Well guys, I have been building guns now for almost 50 years, and I have owned various chronographs for about 35 years. I have used barrels of 22- 28 inches on both 270 Winchesters and on 270 Weatherby mags If we compare barrel length to length and pressure to pressure the truth is that the Weatherby shell only gives about 100 to 120 FPS more, and in MOST cases only beats the Winchester shell by about 80-90 fps. The idea that it's 400 FPS faster is totally false. Now there are several factory 270 Winchester loads on the market that are down loaded to sedate velocities and all the Weatherby factory ammo I have tested was loaded at top velocities, so in those cases the Weatherby will go a lot faster, but that is an invalid test of cartridges. That's just a report on products. That's like putting regular gas in one Top-Fule Dragster and the best grade of Av-Gas with Nitrous Oxide injection in another, and saying it proves the car with the good gas is a faster/better car.
As a gunsmith I take a 100% objective point of view on what I make. I can't afford not to. My customers want to know what i am making and I need to be 100% honest with them because I need their recommendations in my line of work. Word of mouth is the very best advertising there is to a gunsmith, and you need to sell EXACTLY what you claim you are selling in my business if you want to stay in business.
Not that there is anything wrong with the Weatherby. There's not. It works VERY well in the game fields. But so does the 270 Winchester and so does the 270 Winchester Short Magnum. All shoot the same bullets at high velocities (all within about 120 FPS of each other all other things being equal) and if you use a good bullet that holds together, all make bullet holes in game about the same diameter and most go clear through. I have made so many of them in my half century of work I have lost count and I have owned both 270 Winchester's and 270 Short mag myself, and I have killed a lot of game with them. I have made many dozens of 270 Weatherbys for customers and friends and I have hunted with several of those men and women over the last 50 years and seen the Weatherby kill deer, antelope, elk moose and a few bears, and seen it done many many times.
The OP said he was wanting to know "Real World Differences.
Well, this may get hate from those that see their favorite cartridge as a holy object of worship, but the unvarnished truth is that there is none at all that I have ever seen between the 3 shells I mentioned here. Why would there be? 120 FPS looks good on paper but let me point out truth here that is not based on opinion. A quick look at a ballistics table will shot a 150 grain .277 bullet with a B.C. of .489 starting out at 3040 FPS at top safe pressure from a 24" barreled 270 Weatherby mag. The same bullet at the same pressure from a 24" barreled 270 Winchester "only" goes 2965 FPS So that's 75 FPS slower. Right Now lets look at velocity loss of a .489 BC bullet starting out at 3040 FPS and see at what range it's as 'slow" as the lowly 270 Winchester is at the muzzle.
It's at ( a drum roll please............................. ) 36 yards!
Thirty six !!!
Not three hundred sixty.
Not 300
Not 130.
Not even 50 .
Thirty six yards more range.
And then I ask "is there any animal on earth that would be too big, too tough too anything that a bullet at X velocity is simply not good enough for, but if we shoot that exact same bullet at 75 FPS faster that same animal is NOW well-within it's optimum killing range and size/weight for that amount of ballistic energy"?
The OP was spot on when he asked his question. He asked about REAL WORLD DIFFERENCE.
There is none. 75 fps with a 150 grain bullet is not a real world advantage anywhere at any time for anything. Heck I have seen guns firing 500 grain 45 cal soft points and the ones that were 75FPS to 100 FPS faster didn't show me any difference on the game shot compared to those 75 FPS slower. If it doesn't matter with a .458" bullet of 500 grains why would it matter with a 27 cal of only 150 grains?
If you need more power than a 270 Winchester will give you, you need a LOT more power.
Not just 75 FPS. You probably also need 100-200 grains more bullet weight and a larger bore.
Hunting and guns are supposed to be fun. Not excuses for argument and debate for debate's sake. Use what you LIKE and don't let anyone feed you BS as to why your cartridge is bad and theirs is better.
It's not about the "best killing machine" anyway. That would be the trick of the market driven dishonest salesmen. It's supposed to be about enjoying your tools and your hunt.
Use what you LIKE!!!! The bullet you fire is far more important then the shell that held it before you fire it anyway.
Lots of good points in your post; I especially like this one: "
"If you need more power than a 270 Winchester will give you, you need a LOT more power."
Well said
