.270 v. .30-30 v. 30-06


PDA






danxt
October 15, 2008, 02:33 PM
Hi there,
Kind of a newb with rifles, here. Wondering for my first deer rifle if someone could compare these three calibers and give me the strong/weak points of each caliber.
This would really help me decide.
I am interested in things like "knock down power", effective range, product availability/versatility, and accuracy.

Thanks in advance!

If you enjoyed reading about ".270 v. .30-30 v. 30-06" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Geno
October 15, 2008, 02:37 PM
Welcome!

Lot's of articles on line, and searchable here. In short, the .30-06 Sprg is the best bet for what you described.

Doc2005

danxt
October 15, 2008, 02:42 PM
Thanks Doc,
But I was hoping to get some explanations as to WHY.
Or some links to articles or threads that are worth reading.

The Bushmaster
October 15, 2008, 02:45 PM
For all around versitility the .30-06 is the best bet. The 270 is not quite as versitile, but has a little less recoil (not much less). If you are dealing with 100 yards or less and in heavy timber. The .30-30 Lever is hard to beat.

rondog
October 15, 2008, 02:59 PM
A lot depends on where you're hunting, how big the deer are, what kind of ranges you're expecting, brush, trees, will you ever hunt anything else, etc. A 30-30 is a great deer gun in brush and short distances. A .270 will take 'em down farther out. A 30-06 will hit hard at longer ranges, like in the mountains, and will also work well for elk, moose, bear, etc. I personally would go with the '06, and choose my ammo to suit the need, but I live in Colorado.

mljdeckard
October 15, 2008, 03:05 PM
First, you are about to get bombarded by those who do not believe in "knock down power". There is no difference in knock down power between a .223 and a 45-70. The energy transferred by a bullet to a body is so concentrated and instantaneous as to not be capable of knocking anything over. (I do not believe this to be true in all circumstances.)

If this is correct, then the two ways bullets kill are cavity trauma, and penetration. The cavity diameter of the 30-30 and the -06 will be about the same, since they are both .30 caliber bullets, and you would want to use good expanding bullets with either one.

More venison has been put on the table with a 30-30 than any other cartridge. The elk population in America was seriously depleted with 30-30s. BUT, this was mostly either before much better cartridges were introduced, or while they were in the process of taking hold in the early 20th century. The 30-30 was the first cartridge introduced with the intent of being used with smokeless powder, a great improvement, but with the addition of jacketed, pointed bullets, cartridges were greatly improved again, leaving it in the dust. the 30-30 was designed to be used in lever-action, tubular magazine fed rifles. This meant that you couldn't put hard, pointed bullets in it, because the cartridges lined up in the magazine, nose to primer, would start going off as you fired the rifle. It wasn't until the last few years with the new (Hornady?) "Lever evolution" cartridges with the pointed nylon tip that we have been able to stretch the velocity of lever gun cartridges. IN THIS, the 30-30 doesn't really compare to the .270 or -06, it should be compared to other lever gun cartridges. (The ones I'm familiar with would include carbines chambered in pistol cartridges and older rounds like the .35 Remington.) Lever guns using the bigger cartridges would have to use a box magazine, not a tube magazine. I know such guns exist, but the ones I know of are chambered in short action calibers. (Like the .308.) If someone makes leverguns with box magazines chambered for long-action cartridges, I'm not aware of it. (Look at the Marlin and Winchester websites.) You might first decide if you prefer a lever gun or a different action. (Bolt, semi-auto, or pump.) This is where you you will find .270 and -06.

The .270 is a 30-06 shell casing necked down to a .27 caliber bullet. This means that the bullet is lighter and has a smaller diameter, but goes faster. (You can load a .270 into a 30-06 chamber and not realize it by feel. DO NOT TRY THIS.) There is even one step further, the 25-06 is the same cartridge necked-down to take a .25 caliber bullet, which is faster and lighter still. We gun guys have argued for years, which is better, .270 or 30-06? The answer is, for most hunters and shooters, there is absolutely no difference at all. You have to shoot long distances, and with a lot of different loads for each, before you would know the difference. I have a couple of rifles for both, and when I hunt deer or elk, honestly, it depends on my mood, to determine which one I carry. Having said that. the -06 probably has more commercial loads and variety available off the shelf. You can get -06 loads anywhere from in the low-100 grain range to the 220 grain range. (Although I think 180-200 is the practical maximum for that round.)

jbech123
October 15, 2008, 03:08 PM
but the link below has a pretty common sense approach. There are some good articles under the bullets and ballistics section. If you want more specific advice, we'd need a bit more info on what you plan to do with the rifle. Although you said deer, are you talking whitetails in Florida, or mulies in Saskatchewan, or couse deer in AZ? Are you thinking you will do some occasional elk hunting? All 3 calibers you mentioned are proven and fantastic, but they are not designed to do the same thing. Many deer have been taken with all 3, so you will be fine no matter which you choose. Obviously there is overlap and both can be used for deer, but a 30-30 and a .270 are as different as Ford Mustang and a pickup truck.



http://www.chuckhawks.com/index2d.rifles.htm

georgeky
October 15, 2008, 03:15 PM
The Browning BLR is available in short or long actions. Even chambered in the magnum calibers such a 7mm Rem Mag, 300 Win Mag and others.

Tarvis
October 15, 2008, 03:33 PM
What you need to ask yourself is what kind of ranges you will be shooting at. Any animal will be hard to kill if you don't have the skill or patience to place a shot in the vitals. Of the cartridges you named, all are very capable of taking elk sized game. The 25-06 has been argued to be capable of taking elk, but bullet selection, along with shot placement, is especially paramount.

