised.

+1....same experience here, no problem with penetration on deer....all have been pass throughs using 130 gr. Partitions, 130 gr. Remington Core-Lokt PSP and 130 gr. Federal Premium Boat-Tail SP. Would really like to recover a bullet.

Seems like Elmer said the 270 was only good fer skunks & weasels...or...maybe he said only skunks & weasels used a 270....


Mike

No problems here either. Vast majority of time I have exits with standard bullets in the .270 on deer sized game. Certainly no different than 150-165 in the .06 or 140s in the .280. Can't help but think somebody got a bad batch of bullets.

I was just reading on some other site the other day where a guy runs some operation in New Zealand or someplace exotic and claims his operation has killed 7000 some critters and the .270 has given the best results with clients. As J'OC once said - pick your experts.

Lou

Credit where credit is due!

MD - you made the suggestion FIRST. It took a little soul searching but this is a new conclusion for me.

I've considered a 3 rifle battery for everything and 1 of these 2 would be in the 3. (varmints - deer (family) - D G). Since I'm not very likely to hunt D G, these 2 could service a multitude of hunting needs. Or I could have a varmint rifle + the 300.

I don't mean to and am NOT bragging, for the foreseable future I could afford a hunt for mule deer - elk AND keep my arsenal. I've worked and skimped to assemble the collection I have. I'm not too interested in thinning down to 2 rifles.

I've been assembling these for many years. Partly for an investment. I only have 1 rifle that will take a while to make any profit on it. The others can/could be sold at a profit.
Maybe NOT the highest % return BUT how many people lost a lot OR all their profit in the last few yrs? Too many AFAIC. To date I have not lost any on the firearms I have.

All this discussion has RE-affirmed my affinity and belief in the 270 W & 280 R. Both are exceptional cartridges for a WIDE variety of game.

Big game are arming themselves with the 270!?!

Well, last Friday the best game was a fallow buck. Apparently the .270 works alright in the bush too. Go figure. More to it than you think. Now, NEXT week...

I've used a Win. Model 70 in .270 the last 11 years and haven't lost one animal. I've taken Dall sheep, elk, and caribou. My bullet choice is 140 Nosler Partitions and muzzle velocity is 3050 FPS. I've only recovered one bullet. The rest went completely through. Excellent round.

Here is a little evidence why the Winlite 300 is one of my favs.

I bought the gun on Fri 11-07-08. That was in the afternoon before our Opening Day of deer season.

On Monday 11-10-08 I shot it for the first time with Fed Blue Box 180 Speer Hot Cor bullets. After bore sighting and making sure it was on paper at 100 yds. I got this FIRST group.



The first shot was on paper but hi rt. adjusted scope and shot next 3. Measured .840 outside-outside OR .631 c-c the 'best I could measure'.

I killed several deer in 08 & 09, including the biggest bodied buck I've ever killed. However I was dissatisfied with the bullet performance.

So I got some 180 HSP, pulled & swapped the bullets. The following is the FIRST group with the Hornadys.



This group measured .917 O-O and .690 C-C, again the 'best I could measure'. There are 5 shots touching, the 6th shot, low left was me. I called it before I looked at it.

The HSPs performed much better on game IMO.

Ergo - for me anyway, it's HARD not to love accuracy in a LIGHT rifle.

Any game, dangerous or non-dangerous, up to 12 lbs.

Quite a few Norway rats in your neck-of-the-woods, eh?

This brings us back to the "If you could have only one rifle~~

There isn't anything in Maine that doesn't just "bounce" when hit with a 270.

Now there you go, taking all the fun out of it with the truth!

Heehee!

I have never owned or fired a 270. But that is about to change. I have a savage 110 270 and am going to shoot it this month. I promise.

Hubert go get 'em!

Coyotes.

It'll suffice as an antelope gun if you keep ranges reasonable and only shoot does.

Thus spoke Zarathustra.....who ain't fired one yet....LOL!

Wait till he tells you about Barnes and the 223....

Duly noted....

Just Jeff Zero living up to his name.

Of course we was just mimicking Elmer, so to speak.

Was there a "whoosh" sound over y'all's heads a little bit ago?

Did you see my last post...

Ah. The whoosh was over MY head!

What was that? 30" hi??

Just when I think Zero has reached a pinnacle in stupid, he tops the last attempt.

I have used the 270 Winchester to take everything from bison (buffalo) and bear down to small animals like roe deer and alpine chamois. 150 grain bullet used exclusively. Never a problem at all.

Yeah, my wife Eileen took her one and only bison (a full-grown cow weighing close to 1000 pounds) with one 130-grain Barnes TSX through the lungs. The cow went about 40 yards and keeled over.

The smallest game she's taken was a cottontail rabbit. She'd just plunked two pronghorns from a herd when the unfortunate rabbit jumped up from under a sagebrush and then stopped. Eileen's blood was up so she took its head off with a 130-grain Hornady Spire point, but all we could eat was the hindquarters.

We've used 130's, 140's and 150's in several brands, and as long as the bullet went in the right place they all worked fine.

Thank you. Very informative.

Sounds like the 270 Win. can do wonders on all North American game.

Deer sized game....

Kinda like asking what you could use a Chevy pick up for-

Seems to be a lot of them around here lately........speculators.

