Home Forums Hunting & Shooting General Big Game 270 Winchester

jt402, a cheap 130gr Corelokt through the boiler room would have fixed either situation.

It's because when a cartridge is as popular as the 270 and been around as long, it's going to be loaded with all kinds of bullets,used by all kinds of people of different skill sets,and shot at all kinds and sizes of animals under all kinds of distances and conditions. Varying results are inevitable.

How else can we explain experienced guys who have filled trophy rooms with a 270 for elk, moose, grizzlies, deer of all sizes,grand slams of sheep,caribou,etc etc.....not to mention African plains game from eland on down, and even a lion here and there. Yet others struggle with the cartridge on a half starved fork horn and declare the cartridge as no good(?)

I mean....they can't both be right.

I have never run into anyone who has used the cartridge widely on a variety of animals who would believe the Vermont story.Last year a VT buck took a single 270 bullet to the shoulder and his momentum carried him another 20-30 feet beyond where he was last seen. My suspicion is the VT guys who are squawking can't shoot or use lousy bullets.

It's all bullets and placement.

Once I had to put down about 80 sheep that were injured when a road train tipped over. A sad deed. Went thru near two boxes of .40 S&W ammo. I shot all those poor buggers in the head. You know what? Some of 'em needed a second shot!

Failure of the cartridge?

Of course not. I started to become distracted and didn't place the bullet in exactly the right spot. Some of those poor animals were still walking around on 3 legs or dragging their back half, and they had to be shot from about 15 feet away.

Anyone who thinks the 270 has let them down 'cause a deer stood up after being shot needs to look at either their bullet choice or more than likely their shooting.

I am starting to think the difference is the way one hunts. My Dad probably killed 25-30 deer with a 270 win and he would be the first to say that a 270 did not kill like a 30-06. He used partitions for most of those deer.

I shoot a lot and always use "premium" bullet of some sort. Both dad and I though will shoot a deer at almost any angle, running or standing. I am starting to think that 30 caliber bullets offer enough advantage to matter on shots other than perfectly broadside(where everything is good).

For whatever reason 30 caliber holes seem to leave better blood trails, break bone and delivery more shock on deer size animals than 270's.

Dink

Try 130 gr Hornady interlocks and it will turn into a 30-06.

There's your problem.

Low percentage shots are going to case problems, no matter what you're shooting.

Do you need a telephone booth to change the .270 into a 30-06? I'd like to turn mine into a .223 Ackley Improved LOL

I've better things to do than try to figure out fuggers from Vermont. Guys who farm and hunt and recommend voting dhimmicrat seem to me full of it. They obviously can't shoot worth chitt.

That takes a new barrel.

No, just a good bullet.

Why no problem then with the 30-06, 300 win or 300 RUM?

I don't think quartering shots with premium bullets are low percentage shots either.

Dink

I would call a running shot, or any shot where one has to penetrate through a bunch of deer to reach vitals a low % shot.

I suspect what you're seeing is "limited sampling" affecting your perception of what works and what doesn't. Shoot enough deer, and you'll see all sorts of things.

When it comes down to it, there is basically no difference in the killing power of our most popular big game cartridges, especially on deer.

Dink I would not be surprised if you are right; anybody who has killed enough game with a 300 magnum and a 270 will know that the 300's will have tendency to make a more severe and extensive wound in an animal than a 270.This is owing to the fact that they throw heavier bullets of greater diameter at higher velocity. Whether you use deep penetrators or more splashy designs, there is just more bullet material to work with,and at higher velocity.

Some of the more visually apparent train wrecks and dramatic kills I have seen on large bucks have come from 300 magnums and I have tracked enough bullets through enough animals (a good many larger than the biggest deer) to know that 300 magnums can be made to penetrate very deeply,break bones, and cause more trauma along the way than any bullet of 270 diameter.Comparing a 270 Winchester to a 300 magnum is sort of like comparing it to a 338 Win Mag....a 300 mag has more in common with a 338 than it does with a 270....so yeah! I would expect a 300 magnum to demonstrate an advantage! Who wouldn't?

But the only times I have seen them demonstrate a very clear advantage was when bullets were well placed.

They are indeed more potent cartridges than a 270.....But what can we expect when a 300 magnum burns a lot more powder, and throws much heavier bullets of greater diameter at the same or higher velocity?

If you hang around the 300's long enough,you also learn that they are a long way from being infallible,and I have seen a fair number of animals, deer sized and up,that made a lot of tracks after a hit with a 300 magnum,and have even seen those well hit make tracks as well.It also goes without saying that they are more difficult for a lot of people to shoot well and accurately.Prairie Goat alludes to this above.

I have a friend who believed very firmly the same way you do in the extra potency of the 300 magnums who lost a huge mountain mule deer buck up in BC to an errant hit from a 300 RUM at 150 yards....he learned his lesson the hard way.

As to penetration there are 270 bullets that will penetrate almost the full length of a mature buck. I am no fan of splashy, thin jacketed bullets in the cartridge because the performance of those type bullets is not consistent enough to suit me....others may disagree.

I can't think of a shot I would take on a deer with a 300 magnum that I would not take with a 270 and suitable bullet.And I sure don't wait for just broadside shots;but I don't shoot deer up the arse either unless they are wounded and getting away.

In the end I think it has little to do with how you hunt and more to do with how you shoot.

What a diverse group of people we have here on the fire! On one side we have guys that rave about the magical killing virtues of 22 & 24 calibers while another group feels the 270 is a pipsqeak on anything larger than a gopher. Just amazing.

Me, I own 2 270 caliber rifles. Standard & Roy's version. I have nothing to complain of from either and would happily hunt any non dangerous game anywhere in the world with either given proper bullets.

It's not the farmers or the backwoods types who are voting Democrat. It's Burlington, Bennington, Rutland, and Brattleboro that screw my favorite state up. But back on topic, I seldom have ever heard the bad rap on the .30-06 that I've heard about the .270. Maybe guys are quicker to blame the .270 for their deficiencies than they are the '06?

Thanks for the tip. It's good to know that I have 3 guns in one.

I killed this red stag with a .270 Win and standard factory cup and cores. It was a quartering to shot at about 50 yards and the bullet broke the on shoulder and exited behind the off shoulder. The bull ran about 30 yards and died. I've done the same with elk and the .300 Win.


The difference in killing power that I have seen between the .270 and .300 Mag with like bullets is minimal at best...I've killed probably 15 critters with the .270 and 20 or so with a .300 Win. YMMV.