.270 or .270 WSM?

[ed dixon]

My next purchase is going to be a Springfield Armory Mil-Spec, but after that comes a centerfire bolt gun for deer, target, etc. So the other day I asked to handle a nice-looking Savage at the local arms emporium and it hefted and came to my shoulder like a long lost puppy. Stainless, laminated stock, 24" barrel. I thought it was a .270 Win. but when I got home and went on Savage's website I realized it was .270 WSM and doesn't come in the plain old .270. I liked the feel of this rifle so much that I was ready to give up the .308/.30-06 debate and go with a nice .270 and even searched for threads here and at TFL to support the choice. My dilemma is: now that I know I can only get the Savage (as described) in the short fatty, should I go for it or get a Winchester Sporter in the venerable non-mag .270? I started reloading during the past year and would probably load most of my own ammo no matter which way I went. All opinions welcome.

 

[cratz2]

Why not the 270 WSM in a Winchester? I'm a big fan of Ruger and Winchester bolt rifles and they are my first two choices among the American companies. Nothing against Browning, I just don't have enough experience with them to have a solid opinion other than a general, 'Good!'

As for caliber selection, I guess that's a purely personal call. Are you the type of guy that likes to be cutting edge or are you happy with old cartridges that have been killing game for 75 years? The 270 WSM is as fast with a 150 Gr bullet as the old 270 is with a 130 Gr. There should be more recoil. but to tell you the truth, I can tell much between my ADL in 270 and my friends Winchester 70 Laminate though his rifle might weigh a bit more than mine. Still, point is I couldn't tell a big difference... at least not as big as I expected.

According to Chuck Hawks page, the WSM adds about 5 to 20 yards of point blank range with the 150 Gr loads benefiting more from the short magnum, as expected. Is this worth having fewer factory loadings? Do you need that many factory loadings? WSM ammo is going to be a bit pricier in some locals than 270 Win.

How I see it, what it comes down to is if you're planning on mostly shooting 130 Gr bullets, the difference is too slight to even argue over. If you plan on using the 150s, it might be. I've long been a fan of the 25-06 and the 270 and have no intentions of selling either of these rifles. But if I didn't own a 270, I would strongly consider the Winchester Short Magnum.

 

[rugerfreak]

I would have to repeat that---if you don't already have a .270 the .270WSM is the way to go----no matter which rifle you pick.

 

[Art Eatman]

IMO, 95% of the deal is the fit and feel. I'd rather buy a cheap rifle that fit well than be given a finely crafted custom rifle that didn't fit.

Starting from scratch on a hunting rifle, the WSM stuff is as good a way to go as there is. I'd recommend the reloading, of course, since I'm a cheapskate and also because of being able to download for less thump at the shoulder during less-serious shooting.

While there are generally fewer choices in bullet selection in .277, that's pretty much unimportant to a hunter. There are more than enough to do what is needed.

, Art

 

[WYO]

Even for someone who reloads, it costs more money and time to acquire components and to experiment with cartridges that may be a passing fad than it is to stick with the old standby cartridges for which components and data are plentiful. If you plan to shoot a lot, it could be a hinderance. I am in sort of a “back to basics†mode right now, having realized how cheap and easy it is to shoot milsurp ammo, and the POI is close to premium hunting ammo. For someone who only shoots a couple of boxes of ammo a year, has a particular niche for the rifle, likes unique or new cartridges, or the rifle fits better than available alternatives, then maybe the WSM is a good idea. For a general “I need to consider a bolt rifle to get two rifles down the road,†maybe something a little more standard is better.

 

[Art Eatman]

WYO, he's already reloading. A set of dies and a box of 100 bullets is about the same cost as two boxes of quality ammo, even for a stock .270.

, Art

 

[cratz2]

Personally, I would stick with the Winchester Short Magnums in 270 and 300. And I really don't think either will be a passing fad. Now the Super Short Magnums in 223 and 243... I don't know. I don'n need a bullet to go any faster than a 22-250 or 220 Swift can push it or for it to be any more accurate than my Savage 22-250, but that's just me.

 

[ed dixon]

I like the feel of the Win. 70 too, but then I hear as early as this fall most of the Savages may be getting the Accutrigger... hmm. How much does the short action of the .270 WSM add to its desirability?

 

[Art Eatman]

I've always liked a longer barrel for the ballistic advantage; I've always liked the least amount of weight to carry since I'm mostly a walking hunter. A 24" WSM seems to offer the best of both worlds because of that short action.

I wouldn't sell my '06 to buy a .300 WSM, but if I were starting from scratch I'd get the WSM. Since I'm a handloader, I can always load down for plinking or hunting smaller deer...

Art

 

[ed dixon]

Thanks. Art, you're persuasive as usual. Since I don't have them to shoot, looks like I'll be hefting the Winnie and the Savage .270 WSM for comparison before I throw down the lucre. Still have a couple months till the decision. I've come to realize that every caliber out there has its groupies, but my budget's limited, so I'm looking for the one that sings to me. Thanks, folks. New opinions still welcome.

 

[Art Eatman]

Well, you know me and my "Whatcha gonna do with it?" bit. Face it: Most any cartridge from .243 on up will take most of the big game of the lower 48. The limits are shooting and stalking skills, and the discipline to know the "clean kill" range. After that, it's the various costs of shooting and the personal preference thing.

Same sort of thing for rifles. There are few which won't shot plenty good for most hunting. So, fit, then cost and then aesthetics come before brand name, IMO.

The value of THR is the opportunity to "think out loud" before spending money.

, Art