The benefit of a cartridge with a smaller diameter and lighter bullet in the same case (270 vs 30-06) is a faster muzzle velocity and a flatter trajectory when using similar bullets, but this is kind of circumstantial as the big factor is ballistic coefficient along with muzzle velocity. The faster the bullet gets there, the less time gravity will have to effect it. The downside of using a lighter bullet is less energy at range, but the amount of energy required to kill an animal is certainly not 3000 ft/lbs.

What the terrain looks like where you are hunting should be the deciding factor. Where I hunt, 100 yard shots are not unheard of, while 400 yard shots (ridge to ridge) are well within the realm of possibility. I shot a calf elk at roughly 350 yards last week, so the 30-30 isn't exactly ideal, but the 270 is a great choice, with the 30-06 in close second. The rifle I used was a 25-06, but we weren't planning on seeing any elk, happened to get lucky ;).

In the end, pick a cartridge that fits your hunting needs and practice practice practice.

Edit: also, remember that the 270 will do the same job as the 30-06 with less recoil, so you can either carry a lighter rifle or not get kicked as bad. I've noticed that recoil is not as much of an issue when I'm focusing on shooting a critter as opposed to a piece of paper, but if you are recoil sensitive or not very husky, the 30-06 may be too much for you. You can always down-load if you hand load or buy managed recoil ammo, but what's the point of shooting a large cartridge if you're not going to shoot full house hunting loads?

qajaq59
October 15, 2008, 03:35 PM
I'd have to go with the 30-06 as well for what you are describing. However, if you can find one of each to try beforehand it would really help you to decide. Do you know anyone at all that hunts? Or... where do you live? Maybe you are close to one of us and we could help you out?

The Bushmaster
October 15, 2008, 04:11 PM
Wow!! The man ask for information on .270, .30-06 and .30-30...I can't believe how many left out the .30-30 and substituted something else...Must be jealous of the .30-30 history...

Tarvis
October 15, 2008, 04:13 PM
I can't believe how many left out the .30-30 and substituted something else
Short memories ;). Most would rule out the 30-30 due to it's limitations, but for me it's hard to recommend without knowing where he's shooting.

danxt
October 15, 2008, 04:18 PM
Thank you for all your comments so far.
I do appreciate you taking your time to educate me.

I have been shooting for years, but never owned my own.
The past several years, I have been using a savage 110 .243 for deer hunting, and have found it to be adequate for my needs. However, I am skeptical of its abilities in the event that I get to go elk hunting in colorado sometime.

Where I hunt: North Woods of Missouri.
The woods are thick, and most likely would not have a shot at more than 150 yards.
However, this does not mean that I will always hunt the north woods of missouri where the woods are thick.

A couple have mentioned the "limitations" of the 30-30. I do not know what these limitations are.
I understand that the 30-30 and 30-06 are the same caliber, but what does the -06 and the -30 represent?

Tarvis
October 15, 2008, 04:25 PM
-30 is the amount of black powder the cartridge is loaded with, and -06 is the year of it's conception iirc. I don't know the ballistics of a standard 30-30 loading off the top of my head, but past 200 yards the combination of low ballistic coefficient and mediocre muzzle velocity make it drop considerably. For 150 yards you should be golden, assuming you've spent plenty of time behind the trigger. I'm not sure about modern 30-30 ammo in older rifles, but Hornady's leverevolution ammo is supposed to be the bees knees, i think I read somewhere they are pushing 300 fps. The major advancement is the use of soft polymer tips for increased BC; the problem was with tube fed rifles having spitzer bullets denting a primer from the round in front of it when the rifle is fired.

Then again, I'm not all that knowledgeable on the subject so don't write that in ink.

JeffDilla
October 15, 2008, 04:33 PM
I'm not trying to hijack this thread, and I think it's relative to the OP's question, but why is the 30-30 better in thick woods (shorter distance shots?) as opposed to the 30-06 or .270? I'm curious because when I used to go hunting with my grandfather when I was young, he used to always give me the 30-30, saying it was a better woods gun, while he'd use his .270 or .308. I always figured it was him just being thoughtful and giving me the gun with lighter recoil because I was young, masking it with the explanation of it being a "better woods gun", but it seems that this is actually the case. Is the 30-30 better in woods for shorter distance shots because of the different trajectory?

danxt
October 15, 2008, 04:40 PM
Great question JeffDilla

I was wondering the same thing... but forgot to put that question in my last post.

JeffDilla
October 15, 2008, 04:40 PM
I'm hoping it's not just because my grandfather thought I was a wuss.

mljdeckard
October 15, 2008, 04:44 PM
Cartridge names do not always make sense. If you factor in names that aren't really the caliber they represent, and cartridges that are named after persons other than the one who actually invented, they make sense less than half the time. In the case of the 30-06 Springfield, it is named so because it is a .30 caliber bullet, in a rifle built by Springfield Armory in 1906. It was basically an improvement of the 30-03 cartridge, with several modernizations in the design.

The .30-06 Springfield cartridge (pronounced “thirty-ought-six” or "thirty-oh-six") or 7.62 x 63 mm in metric notation, was introduced to the United States Army in 1906 (hence “06”) and standardized, used until the 1960s and early 1970s. It replaced the .30-03, 6 mm Lee Navy and .30 US Army (also called .30-40 Krag). The .30-06 remained the US Army's main cartridge for nearly 50 years before it was finally replaced by the 7.62 x 51 mm (7.62mm NATO, commercial .308 Winchester).

Stolen from wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/30-06

also: In the case of the 30-30, it was so named because it's a .30 caliber bullet, loaded with 30 grains of smokeless powder.

Naming

Although the original name is .30 WCF, the -30 in the designation was added to the name by Marlin, who did not want to put the name of rival Winchester on their rifles when they were chambered for the cartridge soon after its introduction[3]. The -30 stands for the standard load of 30 grains (1.9 g) of early smokeless powder, which was on par with IMR/DuPont's 4064. Over time Marlin's variation on the name stuck, though ".30 WCF" is also used.

again stolen from wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.30-30_Winchester

(I didn't know that about the 30-30, that's why I looked it up.) Some cartridges exist only because one was already in existence, and someone improved it with a different bullet type or powder load, to be able to use it in a different kind of rifle, and yanked recognition away from the original cartridge.

