|
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 243
Campfire Member
|
Campfire Member
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 243 |
A lot of good points for the 270. If you practice a lot, and want to shoot elk at 400 yds get a 300 Winchester.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 14,076
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 14,076 |
If you put the two in front of me I would choose the 270win everytime.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,698
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,698 |
One of my favorite things to do in the winter is reload ammunition. The other thing is to read. My favorite authors are Bob Hagel and Peter Capstick. I do have one entitled African Rifles and Cartridges by John Taylor. Gun Room Press 1948. He puts rifles in several categories, small, medium, and large bore, etc. A small bore would be anything up to a .318, medium up to .375 and big bore anything over .375. So 99% of all this arguing is about which small bore is the best rifle. They are all about the same. Very little difference between .270, 7mm, or 30-06 in most rational peoples eyes. Argue all you want. I would pick the 7mm08 for a light rifle since Dad has a 30-06 already, and if you need a medium how about a 375 Ruger. If you only hunt in North America you should be all set and could get by without the .375 unless you are a glutton for punishment. Sorry for being to rational.  whelennut
I like to do my hunting BEFORE I pull the trigger!
There is only one kind of dead, but there are many different kinds of wounded.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,477
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,477 |
I haven't read through the whole thread yet, so I may be repeating someone. If, like you say, you are planning to get about 3 hunting rifles then I would think that would be an argument for the .270 in itself, as it won't have to be your one, all-around gun. You can complement it with something considerably bigger (a 300 or 338), and something smaller (a 223, 22-250, or 243). It seems to be a good starter for a 3 gun collection, and is a great round to practice with.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900 |
Brad; Yup, agreed.All pretty similar.Thing is i can pretty much understand anyone liking, picking 270,280, 284,7x57,7mag,etc.They are all pretty much alike. One of the better articles written on the subject was by Bob Chatfield-Taylor in an older Handloaders Digest.It is pretty clear we are picking fly shidt outta pepper here. 
The 280 Remington is overbore.
The 7 Rem Mag is over bore.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 8,471 Likes: 2
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 8,471 Likes: 2 |
I wouldn't rule out the 30-06 since you Pop has one!! Dad's never seem to be super smart until you begin to get on in years, then, seemingly, one fine day, like a light switch has been flipped, they "all of a sudden" got super wise.  Anyone who believes that sh*t hasn't met my dad. I thought maybe that thing would happen. At 20, y' know, maybe "I just didn't understand how smart he was yet." Well, I'm 45 and still waiting for signs of wisdom. He pulls dumber and dumber stunts, goes off on his psycho rants more and more every year. I'm gettin' the idea wisdom isn't going to happen. I guess I just got lucky.  Tom
Anyone who thinks there's two sides to everything hasn't met a M�bius strip.
Here be dragons ...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 17,491
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 17,491 |
I've hit the ball and socket on an elk--the biggest bones on a wapiti--at 300+ yards and it still drove a 150gr Partition to the brisket on a 700lb + bull.
Casey
There is only one spot on an Elk were this is located, the hip joint. Just my 2 cent.[/quote] I'm not sure which one he was referring to, but either is formidable. (And yes, I know some folks will argue that the scapula isn't really a socket. But the bone which forms the "ball" is, if anything, larger and heavier than that of the femur at the same point in its connection at the hip.)
Sometimes, the air you 'let in'matters less than the air you 'let out'.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,074
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,074 |
The 2 calibers are both great. With the right bullets and shot placement you shouldn't have any problems w/ either caliber. I love the .270 (my opinion). I shot my .270win so much in the last 10 years I wore the barrel out. It has cleanly taken deer & 400# Hogs no problem. Just a thought- have you ever concidered a .270 weatherby and/or 7mm Weatherby? A little more expensive to shoot but are very fast,flat & accurate with plenty of nock down power.
Treestands don't demand. Treestands don't complain.
Treestands simply ask me to sit down and listen.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,418
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,418 |
To begin, I must admit that I'm unabashedly a .270 Win. guy. Been that way since I was a snot nosed kid reading about ol' Uncle Jack's adventures in the 1960's.
I've used a .270 Win. here in Ak. for about 40 years and it's my "gitter done" rifle. I KNOW I can count on it. To be fair, my other hunting rifle is my .338 mag. which is used on moose & is set up for that. I shot my first caribou in 1968 using my .270, Mod. 70 and 130 gr. Partition handloads. Being a dumb-xxs kid, I shouldn't have taken that shot - way too far. I now use 150 gr. Partition handloads for a velocity of about 2930 fps. and it's boringly accurate.
I've never owned nor shot a 7mm anything. Since I have the .270, why? I do have to admit that a 7RM would do anything a .270 can but I don't believe for a second a 7mm will do things better. I don't see how burning more powder resulting in more recoil which in turn produces maybe 200 - 250 fps more velocity for comparable bullets is worth the hassle. In addition, I'm not convinced the differences in trajectory are worth the added costs either.
