Need Advice!! .270 vs .308


PDA






ach224
March 17, 2010, 11:10 AM
I am looking for a gun that will mainly be used for target practice (100 to 300 yards). I also will be hunting the occasional coyote and wild hog as well, but all shots would be within 150 yards. I am strongly leaning towards the .270 but I haven't ruled out the .308.

I have three main questions:
1 - .270 or .308?
2 - Recommended models for under $350
3 - What scope power would be appropriate?

Any help would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks!

If you enjoyed reading about "Need Advice!! .270 vs .308" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
natman
March 17, 2010, 12:18 PM
Either one will work fine for your purpose. The 308 has a slight advantage in that it can fit in a lighter, shorter rifle. I'd recommend a Marlin XL7 in 270 or a XS7 in 308 with a 2x7 or 3x9 Leupold vxII.

375shooter
March 17, 2010, 12:18 PM
ach224:

There are a lot of other excellent calibers available but if you want to choose only between those two, I would recommend the 270. It's better for the longer shots out to 300 yards and will work well for both coyotes and hogs.

For a scope, quality is important. Your rifle will only shoot as good as the scope will allow. If using a cheap scope the rifle may not shoot as accurately as it's capable of. A power level of 1.75-6 or 2-7 will work well.

If your budget for a rifle is under $350. You may have to buy used.

Uncle Mike
March 17, 2010, 01:14 PM
.308...ammo costs during the 'target' phase of your shooting will dictate this.
.308...accuracy, the .308 has given better accuracy than the .270 in most situations.
.308...short action, makes not a bit of difference, but....
.308...roll your own, the .308 has an endless selection of components available to the reloader.
.308...there is more, but I'm lazy today! lol hehehe

The rifle...Savage 11 Series, Marlin X Series, Stevens 200- In this order! You may have to save a few more rubles for one of these comrade, or buy used.

Scopes...For the money, Weaver, Minox, Burris Fullfield Series, Muller.
Magnification... 3-12, 4-16 with at least a 44mm objective, the 50mm objectives are even better.

Nico Testosteros
March 17, 2010, 01:16 PM
1. Either will work fine. You can probably find cheaper FMJ .308 to practice with. That would sway me. The two rounds will both work for what you want, though.
2. Marlin XL or XS7. I don't have one, though. I've only read about them.
3. Burris Fullfield II. I like mine. Nuff said.

Arkansas Paul
March 17, 2010, 01:18 PM
Flip a coin. They're both great.
As for the rifle, if you're budget is $350 or less, take a look at the Marlin XL7s, or the Weatherby Vangaurds. The Vangaurds are a bit more new (about $400) but you could find a used one.
For a 300 yd shot, a 3x9x40 scope would work just fine. You don't need much more than that at moderate ranges. Too many people go power happy, and it can be a disadvantage.

Uncle Mike
March 17, 2010, 01:25 PM
Too many people go power happy, and it can be a disadvantage.

Just curious...how's that?

Arkansas Paul
March 17, 2010, 01:44 PM
1. Lower power scopes don't exaggerate the movements of the rifle as much. On the bench, you're rock steady. If you have to shoot at game from the offhand position, any movements will be exaggerated more, the higher the power.

2. Lower power scopes usually weigh less. Something to think about in the field.

3. Higher magnification = Less light transmission. A 12x scope will show the same image darker than a 4x.

4. Higher magnification also limits the field of view


My favorite gun writer, Bob Hagel, said that for the majority of hunting, a 4x scope was all that was needed. He claimed that if a big game animal was too far away to shoot with a 4x scope, it was too far away to shoot at period. He was also renowned for his ability with a rifle. I'm not that good, so I don't mind amping up the power slightly. In my opinioin, with scopes, less is more.

Higher power scopes definately have their place. I just think that for 300 yd shots, a 3x9x40 is ideal. That's my opinion. That's what the OP asked for. Your opinion may differ. That's okay.

Hammerhead6814
March 17, 2010, 01:48 PM
Toss up. It really comes down to what rifles your looking at.

aka108
March 17, 2010, 01:57 PM
Check out a Howa 1500 in whatever caliber you settle with. Howa is basically a Weatherby Vanguard less a few hard earned dollars.