The power of the 30-30 peters out after about 200 yards. (Perhaps more with some modern improvements.) Remember, this cartridge is so old, most hunters had neither the talent, the optics, nor the inclination to take shots beyond 200 yards anyway, so it was perfectly fine. There are probably old-timers who can shoot their lever guns further than that, from horseback, but I don't know any of them. It wasn't until they invented the jacketed spitzer bullet, that could handle bigger shell casings and higher velocities without breaking up in the barrel, that anyone thought it was necessary to issue such a rifle to the regular rank and file. (Model 1903-A3 Enfield rifles, with WWI technology, in the hands of good shooters, have taken shots beyond 1000 yards.)

I know guys who hunt elk with a .243. I know guys who hunt mule deer with a .223. My dad killed three with a M-1 .30 Carbine. (A short pistol cartridge.) Doesn't mean I am going to try it. I don't know that I am either that lucky OR that good. :)

mljdeckard
October 15, 2008, 04:47 PM
For the last few years, me and my dad have been hunting in varied terrain, sometimes thick sagebrush, and his favorite rifle for it is his old Remington 760 in .257 Roberts. He's got a scope on elevated rings so he can still use the sights. I've been thinking lately, I would love a Remington 7600 pump with a short barrel, in .308 for the same purpose.

ojibweindian
October 15, 2008, 04:50 PM
I'm not trying to hijack this thread, and I think it's relative to the OP's question, but why is the 30-30 better in thick woods (shorter distance shots?) as opposed to the 30-06 or .270? I'm curious because when I used to go hunting with my grandfather when I was young, he used to always give me the 30-30, saying it was a better woods gun, while he'd use his .270 or .308. I always figured it was him just being thoughtful and giving me the gun with lighter recoil because I was young, masking it with the explanation of it being a "better woods gun", but it seems that this is actually the case. Is the 30-30 better in woods for shorter distance shots because of the different trajectory?


The lever guns chambered in 30-30 handle so much better in the dense woods. Shorter barrel and lighter weight means a lot in dense woods.

JeffDilla
October 15, 2008, 04:54 PM
The lever guns chambered in 30-30 handle so much better in the dense woods. Shorter barrel and lighter weight means a lot in dense woods.

Ahh, that makes sense. That never even crossed my mind. I guess I was thinking only in terms of ballistics, thanks!

maineac
October 15, 2008, 04:57 PM
I think the 30-30 has been called the brush gun as to its length and quick lever action.You have to remember the back in the days of the 30-30 being so popular there wasn't as large a gun choice and the lightness and shortness made it ideal in thick woods when fighting brush and branches,hence being called brush gun

Wolfgang2000
October 15, 2008, 04:58 PM
First I'm not knocking the 30-30. It's a great round.

That said the 3006 is probably the most versatile round in this country. You can get factory loads from 110 to 220 grns. You use to be able to get 55 grn sabot rounds. You can hunt most anything in the lower 48, and you can find rounds at any mom and pop store that sells ammo. You can still find surplus ammo for plinking.

I've seen everything from crows to Brown Bear taken with it.

There is nothing "wrong" with the other rounds. They may even have and advantage in some areas. But as a general purpose round, the old 3006 spanks the but of the other two.

bejay
October 15, 2008, 04:59 PM
you cant go wrong with the 270 or the 30-06 the 30-06 may have more bullet options but they are both very similiar ballistic wise, even at close ranges they are still superior to the 30-30 and the 30-30 should be removed from your list the 30-30 limitations are its lower velocity and energy produced while alot will say its the best round ever and it has killed alot of deer mostly because it been around forever, it has also wounded alot of deer even when point of impact was in a vital area well within the guns range it just didnt have the energy to penetrate like a 270 or 30-06 does.

georgeky
October 15, 2008, 05:05 PM
I killed two deer with one shot from a Marlin 30-30 at 70 yards. The Rem CL 170 grain bullet completly passed through both deer. One fell dead the other ran about 35 yards and fell dead. Dead is dead. The 30-30 has survived this long for a reason. It works and works well under 200 yards.

JeffDilla
October 15, 2008, 05:08 PM
So where does all of this leave the .308? How does it compare to the other rounds mentioned?

The Bushmaster
October 15, 2008, 05:20 PM
If you are planing to hunt Elk. The .30-06 of your list is the best bet...

Wolfgang2000
October 15, 2008, 05:21 PM
It's basically a short 30-06. Case capacity gives the 06 a edge, but the 308 holds it's own. The 308 is my round of choice.

Shawnee
October 15, 2008, 05:32 PM
Keep your .243 and use it for deer. It is the best deer caliber ever invented.

If you want to go for Elk - get a .270. It will cleanly kill any Elk you ever see at any range you ever have any business taking a shot.

The .270 is a "long-action" caliber and - for some people - "long action" calibers sometimes present scope mounting problems. The problem usually occurs when the person has a very thick chest and/or short arms. More "average" built people can usually use a "long action" caliber just fine.
In the case where people struggle with the "long action" they will switch to a "short action" caliber and the "short action" caliber that is most like the .270 is the 7mm/08, and it too will be a splendid Elk-swatter for you.

The 30/30 will certainly kill Elk but you will be limited in range with it.