Largest game I've taken with a 270 Winchester is a buffalo in South Dakota from the same herd that was in the movie "Dances with Wolves". Smallest is roe deer and foxes in Europe. Performed flawlessly. Worked great on my black bears too.

I just picked up a new Rem XCR in 270, I thought it would make a good Squirrel gun. I may try it on deer also!!!!! sure hope it don't bounce off.

My 270 WCF loaded with the 150 gr Partitions at 2925 fps is the perfect WT deer cartridge to me, my 270 is a pre-64 with a really nice English walnut stock, so it's really perfect for WT deer hunting on nice weather days.

Gunner

Coues deer and desert sheep.

Mike

I don't own a fair weather gun, guess I am missing out.

I haven't read all 16 prior pages, but as far as I got most people had ignored the OP's actual question:



Now the 270 can kill all sorts of things, but IMO it's BEST on deer. I'd use one on elk with 150 grain premium bullets if I had to, but I'd prefer a bit more weight and frontal area if I had a choice.

This one's original stock was run over and broken in half by a pickup tire , the original owner hired someone that really knew his chit on stockmaking, complete with case-colored skeleton grip cap and butt plate, and beautifully inletted sling swivel with a barrel band, I really love that little rifle.

Cant bear to take her out in the rain/sleet/snow.

Gunner

That's how it is around here bubba....I'd have to agree with you though. The 270 was made for deer and is hell on them.....As gay as it is (the 270), we all knew the answer so it was probably a rhetorical question anyway....

Fixed it for ya.

The hunter is the variable, not the cartridge.
I would hunting anything in the lower 48 with any bullet from 130gn to 160gn weight. Don't even care is it is someone else's choice. It would still work.

My favorites so far and in order: 1. North American Sheep. 2. Eland.
3. Gnu. 4. Oryx. 5. Pronghorn. 6. Warthog.

More than likely leaves you out !!!

Yup.

Anything that eats grass for a living.

That's a wrap! Put this thread in the can.

Sean nailed it.

Not sure coyotes, wolves, mountain lions, or grizzlies would agree...

They're a given....

Whatever fits on a plate.


Denny

To be VERY specific, I'd say the .270 is at its best shooting deer that weigh between 150 and 250 pounds live weight with ranges between 150 and 300 yards.

That's very specific... what do you base this specific statement on?

Obviously, the .270 is more than suitable for all kinds of game at all ranges, but I figure the .270 is needlessly powerful on smaller critters at under 150 yards or so and, ideally, I'd like a little more gun on animals larger than 250 pounds at distances longer than 300 yards.

The OP asked a specific question so I figured a specific response was in order

I was being a smartass, sort of.

With sensible bullet choice, the 270 can pretty much do it all.

Years ago I read an article in Shooting Times written by a man in his nineties.He stated that he bought a Winchester Model 70 shortly after the model came out,chambered in .270 Win.He lived in Alaska and claimed to have shot and killed over 200 Brown Bears with that gun.He said that about all but several were one shot kills and he only lost two.He blamed his poor marksmanship and not the rifle or the caliber for losing those two bears.He said in those days shooting Brown Bears was a necessary thing when trying to homestead in Alaska.He said they were big bears.I wonder if its possible to find that story on line,I thought it was really good reading.Anybody remember that one?I believe from the early 1980's it was.

I wouldn't doubt it.
Of course, that was back in the day when a rifleman simply placed a good bullet in the right place and didn't over think the whole damned thing.....

PERSONALLY in my experience, the 270 win loaded with a good 150 grain has proven to be an excellent choice on deer, and a good but not ideal choice on elk.
loaded with a good 130 grain its been really effective on antelope

Those pronghorn chops were just about the best meat I ever ate. So, if I had a .270 and the choice of game, I'd probably pick that.

I'd say it's ideal for deer. When I was young I knew a guy who hunted deer with a 760 Remington in .270. He was hell on wheels on running game but one year he jumped a buck and he hit it four times as it ran away. He couldn't find it but a week later a couple guys I knew found it dead. that's how we know it was hit four times. Not a decent shot in it but I was told he didn't get it because of 130 grain bullets. Everybody else I knew that used the cartridge used the 150's. The 150 round nose was legendary here in PA. So when I got a .270 I only used 150's even out west. I used the 150's on all my pronghorn kills. I got my son a .270 and I decided to break tradition and load him some 130 NBT's for deer. He shot a forkhorn last year and after 300 yards I lost the blood trail. The buck went onto a neighboring property that I had no permission to be on. When I saw the property owner I asked him about the buck. He said his nephew killed it later the same day and it had a shallow wound in the shoulder. So this year I had the boy loaded up with 150 grain NBT's. Once bitten twice shy I suppose.

I have a now deceased uncle that shot the front leg off a blacktail buck, with the 130 grain bullet from a .270.

He found chunks of bone and blood, but eventually lost the trail and the buck. He was forever denouncing the .270 as "too fast" and the bullets as "to soft".

Afterwards, he sold his miserable .270 and bought a much more appropriate .280...

He took great joy in showing me the B.S. tables in the latest Shooters Bible, to prove to me that the .280 with the 125 grain bullet was so much superior to the junk .270....

I was barely in my teens but knew enough to roll my eyes and pass gas at his assertions...... Then I bought a .270

I've killed a semi trailer full of deer with that rifle, not to mention a mt goat and a few elk. The only time I've ever had a problem killing with it was when I didn't do my part to put the bullet where it belonged..

