Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Your Take on 7mm & .270 WSM's

That seems a little on the warm side to me, especially out of a 24". I havent loaded any 150 gr bullets in my 270 WSM, but by looking at relaoding manuals, The 270 WSM and the 7 mag are very similar with similar weight bullets. I havent seen a book load that matches what you are getting out of your 7 mag...and thats with a 26" barrel.

There ain't nuthin' on earth that your 7mm 150gr at 3244 will kill that a 140gr 270 at the same velocity won't just as well, no critter would know the difference. And yes I've shot them at that velocity (Chronographed) in 3 different 270 WSM's.
The real difference is that my 270 WSM's probably weigh about 2lbs less than your 7 Mag........................DJ

Try Noslers 5th addition. I have pushed the BT over that speed with less than the full charge listed, did have some high pressure signs in that session, dropped back and got the 3,244 fps. As we know all chambers are not created equal. Both IMR powders hump the 150 projectiles. I have settled on 64 gr. w/ Partitions, yielding 3,192 fps. I have pushed the 120gr BT right at 3,500 fps with the Reloader powders and struck pronghorns at that speed. It was unbelieveable to witness those kills with that kind of speed at 295 and 320 yards (total bang/flops). The 7mm Rem Mag will push comparable bullet weights 100-200 fps greater than the 270 WSM. A more comparable aspect would be the 7mm Rem Mag with the 270 Wby, but even then the 7mm Rem Mag has more muscle. In truth the 7mm Rem Mag is exactly what the 7mm Wby Mag is; no more, no less. The 7mm Rem Mag is the reason that the 7mm Wby Mag and the 264 Win have died on the vine, although I think highly of both those chambers as well.

I agree, this is just splitting hairs type of stuff. Both are flat shootin, azz kicken rounds. As I previously posted, "no flys on the 270 WSM".

I agree with DJ on this, there isn't gonna be any diff betwixt how they kill.

I've been known to say pretty much the same darn thing for some time now. A bit more bullet and or a bit more speed just isn't gonna mean much.

I like to run a 270 it runs a 130 @ 3200 and that is a tish bit slower than the 270 WSM with same weight slug and or a tish bit faster than the 270 WSM with a heavier slug.

No way no how is a critter ever gonna know the diff. It just aint a gonna happen.

To me hunting is all about the gun and not the round. I kind of like my lil G33/40 that I am in the process of rebuilding. When done it'll be about 7.25 lbs with 5 rounds and sling.

If'n I can't get it done with that I need a lot mo round, not just a skosh bit more.

Take your pick, enjoy life, get out and hunt as much you can and don't worry about all of this ballistic gack!

What one will do the other will do.

Dober

My take on the 7mm and 270WSM? They are short. They are fat. If you find this configuration appealing, they are your cup of tea.
The 270 and 7mm bullets will perform on game just as they have out of the various other 270 and 7mm cartridges available. GD

Likewise.....my 270WSM, 24 in. tube, spits the 140gr. AB out at 3,240fps. My 300WSM, same dimensions, likes the 180gr. TSX's at 3,130fps. I sorta like that in a short action, lightweight offering..........

True, no animal I know of would ever know the difference, but I always give credit where credit is due.

I feel that it's always a better approach to applaud people's choices rather than to question them......just seems more productive and a bit more open-minded that way.

Really....who cares what someone else uses anyway?

Magnumb-what are you running in your 300 shorty to get 3130 fps with a 180. That is almost 200 fps over what all I know who run 300 shorty's are getting.

Not dog piling I'm just curious

Thx

Dober

I don't have a rifle chambered for a WSM cartridge. One observation I've made is the newer "super cartridges" that have come out lately use special powders not available to us. The WSM cartridges do use common powders so you can duplicate the performance. Just my $.02.

A powder column filled with RL22, Norma brass and 215M's......yes, a bit warm, but approached with my usual and accustomed caution and a fairly experienced eye towards the obvious. Super accurate and gives up nothing to it's "parent" as I've so often heard, but refuse to join in, with regards to such trivial differences. That's why for me, and perhaps me alone, the 300WSM was a no-brainer given the shorter action and lighter weight offerings.......