Good Hunting !
:cool:

FITASC666
October 15, 2008, 05:42 PM
Danxt

Here’s a curveball: Try the .308. Lots of loads, low recoil and muzzle blast, manufactured loads as fast as a 7mm Rem Mag (Hornady), as powerful as the 06 (Federal HE) and as comfortable and slow for nice mushrooms and channel wounds in the thick stuff as the 30-30 (Remington et. al.). Actually perhaps it is, with a stretch, the first short mag. It started as a shortened 30-06 for automatic weapons for NATO in the 7,62 x 51mm configuration, and then very slightly modified for hunting rifles as the .308 Winchester, I believe around 1954. Hell of a success story since. The trick, regardless of your final choice, is to ensure you select the proper bullet type and weight for your quarry and the right impact velocity for the projectile to work effectively. All this presupposes that shot placement is achieved. Have fun and good luck.

woof
October 15, 2008, 05:48 PM
"Real men" seem to deny it but recoil matters. I would guess that almost every day a shooter without the experience of higher recoil rounds like .30-06 are persuaded here to get more gun than they really need. Then they develop a recoil flinch which they never get rid of. Plus everybody talks about ranges. I never see a response to a thread like this that says it's ok to have a 100 yd rifle instead of a 300 yd rifle and go get closer!

If I were you I'd get the .30-30 and don't worry about the elk. By the time you go elk hunting you'll be ready for another rifle anyway. That's another thing about these threads. The answers are always as if it has to be one rifle for everything, and this is coming from those who have a rifle for every narrow purpose. :)

Shawnee
October 15, 2008, 05:52 PM
Well said, "Woof" !!!!!!!

:cool:

Ratshooter
October 15, 2008, 06:15 PM
I've owned rifles chambered from 223 up to 8x57 with nearly every other round thrown in the mix. Plus 45-70, 44mag and 357 mag rifles.

I have killed enough deer and elk to fill up the beds of several trucks. Only one deer was killed at long range. A small whitetail at 225-250 yards. Everything else was killed at 80 yards or less. The closest was 13 yards.

With the excecption of that one deer I could have killed everthing else with a 30-30. I like to set up to watch crossings, feeders and clearcuts. Thats why most of my shots have been so close. Where and how you hunt should help you choose what gun to start with.

Any of the calibers named will work just fine. I hope you aren't limited to just one rifle. The 30-30 is a fine place to start and it just gets better from there.

scythefwd
October 15, 2008, 07:00 PM
OK, here it goes.
The .270 and the .30-06 are about equal in energy. Both move approximately 2800 fps with a 170 gr. bullet. The .270 is a flatter trajectory, but the '06 can shoot heavier loads (which leaves more umpf there at 400y). The 06 can shoot up to 220 gr bullets, the 270 can't.

The .30-30 is a whole different class. It tops out at 2200-2300 fps with 170 gr bullets. The .30-30 is getting to handgun power at 300y (where to 270 and 06 both are still going strong). The .30-30 isn't just a levergun, but they are most commonly leverguns, so if you want to shoot spitzer bullets you either have to be using polimer tips (like leverloution by hornady) or roll your own (don't put more than one in a tubular mag if it isn't a polimer tipped round, stacked mags are ok to fill).

Like someone said earlier, the wound channel will be larger for the .30-30 and the 06 (both use a .308 caliber bullet) and smaller for the .270 (I'll let you guess it's diameter).

At 100y all three will fully penetrate a whitetail, and possibly an elk (.30-30 is iffy, the others will fully penetrate). By this I mean there is an entry and an exit hole.

Ammo will be most expensive for the 06, cheapest for the .30-30

In power, the 270 and 06 are equals for most store bought ammo. The .30-30 is a distant third. For trajectories, the 270, then the 06, then the .30-30 from flattest to most arched.

aspade
October 15, 2008, 07:18 PM
Like someone said earlier, the wound channel will be larger for the .30-30 and the 06 (both use a .308 caliber bullet) and smaller for the .270 (I'll let you guess it's diameter).

Disagree. At rifle impact speeds most tissue damage is stretching and tearing of displaced tissue, particularly when that tissue is weakened by bullet fragmentation.

Only the last few inches of wound track where the bullet has slowed too much for significant stretching effects are caused by direct cutting and crushing. The important number there is bullet expanded diameter, not unfired dimensions.

A .270 makes notably more of a mess inside than any 30-30 kill I've seen dressed. With about 80% more energy at 100 yards it's not hard to see why.

ColeK
October 15, 2008, 10:44 PM
Dan, I’m not going to read all of these posts but I’m going to try to answer your questions.

I don’t know where live, how you will hunt, the terrain you will hunt, or how well you shoot. All of this can be a factor to consider.

I own and use rifles chambered in all 3 cartridges and have for many years.

The .30-30 aka .30 WCF has been killing deer, black bear, and other animals since 1894. The cartridge is commonly chambered in lever action rifles and these rifles are easy to find as is the ammo. The recoil is less than the other two. The muzzle energy is also less than the other two. With traditional factory ammo the effective range is about 125 – 150 yards. With the new Hornady factory ammo it is effective out to about 200 yards. The accuracy of these rifles is about 2.5” with iron sights and a little better with a peep sight or scope. Rifles in this chambering are considered bush guns and are adequate for most game in the lower 48 state within their range limitation. I killed about 60 deer with a .30-30. My longest shot was a one shot kill at 132 yards.

The .270 Win has been around since 1925 and is available and any action you might want. Ammo is readily available with 130 to 150 grain bullets. The accuracy of these rifles is about 1.5” or less. Most of these rifles are more accurate than most shooters. I have 2 bolt action rifles in this chambering that shoot MOA or less and one of then is over 50 years old. The .270 is good for size game elk size and smaller out to about 350 yards. My longest shot was a one shot kill at 341 yards. The .270 will shoot flatter than the other 2.

The .30-06 Springfield has been around since 1906 and is available and any action you might want. Ammo is readily available with 150 to 180 grain bullets but ammo is available with bullets from .55 – 220 grains. The accuracy of these rifles is about 1.5” more or less. Most of these rifles are also more accurate than most shooters. The .30-06 is good for size game elk size and smaller out to about 350 yards. But it has been used to kill all types of big game all over the world.