RSVP2RIP
March 17, 2010, 03:29 PM
It's funny you are comaring a long and a short action caliber. I would think you would be talking about a 270 vs. 30-06, or 7mm-08 or 260 vs. 308. Since you are talking about very close to MANDATORY chamberings for any rifle, I would start the search for the rifle, then pick the chambering. You may find that you like a gun in a short action, but not the long action or vice versa.

vermont88993
March 17, 2010, 03:32 PM
marlin XS-7 in 308 or weatherby vanguard used in 308. just my opinion

Guiding101
March 17, 2010, 03:41 PM
I would recommend the 270. It's better for the longer shots out to 300 yards and will work well for both coyotes and hogs.


Somebody should talk to the.308 about that. More long range competitions have been won with the ole' 7.62 X 51 Nato than any other rifle. While that may be because of its use as a military cartridge, the fact that it is a proven winner speaks for itself. IMHO, the .308 can do just about anything a .270 can, but good luck getting the .270 to eat the large pills capable in the .308. Both are great guns for the intended purpose. Stevens (Savage) also makes accurate rifles in that price range. They may not be pretty, but they shoot.

NMGonzo
March 17, 2010, 03:56 PM
.308 ... more interesting platforms!

Zak Smith
March 17, 2010, 03:57 PM
The difference in point-blank range will be minimal between these two cartridges. You might get an extra 40 yards with the .270.

The .308 has a lot more match-grade ammo available.

If you ever want to shoot further than 300, there are a lot more high-BC bullets in .30 caliber than .277".

More long range competitions have been won with the ole' 7.62 X 51 Nato than any other rifle.
Matches that proscribe the cartridges allowed to compete cannot necessarily be used to prove than a particular cartridge is actually better, ie, when those that would be better are prohibited.

ArmedBear
March 17, 2010, 05:46 PM
If you ever want to shoot further than 300, there are a lot more high-BC bullets in .30 caliber than .277".

This is something I found, even for hunting bullets. I'm still confused by it, but it's definitely a thumb on the .30 caliber side of the scale in the real world, even where the .270 should be superior in theory.

Zak Smith
March 17, 2010, 05:54 PM
I attribute this to that the U.S. shooting market was "sold" on .270 Winchester as a hunting cartridge, and that's more or less where the .277" caliber has stayed. If you go up 0.007", there are tons of great 7mm bullets. Logically, .280 Remington aka 7mm-06 is a more versatile choice vs. the .270.

-z

Silent Rifleman
March 17, 2010, 05:55 PM
If you handload, you can cook up some .270 that will easily outperform a .308( I am using a .49 BC bullet that's doing 3100 at the muzzle). Factory, not so much.

Both rounds are easily available as store-bought, however you will have a little more of a selection in the .308.

mickeydim468
March 17, 2010, 07:26 PM
You know, I want to cast one more vote for the Weatherby Vanguard. But I do have a
question...

Does the $350.00 price tag include a scope or is there a scope budget to work with as well?

If you can spend $350.00 on the rifle alone, then the Weatherby is not far, or at all, out of your price range. I got my short action Weatherby for $349.00 at a local store and at the same store I got my Magnum for $369.00 with the long action non magnum in between at $359.00.

For a scope I agree that 3-9X40 is a good choice and the Nikon ProStaff can be had online as low as $139.00 at optics planet, if you do not mind buying a demo model, or new at $169.00. This is the model with the BDC reticle. And it does work, it just takes a little practice, which I would recommend anyway! :D

Good luck and happy rifle hunting.

Mike

joed
March 17, 2010, 08:16 PM
Tough choice on cartridge, and I'd have a hard time deciding. I own a .25-06 and .308 and like both. The advantage to the .25-06 is the trajectory is flatter, the .270 will also have this advantage. You'll find more bullet choices for the .308 but that hasn't hindered my 06 at all. The .25-06 bullet drops about 32" at 500 yards and I think the .270 will be similar. At 500 yards the .308 drops somewhere in the 40" range.

Most of the high power matches see the .308. But the matches were made to cater to the .308. The .270 couldn't compete in this game only because you'd cook a barrel after the timed shooting. I tried this once with the .25-06 and found the barrel gets to hot. But it was much easier hitting long distance targets with the .25 because of less bullet drop.

joed
March 17, 2010, 08:24 PM
I attribute this to that the U.S. shooting market was "sold" on .270 Winchester as a hunting cartridge, and that's more or less where the .277" caliber has stayed. If you go up 0.007", there are tons of great 7mm bullets. Logically, .280 Remington aka 7mm-06 is a more versatile choice vs. the .270.