I can say the same thing about a 1/2 a dozen other good cartridges, too.

I'd use in on anything short of griz.

it would probably be good for skunks in a leg hold trap grin

http://www.ballisticstudies.com/Knowledgebase/.270+Winchester.html - hard to summarize all of the info. The writer says his wife took over 900 head of game mostly with a .270 150-gr HotCor loads. Appears they get lots of experience from their guide services and their own shooting.

@Marlin1895 - that guy also says the .250 Savage is hardly adequate for deer.

Wow! That's a long read.... I had to get a sandwich

Been used successfully on them,too.

Great responses. I killed a nice raghorn bull elk this year with my .270 win model 70, 24" barrel shooting a140 gr TBBC, one shot at about 235 yards and he fell where standing. Hit his shoulder blade and found on far side under skin.

I killed two mountain goats (alaska, Idaho) two great bucks and an elk in 2011 with the .270.
And another Idaho hunter borrowed my gun to kill his Idaho mountain goat that fall.

Take your pic as to what "game" is best, all but one animal were drt.

Mine have cleanly taken wildebeest, zebra, eland, oryx, sheep etc. no problem.

What a bunch of BS! We all know a .270 is a mouse gun. Why do you guys insist on pulling of stunts like killing game animals with it?

I'd use my 270 win on anything in NA without hesitation..

I believe a 270 Win set up with a tough 140-150 is a pretty danged good rifle for a lot of stuff, but my 270 is really in its niche hunting deer (muleys and whitetails). Just can't find much that's worked any better.

It would seem that facts can confuse argument?

I've never had any "hate" for the .270.....but then again I don't have much "love" for it either. The .270 is great for light to medium weight animals at somewhat longish ranges. That's what it was designed for.

Yes it can work well on larger game, but it is far from perfect on game heavier than 300 pounds or so......particularly with the "typical" 130 grain bullets. I've found (and apparently a lot of others do too) that going up to a 150 grain bullet makes the .270 into a whole nother kind of beast. Much more effective on larger game.

When ever someone starts a discussion about smaller cartridges on larger game, the 7x57mm is always mentioned.....and rightfully so. However most seem to forget that the 7x57 (as used by Bell and others) made it's reputation with heavy-for-caliber 175 grain bullets at close range.

If the .270 were typically used with 160 grain or heavier bullets at 2500-2600 fps....it too would be "legendary" on larger game. Penetration is the key.

Most insist on retaining the long range ability of their .270 by using lightweight 130 grain bullets.....and against large (elk and above) animals this can be a problem at times. The light bullets just don't ALWAYS penetrate enough. Nothing "wrong" with the .270.....just a missuse of a great round.

If you insist on shooting 500 pound animals at 300+ yards, the 7mm Magnum....or better yet the .300 or .338 Magnums will outperform the .270 every time. The .270 "can" be used effectively on larger game.....but it will never be the "best" at that chore. The .270 will perform much better with heavier bullets....but will give up some range to do so.

I don't "hate" the .270, but I try to be realistic. Too many .270 fans like to give this round some kind of "magic" properties. Ballistics are not magical......heavy bullets perform better than light ones no matter what chambering you use. Limit the ranges and use heavier bullets and the .270 is good (note I said good.....not great) on heavier game......but it will never be the "best" at longer ranges.

Excellent post.

Best? Deer-sized game out to around 300-350 yards, or, if there isn't much wind, somewhat farther than that.

Same "best" as for a 6.5x55, but the .270 recoils more, and the bullet fired from a .270 is going to drift more in the wind out around the 400 yard mark and beyond.

The .270 was at its best compared to other cartridges during the period before laser rangefinders became common (and after rifle scopes became common). With the .270, you can zero for 250 yards and hold in the middle of the chest out to 300 yards, with wind corrections that are pretty reasonable. To be honest, hardly anybody needs more than that because, from what I've seen, most of us can't shoot adequately past 300 yards without considerable practice, and the right .277" bullet is going to do the job on any medium or big game commonly hunted in the Lower 48. The .270's recoil, which isn't really that bad, is the biggest negative besides its bullets not being as aerodynamic as bullets available one size smaller and larger (.264" and .284"). Overall, with the technology today, the .270 is a compromise cartridge, but it is still great for being a flat-shooting round with readily available factory ammo.

My great uncle shot 40-50 grizzly bears on the northern BC coast around the logging camps with a 270 win from the 1930's to mid 1940's. He's 93 and just found out the 270 is too small for anything bigger than deer.

anyone who puts down the 270 Win has never used it or can't shoot for chit or both

Actually, the reality is that hands-on experience trumps speculation, every time. [/quote]

I believe that speculating about the collective information of those with the most hands on experience trumps all.

Shod

Razorback....I think you get it. The .270 takes a lot of the guesswork out of semi-long range shooting.

And 400 yards is a LONG way out there for most shooters. For smaller game (under 300 pounds) at unknown ranges the .270 is hard to beat. For larger game (500 pounds+) there are much better rounds available.

Damn it...use the "best" cartridge for the job.....don't try to make one round do everything....no matter how much you "love" it.

Yeah...me and Joe killed a bigg-um is a real good argument

Damn it...use the "best" cartridge for the job.....don't try to make one round do everything....no matter how much you "love" it. [/quote]

This is exactly what I do, I don't need to use one cartridge for every job. I prefer the 223 or 243 for deer and my 270 takes care of the heavier work.

