Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Custom Rifles & Wildcats 270 winchester

Hi I read last year a article abot the 270 winchester that it was a good hunting cartrage, but lacked in accurcy about 2 inches was normal for it, I don't know or have any experiance with it,but was thinking about a 270 wsm, but don't know if it has an accurcy problem . any body have experiance in that area, I <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> would appericate feedback on it , Thank's Hubert

Some writer is full of poo pooh<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Mike

Hubert-

Had experience with three 270 Winchesters. 2" @100 yds. is not the norm. Even using factory ammo all would do better than 1.5", and under 1" with handloads. If the gun/scope combo is sound, a 270 will shoot.

C/B

Dido. There's a reason that the .270 cartridge is a classic..It's accurate, easy to shoot and it works! BT53

The article he's talking about was written by Jim Zumbo and can be found online at outdoorlife.com. I read it too, but didn't think much about it. It didn't say that a .270 can't shoot, but it did show differences between rifles with factory and handloads.

Good thing my rifle didn't read that story. My 270 is my go-to rifle. It is the ugliest rifle I have but it shoots better than any of my other rifles, to include my 700 Varmint Special 222 target rifle.
With 140gr Failsafes is shoots a .38 5-round shot group. I'm currently changing over to 140gr Accubonds (handloads) It shot less than 1" @ 200yds (5-round shot group) a couple weeks ago with factory FED 140gr Accubonds.

Magnum Research Mountain Eagle (Sako 691/Krieger Bbl)
Leupold VX-III 3.5-10X40 B&C

SPAD

In my experience the .270 is one of the more accurate cartridges on the market. The .270 is also generally not very finicky when it comes to finding a go too load.

I've owned 6 or 7 .270's( all straight factory rifles) over the last 15 years and all of them were legitimate 1 inch guns. And 4 of them would do considerably better.

My current .270 is a SIG SHR 970 topped with a 6x38 Weaver that is super accurate. It will day in day out put 3 shots (factory or handload) into slightly under 1/2 an inch @ 100 yards and put 5 shots into around an inch.

Good Shooting,
HBB

I reckon I will just have to buy one, the story sounded fishey to me, I don't think he liked the 270, and was trying to prove his point. if you don't like something it will never perform for you, and will always feel like a stranger to you,,Hubert

The .270 is NOT finicky at all. Most easily shoot under an inch. Jim Dumbo is the worst of the worst to listen to or read about. That guy hasn't learned [bleep] in all his years of being lead to tame animals. He is embarrassing to watch "hunt" and is NOT a good example of "intelligence in the field". That guy could screw up a good [bleep] session in the crapper. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> Flinch

I am a long-time fan of the 270 and it is EXCELLENT in all regards. I have also heard good reports about the 270 wsm but I hear the recoil is very FAST. As much as I like the 277 cal, I think I can live without the 270 wsm for now.

Flinch,

I think you're holding things back. Tell us how you really feel about Jim whatshisname.......... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

badger

Wasn't it Jim Carmichael that wrote that article? I thought so?

Outdoor Life Article

Until that piece, I used to have respect for the guy's opinion and experience. After that ridiculous and meaningless test, I now think he's a blowhard who likes to stir the $%!^.

It's not exactly Classified Information that the 270 Win is not a BR round.

I read Jim Carmichel's article on the 270Win too awhile back. Lost respect for him after that, seems he is a man on a mission - his mission. It would be interesting to hear from one of Jim's friends who posts on here and is a big fan of the 270Win. He might be able to shed some light on why Jim wrote that article. How about it A.D.?

MtnHtr

Boy, you really want to poke the hornet's nest, don't you? you know how testy that guy gets when you challenge him on what he KNOWS is right <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

CAS,

Actually, I really would like to hear his thoughts. Since he knows Jim, maybe he knows something we don't and could shed some light on the article. No malice intended, Scout's honor!

MtnHtr

I agree with the others who've stated that the .270 Winchester is simply a fine cartridge with great accuracy in a good rifle. Don't be misled by the naysayers -- if the .270 were inaccurate it wouldn't have the superb reputation it has.

Guess I must be the odd one here, I saw nowhere that the man blamed the cartridge for any inaccuracy. He did seem to put the blame on the bullet makers, factory ammo makers, and one model 70 target rifle, though. All the while extolling it's virtues as a hunting round and it's accuracy in hunting rifles. This was one test with one rifle, didn't even say whether they tried more then one barrel or not. Yes from the description of the rifle it should have been a good one but you can't count on anything anymore. It is not unusual for a rifle to not like one or more bullets and in this case most of the hand loads it seems were the 135 grain bullet because it is the only one available for benchrest shooting specifically. While I do not think the test answered the question about the 270 as a benchrest caliber, I do know the article will not stop me from buying a 270 or from reading Jim Carmichel's works, but then I do not have to agree with everything anyone says to see value in their work.

I know that when certain gunwriters are mentioned on here there is such an out pouring of hate you would think they were the anti-christ himself. IIRC I even remember someone that knew one said he was an a$$hole, that may be true and I have no desire to dispute it, be that as it may, I also know I have learned a lot from a$$holes over the years.

The 270 Win is a pretty [bleep] caliber. Doesn't shoot worth a damn, no penetration, poor ballistics. Hell, I'd be scared to take on a p/dog with one.
Some examples of a 130 TSX load I tinkered with. 3040 fps





<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

Here's a target from the 270 I have for sale in the classifieds. (And its in PA, hint-hint).It doesn't like factory fodder either. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Snuffy,

The "mystery" of the whole article is its message or point, that the 270Win is not accurate enough to drill 1" holes at 300yds due to a lack of target grade components? So what is the point then anyways? I thought Outdoor Life catered to hunting and fishing crowd instead of the target shooter crowd.

Now here is what I think is a "mystery". Its no secret Jim C is a big fan of the 280Rem, he's been ranting about em for years. Yet you will find in alot of circles the 280Rem has been coined "fussy", "hard to make accurate", even quoted in the VHA mag, "a lack of quality target bullets (regarding 7mm bullets)" Yet in Jim C's eyes the 280Rem is the cat's meow, the same case he is trying to make for the 270Win could be made for his beloved 280Rem? Just maybe?

I read in one gunrag, riflebuilder D'Arcy Echols was quoted as saying the 280Rem and 338WM are fussy or difficult to make accurate. Now these two cartridges happen to be two of Jim C's favorite cartridges and he has even wrote in one of the Nosler manuals, the 338WM is easy to load for and accurate.

Two differing opinions - who is right or wrong? Neither?

What it comes down to is this (and not in any particuliar order): 1.Shooter 2. Rifle 3. Ammunition

I know plenty of 270Win shooters who can hold their own with the best of em at the range or in the field. And I know a few 280 owners who can do the same too. Jim C's article on the 270Win was lame at best.

MtnHtr