Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Boddington on the .270 Winchester

Me and son did few free range exotic hunts few years back. These guys do high / low fence hunts and hunt nearly 365 days a year. See tons of animals killed of all sizes. Far more than any other outfitters in US I would wager. They hated 6.5 creedmoor. Said lose far more animals hit with it than other rounds, even the 243 which they liked. On way back from hunt we ran into another outfitter at gas station and he asked what I was using and said good not that stupid creedmoor. So, as Boddington stated there is disdain out there. My party had several 6.5 CM shooting 139 scenars in it on one hunt and performed great. Being a gun guy I kept picking at it since did not make sense to me and best we could come up with is maybe related to bullets guys are using on average wirh Creedmoor since happy with 243/my parties results with 6.5.

Lou

My brother hunts with a 6.5 Creedmore. I've used the 6.5 Swede for years. My Dad's "deer rifle" was an Arisaka 6.5 Japanese for 55 years. They have been and were effective on Whitetails in Pennsylvania. The 270 model 70 I once used was equally effective but not more.

I was certain that's not true in Norway, and 2 seconds of google showed it's not. The 6.5CM with a 139 gr bullet is 100% legal to use on Big Game in Norway, meeting both bullet weight and energy requirements:

https://www.face.eu/sites/default/files/norway_en.pdf

For moose, red deer, follow deer, wild reindeer, wild boar, wild sheep, musk ox, wolf and bear,
ammunition with expanding bullets weighing a minimum 9 grams is required.

a) ammunition whose bullets weigh between 9 and 10 grams (139 and 154 grains) must have an
impact energy of at least 2700 joules (275 kg/m) at a range of 100 metres, E 100.

b) ammunition whose bullets weigh more than 10 grams (154 grains or more) must have an
impact energy of at least 2200 joules (225 kg/m) at a range of 100 metres, E 100.

I hunted red deer in Norway in 1996, and there were no questions about whether my rifle was legal, and in fact I don't remember even having anybody ask about it.

Have never hunted in Sweden, but hunted moose and whitetails in Finland in 2015. That was hosted by Sako and included and include a tour of the Sako/Tikka factory in Riihimaki. It also included a number of other gun/hunting, writers and not just from the U.S. but Europe. The company loaned us all rifles during the hunt, all .308s if I recall correctly, and we all had to shoot the "two-headed" running moose target, because the hunting was all done by drives using dogs. (Was also told that the test was being phased out, because so many Finnish hunters were getting too old to pass it, but don't know if that happened.

My personal experience is that I can't tell any difference between the field performance of the various medium-powered 6.5s (6.5x55, .260 and 6.5 Creedmoor) on big deer and the .270 Winchester. That also includes various larger 6.5s from the the 6.5-06 class--including the the 6.5-06 itself--up through the .264 Winchester, and various .270 "magnums" including the .270 WSM and .270 Weatherby. This is also after having used all of them in the field not just on whitetail, mule, axis and fallow deer fairly often on but on bigger deer such as caribou and elk.

Have mentioned this elsewhere, but don't comprehend why 6.5s and .270s using the same basic bullets, whether in weight or construction, would have different results. Some might mention "physics" as the reason due to the larger diameter of .270 bullets, but have hard time believing an extra .013" in bullet diameter makes any perceptible difference--since it's about the thickness of the average business card.

When hunting all those deer with various 6.5s I have used bullets from 120-grain monolithics to 140-grain lead-cores, and with various .270s have used 130-150 grain bullets, again from monos to lead-cores. Also fail to see what affect an average of 10 grains of bullet weight might have had, since all the bullets penetrated more than sufficiently.

In fact the last "deer" I took with a 6.5 was a big cow elk 10 days ago, which weighed around 350 field-dressed. The cartridge was the 6.5 PRC and the bullet the 127-grain Barnes LRX, started at a little over 3000 fps. The cow was quartering strongly to me at around 200 yards. At the shot she dropped and never moved, because the bullet entered the chest just inside the near shoulder, clipped the bottom of the spine and ended up somewhere in the innards beyond.