Several other members here and friends at the range have also posted or told me about gettin' in the low 31's as well. Heck, posts recently have told of '06's, with factory tubes, gettin' in and around 2,900 fps with 180's.......the case capacity of a 300WSM being substantially more. Doesn't make me want to duplicate such #'s, but it is what it is. The '06 was once thought to be a solid 2,750 fps performer (and still is to my way of thinkin'), but with newer powders and 24in. barrels being pretty standard, the mid 28's seem to be well within ones reach these days. I happen to remain a dedicated IMR4350 user, but no doubt RL22 would likely again be a solid performer in this cartridge as well.....perhaps even RL25.

No worries....as opposed to others....I haven't seen you as the dog piling type. Had I, my response may have been somewhat different. I tend to roll the opposite direction I'm being pushed......the laws of nature I guess....the human type.

If anyone is looking for one, I ran across a NIB M-70 Classic in .270 WSM, in laminated varmint stock, with heavy stainless barrel on a blue action.

[quote=magnumb]A powder column filled with RL22, Norma brass and 215M's......yes, a bit warm, but approached with my usual and accustomed caution and a fairly experienced eye towards the obvious. Super accurate and gives up nothing to it's "parent" as I've so often heard, but refuse to join in, with regards to such trivial differences. That's why for me, and perhaps me alone, the 300WSM was a no-brainer given the shorter action and lighter weight offerings.......

Several other members here and friends at the range have also posted or told me about gettin' in the low 31's as well. Heck, posts recently have told of '06's, with factory tubes, gettin' in and around 2,900 fps with 180's.......the case capacity of a 300WSM being substantially more. Doesn't make me want to duplicate such #'s, but it is what it is. The '06 was once thought to be a solid 2,750 fps performer (and still is to my way of thinkin'), but with newer powders and 24in. barrels being pretty standard, the mid 28's seem to be well within ones reach these days. I happen to remain a dedicated IMR4350 user, but no doubt RL22 would likely again be a solid performer in this cartridge as well.....perhaps even RL25.

No worries....as opposed to others....I haven't seen you as the dog piling type. Had I, my response may have been somewhat different. I tend to roll the opposite direction I'm being pushed......the laws of nature I guess....the human type. [/quot
I sure would like to see you shoot that over my Oehler........from a distance. I can't even get to 3000 with the several I have loaded for. Can get there with a 300 winnie though. Rl22 is my faviorite powder, too. All the wsm's I have loaded for have been lacking in the velocity department, from what they are supposed to get.

One Oehler is probably as good as the next....IME. One of the range masters shoots PALMA and is Nosler sponsored so he insists on it being calibrated properly and often.

Understand your sentiment and message. It gets what I've stated with a compressed load, which probably wasn't lost on you as you are obviously quite familiar with the WSM's. It is a 24 in. barrel, which may still not totally account for the velocities reached.

A friend and I bought 2 identical rifles, M700's in 300RUM, at the same time with serial #'s almost matching. After break-in and wringing out some potential loads, we settled on **.*grs. of RL25 and 200gr. NP's as this load was very accurate in both of our rifles and didn't exceed max recommendations. He doesn't handload and since I do, I supply him as well.

Same exact loads, my equipment, my routine and 2 rifles as current and identical as possible. The above Oehler clocked his MV @ 3,111 fps and my MV @ 3,189 fps......10 shot groups each, fired within minutes of the other finishing...........go figure. I can't, but prefer being on the end I am rather than my partners.

From DJ's post, it seems that our 270WSM's get essentially identical velocities with 140gr. pills, but others report differing results. Perhaps some are trying to compare 22 in. barrels compared to others reporting their results from 24 or 26 in. barrels....I don't know. My WSM's have 24 in. barrels and my 300RUM has a 26in. barrel.

Not attempting to present my 300WSM results as anything other than what they are.....a very effective and accurate load at the top end of it's expected potential.

****Added Monday mornin'**** I was thinkin' about my fortune with these velocities when I settled in for the evening last night. I use the 180gr. TSX in the 300WSM. Prior to any load development for this cartridge, I had read on Barnes site that, due to the TSX's design/grooves and all that they were purported to do for pressures, it was likely that one would be able to add an additional couple grains to the tank as compared to other bullets. Since I'd not used the TSX's before and this "concept" was new to me and I wanted to make sure I understood their reasoning correctly, I called Barnes prior to any 300WSM load development.

