270 win the best?

I'm a huge .270 Win fan, been using a couple for years, killed many, many deer (mulies, whitetails and a couple blacktails), 5 chamois, and a couple Russian boar.

I don't believe it's the perfect deer caliber, unless you assign a whole lot of parameters to eliminate other useful cartridges. For instance, it's in no way, shape or form the perfect woods caliber for whitetail. IF shots are also limited to around 150yds, it offers excessive energy and velocity that aren't needed. While it's accurate enough for hunting, it's not known as a target caliber.

Then there's the rifle set up. My .270s were both set up for open country 24" barrels, high magnification scopes. This past season I hunted from a ground blind a couple times. My compact M7 in .260 was still at the smiths, so I dragged my long action, 24" .270 into a ground blind. It freaking sucked maneuvering that thing when compared to either of my short action, 20" barreled guns. My 20" barreled 7lb Rem M7 in .260 offers the same capability with less recoil and loses about 30 yds in effective range IF you go with the MPBR way of doing things.

The .270 Win has a "niche" in the deer hunting world, but with the newer cartridges and associated twist rates that "niche" is getting much smaller, if it even exists. IF I was looking for another "open country deer rifle" tomorrow, and wanted a .277 it would be a .270 WSM with a fast twist barrel or a 6.8 Western (which will come with the faster twist), both are shortish action cartridges, both are or can be set up to take advantage of long high BC bullets and both offer a velocity advantage over the .270Win.

I've proabably told this before, but I had an old friend who was a fan of both 257 Roberts and 7mmRM; a handloader and knew well that the 7 was a bit of overkill - on both ends for 200 yd whitetails. So being a handloader (we all know what that means) he was loading the 257 up and the 7 down. One day he proudly announced that he was loading the 257 up to "almost a 270" and in the next breath, the 7 down to "about a 270". At that point, I pulled a 270 cartridge out of my pocket and stood it on the table between his two rounds and said to him "there, I've got something just as good as a 270". He grumbled that I just don't get it, and wandered off mumbling to himself. He was right.

There’s one of these “.270 s the greatest round ever” threads about every six months. I don’t understand why .270 shooters feel so inadequate and insecure that they need constant validation of their choices.

redneck2 said:

There’s one of these “.270 s the greatest round ever” threads about every six months. I don’t understand why .270 shooters feel so inadequate and insecure that they need constant validation of their choices.

Click to expand...

LOL! I think there's some truth in that post!

WisBorn said:

The 270win is ok and even better if your name is Jack and Winchester is providing you with all the ammo and rifles to hunt with.

Click to expand...

I can't say that Winchester didn't slip Jack a couple bucks on the side, but his .270 rifles were custom built on M70 actions and he was a handloader. Just to set the facts straight.

I think that there are many great choices in deer calibers. Some excel at longer ranges better than others, none are worse at short range than they are at long range .With proper shot placement on the part of the shooter and a round with decent terminal performance, deer are not that difficult to kill. As for me, I prefer 6.5 CM in a light sporter like a Ruger American, shooting a 140 grain SP load that the rifle likes, for any application with deer and most others in the lower 48. It is a lightweight low recoiling rifle (like a 243) - which pays dividends when firing offhand (no support) from something like an elevated stand in a "less than perfect" position, firing a bullet weight in the 270 Win weight class. The 6.5 is short action, and I have never heard of a 6.5 that doesn't exhibit good inherent accuracy. A 140 grain 6.5 CM also has 40% greater projectile weight than the typical 243, with velocity closer to what a 308 puts out. With a good scope with variable power, I can dial it down to the lower end of the power for a great field of view at the shorter ranges where most deer are shot, or increase the power for a longer shot like across a pasture. Remember that the ACOG issued in the army (4X) on a standard M4 is more than capable of consistent head shots on an E type sillouette by an average marksman using garbage SS109 green tip at 200 yards. An illuminated reticle is a terrific feature for those deer that pop out during the last few minutes of legal shooting light, esp. if you are hunting from thick tree cover or from inside of a popup blind or box blind, where useable light during those waning moments is compromised. This is what I prefer and why, as an effective setup for most any situation. I have also been successful with many other calibers and setups- in the recent past I have dropped deer with 30-30 and 30-40 Krag with iron sighted rifles, as have many thousands of other hunters. My blacktail I took in the mountains a couple years ago I used a 300 Win mag with a Carl Zeiss scope- at 80 yards.

Laphroaig said:

I can't say that Winchester didn't slip Jack a couple bucks on the side, but his .270 rifles were custom built on M70 actions and he was a handloader. Just to set the facts straight.

Click to expand...

If Jack used a 280Rem where do you think the popularity would be?
No internet forums.
Outdoor Life was where hunters went to learn about what was new.

I’m the same way with rifle calibers if I am with cars. I am not very loyal to any of them, I do have preferences. I am a fan of the 270. I am a fan of the seven mag. I am a fan of the 257 Roberts. I am a fan of the 308. I am a fan of the 7MM-08. I am a fan of the 300 PRC. This list could go on for a very long time. I think I just need to get one of each.

WisBorn said:

If Jack used a 280Rem where do you think the popularity would be?
No internet forums.
Outdoor Life was where hunters went to learn about what was new.

Click to expand...