I had plenty of confidence in that load because have used it before on somewhat smaller deer--and Eileen used a 130-grain TTSX from her custom .308 Winchester to drop another big cow at 250 yards a few years ago, also quartering toward us, and that bullet was loaded to 2850 fps to reduce recoil.

Might also mention something Finn Aagaard wrote years ago in an article titled "Guns of the Settlers," about his first several decades of hunting in Kenya. He started keeping a hunting journal in 1956, and after many years came to the conclusion that the specific big game cartridge didn't matter all that much, because blue wildebeest (supposedly one of the toughest of plains game) ran about as far after being shot through the lungs with any cartridge from the smaller 6.5mms to the .375 H&H. His last sentence reads: “Even today, as it always has been, it is not the rifle or its cartridge that matters so much, but rather the skill and knowledge of the rifleman-hunter who is using it.”

JB, My information was wrong, (thanks African Hunting .com) I just looked at the Bronnoysund Registry....the last phrase in every sentence regarding requirements for hunters..."or documentation of experience from the hunter's home country.", which I assume to be a license from your home state, meaning no test? Reading the Registry rules I get the impression, it is primarily for the first time hunter.
Bergara has an article by Martin Bie-Erichson on Norway hunting requirements...he mentions nothing of cartridge rules either. In any case, I won't be going back to the old country...but if I did, I'd take enough gun to meet the published rules, just in case somebody was enforcing them.

A few things I find interesting is:

The 270 parent case is the 3003 …….it’s longer than the 3006.

Mule Deer really opened my eyes a long time ago here when he said something like it’s funny when people debate the differences between a 3006 and a 270.

In real life terms …..I realized there isn’t.

Yet these articles dissect the minutiae to the point of “ if you use X, instead of Y, you not only won’t get Z…….you should be banished from seeking Z.”

In other words if you like Y and not X…….Santa won’t be coming to your house!

It seems to me …..

the 6.5 needs lighter bullets for varmits
will a 6,5 rifle twist allow this? I dunno.

the 270 needs heavier bullets for long range…..
to accomplish this….a 270 barrel needs more twist,.

Then they would be very comparable ordinants.

In hunting Manitoba and Saskatchewan, I'm continually amazed at the chamberings that show up with first-time hunters to Canada. "These are a lot bigger deer than we have in PA, FL, etc., ergo, 300 Win Mags, 300 WBY and 300 RUM"........just to kill a big-bodied whitetail. And many of those were brand-spanking-new rifles purchased for the hunt.

Common sense and experience sure do go a long way - it'd behoove Mr. Boddington to exercise a bit of both.

A quick recollection (does not consider other deer sized critters)

I have killed deer with....

Tac-20
243 Win
25-06 Rrem
257 Wby
6.5 x 55
260 Rem
26 Nosler
270 Win
270 WSM
6.8 Western
7mm-08
280 Rem
7 mag
7 STW
30 WCF
308 Win
30-06 Srpingfiled
300 H&H
300 Win Mag
300 RUM
325 WSM
338 RUM
35 Whelen
375 H&H
45-70

I would tend to agree with FA.

ya!

GWB

I suspect the reasoning behind the guide/outfitter's disdain for the 6.5 Creedmoor is directly tied to the owners of them having entirely too much faith in what they've read vs. what they've done.

..."or documentation of experience from the hunter's home country."

While 1996 was a while ago, that jogged a memory-center in my brain. I went to Norway with my late friend and fellow writer Tom McIntyre, who often contacted the travel/tourism departments of various countries to ask if they'd be interested in having American gun writers come over to hunt and publish articles on their experiences. One year he decided we should go to Norway, and when he contacted the Norwegian tourism department they paid our way, and arranged an itinerary....

It was very interesting to discover how easy it was to get into the country with our rifles. We landed in Oslo, and the two custom officers who greeted us were a pair of guys who looked to be around 30. (Tom and I were in our mid-40s.) We showed them our American hunting licenses, along with the U.S. Customs forms for our rifles--which can serve as "registration" for entering other countries, but are also meant to prove we had the firearms when we left home, and weren't trying to smuggle in "foreign" firearms.

