Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Real world differences between the .270win & .270 weatherby?

Can't argue with that

Do you think I can get that kind of speed out of a 24" barrel? I have no intentions to change out the barrel it's gonna stay.

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

So much parsing out ballistics and creating scenarios that level the playing field. The problem is that the playing field is not level. If you can't build a 270 Wby rhat can break 3500 with 130s, something is wrong. I chrono every handload and factory load that goes in every firearm I shoot, including 270 Wins in a couple barrel lengths. Even my old 24" 270 mag Vanguard breaks 3400 with 130s. My 270 win Vanguard never got anywhere near that, with it's 24" barrel.

The thing is, the results I get from my Wby are pretty average for standard factory rifles. If you don't want to shell out ridiculous money for a "custom" rifle and don't want to handload, you can get the same velocities. Take it out of the box, scope it and go to work. Could be it's just too simple for some people.

All the cherry picking and skewing stats doesn't change the facts. Build a 26" 270 Win that can run with the Wby and we can have a discussion.

Bought my first chrono in 1981. I probably have close to 5k rounds entered into my load book now. One of the first things I found out is barrel length does make a difference. Cut a 300Wby down to 24" and it only marginally faster than a 300WM. Cut a 300Wby down to 20" and ya' got an '06. Of course, this is assuming the loads are within reasonable pressures. Only 270Wby's I've chrono'ed were all Mark V's with 26" bbls. A quick glance at my load book and I can't see any that broke much over 3200fps with 150's.

When I bought that chrono it was a novelty out here in the colonies, and other shooters at the range would often ask it they could fire a round over my chrono to see what their velocity was. I soon learned to "warn" the magnum shooters that the recorded velocity was most likely going to be significantly slower than they were led to believe. I had the ancestry of my chrono questioned a couple times..........






Amen. Bullet construction trumps everything else when it comes to killing larger critters. Plus packing a 9lb rifle quickly loses its allure in most elk country.

I have most of the popular reloading manuals published since WWII, and I can't find any that advertise much over 3450fps with 130's in the 270Wby, and those manuals tend to be, ah, optimistic with most rifles.............The majority of the manuals list the 130's around 3300fps max.
The best pressure barrel the average guy has is his chronograph. If he's running over max listed velocities, odds are good he's over max pressure.




No, a 270W will not come within 200fps of a 270Wby, but the difference in trajectory at reasonable ranges one can expect to make a good shot in the field is a few inches. Then again, that's true with most bottleneck cartridges using current powders............

I hunted exclusively with a 270 Win from 1976 to 1999, before that it was a sporterized Mauser. That 270 was a Ruger M77 tang safety, paid something like $139 for it brand new. I hand loaded for it from day one and took truckloads of game with it. I gave each of my sons and one of my stepsons a 270 Win (including that rifle) when they came of age - I hold the cartridge in very high regard and I'm well aware of the 270 Win's capabilities. I transitioned to a 30-06 in the '90s and still hunt with that rifle. I found it to be a somewhat more effective killer than the 270. If forced to hunt with only one cartridge for the rest of my life, that would probably be it. I still carry it to the woods for deer and hog. The round is immortal, as far as I'm concerned. I also hunt with a 45-70 sometimes and it is an absolute hammer. The Weatherby is a fine bean field and R.O.W rifle and dandy for out west. But it will kill up close too, if you happen to have it on you. I've dropped a number of deer at woods ranges with it. I hand load and chrono for everything I shoot. So, I think I'm pretty well rounded, cartridge wise and fairly open minded. The 270 Win will never catch the Weatherby, nor will the WSM. Doesn't mean I'm not a fan, of the Win at least.

Optimistic load data...I'll point you to the Nosler load data site, which is my preferred source, as I primarily use their bullets. I have found their published velocities, at least for the powders I work with, to be on the money or conservative. I never fail to meet or beat them in the Mark V by staying within SAAMI specs or only very slightly exceeding published charges. However that practice is usually detrimental to accuracy. Using the max load 73.0 gr RL22 load, I get 3537 avg fps in my fire formed and neck sized brass, with great accuracy. That's 80 fps better than their numbers. I don't think they're being optimistic at all; quite the opposite. I'll say this, I think the Weatherby Mark V may have a somewhat better barrel than a lot of other rifles. I also think rifles chambered in a Wby cartridge ought to have 26" barrels. Maybe the same for most other magnum rounds.

Their top load for the 130 gr 270 Win is 3158 from a 24" Shilen barrel. The 150 gr bullet gets a top speed of 2913. Pretty good but still 300 fps behind the Wby. Let's assume you can beat the Nosler book velocities proportionally with the Win, like with the Wby. Still 300 fps behind. Factory Weatherby 130s go 3565 over my chrono. Barnes load data on the other hand I have found to be extremely optimistic in every Weatherby rifle I have tried a Barnes bullet in. So I guess, if you look hard enough, you can find load data that doesn't live up to published velocities.