There are a few things to remember:
1. Most big game in this country is shot at less than 100 yards.
2. Muzzle energy doesn’t make up for poor shot placement.
3. If you want to be a good shot at ranges longer than 100 yards you have to practice, practice and practice.

Pick a rifle in any one of the 3. Go practice, practice and practice. Then go huntin'. And good luck.


The Ol’ man said, “Son, don’t brag to me about the long shot you made! Brag to me about how close you got!”

qajaq59
October 16, 2008, 06:52 AM
The .308 is nice if you happen to like lever guns. It gives you almost the punch of the 06 and you can still have the lever. It's my favorite rifle.

danxt
October 16, 2008, 08:55 AM
Keep your .243 and use it for deer. It is the best deer caliber ever invented.

How come?
I have found it to be adequate for the land I've been hunting on, but I never considered it to be a great caliber.

Shawnee
October 16, 2008, 09:08 AM
Hi "danxt"


"How come?"


Because it will cleanly and humanely kill any deer you ever see at any distance you should ever take a shot at. It has a very, very modest recoil and blast which is a huge help to accurate shooting. It is chambered in a wide variety of rifle and action types. Available commercial ammo for use on deer is very good and it is very easy to reload for.

:cool:

Art Eatman
October 16, 2008, 05:29 PM
The most common loadings:

.30-30: 170-grain bullet at 2,200 ft/sec. Hornady now has the "Leverlution" loading with a soft-tip bullet so that a pointed bullet can safely be loaded into a tubular magazine. The 150-grain has a muzzle velocity around 2,400 or 2,500. The pointed nose allows a flatter trajectory than the round-nosed standard .30-30 bullets.

.270: 130-grain at around 2,900 to 3,000 ft/sec. This is ancient standard deer load. Some use the 150-grain bullet for elk.

.30-'06: 150-grain at around 2,800 to 2,900 ft/sec. This has pretty much been the all-around load for the best part of 90 or more years. Some also use the 165-grain in for deer hunting, and the 180-grain bullet is common for elk.

Note that barrel lengths affect the above numbers. Shorter is slower.

For handloaders, the thirty-caliber cartridges have more options available than do the .277s.

mljdeckard
October 16, 2008, 08:04 PM
I very much agree with the .243. It's fast, flat round with scorching velocity. It's more than enough for anything from varmints up to deer. (I know guys who hunt elk with it, but I don't. The only reason I don't use one now, is me and my dad share a deer rifle in .257 Roberts. I might still get one for my wife.

Shawnee
October 16, 2008, 08:56 PM
".270: 130-grain at around 2,900 to 3,000 ft/sec. This is ancient standard deer load. Some use the 150-grain bullet for elk"

That's definitely a low muzzle velocity figure for a .270 130-grainer. It will hit 3200fps easy and I just now learned the load I thought was producing 3200fps without undue pressure is actually at 3600fps ! :eek:

Check my post on the handloading forum re: .270 & .243. "Ants" just gave me a major education !:what:

:cool:

RugerOldArmy
October 16, 2008, 09:31 PM
That's definitely a low muzzle velocity figure for a .270 130-grainer. It will hit 3200fps easy and I just now learned the load I thought was producing 3200fps without undue pressure is actually at 3600fps !


.270 Win makes significant use of barrel length beyond 22". Getting 3140 fps w/a 130 Gr bullet (a traditional Jack O'Connor load), in a 24" barrel is near the margins. I have a Savage with a 26" Shilen barrel, and never got much over 3200...even with a stout load of RL22.

The 3600 fps w/130 Gr bullet, in anything other than a bizzarre configuration, is a mistake, a malfunction, or pure fiction. You can't believe everything posted on the internet.

W/46 Gr. of H4350, and the laws of diminishing returns, in a 24" barrel, I doubt it gets 3200 fps.

Slower powders (IMR4831, H4831, H4831SC, RL22, MagPro) will get more velocity in .270 Win than H4350, but in a barrel 24" or less, getting 3140 fps with a current book load is about the best a handloader can get.

Older manuals listed hotter loads, but even factory cartridges are loaded lighter than they were in Jack O'Connor's day.

For most sporters w/a 22" barrel, I doubt you'll get a safe load to 3140 fps.

You can get 3600 fps in a 22" .270 Win with Sierra's .277 90 Gr Varminter and RL15 though. (A Sierra accuracy load, no less.)

scythefwd
October 16, 2008, 09:33 PM
Disagree. At rifle impact speeds most tissue damage is stretching and tearing of displaced tissue, particularly when that tissue is weakened by bullet fragmentation.

Only the last few inches of wound track where the bullet has slowed too much for significant stretching effects are caused by direct cutting and crushing. The important number there is bullet expanded diameter, not unfired dimensions.

A .270 makes notably more of a mess inside than any 30-30 kill I've seen dressed. With about 80% more energy at 100 yards it's not hard to see why.

True, the bullet does a lot of damage tearing through the deer. A 270 is moving so fast that it helps in the damage compartment, but you are still tearing with a smaller slug at first (unless the slug expands from pure air pressure a full .038 which I don't see happening). I said the wound channel would be larger, not more ragged. The more ragged hole left by the 270 will be more total damage, but the hole size (entry hole at least) will be smaller. The exit hole depends solely on your ammo. Will a nosler partition spread out as much as a softpoint flat top (never seen a flat top soft point .270, but I am willing to accept that it can exist)? Will the rate of spread be the same? The 270 will have to spread out at least 1/6th more just to have the final size the same and it will have to do it in less time (since it is traveling at almost 600 fps faster assuming the same weight bullet and accurate reloading info in my manual). And the most important question, at 100y, will either bullet fully expand before exiting the other side? I don't see that happening, nor do I see a standard sized deer of 200lbs (ok, I grew up in IL, in VA it's closer to 125 lbs) having enough mass to keep either bullet from going completely through.

