.270 vs .30-06 (POLL)

.270 vs .30-06 if primary use will be WI whitetail


  • Total voters
    296
Status
Not open for further replies.
I've been using a 30/06 for 40 years. The 30/06 does anything I could ever need it to do.I have never shot anything with a .270. I voted .270. When I bought an 06 I wanted either 30/06 or .270. I have never regretted the 30/06.....but have no doubt the .270 would have done all I needed as well. It should shoot a bit flatter and kick a smidge less.....but the differences are almost inconsequential. Today I wouldn't choose either. I would choose a 7mm-08. Lots of cartridges are good all around medium to large game rounds. The ones that kick less are generally preferable in my opinion.
 
This will be my one hunting rifle. Will be used mostly for Wisconsin whitetail but would like to know that I could head out west and hunt larger game as I would like to do that at some point. If you want to comment, cool. If not, just vote. Curious to see how this goes. I'm guessing 70/30 in favor of .30-06. Ive got my eyes on a couple Weatherby Mark V's. One is a deluxe in .270 which I prefer the looks of and the other is an Ultralight in .30-06 which I don't like the looks of as much but I do appreciate a lightweight rifle. Again, no need for a flame fest, just want to see primarily how people vote given the situation. Part of me feels that with modern bullet design, technology, and construction, no reason the performance gap hasn't closed a bit between the .270 and -06. The other part of me wants the option of a bigger bullet and a slightly more readily available cartridge with a storied past.
I have noticed on these rifle boards that the larger caliber always gets more love. So if your choice were for example 260 vs. 270, 270 would win, or in another case if you asked 17HMR vs. 22WMR, 22 would win, or if you asked 7mm Rem Mag Vs. 300 Win Mag, 300 would win. There is just some kind of "bigger " bias and I can not understand it totally.
For me 270 is the winner especially in a 24" barrel and sighted in 3" high at 100 yds. This was called for in Jack O'Connor's excellent " Know your big game rifle" https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...FjAAegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw2zJ3HIdOSG6b0qbKWLyjF8

The 270 Win with good old 130 gr. Sierras, 140 gr. Accubonds, or 150 Interbonds is just plain deadly.
https://www.hornady.com/bullets/rifle/270-cal-277-150-gr-interbond#!/
 
Bring enough gun for the game and the terrain. Wisconsin deer, it won’t matter. “Out West hunting” it might, but between those two, no practical difference. I might vote .308 based on the number of caliber specific scopes made to mate with it that offer easy to use dials if you know your range. I have 2 -06s and 2 in 6.5 Creedmoor, can’t say at typical hunting distance I’d prefer any of them over the others based on killin power.
 
My choice is the 280 Remington.

Between the two you are looking at, I voted for the 30-06. I just feel it's a more versatile round.

But there is nothing wrong with the 270. I just personally think it's a bit on the light side for the largest of game.
 
Does that weatherby stock design transfer the recoil into your shoulder at a different angle or something?
It's a straighter recoil direction and the cheekpiece is higher and fatter toward the back so as the rifle recoils, it pulls away from the cheekbone instead of banging into it. The Savage stock had more drop and the comb was high, resulting in more "savage" felt recoil.
 
It's a straighter recoil direction and the cheekpiece is higher and fatter toward the back so as the rifle recoils, it pulls away from the cheekbone instead of banging into it. The Savage stock had more drop and the comb was high, resulting in more "savage" felt recoil.

Picher nailed it.
 
For most shots at game, say under 300 yards, both the .270 Win and .30-06, with decent bullets, have more power than needed to kill the game being hunted, even big deer. Finding the right bullet for the game is the key. I've seen lots of hunters choose bullets that are too heavily constructed, or so heavy that the trajectory isn't as good as it could be with the right projectile for the cartridge.

I like bullets for the '.06 in the 150-165 grain range and 130 for the .270. Bullet construction is the next consideration. Some are too tough, as I found some batches of Hornady GMX for .270 and '06. Conversely, we had an early batch of Nosler Ballistic Tips that were too fragile, actually "blowing up" on a small lung-shot doe at about 60 yards. (a 3"+/- chest exit hole and tissue blown out in a 10 foot cone behind the deer).

Speaking of bullets, Winchester's "Deer Season" factory ammo in .270 and .243 seems well-designed and is quite accurate in my rifles. I'm planning to use them this fall, unless further testing finds fault with them.
 