Referring to my ballistics program, I see that I chrono'd factory Weatherby 150gr NPT at 3254 fps. In my notes, I see I got a 140 AB running 3318 in front of some N560, the published velocity was 3190. I did exceed the max charge by 1 grain but the Mark V action did not notice. The fact that 270 Wby is a great cartridge does not mean that the 270 Win, WSM, 30-06 or (insert your favorite cartridge here) is not. But it is faster...

Somebody mentioned a 9 lb rifle - I'm carrying the ULW, comes in under 8 lbs scoped and loaded. Not the lightest but honestly, if I can't hump a 9 lb rifle around, I should take up golf or maybe enter a spelling bee. I did carry my Wby in elk country this year, up to 10,000' on foot. Most of the time, I hardly noticed it. 90% of the time, it was in my hand. I'll admit that I trained brutally hard for that hunt. Unfortunately, a few days in, my wife became gravely ill and I had to get her home asap. I'll be back next year though with the same rifle.

I haven't had much trouble getting 3500 ft./s in my Weatherby mark five with 130 grain bullets using Reloader 22 and IMR 7828. This with an old Oehler chronograph.

Seriously? Now that's a rarity...........




Now I know you're superhuman..........

Nope, just a human in good shape. 65 years old, 6', 192, 12% body fat. I work out 5 mornings a week, weights and cardio. No gut. I'm also a blacksmith. Afternoons, I do 3 miles in my hunting boots with a 25-30 pound pack, carrying either dumbbells or my rifle...in my hands. You should give it a try - it opens up a lot of possibilities...like carrying a rifle in your hands or being able to tie your shoes, without having to stop to catch your breath.

My Nosler # 6 lists a 140 gr with 71 gr 7828 to achieve 3260fps . Using a 140 accubond and 71gr 7828 , I chrono 3280 .
Close enough , can easily take that load farther in my rifle , but it gives me 0.4 MOA, so I don't bother.



Have both cartridges , fair comparisons , the WIN still doesn't catch the WBY. Nor should it

Now that's funny, a Floridian flatlander trying to school me on altitude............

As a guide for 25+ years, I've heard it before..........

I'm not schooling you. I suggested you might want to shape up, since you think a 9 lb rifle is unmanageable. I'll bet this flatlander can go anywhere you can though and I'm an old man. I'll be back to the western slope next fall, if you want to have a go at it. I'm game for any challenge.

I guess you're done with the Weatherby/Winchester thing. I don't blame you.

Most load data for the 270 Wby is grossly watered down. They don't even actually test it. The numbers are computer generated.

To say there's no real world difference between a 270 Win and a 270 Wby is laughable. I've own/owned and loaded for all 3. The Wby simply stomps the WCF. The WSM comes much closer, but if you want the king of .277's, the Weatherby is it.

+1 million. Weatherby envy is still prevalent after all these years.

I never really gave weight much thought until I started reading these different forums. Way too much emphasis on achieving feather weights imo. An 8-8.5 biggame rifle is a fine hunting weight.

For my uses the data should be provided with a 22" barrel or shorter. I wonder how the Weatherby would chrono out of these short tubes? I also am very fit and 60 years old and for my style of hunting weight is of real concern. I now use a .270 win with a 19 " barrel for sheep and elk. With R26 and 150 Partitions it chrono'd over 2900 fps. The only piece of equipment that isn't lightweight is my German binoculars. Barrel length is an eliminator for me.

Nothing wrong with the WBY version but a standard .270 Win would get my money.

The Win wins with lower costs for factory ammo and brass. If I need more oomph I have a .280 Rem, 7mm RM and .300WM. If I had none of them and was starting fresh the .270WBY would still lose to other options.

YMMV

comerade - I don't think there's much point in a 22" barreled Weatherby magnum, which is why they currently come in 26", and the older ones were available in 24" & 26". The cartridges were designed to run in longer barreled rifles - they need the inches to hit their stride. I hunt frequently in thick woods and swamps in the southeast, usually with a 22" 30-06, and have never wished for a shorter barrel or felt like the longer barrel was a hindrance.

Ziggy - I agree. How long ago was it that men (and some women) carried 8 & 9 lb rifles all over the place and never whined about it? I do have one lightweight rifle and enjoy carrying it, but I sure as Hell don't feel sorry for myself when I'm humping around a full sized rifle.

This "cost" argument never fails to crack me up. Even if I was forced to buy Weatherby factory ammo at full cost, it would still be the cheapest part of the whole hunting experience. If money's a problem, you'll find it's probably a lot cheaper to just go to the grocery store than gear up to go hunting.