That said, the 270 is the superior round of the two, but it is more than necessary if you are hunting at less than 150y.

RugerOldArmy
October 16, 2008, 09:40 PM
One other thing the .270 Win has going for it is sectional density. If you compare numbers of mid range bullets for '06 and .270 (say 165 and 130, respectively) and heavier bullets (say 150-160Gr .277(s) vs 180 Gr .308(s)) the .270 Win's SD(s) are higher. It is one reason the lighter bullets are still so effective, higher SD aids penetration.

scythefwd
October 16, 2008, 09:48 PM
RugerOldArmy,
I have wondered about that. A .270 will shoot through deer at 300y. At what point does having more penetration become a problem (say you go though before you expand)?

RugerOldArmy
October 16, 2008, 10:11 PM
A .270 will shoot through deer at 300y. At what point does having more penetration become a problem (say you go though before you expand)?

I don't see overpenetration as a problem. No matter what, you're ethically responsible to consider what is behind your target. If there is another deer, you shouldn't take the shot in my book.

With respect to going through before the bullet expands, I don't think that is an issue, unless you managed to find solids in .277. (I've never seen any in .277). Most all hunting bullets in .277 expand, and even Noslet Partitions expand well. With a .270 win, I'd worry more about taking a 50-75 yard shot with a bullet that expands too much at that speed...say a 130 Gr Nosler Ballistic tip. I use Nosler Partitions more for this reason than any in .270 Win.

Within 75 yards, and '06 with a heavy bullet probably has the advantage over the .270, just because a lightly constructed bullet would be less likely to shatter if it hit a bone, given the difference in velocity between an '06 and a .270 at that range.

Art Eatman
October 17, 2008, 12:11 AM
Factory loadings in the '06, from 26" barrels included the 110-grain at 3,480 and the 150-grain at a tad over 2,900. Those numbers were published for decades on those pads you find on gunstore counters.

So I can maybe believe 3,200 from a 26" .270 with a 130-grain, but I don't ever recall seeing it.

But 3,600? Hey, that's some fine Progressive Pall Mall that somebody's smoking. Sorry, not credible at rational chamber pressures.

But you start talking about the barrel lengths of most modern rifles, and I stand by my numbers as being reasonable ballpark...

TCB in TN
October 17, 2008, 12:37 AM
I love all three rounds but the comparison between the 30-30 and the other two is flawed. The 30-30 is a great round, proven to be "effective" (whatever that means) inside 150 yards on deer, and "effective" at closer ranges on larger game. But the other two outperform the 30-30 in EVERY area except recoil, and the "handiness" of the typical 30-30 package, at ALL ranges. Flatter shooting, more powerful, you name it the .270 and 30-06 are over better rounds. Those arguing between the .270 and the 30-06 are really picking at nits. The .270 shoots slightly (and I do mean slightly) flatter, and the 30-06 handles larger bullets and usually has a better selection of rounds over the counter. BTW the average hunter is not going to notice the difference in performance on the 130gr .270 as compared to the 150gr 30-06. I have owned, shot, hunted, and taken game with both and think that they are both great. Currently I own several 30-06s mainly because I found good deals on them (for myself and my boys), but had I found a good deal on the .270 I would have went down that road and felt just a comfortable with my selection. I grew up shooting the 06, and have a great love of the round but discussing the comparative merits of the two rounds is like discussing a beautiful woman, and her equally beautiful younger sister.

danxt
October 17, 2008, 10:14 AM
Thank you all... I had no idea that I would get this elaborate of a response, and I think it's great!

Since it has become clear that the 30-30 is really only effective out to about 150yds, what would be the effective range of the .243 Win?

I always thought that the .243 was a smaller and therefore less effective round that didn't have the range to do the job at 300yds... but would it?
If my assessment is correct, the real factors here are centered around velocity and bullet mass... in other words, the amount of energy you can put into the animal.
So, since a .243 is usually a 100gr round (right)?, and it's moving at about 2800 fps the inertia of the round (at muzzle) is 100 * 2800 = 280000 gr*fps.
I know the .243 is also available in a 125gr round, but what would be the velocity on that? Can I assume that it's 280000 / 125 = 2240?
Now naturally, since it is a heavier round, it is moving slower, which means that you can expect more bullet drop at the same range as with a 100gr.

So, if it were possible, wouldn't you want to get the lightest bullet you could to maximize your range and still put the same amount of energy into the bullet, and therefore into the animal?
Since diameter of the round doesn't really matter much when it comes to how big of a hole it makes, wouldn't you just want the smallest, flattest shooting round you could get?
Then why not look for a .243win in 50 gr?

Is there any truth to this, or am I missing something?

gvnwst
October 17, 2008, 10:27 AM
I know the .243 is also available in a 125gr round
the heaviest 6mm bullet is 115gr, and this is a match round.

So, if it were possible, wouldn't you want to get the lightest bullet you could to maximize your range and still put the same amount of energy into the bullet, and therefore into the animal?


lighter bullets are less aerodynamic, and lose their energy more quickly. 50gr bullets are mostly made for varminting. also, heavier bullets disperse their energy to the target better than lighter ones. well, varmint bullets, but do not try to hunt deer or larger with those. :D


As for the effective range of the .243, soem people take deer past 400yd.

Geno
October 17, 2008, 10:30 AM
Good questions. The depth of penetration can be effected by the bullet's sectional density, a calculation of the weight and diameter. It is basically the bullet's integrity...the ability to stay in one piece. With newer bullets, such as the Barnes X-bullet, sectional density nearly becomes a mute point, because it is a monolithe type bullet (solid but expandable). As to going with the lightest bullet, no, you still need enough energy (calculation of weight and velocity) to reach vitals.