30-06 Only rifle I've ever used except some lever actions in different calibers. Can get ammo anywhere. Thats what made me pick 30-06 over every thing else. IMG_1314.JPG
 
I chose 270 simply because recoil is less. Years ago, I suffered two broken collar bones in a motorcycle accident and recoil has bothered me ever since. My main deer rifle is a Glenfield 30-30 fitted with a 1 inch recoil pad.

TR
 
This will be my one hunting rifle. Will be used mostly for Wisconsin whitetail but would like to know that I could head out west and hunt larger game as I would like to do that at some point. If you want to comment, cool. If not, just vote. Curious to see how this goes. I'm guessing 70/30 in favor of .30-06. Ive got my eyes on a couple Weatherby Mark V's. One is a deluxe in .270 which I prefer the looks of and the other is an Ultralight in .30-06 which I don't like the looks of as much but I do appreciate a lightweight rifle. Again, no need for a flame fest, just want to see primarily how people vote given the situation. Part of me feels that with modern bullet design, technology, and construction, no reason the performance gap hasn't closed a bit between the .270 and -06. The other part of me wants the option of a bigger bullet and a slightly more readily available cartridge with a storied past.

Of these 2 RIFLE choices, the Mark V Ultralight is a rifle I seriously desired 16-18 years ago. There was even one in .30-06 on the used rack at what was one of my favorite local gunshops. Luckily (?) I was 18 and saving for college classes and didn't buy it.

However, a .30-06 in a sub 6-lb rifle is going to kick quite hard. Like .300 Magnum hard. Now I've had a 6-lb single-shot .45-70 that earned the nickname "The Punisher", and I'm not sure I want to try to zero that Ultralight in -06 if it takes more than a couple of 3-shot groups. Repeated exposure to that level of recoil doesn't in fact do good things for your shooting habits. (After shooting a few rounds through that .45-70 I mentioned, I'd tense up shooting my 14-lb AR-15 target rifle for the first few strings, until my subconscious re-learned I wasn't going to get smacked around every trigger pull.)

Now, if you were to consider getting the Ultralight in a .308 or 7mm-08, I think you'd have a much more shootable rifle, which would still be perfectly adequate for whitetails to 300 yards. With 150 to 165 grain bullets, there isn't enough performance difference between the odd-six and the .308 to lose any sleep over. And I might not agree with the "1/4-1/3 less" recoil jmr40 quoted earlier, but the .308 DOES kick less than the odd-six. I have my grandfather's old tang-safety Ruger 77 in .308 and a Remington 700 ADL in .30-06, that weigh about the same all dressed up. (I don't have a postage scale but I'd ball-park 8-ish pounds each.) There's no doubt in my mind the .308 is easier to shoot, even after putting half a box of ammo through the odd-six to get "tenderized" first.

So yeah, I'd vote "other" if it was an option and say find a Weatherby Ultralight in .308.
 
Of these 2 RIFLE choices, the Mark V Ultralight is a rifle I seriously desired 16-18 years ago. There was even one in .30-06 on the used rack at what was one of my favorite local gunshops. Luckily (?) I was 18 and saving for college classes and didn't buy it.

However, a .30-06 in a sub 6-lb rifle is going to kick quite hard. Like .300 Magnum hard. Now I've had a 6-lb single-shot .45-70 that earned the nickname "The Punisher", and I'm not sure I want to try to zero that Ultralight in -06 if it takes more than a couple of 3-shot groups. Repeated exposure to that level of recoil doesn't in fact do good things for your shooting habits. (After shooting a few rounds through that .45-70 I mentioned, I'd tense up shooting my 14-lb AR-15 target rifle for the first few strings, until my subconscious re-learned I wasn't going to get smacked around every trigger pull.)

Now, if you were to consider getting the Ultralight in a .308 or 7mm-08, I think you'd have a much more shootable rifle, which would still be perfectly adequate for whitetails to 300 yards. With 150 to 165 grain bullets, there isn't enough performance difference between the odd-six and the .308 to lose any sleep over. And I might not agree with the "1/4-1/3 less" recoil jmr40 quoted earlier, but the .308 DOES kick less than the odd-six. I have my grandfather's old tang-safety Ruger 77 in .308 and a Remington 700 ADL in .30-06, that weigh about the same all dressed up. (I don't have a postage scale but I'd ball-park 8-ish pounds each.) There's no doubt in my mind the .308 is easier to shoot, even after putting half a box of ammo through the odd-six to get "tenderized" first.

