Is there a good .270 Winchester load for the American deer woods?

d2wing said:

Did I just feed a Troll??

Click to expand...

No, Savage 99 notwithstanding, I might still find a classic bolt-action rifle someday I like that just so happens to be a .270 such as a Husqvarna Model 3000 Crown Grade. I want to primarily hunt woods deer. It would be a shame to dismiss such a gun because there is no perfect factory .270 loading for it for my purposes. Even if there is a perfect factory .270 loading for the American deer woods in terms of conserving meat, how much does this stuff cost round per round and how readily available is it?

Ugly Sauce said:

I think the point of the post is how to reduce the amount of meat damage from a .270 at close range, rather than if it would kill a deer under 200 yards. Don't be such a grump.

Click to expand...

Ugly Sauce, thank you. BINGO!

Let's forget about rifle makes/models and just focus on the cartridge itself.

This OP was inspired by my favorite YouTube gun expert extraordinaire, Mr. Gun Blue 490. He claims that the velocity of the .270 Winchester has to be reduced to a figure about 2,700-ish with a 150-grain bullet to be a perfect deer killer at closer ranges and that hyper velocity typical of .270 in light 130 bullets is a close-range meat ruiner. He claimed that years ago, ammo makers offered such loadings but that nowadays one might have to take up the loading bench to achieve such ballistics. Younger generations of hunters seem to be dismissing this famous Jack O'Connor caliber for 6.5 Creedmoor or some other newfangled 20-something caliber cartridge. The question really should be can one still easily find factory .270 ammo in a sub-2,800-fps velocity?

.45Coltguy said:

Look at my post about rogers. Your ammo is there.

Click to expand...

Velocity, please? Never mind, thank you for your input, I found out on Google that they do 2,830 fps. A bit too speedy still and a bit too pricey at nearly $1.50 a pop. I have to now stick with an American .30-something for a possible future deer rifle. Preferably good ol' .308 Winchester.

JCSC said:

130 partition and broadside vital shot. DRT.

I see lots of people take shoulder and neck shots and you should expect to have significant loss.

shoot your gun like a bow and you’ll be fine with whatever.

Click to expand...

Broadside? It sounds like quartering to shots are not feasible for conserving meat since one needs to punch through shoulder with that presentation by the animal.

Hugger-4641 said:

If I had to use a .270 for deer, I'd get the Norma Whitetail 130gr.

Click to expand...

For strict broadside shots to the vitals?

Will a .308 150 bullet at 2,800+ fps do any more damage to meat through the shoulder on a quartering-to shot than a .270 150 bullet at 2,700-2,800 fps at close range? Is meat damage at any range a toss-up between .270 and .308 in the same bullet weight with the same shot presentation?

.45Coltguy said:

'Bacon, did you read Roverguy's post? A good call.

Click to expand...

Yes, I did. It seems like he doesn't want a .270 especially within the shooting lane limits of wooded cover. Wooded cover means close shots most likely. It seems like short-action cartridges are better for shorter ranges and for faster cycling action. One must be hasty to get a shot off at a deer in heavier cover. It seems like .308 and .300 Savage are ideal woods calibers for bolt-actions and the exclusive Savage 99 lever job with its non-tubular magazine. The Savage 99 is the only lever-action rifle ever designed to handle ballistically superior spitzer cartridges that were originally bolt-action material. Perhaps, .30-06 and .270 are better for plains, desert, meadows, field and mountains. The lever gun is often touted for its handiness in the woods. My grandfather had a Husqvarna Model 3000 Crown Grade in .308. It seems that this bolt-action rifle had an ideal caliber for even wooded cover. His early-'60's Swedish-made classic also sported iron sights and a front bead hood. The gun was also drilled/tapped for a glass sight. It would seem that this gun might work for deer in more open areas as well as in the smaller fields. The .308 will handle ranges up to which no ethical deer hunter of this caliber should ever exceed being 400 yards tops. 300 yards is MPBR for the .308. The other "longer-range" cartridges including the .270 have a similar MPBR. Hold-over might be needed out to 400 yards. A crafty and patient hunter should be able to stealthily close in on a 'lope on the plains or an elk in the meadow to about 300 yards.

NMachine said:

Uhhh.....Browning BLR, Henry Long Ranger,

Click to expand...

oh, don't know about those: my grandfather had a 99 and that's all I know: much of what I know about guns is what has been in my family, I have owned or I have fired in the service

d2wing said:

I strongly disagree about using slower heavier bullets unless you are a good tracker. The faster bullets mean faster kills. I wouldn't worry much about damaging a front shoulder. The difference in bullets isn't going to mean much anyway as far as meat damage. The 270 is a good hunting bullet because it is fast in light bullets and upsets easier than some others. If you really want to conserve meat use a much slower bullet. A 150 308 is better in everyway anyway. Or some other round like a 30-30.
I also agree that you need to find a real expert. I don't think he is right about that 2700 figure anyway. This is a silly discussion. if you think that guy is an expert why pose questions on here.

Click to expand...

The underlying question I was putting out was about the current availability of .270 ammo factory-loaded with slower heavy bullets, 150+ grains/2,700-fps- (minus). My expert claimed that there were no such current offerings to the best of his knowledge. He gave me the impression the factory ammo market may have abandoned sensible .270 loads for wooded-cover hunting. I wanted to see what people here know about what our current choices are in .270 Winchester ammunition unless most here don't even worry about velocity. I am not a handloader, by the way. Mr. GunBlue is a devout handloader who claims he can easily whip up some slow-moving .270 loads on his bench. Heavier bullets with reduced powder charges. No problem for him. The bottom line, the .270 might not be the best choice in the world for Year 2022 hunters who don't handload and who do hunt in wooded cover a lot.

I don't own a chronograph to speed test my ammo also. The .270 Winchester is based upon the .30-06. A big case pushing a smaller bullet. It's like a 454 motor in a Chevy Vega body. The last time I hunted deer was with a Browning A-Bolt II in the woods in .25-06 Remington. The loads were 117 gr. Federal Premium BTSP. My dinky California blacktail yearling buck about 100 pounds soaking wet on the hoof was taken in a forest shooting lane of about 100 yards. Now, we are talking about a dinky fly-weight bullet coming out of an aught-six case at a blazing 3,100+ fps. This is like a 454 motor in a Chevy Chevette! The buck was quartering toward me at 45 degrees. I mistakenly aimed behind the shoulder and tore up his paunches. I later realized I should have aimed more forward to punch through his shoulder and into his vitals. I don't know how much meat damage would have been done otherwise if I had proper placement on the shot. It was all gut damage. There was a rib broken in two. There was no meat damage that I can remember. The paunch-wounded buck had travelled about a 1/2 mile and was found 45 minutes later dead in a small depression in the side of a hill.

In one of his videos, Mr. GunBlue490 dismisses the .25-06 as a deer cartridge that actually makes his cut. It may cause meat damage in the case of actual proper placement. It's a screamer for speed.