In short, though, I think you should look at several different manufacturers and see how their fit & feel work for you. Then get the rifle that really "floats your boat". Just my opinions for whatever they're worth. Good luck & have fun.
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: Dec 2003
Posts: 5,950
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 5,950 |
The 270 and 7 mag are very close in performance. Neither shoot enough flatter than the 30-06 to make a meaningful difference in the field - a common misconception.
- Well......."maybe" and "it depends"...so here we go!  I use the following in all three cartridges,and in handloads: 270-130 @3100 7mag 140  3200-3250 7mag 160 @3080+- 30/06 165 @2900(the 150 at 2900-3000 is the same thing) I zero all these loads at 3"high at 100.All are pretty similar at 300 yards with the 7 mag at POA;the 270 a couple inches low,and the 30/06 app 4"-5" low. BUT: At 400,the 270 is down app12";the 30/06 about 16;the 7 mag-160 app 9-10";and the 7 mag 140 down app. 8".All loads have acceptable mid range(to me)and I have been shooting all these combo's at actual distances for over 30 years. Bottom line: for those who do not use "dots" or reticles to compensate for excessive drop,and have these trajectories cemented in the brain(me ....or for those circumstances where I must deal with distances and with no, or little, time to laze, correct,etc, the trajectory "edge" of the 7 mag and 270 over the 30/06 have proven an advantage for me. We can say these are small differences and this is true;but they exist and an experienced 30/06 shooter will compensate pretty automatically;but if you are accustomed to the flatter trajectory,it takes some retraining! That both shoot flatter is pretty clear,and while the 06 can be used with more modern bullets like 130TTSX at higher velocity to give a flatter trajectory, the same can be said regarding the other 2 cases to maintain the edge. There is nothing mysterious going on here; it is simply that both the 270 and 7 mag generate more velocity with commonly available hunting bullets,so just shoot flatter.YMMV Okay. Now zero all four loads at 300 yards. What are the differences at 400 now? How about at 200 and 100? Your phrase, "I zero all these loads at 3" high at 100" is an oxymoron. A rifle's "zero" is where the line-of-sight intersects the bullet's path. If you zero those 4 rifles/loads at 300 or even 200 yards, you will see that the real world differences are much less than you make them out to be. -
Our God reigns.
Harrumph!!!
I often use quick reply. My posts are not directed toward any specific person unless I mention them by name.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 50,170 Likes: 2
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 50,170 Likes: 2 |
Ok I want one of theses 2 rifles. Alot of you guys are steering me towards the 270 win thanks for the info. I am just trying to get more opinions on each of them and why they like one over the other. The 30-06 is out my father has one so I am looking for a good flat shooting all around hunting rifle. I'm not saying this will be the only rifle I ever get again I just don't want to buy 5 or 6 if I can get away with 1-3 rifles for most big N.A. Game animals excluding grizzleys,buffalo etc. I am looking to go for wild boars down south some pronhorns, sheep,whitetails,mules and elk. All opinions appreciated thanks Don You asked for it! In my opinion the 7mag just weighs more and hurts your ears more.
The only thing worse than a liberal is a liberal that thinks they're a conservative.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,019
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,019 |
If you're going to own just one big game rifle the 7 mag is a good choice; otherwise, go with the 270!! If I need more reach I will move up to my 300 WBY; more stopping power then I move up to a 375 H&H or larger. Lou
************************
NRA Benefactor member
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 28,277
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 28,277 |
The 270 and 7 mag are very close in performance. Neither shoot enough flatter than the 30-06 to make a meaningful difference in the field - a common misconception.