Please note: Jack was a big fan of the 7×57 also. He would have loved the 7mm-08!

Na. I’d give the nod to 308 or 7mm-08 over the 270 Win. I don’t have any axe to grind with the 270 Win, but I don’t think it does anything that the 308, 7mm-08 or even the 6.5 Creedmoor can’t do in a shorter action with a shorter barrel. Of course, I find myself more and more using a suppressor these days and so barrel length and overall length matter more to me than they might matter to the average American hunter.

That said, I certainly appreciate your level of commitment.

the 270 is a good deer cartridge out to normal hunting ranges. It's somewhat unstable bullet actually helps it with bullet upset in game. But it also hurts accuracy. It was a wildcat round that claimed to be faster and flatter before chronographs or scientific design. Turns out any advantage claimed by O'conner was pure myth. The round, unlike any other in it's category, was not developed as a match or military round and has never been successful in major rifle matches. That makes it the most over rated round but still a decent hunting round. Much superior rounds would be just about anything else. 7-08, 308, 30-06, 7 MM RM mag etc. All record setting accuracy rounds in their day and more powerful. But the 270 is plenty good enough for deer hunting.

Maybe yes, maybe no, all depends. For me, .30-30 east of the big river and .270/7mmRM west of the big river. And .45-70 everywhere I want to stomp stuff flat so it does not run off.

3C

troy fairweather said:

The 6.5cm is the man bun, but the 270win is the ponytail.

Click to expand...

Sorry…not sure what that means…

Are you saying an updated cartridge with improved long range ballistics that used faster twists and higher BC’s to produce more power and improved accuracy at extended ranges is somehow less masculine?

redneck2 said:

There’s one of these “.270 s the greatest round ever” threads about every six months. I don’t understand why .270 shooters feel so inadequate and insecure that they need constant validation of their choices.

Click to expand...

Its for the same reasons 9mm, .40 and .45 guys…and even worse, Ford, Chevy and Dodge guys, pull their pants open and wet all over each others charcoal; it gives folks something to talk about when hunting season is over.

For deer hunting I have .223, .243, .257 Robts, 6.5x55, .270, 7mm RemM, .30-30, .308, .300WhbyM, .35 Rem. and .45/70 rifles to pick from. Each has its highs and lows, no one caliber (or rifle) is perfect for every situation.

Stay safe.

Once when I was carrying a 270 Winchester for a deer rifle, I spotted an average sized, 2-point mule deer buck on the other side of the canyon. He was standing with his rear end to me, and he obviously didn't have any idea I was even around.
Overestimating his range (I guessed him to be close to 300 yards away), I sat down, put the crosshairs right on the top of his head, and squeezed the trigger. In an instant the deer went down - it looked like my 130gr Hornady .270 bullet had actually driven his head forward a little bit when it struck. However, the deer jumped right back up and took off down the hill, disappearing into some sagebrush and small quaking aspen trees.
So, I hiked over there and started looking around. It wasn't more than a minute or two before that deer (minus his left antler) jumped up right in front of me, and I shot him in the back of the head. He went down for good that time, and we had venison liver and onions for dinner in camp that night.
So that proved it - if I hadn't been using a flat-shooting 270 Winchester, I would have hit that deer in the back of his head with my first shot instead of just taking off one of his antlers. DARN all those flat-shooting 270 Winchesters!

txcookie said:

I love the 243 that 65cm would just be great its like a 270 light in my eyes. Elk on down but with no real recoil. I just don't like it's over hype as the greatest at everything. For a short action it's pretty tough to beat

Click to expand...

I agree, it’s not the greatest at everything. I also agree it’s not much, if any better or worse than most other quality 6.5 to 6.8 caliber cartridges including the .270, out to 400 yards.

But past 4-500 yards…much beyond…it is clearly superior. Doesn’t mean much to hunters, but for folks in the PRS sport, or who just like to make steel ring at 1200 yards and beyond, it’s a lot easier with a cartridges built for the task. And you can do it with a $500 hunting rifle.

txcookie said:

I'd disagree the bc never really lies and the number favor the 270 win to be an accurate cartridge. My rem cdl has zero issue printing .5 moa with game kings. I'm not sure why one would claim that 130 grain bullet can't fly right?

Click to expand...

BC isn't everything but I am not going to argue. Why don't you enter a major match and see how you do. And why not just shoot sewing needles out of your rifle. Oh and which National match was I wrong about.

Actually, the .270 kinda approaches the best. Just a little anemic.

If you’d just round up a little to .284 to get better B.C., heavier bullets, and add say 15 grains of powder to get some speed, you’d be good to go.

Maybe add a way cool, accuracy enhancing belt while you’re at it and you’d achieve near perfection.

redneck2 said:

Actually, the .270 kinda approaches the best. Just a little anemic.

If you’d just round up a little to .284 to get better B.C., heavier bullets, and add say 15 grains of powder to get some speed, you’d be good to go.

Maybe add a way cool, accuracy enhancing belt while you’re at it and you’d achieve near perfection

Click to expand...

Sounds like a 7mm Mag???

WisBorn said:

Sounds like a 7mm Mag???

Click to expand...

You mean somebody already came up with my idea?

redneck2 said:

You mean somebody already came up with my idea?

Click to expand...

Winner Winner Chicken Dinner!