Tech's at these sites know pretty quickly when someone is an experienced and/or somewhat of a savvy handloader...it's easily discerned within a short period of time as the jargon, the conceptualization of information given and overall "flow" of the conversation makes it such.....or should. I asked the obvious question of the tech that answered my call. He told me that the site information and info found in each box of their TSX's was correct and that the TSX's design did allow for more powder to be used......generally speaking. Now that goes both ways. He then said that I should be able to get about 1-3 grs. more powder with their bullet over others......not 1 or 2 that I expected to hear. A little bit scary honestly as I'm well aware of what 1 gr. can do, but 3 grs.?

Long story short, if possible, I always work up loads in 1/2 gr. increments.....always. I also start at or near the bottom of the manuals suggestions for specific powders. Whether I was told that I could use up to 10 grs. more powder with the TSX's, I still would have proceeded as I always do. It's always worked for me and after 30+ years of pourin' powder into little metal cases, I feel pretty confident in my methods.

The use of the 180gr. TSX did allow me to use some additional powder. I found a sweet spot earlier on in the load development, but it was only giving me very mild velocities that were just above '06 capabilities. I continued on up the load charts and found my groups becoming even more impressive (which is more the case than not...IME).....until I found my current load. This load fits somewhere between the top of the charts and what the tech had explained to me.

Does the TSX always give this "wiggle room"......nope. Tried the 200gr. TSX in my 300RUM after I'd already developed a dandy load usin' 200gr. NP's.....just for grins. I started way down the powder ladder as usual and found that I was experiencing pressure signs prior to even reachin' book max's!! Bolt lift became a tough go, primers were profoundly flattened (primers aren't necessarily a great indicator of pressures anyway, but these were almost "innies") and recoil was noticeably more enhanced. End of that load development and certainly glad I didn't just jump in starting where my 200gr. NP load ended thinking I could just add a few more grains 'cuz it's a TSX!!! Glad I went there however as everythings a lesson, but the top end velocities prior to experiencing those pressure signs were only about what the 300 WinMag and 300WSM can do so......not interested.

Just some additional background and food for thought.......

Oh yeah....and for those that think it more "efficient" (read: cheaper and less waste of your time) to start at the max and go up from there....don't. Had I done that with the above 300RUM example...it would have been bad. Those pressures signs were experienced considerably well below book max....for whatever reasons. Do the work.........

Savage: My two "go-to" rifles at the present time are a pair of M70's; one is a pre64 FW action with a #1 contour Krieger,CM,chambered in 270 Win,22", with a Brown Precision Kevlar stock. It has a Krieger because I shot out the original barrel. With a 4X Leup it weighs about 6lbs,14 oz.

The second is a M70 classic in 7rem mag,Brown stock,24"Krieger, that weighs under 8 lbs (closer to 7 1/2 actually)with a 2.5-8 Leup.Either of these may be a bit heavier than a Kimber Montana, but not enough to matter.I am a bit underwhelmed by the Montana because I've been building rifles similar to it since about 1980.

The Montana does not have as rugged a trigger as the M70(I do not like enclosed trigger mechanisms in a big game rifle);it also lacks a floorplate. Having owned and shot the Kimber Montana's in 270 WSM and 7MM WSM, I have frankly seen no reason to move away from the M70's.The stainless feature is nice, but I've watched stainless rifles blossom rust in SE Alaska, while my CM 375 came through just fine.You have to take care of both types.

The Montana is a decent rifle, for a factory job, with a lot of nice features,and I like them. But if the Kimber were as good as a M70, guys like Echols and Miller would build customs on them; they don't. Echols also does not chamber for WSM's.I don't need Kimbers and I sure don't need WSM's of any caliber.

I will, any old day, take a M70 FW chambered for 270 or other cartridge of choice, drop it in a Brown Kevlar, Bansner, or McMillan Edge), and know that the Montana has no legs up on what I've got.

150 Factory Federal NP's out of my Kimber 270WSM are coming out at 3165 - it's hardly 200 less than a 7mag. Pretty close as far as I'm concerned.

7wsm shoots 140's over 3300 fps, 150's around 3200 both near max. Never tried to push it beyond that, didn't see the need. Backed off a couple a three grains and have had very good results both on paper and game. If your game is deer, these guns are really over kill (way). Wife and I will be shooting 7-08s for the next forseeable future with no worries about shooting flat enough or being powerful enough.