The 270 is the largest caliber that I have and It is also the best tool " in my hands" for the job of any bigger game.

I'll happily explain why if anyone so desires to know. Grin

Shod

No disrespect to your Great Uncle. But bullets have improved since those days. Phil Shoemaker, an Alaskan Master Guide, suggests the 30/06 for the Bear hunters he guides.
I've never shot a Bear. I have no personal experience. Phil does.

Liberals, Hippies and communists.

I've had 4 270's and I think that they are about the best coyote rifle out there, about on par with a 25-06.

Bushrat what would your uncle say to some knot head that called him gay.

Amen Brother! Loaded with light bullets it's almost as good as a .25-06!

After years of hearing people extol the .270 Win as if it were a magic wand of sorts, I've become skeptical of each and every user of it. I've seen far too many of the Jack O. kool-aid drinkers wounding stuff with it to be impressed.

This cartridge isn't any different from many others. In the hands of a skilled shooter it can be used effectively. In the hands of an unskilled shooter it is flat enough shooting to wound easily. I'd rather see an experienced shooter with a small caliber, or an inexperienced shooter with a short range gun. At least that short range gun will allow them to miss completely.

You can immediately write off any comment by someone who will brag on the .270 and bash similar performing cartridges. It is a tool to use, nothing more.

My wife shoot's one loaded with 150's, it works for her. She thinks anything past 300 yards is too far. I don't tell her any different as she has not the patience or interest in developing the skill to shoot any farther.

So far what I got out of this is that you are sceptical of you're wife, the 270 is nothing but a game wounded, and perhaps this is why you've chosen the 270 for your wife.

I'm a bit confused as to your comment.

Shod

Im glad you got that much out of it. Im still not sure what he was trying to say..

Reading comprehension is an issue for much of the High School Grads in the US.

I wasn't asking where you graduated, I wanted to know what you're post meant.

Never mind!

Shod

Go wash the Kool aid stain from your face.

From one of our fallen and great hunters:

Tough crowd! I understood exactly what Nate was saying. While I don't feel the same about the .270 win, some of the people who jump on the latest long range flavor of the month do evoke the same reaction from me (anything ai'd, 6.5's seem to be getting alot of this lately. I.E., not every 7mm rem. Owner is a tool, but every tool owns a 7mm rem., etc.). I've never actually meet, personally, a .270 owner who talked about 700 -800 yard shots on animals. .270 actually seems to attract alot of sensible hunters in my opinion. Then again I hang with a crowd that still appreciates shots under 300.

Gentrification of the fire and our language going on.

I saw what you did and thank you! Easy to say something in the heat of the moment but not always so easy to delete.
Good on you.
Pete

There's a few cartridges today that do pretty much what a 270 does. Some do "better" and this usually red ults from cherry picking loads or burning more powder, using longer barrels and maybe even getting kicked harder.

But back when it was invented it was uniwue in it's class and was so successful that everyone wanted in on the sales action which is how we ended up with the 280,284 and a bunch of others.

Like anything put in the hands of the population at large it's going to end up in the hands of unskilled shooters/hunters and experienced game shots alike. Results will vary. But damning a cartridge because it gets used by dodos who can't shoot is like blaming gu ns for crime...silly.

Today we can do most anything we can get done with a 270, with a number of other cartridges. But anyone who has a hard time killing BG animals with a 270 needs more practice and experience shooting animals.

That bears repeating ! ! !

OK, I'm going to make an attempt to focus!

First I'd like to say, well done Bobin sir and who do you think you are always showing up with all this logical reasoning.

Second, BigNate, I read your post through again more closely and I do agree on most all of your points. New I should of went to college.

It was the part where you said you were sceptical of any and all users of the 270 that through me off.

Now the focus part and to actually answer the the question of the thread.

What is the best big game for the 270?

I made a statement earlier that for myself the 270 is the best rifle that I own for any and all big game!

How can I say that? For several reasons.

First it has to be understood that each individual has a unique set of circumstances which need to be taking into consideration as to be able to determine which caliber may or may not be the most affective for an individual.

Take into consideration for example someone who has perhaps had neck surgery and the end result has left the individual with a few after effects that the individual neither wanted nor desired.

Would a 338 magnum stoked with max loads be the most effective tool in this persons hands? How much practice shooting in the off season do you think the individual is going to get.

My son lives in Wyoming and he just got home from his first year in guide camp and called me. He said, Dad, I want a 300 RUM because a fella showed up in camp with one and man it was a sweet rifle! I said, Son, how well did he do on his hunt?

My son let out a loud laugh and said, Dad, he couldn't hit jack schit!

I asked him what was the hunter who did the best carrying. A 6.5X55 sweede!

This experience is not uncommon and in fact in my reading of guides and there experiences I have often noted the statement that hunters with 30/06 or 270 in hand seem to be the most successful in hunting camp.

A rather profound statement and one I am certain my son will be eye witness to in his years of guiding to come.

The conclusion that I have reached is the single most effective ingredient in a successful hunt is to be able to hit the target where intended and critters will die quickly and effectively.

There's a saying an uncle once told me, he said you can be the man with the biggest gun in camp or you can be the man who kills the most game! Which one do you want to be? The truth is the 270 or the 30/06 are more than what is needed to accomplish just that. So are any of the magnum calibers for that matter.