My preferred bullet for the .243 cal is a 95 grain Nosler Partition. On the last deer I shot with that caliber, the bullet entered through the front of the chest (dead-center), and blew the deer's heart completely loose from all connective tissue. The bullet continued to penetrate the deer's whole body length. We retrieved the bullet under the skin just right of center. That was fired from a 6mm Remington, which is .243 cal.

Shawnee
October 17, 2008, 10:52 AM
Hi danxt


The .243 is the best deer caliber ever invented. It will cleanly and humanely kill any deer you ever see at any range you ever have any business taking a shot at. It will do so with more than one particular weight bullet.

In general, .243 bullets of 90grs or more are designed to penetrate better and expand slower which is to say they are designed for deer/antelope.

In general, .243 bullets of 85grs. or less are designed for very rapid expansion which is to say they are intended for varmints.... and they DO open up much faster. However I've found the Hornady 87gr. BTHP stays together much better than the lighter bullets. I also know someone who uses the 85gr. Sierra Gameking bullet with good success on deer.

I have killed a trainload of deer with one-shot kills using the Hornady 87gr. BTHP which - theoretically - is a "varmint" bullet. A couple have been beyond 400yds. I have dropped deer with the old 100gr. bullets beyond 300yds. Just recently I killed a doe at about 260yds. with one of the new Hornady 58-gr. V-max bullets - but that was a head shot. I also killed one at about 60yds. with that bullet with a lung shot - she went about 100 feet before keeling over. Though I am "two-for-two" with the 58-gr. V-max, I have decided to NOT use it anymore on deer. That is partly due to the fact that they are more affected by wind.

My rifle is (was:() "zero'd" at 275 yds and here is the trajectory chart for it with the Hornady 95gr. SST bullet...

sst 95 gr., .355 B.C. www.hornady.com

Yardage 50 100 200 300 400 500
Vel (fps) 2966 2837 2588 2353 2130 1920
Energy 1856 1697 1413 1168 957 778
Traject, 1.2 3.0 3.2 -1.8 -13.1 -32.0

You can see that out to 300yds. I can use virtually the same point-of-aim and be sure of a lethal hit. From 350yds. to about 450yds a point-of-aim slightly above the top of the deer's back will produce a lethal hit (in the chest cavity).

The difference between the 95gr. bullets and 100gr/105gr. bullets is not enough to change that point-of-aim substantially. But of course you can always fine tune your sighting for the different bullet

The muzzle velocity of - for example - the 87gr. BTHP or the 95gr. SST can easily (and safely) be made to 3200fps. by reloading. I still favor the 87gr. BTHP (or spire point) because it will also open up well at shorter distances and I like to have the bullet expend all its' energy inside the deer.

The blast and recoil of the .243 are very, very modest and that is a tremendous aid to accurate shooting

(Sorry the numbers aren't spaced more evenly. I type them evenly spaced but the "translation" to the forum scrunches them all up)

HTH

:cool:

Shawnee
October 17, 2008, 11:02 AM
Oooops

Meant to start a new thread

Wolfgang2000
October 17, 2008, 12:58 PM
danxt
Since it has become clear that the 30-30 is really only effective out to about 150yds, what would be the effective range of the .243 Win?


First I've SEEN a deer dropped with 1 30-30 round at 250 to 300 yards on several occasion's. Yes it takes a person that know his rifle and chosen load. But the 30-30 is a very capable round. The down side to a 30-30 is the limited platform for it. Usually just a lever action. If all I could have is a 30-30 lever action I wouldn't feel under gunned.

The 243 is a capable round, I just don't understand how we got from 270, 30-30, and 30-06, to 243???

There are many capable rifle rounds out there. What you need to figure out is which is popular in your area, and will handle the critters in your area. So preform the Wal-Mart test. Go to your local Wal-Mart and check and see which round they stock the most of. Why do this? The more of a particular caliber is in stock of a certain caliber the cheaper it is. This will also effect reloading supplies etc.

My local wally world has a whole shelf of 06, followed by a shelf of 30-30, then a third shelf that has a couple box's of each of the other calibers.

When I made my choice in the early 90's I chose 308. (Yes I know it goes against the Wal-Mart test.) However at that time 308 surplus was flooding the market, and I had access to 308 through work. It has worked for me, and I have not regretted the decision.

YOU have to make it work for YOU.

TCB in TN
October 17, 2008, 07:29 PM
First I've SEEN a deer dropped with 1 30-30 round at 250 to 300 yards on several occasion's. Yes it takes a person that know his rifle and chosen load. But the 30-30 is a very capable round. The down side to a 30-30 is the limited platform for it. Usually just a lever action. If all I could have is a 30-30 lever action I wouldn't feel under gunned.

The 243 is a capable round, I just don't understand how we got from 270, 30-30, and 30-06, to 243???

There are many capable rifle rounds out there. What you need to figure out is which is popular in your area, and will handle the critters in your area. So preform the Wal-Mart test. Go to your local Wal-Mart and check and see which round they stock the most of. Why do this? The more of a particular caliber is in stock of a certain caliber the cheaper it is. This will also effect reloading supplies etc.

My local wally world has a whole shelf of 06, followed by a shelf of 30-30, then a third shelf that has a couple box's of each of the other calibers.

When I made my choice in the early 90's I chose 308. (Yes I know it goes against the Wal-Mart test.) However at that time 308 surplus was flooding the market, and I had access to 308 through work. It has worked for me, and I have not regretted the decision.

YOU have to make it work for YOU.

You are correct, that deer have been taken out to that distance with the 30-30, but not consistently, by the average shooter. The .270 and 30-06 are flatter shooting and will be easier to hit with than the 30-30 at the longer distances.

