Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters A case for the .270 Winchester

Damn! dude, who stole your puppy? What a warm way to treet a newby?

I know what you are...ignored.

Actually Rainshot I'm more like that too. I have several deer rifles in many different chamberings and I like them all. But since I have had the .270 longer and have some sentimental attachment to it, after hunting with it for 52 years, it is pretty much my go to hunting rifle. I usually start the season hunting with it but after I kill something with it I will take other rifles with me the rest of the season.

This is as non partisan as it gets. I like the 270 and don't really care what others feel, that don't like it. On it's merits alone, the cartridge will last for another 100 years regardless of what people say. Most people that shoot these guns don't belong to a internet forum to find out if it will work...

I have no problem with the 270 Winchester. I would never say it is a good choice for women, kids, or others lacking in testosterone. It's good for anyone who is smart enough to use it. Bullet placement tops all else,bullet construction appropriate for the task req'd is next. People like to bad mouth things they don't have or have not personally experienced. All that really shows is a petty narrow minded attitude. We are supposed to be gunowners and should stick together instead of making petty snide remarks about what you don't have. I could easily use one for the rest of my life for what hunting I'm likely to do for what's left of it. Variety is the spice of life, use what you want and have enough grace to extend that courtesy to the next person without a bunch of bullshit remarks. Lee J. Hoots entered his writing career with Wolf Publishing with a bullshit diatribe against the 270 as a mule deer cartridge now I can't read anything he says objectively, Jap O'Connor promoted it so hard it damaged his objectiveness. Elmer hated it because of the incompetents using it ineffectively that were inspired by JOC. It will get the job done every time when pointed correctly with $11.97 Federal blue box ammo from Wallyworld. Tell me again how the f**k can you hate that? Can't believe this sh*T must be cabin fever. MB

The 270 stands on its own, not necessary to make case for it.

Hard to beat a 270 WCF.

dave

I have used the 270 a lot, in fact it was the second big game rifle I owned. I also was a follower of Cactus Jack and loaded my rifle hot with 130 gr. Sierra Prohunters. Pretty destructive as a close range east Texas deer rifle but as a coyote and jackrabbit rifle it was awesome! I took my first Mule deer with it and just generally shot it a lot. Till the barrel went bad anyway. I traded it for a new Ithaca shotgun and a well worn M28 Smith & Wesson. Wish I had kept it and had it rebarreled, a 1972 Remington BDL that was a born tackdriver. After that I picked up a custom Mauser in 270 and my Springfield 30-06 was finally finished after 6 years I used them for much of my Wyoming hunting. No matter what new cartridges come out those two rounds can still do it all.

My only complaint about hunting with the 270 is the larger freezer required to store the meat harvested with it.

5 pages and nobody mentioned the 270 Improved (the 280)...

oops, it was mentioned. my bad.

I speculate that if a bullet company did the r&d to make super high b/c target and hunting bullets for the 270 they would never keep up with demand.

I had a 270 many years ago. A PH 1200 SC. It wasn't what I needed. It was the same for most hunters where I lived. There were several factors that made it a bastard stepchild around here.

Where I hunted, the terrain didn't call for it. For most of us, it was a LR cartridge. Whether it was deer, bears or moose, almost everyone thought of it as a silly cartridge to own unless you lived on the prairies. We wanted a good 200 yd cartridge.

No one thought of it as a varmint cartridge.

Jack O'Connor's writings about sheep, goats or deer didn't apply to us. But he wrote about the 30-06 as well. Those articles seemed more sensible. There were a lot more bullet choices too.

It didn't help that there weren't a lot of .277 bullets or factory loaded ammunition to be had where I lived. As I recall, there were only 130 and 150 gr.bullets. There might have been 160 gr. Noslers as well. With the exception of the Partition, there were no premium bullets that I remember. There were more 311/312 bullets available, both loaded cartridges and bullets for reloading.

I don't think we ever thought of the 270 Winchester as inadequate or under powered. It just didn't seem practical. And I believe we weren't the only region of North America that thought the same way. For example, how many 270s were used in the NE US woods? Not many, I bet.

But times and thinking change. The numbers and types of bullets increased - copper, bonded and even more cup and core choices. In the late 1990s, the Internets came along, and we had access to stores all over where we could buy what we wanted.

Steve, you seem to have forgotten the 160 gr. Dominion Kling Kor. They worked just fine. I live in southern Ontario and have known .270 users around here for years. Your being confined to army camps must have affected your exposure to the cartridge.
Jim

I wasn't always in the army. I lived near Sudbury before I joined the service. There weren't many 270s around. I can't think of anyone where I was that owned one. That probably explained why CDN Tire and the hardware stores didn't carry much 270 ammunition.

Edited to add: My future FIL owned a 30-30 lever. Most of his family owned different cartridges. Several 340s in 30-30. Some 99s/94s in either 300 Savage or 30-30. Some 303s. My family had a 30-06 and some 303s. We used to shoot at a 'dig out' ( a local area used by people for sand). Almost nobody there reloaded. I used to pick up all the brass, even the stuff I couldn't use. At Crean Hill, there were some reloaders. That's where I learned about the Lee Loader.

Have you ever noticed that most of the time when there is a discussion comparing calibers of rifles, it's likely to go something like this..... the 243/6mm is a better varmint rifle than the 270, because its flatter shooting and there is a variety of lighter weight bullets available. Or, the 257 is better at this or that, than the 270.... or, the 25-06 or 6.5 is better than the 270 for whatever reason. Seems like everyone wants to compare their caliber to the 270. Why? Could it be that everyone knows the 270 has set the bar awfully high and the only way to get credibility is to say they are just as good or better?

I'll be the first to admit that there is no caliber that is perfect for every situation. I wouldn't advise shooting elephants or rhino's with a 22 and it would be slight over kill to shoot pd's with a 477. However the 270 is likely to be one of the most versatile calibers there is, being used to shoot pd's on up to elk and moose. The fact that lots of calibers are compared to the 270 just proves how good it actually is.

Comparing cartridges is rarely a good thing because of the large area in which the membership here is located. Just think, many regions of North America and the world come to this forum. The animals that are hunted, the topography and cartridge history/popularity are vastly different.

These debates are worth the cost of admission just for their entertainment value. Close your eyes and pick something and I bet you can kill a lot of stuff with it.

I thought this would be Pelican vs. SKB?

While the .270 has its followers I'm not one of them.