Carry the one that you can quickly and effectively kill game with and that will be different for each individual.

Shod

I've killed exactly one animal with a .270. It was flat out the fastest kill I've had yet. It was on a small WT buck that was sneaking across a swamp edge at sun down. He simply flipped over dead with all 4 feet in the air. Stone friggin dead. Didn't twitch a bit. Killed with a m70 fwt, 130gr. core-lokts.

A tomato stake.

The 270 will put both steak and tomatoes on the plate! Not a lot of rifles that will do that.

Shod

Or keep all of them and buy a .280!! LOL

But seriously, if you DO draw that elk tag, which one would you use? Inquiring minds want to know!

Either I'm lucky or mine is just stellar, but it seems to be the most forgiving round to hand load for.

I have found the same thing.

IME it's less fussy than a 280, more predictable than a 7 Rem Mag and a host of other Big 7's. I don't even bother to chronograph the damn things anymore and load "development" is as easy as stuffing in 60-61 gr of H4831 with a 130 gr bullet and going to the range. Velocities will generally be over 3000 and if I bother to check them sometimes over 3100.

I just zero them and take them hunting.

I have a feeling the 270 juju will go out the window when I start messing with the 270WSM.


Since we're on the subject, whats the favored 150 grainer? I've played a little with ABLR's, but nothing else. Don't hear much about Swift A-Frames.

Any reason?

IMHO a 130 TTSX is about as good as it gets in a 270.

Not a lot of flies on a .463BC going 3,100 I reckon....

16 I have not loaded a 150-270 bullet since the 70's (well maybe a few sometime in the 80's). I just ran a 130 all these years.

Nothing wrong with a Swift Aframe....I have never used them but have a stash here for when all my 130 Bitterroots are gone. Purely anecdotal but RinB on here has used the 130 Swift Aframe in Africa and tells me it stones zebra and similar sized stuff. IME the 130 Swift Aframe is an accurate bullet,although the BC numbers won't impress anyone.

After shooting another 6pt Bull Elk this year, I am convinced now, more than ever that the 270 win. simply works and is about to become a true classic of a cartridge for all NA big game.

What is your definition of a classic?
The magnificent .270 has been around since 1925.
I'd say that makes it a classic since at least 1975.

It is definitely poised to be a classic.

Yeah it's been doing that stuff for a very long time.


And among bolt action chamberings for big game hunting,it's likely the most popular and successful non-military, commercial cartridge ever.

That would simply not have happened if it did not work really well.

Hell, I've only been around since the 50's and I've been called a classic. Not sure it was a compliment.

NV: I'm certain it was....

You nailed it, already a Classic cartridge. JOC saw to that before his death in 1978.

Doc

Mine likes 150 grn interlocks spire points best and H4831.

Been a lot of game killed with the 'Bath House Special'.

Bahb...

Classic guys shoot classic calibers! Right?

Close...150gr Speer HC with the same powder!

But in an Amish machine gun!

Paul: That would be correct. It does not bounce off Kansas bucks.

It bounces Kansas bucks....




Miller Time!

Funny to see this thread, that WSM lasted about 15 minutes.....

I think it was a solution looking for a problem.

I remember reading Sports Afield Magazine in the late 1950's and John Jobson writing about the .270 in one of his articles. His writings piqued my interest in rifles. If my memory is correct he was an advocate for the 130 grain.
Best game for it? About anything you get to hunt in this nation.

Jim

This .....

The .270 works on damn near everything, but If I had to pick the game it is most ideally suited for, I'd have to say mule deer and big bodied whitetail.

Think it's good for most big game found in NA.

I'd say it's sweet spot is game weighing 150-600 lbs though it can reliably take game weighing more but you asked for best. In N America that takes in all of the most popular big game species from deer to caribou and elk as being in its " best" range making it a very useful round.

Unicorns..

Rabbits.......according to Elmer Keith

Bighorns and mule deer. Perfect.

IIRC, I believe he said it was good for "chipmunkies."

I ca;t believe I just san down are read through all 25 pages of this thread obviously resurrected from the dead. Interesting stuff. Made me think a bit though. Got my first .270 in IIRC 1973, and FN Mauser with the thinnest barrel I ever saw, a stock so ugly it would abort a lady crocodile. (Thank you Mr. O'Connor for the use of that line.) But that fugly gun would shoot. Trued 130 gr. bullets and took a nice 4x4 Mule Deer with it that year and a few more over the next couple of years. Quickly switched to 150 gr. bullets which were a bit more kind on eating meat. Wasn't until around 1981 that I took it out of the safe and shot some of those 1970's loads that it still was a good shooter but dammit just too darn ugly. Back into the safe. Since then, I've acquired a few rifles in .270, a Ruger #1A and another commercial FN Mauser. The Ruger is good for about an inch with my handloads and the FN is another tack driver just like the first. Just too damn heavy to pack in the higher elevations. Cruising a gun show a few years back a Winchester M70 XTR caught my eye due to it'd black stock with the same lines as the Featherweight. Gun was really clean, had a nice Leupold scope on it and the price was really more that fair. Guy said it was an excellent shooter and very accurate. I'm thinking year right but for the money, I'd have an action, stock I liked the shape of and a decent scope that if needed I could send hack and get fixed. What the hell, I bought it. Next day I hit my local; Wallyworld and bought two boxes of Winchester 150 gr. Power points and hit the range. Long story short he said the gun was sighted and I took the chance that it was. It was. First five shot group with two minutes between shots was .50". I shot a total of four five shot groups that day, two minute intervals between shots and the larges group was the last one as .80", most likely my fault. Worked up an accurate load with the 150 gr. Sierra Game King and used it in 2009 on my antelope hunt. Shot came at 75 yards after about a half mile stalk. Bullet entered just behind the short ribs in the left and exited just behind the right shoulder. The antelope trotted off into a thirty foot half circle and expired. Can' ask for better than that. FWIW, I loaded up some 150 gr. Nosler Partitions and the shot to exactly the same point of impact at 100 yards and close enough out to 300m yards that I'm not worried should a long shot show up. I prefer to not shoot past 350 yards. Just not comfortable faster out even though I know I most likely can make the shot. Most likely just doesn't cut it for me.
Paul B.