After showing them our papers they sent is on our way. They didn't even ask us to open our gun cases--just wished us good luck hunting!

Could be. The outfitters/guides themselves were not gun guys but hate having the “you draw blood you pay” conversation. That is all they really cared about vs having some strong caliber bias as far as I could tell. They asked me what I thought as knew I was gun guy and basically said only thing I can think of is bad bullets (or at least wrong for the type of shots/game). assuming the average 6.5 cm shootet was not worse than the average everything else shooter. I said make sure the ammo clients are using are intended for hunting and maybe at least had a deer or some other game animal picture on the box.

Lou

Even discounting your fame preceding you, by and large, Norwegians, other than my relatives and myself, are an easygoing, sensible bunch.
Nothing to do with guns or hunting, but a cousin whom I occasionally correspond with in the old country, tells me, "do not be deceived by the newspapers, we (the Progress Populist party) do not approve of Muslim immigration, no, never." Sound familiar? LOL

I have 2 good friends who've never met nor spoken. Both have identical (except for color) NULA 270Win rifles topped with NF NXS 2.5-10x42 IHR reticle scopes. 1 uses 140 Accubonds w/H4831, the other 150gn Partitions w/R-26. Both went Dall Sheep/Caribou hunting in '21. One in AK, the other in NWT Canada. Both got some "looks" from other hunters in camp and guides for "only" having 10x as their top power setting on their scope, 270Win vs. something "PRC/Creedmoor/etc", and no VLD-esque projectiles. Most of the rest of the camp had setups much more along the "tactical" lines, Hubbles mounted atop, pole-vault carbon-fiber wrapped barrels, some with rather large suppressors attached etc etc etc. Both filled their sheep tag with no "drama" regarding rifle/projectile performance nor bullet placement. Of course as they started filling tags (multiple animal hunts), others wanted a closer look at their "old-school" rifle setups. "This damn thing is a toy" was the most often heard response to others picking up the NULA. In the end as it almost always is, the guys who show up with stuff that's well practiced and employable by instinct typically end up with things working as they should upon being offered an opportunity by Mother Nature.

.243=.257=.264=.277=.284=.308=.323=.338

Basically the .243win is the same as a .340 weatherby.

However after .338 these rules don’t apply. The 35 bores are vastly superior. It’s only after the .338 that the magic starts to happen. Lmoa

John
Do you realize what you have started with your statement pasted below? Heads will and are both exploding and imploding.
“Some might mention "physics" as the reason due to the larger diameter of .270 bullets, but have hard time believing an extra .013" in bullet diameter makes any perceptible difference--since it's about the thickness of the average business card”
How many times have we heard some fire members extolling the virtues of the 280 vs the 270? The difference between these two cartridges is less than the previous referenced .013”. Just stiring the Christmas pot.

"This damn thing is a toy". Where have I heard that before, more than once.....












Although these days I prefer Accubonds, I've yet to find that 130 gr. Accubonds or Ballistic tips over 60Gr. of H 4831SC to be lacking on the game that I shoot.


Quien Sabe

GWB

Why would he rethink his stance? He's right. When you're talking a full second of flight time, animals move. Happens a lot more often on long range shots than the long rangers care to admit.

I think if you rethink what you need to hunt with, you could rethink taking longer shots.

Or not.


Seems you need buddies, ( spotters) , gizmos, ( wind dopers, bipods, tri pods, muzzel do whippees) way points, permission and enhanced shooting skills.

I always wonder how you find em, or even where to start tracking them to find them When you took a shot 800 yards away.

I kinda like Elmer Keith’s deal……

“ If you think yer close enough…….

Get closer.”

+/- 175 yds to the spin cast feeder in the foreground.

IIRC, +/- 670 yds to left dot, 900 yds. to right dot, 1,200 yds to middle dot (ranged with Leica Rangefinder)

My preferred targets are pigs, as I can take them year round. Pigs are constantly moving. At 175 yds, I have had them move over 12" between the time my brain sez' squeeze, my finger pulls the trigger and the bullet impacts.

Long shots in my neck of the woods are a good way to lose an animal.

ya!

GWB