- Well......."maybe" and "it depends"...so here we go! I use the following in all three cartridges,and in handloads: 270-130 @3100 7mag 140 3200-3250 7mag 160 @3080+- 30/06 165 @2900(the 150 at 2900-3000 is the same thing) I zero all these loads at 3"high at 100.All are pretty similar at 300 yards with the 7 mag at POA;the 270 a couple inches low,and the 30/06 app 4"-5" low. BUT: At 400,the 270 is down app12";the 30/06 about 16;the 7 mag-160 app 9-10";and the 7 mag 140 down app. 8".All loads have acceptable mid range(to me)and I have been shooting all these combo's at actual distances for over 30 years. Bottom line: for those who do not use "dots" or reticles to compensate for excessive drop,and have these trajectories cemented in the brain(me ....or for those circumstances where I must deal with distances and with no, or little, time to laze, correct,etc, the trajectory "edge" of the 7 mag and 270 over the 30/06 have proven an advantage for me. We can say these are small differences and this is true;but they exist and an experienced 30/06 shooter will compensate pretty automatically;but if you are accustomed to the flatter trajectory,it takes some retraining! That both shoot flatter is pretty clear,and while the 06 can be used with more modern bullets like 130TTSX at higher velocity to give a flatter trajectory, the same can be said regarding the other 2 cases to maintain the edge. There is nothing mysterious going on here; it is simply that both the 270 and 7 mag generate more velocity with commonly available hunting bullets,so just shoot flatter.YMMV Okay. Now zero all four loads at 300 yards. What are the differences at 400 now? How about at 200 and 100? Your phrase, "I zero all these loads at 3" high at 100" is an oxymoron. A rifle's "zero" is where the line-of-sight intersects the bullet's path. If you zero those 4 rifles/loads at 300 or even 200 yards, you will see that the real world differences are much less than you make them out to be. - Strictly my way here, but when ballistic gackin comes down to how loads shoot to range and how they comp in terms of drop the only way to be truly fair about this is to begin them all right on @ 100 yds. The idea of zero them for 200, 250, 300 or whatever quickly goes away from keeping things apples to apples. So start them all right on @ 100 and see how they stack: (gack from Nozler Manual and rounded up/down to nearest .5") 270/130 3100==minus 24"@ 400 minus 44.5" @ 500 7mm/140 3200==minus 22"@ 400 minus 40.5" @ 500 7mm/160 3100==minus 23"@ 400 minus 42.5"@ 500 06/165 2900==minus 29"@ 400 minus 51"@ 500 I didn't even go there to 300 yds mainly cause I've always felt that most all rounds and men were equal to 300. Once you get into the world of 400+ then things really begin to change...  Just some thoughts 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: May 2005
Posts: 327
Campfire Member
|
|
Campfire Member
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 327 |
I'm going to step in here and say... With Kimber chambering the 280 Ackley and Nosler making brass for it....
You've got your answer. Just order a a lot of brass to make sure you have it.
In my opinion, if that had been released a long time ago there wouldn't be a 7mm Rem Mag or a 270 Win. It's basically the best of each put together.
-Everyone has a dream hunt, mine just happens to be for a Moose-
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,489
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,489 |
Unless you are going way out there, the .260 & .270 are lots more user friendly.
I have hunted with all three and never felt undergunned with the .260 with 140 grains. Within 400 yards.
stumpy
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 11,371 Likes: 1
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 11,371 Likes: 1 |
Get the .270, I have both. The .260 is an interesting little cartridge but no thanks.
1st Special Operations Wing 1975-1983
919th Special Operations Wing 1983-1985 1993-1994
"Manus haec inimica tyrannis / Ense petit placidam sub libertate quietem" ~Algernon Sidney~
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900 |
Redhead: All those loads are "zeroed",however you wish to define the term; with all zeroed 3" high at 100 yards,the 06 is zeroed at about 250 yards; the 270 is zeroed at about 280 yards,and the 7 mag loads are zeroed at 300.3" high at 100 yards is your reference point.So, in fact all these loads ARE zeroed
So, zero them all at 300 yards to make it fair; he 30/06 will have excessive mid-range at 180-200,because it is not as fast as the other two.This is not good,because it would be too easy to overshoot.
Let me suggest that you take all three to 300,400, and 500 yards,all "zeroed" precisely the same,however you wish to do it,and shoot them. There is simply no way that the 06 will demonstrate a flatter trajectory than the other two. When someone tells me there is no difference in trajectory between a 7 mag and a 30/06 at 300-500 yards,given the "best" loads in each,I immediately know they have not shot the two side by side.
The 280 Remington is overbore.
The 7 Rem Mag is over bore.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 853
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 853 |
You might consider the .280 Rem.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 16,610
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 16,610 |
If you shoot factory ammo, you can get the performance of both with the .270 and use Hornady ammo.
Hornady makes a "light mag" round offered in .270. If you look at the ballistics of the 130gr light mag .270 round, it is pretty close to the same trajectory and down range kinetic energy as the 139gr 7mm rem mag round.
At 500 yards:
.270 130gr light mag
Drop: -33.30 inches
Energy: 1430 ft-lbs
7mm 139gr rem mag
Drop: -34.20 inches
Energy: 1521 ft-lbs
So, you could go with the .270 and depending on the choice of rounds, have ballistics similar to either caliber. Just pick the light mag round for heavier game and the regular rounds for medium game or the range.
"Hey jackass, get your government off my freedom."
MOLON LABE
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 16,610
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 16,610 |
Unless you are going way out there, the .260 & .270 are lots more user friendly.
I have hunted with all three and never felt undergunned with the .260 with 140 grains. Within 400 yards.
stumpy It's also a shame that the .264 win mag isn't more readily available. Kinetic energy of a .270 and the ballistic coefficient similar to the 7mm rem mag.
"Hey jackass, get your government off my freedom."
MOLON LABE
|
|
|
|
|
519 members (01Foreman400, 1badf350, 10Glocks, 06hunter59, 1936M71, 10gaugemag, 70 invisible),
2,456
guests, and
1,162
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,193,699
Posts18,513,711
Members74,010
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