I don't feel the "lever gun" is a limited platform, my Browning BLR in .308 will do the deal on just about anything that I personally care to shoot at. Now the traditional lever gun (Marlin/Winchester/etc) in 30-30 or 44mag etc. will be more limited but the new leverevolution ammo changes the equation a bit.

As for the .243 it is a great round, and as Shawnee has said, it is adequate to take pretty much any deer on this continent. I personally like a bigger bullet but if you put it right where it is supposed to be then it can certainly be effective out to 300+.

The Walmart test is a pretty good idea. Even if something else might be "better" what is available and commonly used will likely be effective and will also be cheaper than a better alternative that is less commonly used. BTW without even looking I will bet that .308, .270, 30-30, and 30-06 will ALL be plentiful at you basic hunting store, and chain sporting goods stores anywhere in the lower 48 and Alaska as well.

Shawnee
October 17, 2008, 08:48 PM
Gotta disagree with "The Walmart Test".

I know it sounds good at first blush but it just doesn't hold water, at least not very well. That's because the quaint notion of stocking what the consumer wants most applies mostly to small business and a lot less so to big chains who expect consumers to buy what is most profitable for the seller.

I was in the local Walmart and noticed they had a few boxes of 30/06 on the shelf and a case of 7mm/08s sitting on the floor waiting to be put on the shelf. I commented about it to the guy with the "manager" name tag and his response was that Walmart has a list of calibers that are commonly stocked but their stocking policy (re: quantity) is guided by which caliber(s) they can make the highest profit margin on (ie. which calibers they bought cheapest recently) - and NOT on which calibers are most popular locally. He also said individual stores may get shipments of calibers that turned out to be "overstocks" elsewhere in an apparent attempt to get rid of slow-moving inventory.

It is a lot easier for me to believe Walmart is a business guided by the bottom line than to believe they are an expert hunting supplier with the best interests of hunters as the guiding principle of their company.
So I, personally, am pretty skeptical of using the Walmart level of intelligence as a measure of local caliber popularity and certainly not as a measure of caliber effectiveness or appropriateness.

Local opinion may vary. :)

:cool:

danxt
October 20, 2008, 10:18 AM
Wolfgang2000
The 243 is a capable round, I just don't understand how we got from 270, 30-30, and 30-06, to 243???

Sorry, I know it wasn't part of the original question, but since a few people commented on it's capabilities, and since I already have a .243, I thought it was worth discussing. Maybe I should have started a new thread to discuss the .243, but I figured this worked just as well, since we were already talking about it.

Shawnee
Yardage 50 100 200 300 400 500
Vel (fps) 2966 2837 2588 2353 2130 1920
Energy 1856 1697 1413 1168 957 778
Traject, 1.2 3.0 3.2 -1.8 -13.1 -32.0

You can see that out to 300yds. I can use virtually the same point-of-aim and be sure of a lethal hit. From 350yds. to about 450yds a point-of-aim slightly above the top of the deer's back will produce a lethal hit (in the chest cavity).


What is the Zero on this trajectory?

The Bushmaster
October 20, 2008, 10:42 AM
bejay. The .30-30 IS still taking more deer and deer sized game then any other calibre each year. It is a very viable cartridger in both the Marlin and Winchester lever rifles. Yes. It has it's limitations (200 yards), but I would rather pack it in the woods then my Browning .30-06. And I would rather pack my .30-06 when I expect to shoot longer distances and didn't have to put up with heavy timber and buck brush...

Don't discount the .30-30 yet. It ain't dead...Reloading die sets are still in the top 10 die sets purchased...

Wolfgang2000
October 20, 2008, 01:52 PM
danxt
Wolfgang2000
The 243 is a capable round, I just don't understand how we got from 270, 30-30, and 30-06, to 243???

Sorry, I know it wasn't part of the original question, but since a few people commented on it's capabilities, and since I already have a .243, I thought it was worth discussing. Maybe I should have started a new thread to discuss the .243, but I figured this worked just as well, since we were already talking about it.


As I sure you know the 243 is a necked down 308. A lot of people like it because it's recoil is less that a 308 or 06. It might have a slight edge on the 30-30, but not much, just a flatter trajectory.

If you already have a 243 I would pass on the 30-30 and look at the 06.

Again It's not that the rounds or "bad". YOU just need to find the one that fills YOUR needs. IMO the old 06 is still one of the most versatile rounds out there.

Shawnee
October 20, 2008, 02:54 PM
Hi Danxt...

"What is the Zero on this trajectory?"


275yds.


Hi Wolfgang...

"It (243) might have a slight edge on the 30-30, but not much, just a flatter trajectory."


Either your mind is gone or you've been forgetting to put the powder in your .243 handloads. :D


:cool:

TnBigBore
October 20, 2008, 07:56 PM
If you like the way your 243 handles and you can shoot it well, it should be up to any deer hunting you will ever do. If you hunt mostly in the woods and your shots run mostly short there is no rifle that compares to a handy levergun.

The handiness factor cannot be overstated in a woods rifle. When I was a teenager and thought I needed the latest whizbang magnum I used to carry a heavy, cumberson, Hubble scoped bolt gun through the woods to my treedstand and shot bambi from 35 yards most of the time. I usually lost lots of meat as well. When I started plotting the distance of most of my shots and realized that they were nearly all under 100 yds, I wized up and bought a Marlin 336 in 35 Rem and mounted a nice small 2-7x scope on it. Since then, I rarely hunt with anything other than a Marlin or Savage 99 levergun.

The 30-30, 35, 32 Special and their ilk will not knock your socks off with their ballistics, but they flat kill deer if you are a decent shot, and without ruining much meat and knocking your fillings loose. People use way too much gun for whitetails. They really are not that hard to kill if you punch them through the lungs with a 55-405 grain bullet.

If you enjoyed reading about ".270 v. .30-30 v. 30-06" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!