I guess the 270 did a good job of eradicating them.


Jerry

Interesting thread for me - it is embarrassing to admit I cant remember ever even firing a 270 in 40+ years of hunting and more shooting. I have close friends who love their 270's but I Was always a 7mm Rem Mag guy so figured the O'Conner special would be a step down.

I found my grandson was a lefty shooter last year and came close to buying him a 270 this month but went with the 06 to avoid the cost of new dies and bullets. He is shooting 130 grain light loads out of a righty 06 now so he should be happy with the switch to his more natural side. I'm more of an elk hunter these days and plan to start him on them next year so the larger diameter bullet makes sense to me. Honestly for smaller deer and antelope the 270 seems ideal particularly with good bullrts but if you already have a 7 Mag, 300 Wby, and 30-06 why would you ever need a 270?

Paper.....not too thick tho.....
Seriously ...loaded with 130 it's probably the perfect deer chamfering...

Early Winchester ads were more colorful than today. I recall one that listed Winchester recommendations for brown bear cartridges.IIRC they listed the 375 H&H,300H&H,the 30/06,and the 270 Winchester;and the 348 in the M71 lever action.

I am pretty certain that a world record polar bear was killed with a 270. Hosea Sarber (I think he was a warden or biologist with Alaskan F&G) killed a lot of brown bears with the 30/06 and 270. None of this is a surprise since Winchester designed the 270 as a BG cartridge..

Shetland ponies and scare goats.

Elmer Keith described the .270 as "a damned adequate coyote rifle".

Never paid much attention to Keith. He was still shooting tin foil jacketed heavy bullets at BG animals while the rest of the world was on to Nosler Partitions. He never "got it"near as I could tell.

Lots of other options when chasing PA and NY whitetail bucks, but just can't leave the M700 Classic 270 that I purchased in 1981 behind, it's never let me down and has too much mojo....

My grandfather was stationed in Fairbanks during the Korean war. He often mentioned that while he was in Alaska the world record Brown bear (at that time) was taken with a .270 Winchester.

Exactly. Keith stayed stuck in the 19th century. He never did get it.

So true... I've never been a fan.

Truth be told I recently bought a VG in 270. Waiting for my Talleys to arrive so I can mount the scope. Hopefully i'll christen it over the last 2 weeks of deer season

According to the book Fifty-Five Years in the Alaskan Bush by Alaska guide John Swiss, the 270 is a first class polar bear rifle. The number two record polar bear was taken by a hunter guided by Mr Swiss and he used a 270 with "130 grain bronze points" to take the bear.

Mr Swiss also guided the hunter that took the number one record polar bear. That guy used a 30-06 for his bear.

Me neither. Once I read his stuff about killing animals at 400 yards with an open sighted .44, I figured he was one of "those guys" you meet in a bar and I never believed a word he wrote after. Ignorant loud mouth.

I've read were he was actually a pleasant guy to be around.
Jack was the one that was supposed more arrogant.

Either way both have killed a truck load more game than me!

Yeah I hear JOC was not the type to suffer fools easily...

Forget JOC and EK! If you want a no nonsense gun writer with real experience and a no bull schitt approach, we have our very own JB here on the fire. A better or more knowledgable gun writer has never come along...

Let's not forget Finn Aagaard... there are few, if any, his equal when it comes to a combination of phenomenal experience in the game fields, an experimental but practical mind, and a fine ability with the English language.

Finn Aagaard and John Barsness are my hand's-down favorite writers, but Jack O'Connor belongs in the pantheon of the immortals.

Bob Milek was another excellent writer.

OK, whatever

I'd use the .270 on anything in NA. On the big bears I would have backup and wouldn't take suboptimal shots though.

As to the original question,

I was thinking whatever is in the crosshairs.

It is much harder to find bullets that will not work, than ones that will.

My biggest bull fell to a properly pointed 270... 10.5 year old 6x6 stud.

Hitting a big-game sized animal at that range is doable by many people with long-range hand gun experience and talent. Actually killing it at that range requires some luck.

Great bull. I have killed my last several elk with a .270. It works well.

Elmer was a unsurpassed shot.. Pistol, rifle, or shotgun..
Lots of folks lost a lot of money betting Elmer couldn't hit things at long range with a sixgun..

He also used Nosler bullets in his .340, but stuck with the 275 gr. Speer for the .338..

In many of his works up until about the 50's, he mentioned the .270 as a good gun as long as broadside shots were taken.. I personally feel when he and O'Connor clashed at several affairs, he really took to bad mouthing the .270..

