|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 477
Campfire Member
|
OP
Campfire Member
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 477 |
I'm considering getting a .270 WSM in either the Kimber Montana or the Classic.
Can anyone tell me if there's any noticable difference in the recoil between the .270 Win and the .270 WSM in these rigs? How about muzzle blast. Any difference there? My biggest reason for considering the .270 WSM is the shorter action, overall length, and slightly lighter than the .270 Win.
I have a 84M in .260 that I absolutely love, but my wife has claimed it now! (Plus it's a good excuse for another rifle!)
Thanks in advance...
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 180
Campfire Member
|
Campfire Member
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 180 |
Check out the Chuck Hawks recoil table. It will give you a good idea anyway. I hear a 270WSM recoils about like a standard weight 30.06. Not bad but a little stouter than a .270.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 294
Campfire Member
|
Campfire Member
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 294 |
I have shot a lot of both and now with the onset of neck trouble am very concerned with recoil. The recoil numbers you calculate on the various web sites I think are pretty good (based on rifle weight, bullet weight and powder capacity, etc) and in my experience once you get the calibration of the numbers to your desired recoil limit they are a good indicator. My 270WSM is 2# lighter than my 270 Win (5.75 vs 7.75#) and as the numbers indicated I no longer want to shoot that rifle, even with a sand filled sissy bag. I have a really heavy 30-06 Mauser and the numbers said even with the 180 gr it would be close to the fairly light 25-06 with 120 gr that I can tolerate and indeed it's not bad. Don't know so much about muzzle blast as in my experience anything with a reasonable barrel length 21" or more it is not an issue, but again I have limited experience there.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 28,277
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 28,277 |
If the barrel lengths are fairly close the mzl reports will be similar albeit a bit more with the WSM.
As for recoil, neither will bother most people but you will notice that that the WSM is a bit stouter and a bit quicker.
I'd be for not sweating it, what kinds of critters and ranges will you be using it at?
Thx
Dober
"True respect starts with the way you treat others, and it is earned over a lifetime of demonstrating kindness, honor and dignity"....Tony Dungy
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 184
Campfire Member
|
Campfire Member
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 184 |
I have both calibers in Model 70's. My 15 year old shoots the 270 wsm. He is a tall skinny kid and shoots it real well. The 270 wsm is like Dober says. Just a bit quicker with a bit more bark.
Wsmnut
Belief is often the death of reason.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,603
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,603 |
You can't go wrong with a .270 Win. If you want to step-up in power get a .270 Weatherby Mag. I've shot all three and I prefer the .270 Win and the .270 Wby. But to answer your question the .270 WSM w/130's recoil about like my .30-06 w/180's. Not bad at all.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,418
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,418 |
I have a pre-64 Mod. 70 in an H-S Precision stock. The thing weighs about 9 1/4 lbs., as I recall. I've had numerous other .270 Wins over the years as well. In addition to my .270 Win., I also have a Kimber .270 WSM. Yeah, I'm a 27 cal. slut. Anyway, I always use 150 gr. bullets in both rifles and can say that the recoil in the WSM is a bit more stout than the standard .270. The thing to remember though is that in my case, the .270 Win. is several pounds heavier and I use around 11-12 grs. more powder in the WSM. To me, neither is intolerable & I can easily go thru a box at the range in a day. In the field, you won't feel the increased recoil of the WSM. Just my thoughts. Bear in Fairbanks
"Unless you're the lead dog, the scenery never changes." Amazingly, I've lived long enough to see a President who is worse than Carter. And finally, Gun control means using two hands.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 15,593
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 15,593 |
i have 2 friends who love their WSMs... they seem to kick a little more shareply than a .270 win. in the same style rifle... still shootable, in my book.....
"Chances Will Be Taken"
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,253
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,253 |
I've felt that my WSM's recoil is more of a long "push" than a sharp "punch" in comparison to my 280. I think the difference has more to do with the recoil pad than with velocity and/or bullet weight. If you are recoil shy, just have a 1" decelerator installed and you probably won't notice that you're shooting a magnum cartridge.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 6
New Member
|
New Member
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 6 |
I shoot both the .270 and .270wsm. In stalled a Limbsaver pre-fit recoil pad on my Tikka T3 Lite .270WSM. Can't tell the between it and my Remongton Mountain rifle in .270.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 18,075
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 18,075 |
With a rifle as lite as a Kimber you will know it's going off, especially if using 150gr bullets.
In my Featherweight with Mcmillan stock you get a noticeable increase in felt recoil going to 150's. It has a very narrow recoil pad/butt area. With 130's I don't notice it being much different.
If you are close to Carrollton PM me and you can come shoot mine sometime.
Mike
God, Family, and Country. NRA Endowment Member
|
|
|
|
603 members (160user, 222Sako, 10gaugeman, 1moredeer, 10gaugemag, 69 invisible),
2,528
guests, and
1,145
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,191,115
Posts18,464,490
Members73,925
|
Most Online11,491 Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|