The .25-06 was a similar situation, the bullets were mainly hunting bullets. A few years ago Berger started producing bullets for the .25 with a BC as good or better then the .308 168 gr Match. I'm willing to bet they are producing the same bullet for .277.

I like the .308, I'm just not sold completely on it.

mickeydim468
March 17, 2010, 08:25 PM
I am of the theory that if you practice enough with any cartridge, you can become proficient at any range. Whether your bullet drops 32" or 132", as long as you know what to expect, you can compensate for it. I know that is a bit of an exaggeration, but you get my drift. I think rifle feel and component availability would be my determining factors in this case.

Mike

Silent Rifleman
March 17, 2010, 09:28 PM
^^ I handload these

http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct/?productNumber=740550

Ballistic Coefficient: 0.49

With 54 grains of H4350 behind them I am getting right at 3100 FPS out of an old tang Ruger 77.

Attached is the base Rangecard I use with mine. Again, it aint no benchrest gun, but it's hitting the 10 ring on a SR63 target at 300 yards as long as I hold it right. Pretty substantial recoil though.

Adair
March 17, 2010, 11:44 PM
I agree with everything Guiding101 said. The Savage/Stevens action is good enough that it is often used as a starting point for an economy custom highly accurate rifle. 308 has far more to offer in factory ammo, and mil surp (which is non-existent for 270). The 308 is easy to find all components for should you take up reloading. It is also easier on brass and barrels.

ArmedBear
March 18, 2010, 12:29 AM
I know that is a bit of an exaggeration

You haven't seen the Black Powder Cartridge guys, then.:)

A bit of a PITA for my taste (you'd best know your range very precisely), but 10 feet of drop doesn't phase some people.

DIM
March 18, 2010, 02:51 AM
I have both, but for target practice I use .308, since I reload both calibers, 308 proved to be more economical 46 gr vs 57gr, as far as bullets there are plenty out there for both, when I go after local white tail population I usually flip the coin... as far as rig get savage, they just came out with EDGE http://www.savagearms.com/firearms/model/edgexp
http://www.savagearms.com/firearms/model/edge
listed for $379 with a scope, if you shop around you will find them at much lower price


As far as thread about 54 grains of H4350 I disagree, it is hot load but I just don't see how. 53.5 grains of H4350 which is max load by Hodgdon clocked at 2994 fps adding 0.5gr will not push 135 grain bullet by 100 fps faster, but I would settle for 3050 ;-)

Ky Larry
March 18, 2010, 08:45 AM
Flip a coin for caliber. Both will be more than enough for your needs. When shopping for a rifle, don't forget to check the used rack. Lots of good deals this time of year for previously owned "deer" rifles. As someone stated earlier, you might be well served by shopping for the gun first and let it decide your caliber. Good luck.

Silent Rifleman
March 18, 2010, 09:13 AM
Ya know, it surprised me too, even had me questioning the integrity of my chrono, but the drops work out. I've never clocked one over 3100, but the majority of them are ~3075

snooperman
March 18, 2010, 09:23 AM
Mine shoots flatter than my 308 at those distances and I find it more accurate as well at those same distances. However, each gun is different and I could not argue this with other shooters for that reason. I am sure there are 308 guns that would out-perform my 270 at those targets.

DIM
March 18, 2010, 10:03 AM
Choosing scope for 300 yards I wouldn't go more then 9x zoom, I used my for 500 yd in .308 which groups 2.8" - 3". As far as brand, I would go with Nikon Buckmaster or even Prostuff and I wouldn't bother with BDC unless you stick to the same bullet and same load. Vortex, is another brand you might try, they make reasonably priced entry level scopes http://www.vortexoptics.com/category/riflescopes

heeler
March 18, 2010, 10:06 AM
I no longer own a 270 although I have owned two in the past and killed many a Texas Whitetail buck with them.
Hogs too.
I prefer a 308 mainly because I can get them in a short action carbine which I really prefer for slow walk hunting.
But either will more than suffice for the task at hand and both have ammo readily available in small town outlets such as gas stations, food stores, hardware stores,etc.
The 270 is a very flat shooting cartridge.

thomis
March 19, 2010, 08:30 AM
If a choice comes down to the two rifles mentioned in previous posts, the Weatherby Vanguard and the Savage Stevens or new Edge... remember the Savage is made in USA. The Vanguard, not.
Decision made.

If you enjoyed reading about "Need Advice!! .270 vs .308" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!