Elmer was an experimenter, developer, all around gun man..
JOC was a writer who wrote about guns..

Brad,
Didn't you get the memo?
.270's not adequate for large Bulls.
What load/bullet were you using?

That's what I think too. I believe Elmer wasn't taking shots at the .270 as much as he was taking swipes at O'Connor.

Well.......yeah! I know that!

But even John read JOC and Elmer....


Ingwe: John shoots a 270 though.....I'd like to be a fly on the wall for the conversations you two guys have.

Hummmm...I was thinking it would be much harder to find bullets that will not work, than ones that will. At least that's been my experience.

Right Bahb? I still got it!

Fixed it, that is what I meant.

I was quite sure that's what you meant! Just had to check.

This bull took a 130 TSX at 564 yds from the 270 win through the top of the heart and absolutely bounced.

Not surprised. Didn't even need that lucky horse shoe on the fence!

Looks to be a bit destructive on the meat

Crazy cool colored hide on that thing! Hope you kept it.

I would say this statement applies to every single cartridge (arguably) between anything that shoots a .277 through every single cartridge that shoots a .308. Take 270 above and insert your favorite within the range specified and the same thing could be said. They are all so much more alike than they are different.

In addressing the OP's initial inquiry, deer sized game is where all those mentioned are ideal.

I think I saw the same ad...

Cool ad.

Scotty: That would be the one!


I think of that add when someone relegates the 270 to jackrabbit cartridge status. Didn't Phil Shoemaker have a client use a 270 to kill a rather large brown bear with a 270 a couple years ago?

Never done it myself but have a couple of old friends who have killed 4-5 grizzly and brown bear with the cartridge.

What is considered adequate for the large game has greatly changed over the years. Some of it is because of being more realistic about shot angles and shot conditions. Of course a .338 can take a large bear under more conditions and less desirable shot angles than a .270 can. If the .270 hunter is backed up by a guide and picks his shot he will do well. But if you're going off by yourself looking for large bears a .338 makes sense but a .270 absolutely does not.

Several years ago I read a story written by a guy (sorry,forgot his name) who did Black Bear culling/management for a timber company in Washington state. His rifle of choice was a 270 and he shot A LOT of bears with it.

However, as much as I like the 270, and would use it for Black Bear without hesitation, if I had other options...like say a 35Whelen why wouldn't I use it, instead?

+1

In the mid 90's I remember reading an article on elk rifles by JB. I think it was one of my dads American Hunters. JB said, in summary, that the 30-06 was the best elk cartridge for most hunters. I was relieved, since every other fool in the magazines had been telling me that I needed a .338 or something. Put my worried little 16 year old heart to rest. I could tell there was something different about that article just by the way it was written. I knew it was solid advice.

I could probably rewrite just about the whole article I read it so many times.

Clearing out the gun safe has left me with a 84L .270 and a 8400 300WSM. Tomorrow its time for the new 84L to head out for a NM cow elk hunt. Going to use the 140gr. AB's - once we drive around the snow and ice storm in the mid central
part of the country. Prior to this, 150 NP's always worked when the cartridge rotation came around.

A well aimed 270 or 30/06 will get most any job done.

I got my Saturday read in.

The .270 Winchester is a good cartridge, like any round the hunter needs to put the bullet in the right spot.
At this time, I do not own a .270, my son has one and he says, "that all a guy needs". "Shoot them in the right spot and critters die".

He's a smart guy, he must have gotten his knowledge from hes mother.

You all have a good day.

Just a hunch, but I'll suggest the 270 Win has taken more big game in the CONUS than any cartridge not named 30-06 or 30-30. In the Wide West, 30-30 must drop out of the top 2.

Coyotes

Sure, good thinking, practice before the elk season. 90-gr TNT @3700 fps.

Whelan Nut, The book is "The education of a bear hunter" by Ralph Flowers. He used an iron sighted Rem. 721 then added a 2.5x scope later and preferred the 130 gr. Bronze Point. He says the BP was no good in the 300 Sav. as it was too slow to properly expand (read explode) and the second best was the Silver Tip. Good friend of mine knew him and I have the book and read it every year before bear season, a LOT of good stories and information. I have shot a lot of BB in NE WA and have to agree that a fast expanding bullet is the way to go but I do use NPT's for the penetration and exit hole after the quick expansion-Muddy

muddy22

Yup, that's the book I was thinking of! Thanks for jogging my memory.

WN

Thanks. I just bought a copy on Ebay.

I've shot a .270 for most of my life and didn't realize how inadequate it was until I started reading this forum a few years ago.

As for the best big game for the cartridge I think it's perfect for culling feral Shetlands.

This is a pretty darn good answer....

That's because half the negative stuff you read on here about the 270 is BS, and the other half is suspect.

Would an aardvark be considered a big game animal?

Keith and Askins were always badmouthing the .270. Neither had any real world experience with the cartridge though. Kinda like my Dad. He liked to call the .270 a groundhog gun even though he never even fired one. When you actually use the .270 you realize just how smart O'Connor was!

Good one, Bob!

Would a cup and core bullet work or is a premium bullet needed for chupacabra? I've read they are expanding there range to where I live and I want to be prepared.

If you couldn't get something that had magnum on the end, a 270 would be the thing to buy.