So yeah, I'd vote "other" if it was an option and say find a Weatherby Ultralight in .308.
Good insight. The only -06- I've shot were easily 7+ lbs and kicked pretty hard. The 9+ pound m1 garand was quite shootable but still a pig so it dissipated a lot if that recoil. I am personally somewhat fond of the idea of 7mm-08 after reading about it so you never know. We'll see what else floats along.
 
I use a PAST recoil shield on my shoulder when shooting heavy-recoiling rifles from the bench. Sometimes I even put a sand-filled bank-bag between my shoulder and the rifle butt. It's hard to shoot well when the rifle is kicking the heck out of you! I learned, when sighting-in several rifles for customers that discretion is better than bruising.
 
I chose the 270. It will do as well as an "aught six" on any game in N America. I have never been in a store that sold center
fire rifle ammo that didn't have a couple of selections of both 270 and 06. I have been using a Stainless Stalker in 270 for 30 years. Nothing I have shot has run off. Most were DRT. I do not feel under gunned when on the few Colorado elk hunts I have been a part of. While I have not been presented a shot my brother has taken two nice bulls. Both taken with a 270. One shot kills at 200 and 300 yards. I however would not go after the brown bears with a 270, but I would not with a 30-06 either. My bear gun would start with a 4.
 
I have noticed on these rifle boards that the larger caliber always gets more love. So if your choice were for example 260 vs. 270, 270 would win, or in another case if you asked 17HMR vs. 22WMR, 22 would win, or if you asked 7mm Rem Mag Vs. 300 Win Mag, 300 would win. There is just some kind of "bigger " bias and I can not understand it totally.
For me 270 is the winner especially in a 24" barrel and sighted in 3" high at 100 yds. This was called for in Jack O'Connor's excellent " Know your big game rifle" https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...FjAAegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw2zJ3HIdOSG6b0qbKWLyjF8

The 270 Win with good old 130 gr. Sierras, 140 gr. Accubonds, or 150 Interbonds is just plain deadly.
https://www.hornady.com/bullets/rifle/270-cal-277-150-gr-interbond#!/
I used the 140 Accubonds for my moose last year. The 860 lb (dressed) critter was down and out at 270 yards within 15 yards of where I shot it in the old haul road.
 
The real answer is a 7 Mag. Shoots flatter than either of your choices and has a tremendous selection of bullets.

Actually, there is no right (or wrong) answer. Guys get all wrapped around the axle about a few hundredths in bullet diameter. As Art said, Bambi don’t care. I’d pay more attention to the rifle itself and the scope rather than the caliber.

I don’t know that there is another sport where guys argue so vehemently over totally meaingless differences
 
Last edited:
I've found that a 30-06 loaded with 200NP's is BIG medicine and I'm not alone in that thinking.

Here's what one of the most respected bear guides in Alaska thinks,

standard.jpg

MY experience falls right in with Phil's...

DM
 
I don’t know that there is another sport where guys argue so vehemently over totally meaingless differences

Meaningless??? My personal hero, (insert name here) in his excellent book, (insert title here) clearly states that the (insert caliber here) is far superior to sliced bread and many gun magazines (at the time) agreed.
 
Get the better looking one.........

I live in MT, and have hunted with both cartridges. No real performance difference in the field, however lightweight rifles are not nearly as much fun to shoot. I owned a Winchester Featherweight in .270 and it kicked like a mule while my .30-06 is relatively pleasant to shoot.

Also, the Featherweight's groups would open up as the barrel heated. Neither of these are a big deal if you are only firing a few shots in the field, but not great if you plan to shoot it at the range on a regular basis.

Some stock work might have helped but I went with plan B and switched to a heavier gun.

Last but not least, there is something to be said for a rifle that brings a smile to your face every time you look at it.

YMMV
 
Either cartridge should be more than sufficient for the primary purpose. I voted for the 30-06. Just because I think it would be fun to handload for the variety of bullets available.
 
I don’t know that there is another sport where guys argue so vehemently over totally meaingless differences.

That is where the fun lies! As long as we can smile at the end, sit down, open a nice single malt and argue over which Muscle Car is best, it's great!:)
(Dodge Hellcat, again, obviously.):D
 
Surely we all agree when it comes to Muscle Cars. Right? Actually, seeing guys like Big Daddy and Roger Gustafson screaming down the track is my idea of Muscle Car.


9FB7E3E1-F25D-4F46-87C7-73AA28FCEC8E.jpeg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top