I have lots and lots of coyotes on my property. There are few rifles better for coyotes than a 270, in my opinion.

After mowing my lawn a month ago, I was in eating lunch. I looked out the window -- a coyote was walking across my yard with a pheasant in his/her mouth. The best rifle that day would have been the one that was leaning beside the door. Now, I have a rifle leaning beside the door. I happens to be a 30-30 with cast bullets. It is my wife's. Next time...

When I go elk hunting, I usually carry a 300 Win Mag or a 338 Win Mag. This year for a cow it will be an 06.

A 270 would work too.

But when I'm calling in yotes: I'll have a 25-06 or a 270 in my hand.

Elmer Keith was right sometimes. He said a 270 is good for coyotes.

Not a writer, just a student of several things.

I have used a .270 off and on since 1960. The three bad experiences that I have had with it were one each bullet selection or failure. Whichever, 150 bronze points did not open up! Then there were two each instances when in heavy fog I ended up much closer to my quarry than I intended and misjudged the distance. I let the gun rag BS talk me out of this caliber for a long time.

Similar story on the ..30-30 not being enough gun. Then I investigated a double murder where the .30-30 was the assailant's choice. At some 50-60 yards, the damage that I observed at the autopsies said otherwise.

Back to the .270. A few years ago, I had a bit of disposable income. Good job and kids out of college made me think I was rich. I like take down guns. The Blaser attracted me. I picked the .270 as a general purpose tool with just enough reservations that I also got a 9.3x62 barrel for bigger stuff. A .223 setup would make all the rest of my battery redundant, but I already have three rifles in that caliber.

I have a pre-war M70 in .270, three .30-06s, a .308, and a .243 in bolt guns, so as you see, I'm open minded, or perhaps a loonie.

Bottom line is, that if I do my job, the .270 is plenty for the lower 48 and perhaps for Canada and Alaska. BTW, I sold my last belted magnum some four years ago.

Best wishes,

Jack

I must of miss-read. I thought the question was what is the best game for the 270, not the biggest game for the 270.
Other 'best' might include white-tail, antelope, mule deer. But I don't think best game for the 270 is all the animals in the lower 48. P

The 270 was designed as a flat shooting, mild recoiling big game cartridge. Not as a deer cartridge.

It's proven to be completely adequate in that role for several decades on most everything here and most stuff in Africa as well.

This Internet chatter about sticking it in niches for smaller stuff is silly.

In the United States, nilgai are probably the best fit for the cartridge--in India, apparently not so much.

To reiterate that, my first-time, hunting companion toted a 270 into the Wind River range on a wilderness elk hunt last fall. Our outfitter told him his 270 was too small but I had him out last summer shooting to four hundred yards and he was competent. I told him not to worry--he was just fine; to visualize the Bulls chest as a medicine ball and to think of it in three dimensions and to center it.

His chance came early in the morning on a broadside bull at two hundred yards and he put a Federal 150-gr Nos Part (we chrono'd at 2850 fps out of his Tikka) through the Bulls chest. It went twenty yards. It was the biggest 6x6 in camp.

The 270 is much more than a deer cartridge with the right bullet..

.270 threads seem to go on forever. You would think that after 4 years this subject would be sorted out.

I guess that's a testimonial to the popularity of JOC's favorite round.

I like the .270 threads.I am a sheep hunter first and nearly always pack one of my .270 Jack's. THIS IS Grizzly country,and often bull elk are killed on these trips- it is plenty for elk and I use a good bullet all the time anyways.As a sheep hunter it is the default choice by many.A 6 lb,short barreled synthetic job is a delight in the crags and rock chutes a hunter travels doing this.Any rifle with a long 24"tube is too long imo. THE .270/.280 is about perfect.

Or those who believe the cartridge is the most over-rated cartridge in the universe.

In his book THE SHOOTERS CORNER Don Lewis said "I could never see carrying a .270 when I could get more efficiency from a .30-06". I love both rounds but I've long considered those words..........

Of course most people know how the 270 came to be...

There were a few whiners (sissies) who came back from WW1
They complained that the 30 hurt their little shoulders.
So Winchester made a cartridge for sissies.
Then they hired a hunter who needed a guide to hunt anything and they told him to promote the cartridge.

Most of those shooters went to San Francisco, but others went to New York City

Yikes! no wonder Ingwe considers the 270 gay!
Explains alot.

I may have to sell my 270's?

I feel misled by BobinNH, he told me the 270 is great and a real mans gun?

4 x Kudu bulls hunted this year obviously didn't know that they died from a gay .270 bullet - three of which did not take one step after impact. Similar story for the 5 Kudu shot last year ... they must be getting soft!

Oh shidt! It's worse than I thought!

Best ever for desert bighorns!

One of my first rifles was a 264 Win. One criticism I heard was, "Yek, that isn't much better than a 270!"

I loved to shoot jack rabbits with that rifle, it was also great on crows. I sold it to a friend who used it on prairie dogs.

I suppose it wasn't much better than a 270 after all😄

My pre-war M70 .270 was one of three that cousin bought from an old family friend about 1960-61 when friend "hung up" his guns. The other two were a .30 Govt 06 and a .264 Westerner. We gutted a few coyotes, jack rabbits, and prairie dogs with the ..264. It did a good job on them! Almost as good as a .270.

Best,

Jack

I never paid the slightest attention to what Don Lewis wrote. Above is a perfect example of "why"...