270 Win. In brush country?

Status
Not open for further replies.
WOW, we posted the same exact video at the same time, your reply was not there when I started typing :-O

I watched the whole video a couple months ago. It may not "prove" anything scientifically but it's the reason I'm bringing my .44 Mag 1894 instead of my 30-06 to a very brushy island I'm hunting in a month...

Funny how that works sometimes like if folks were synchronized.
Buffalo bore has some bad ass 44 mag loads for deep penetration.
I guess it depends on what you want to harvest.
If you run into large mangrove nothing will get trough that stuff.
 
It's always interesting to learn where these "facts" originate. But the creators of such facts seem forever to remain as elusive as the facts themselves.

Offhand,
There is absolutely nothing elusive about momentum.
It is so important, not just in these situations, but also in certain competitions where it becomes a requirement, also known as power factor.
Obviously we are talking specialty use here where you compensate speed with section and grain.

facts = physics = math.
 
These are the facts.
Here a comparative for anyone confused about the importance of momentum vs. energy.
Power factor is a fancy ballistics word for momentum. Momentum is what gets things knock down.

More energy, less momentum.

upload_2017-9-12_16-13-3.png

Less energy, more momentum.
upload_2017-9-12_16-13-35.png
 
There is absolutely nothing elusive about momentum.
Are you talking about the "momentum" that rips the thin jacket of a 400 grain bullet from a .45/70 when it hits a slender tree branch, rendering it useless. Or the momentum of a high speed .270 bullet that continues on its way to the intended target. If you want to talk physics, I'm our man, it's my business. But first we use apples against apples: steel balls: big slow ones and little fast ones. Go do your math and get back to us.
 
Few years back I had a shot at a HUGE buck. Had watched him bedded down for maybe 30 minutes. He was directly silhouetted against the setting sun when he stood up. 40 yards, broadside. 12 gauge with copper solids. I could hit a tennis ball at 125 yards consistently

Three shots, all missed.

I couldn't see the small willow bush in the sunlight that was in front of my muzzle, maybe 10-12 feet away. Branches maybe the size of a lead pencil or smaller. The myth of a brush buster is that. A myth.
I am with Redneck on this one. The 270 will work fine if you don't shoot through the brush. The trick is to shoot through the holes in the brush.

I shot at a doe with a 300gr. XTP out of a 50 cal black powder gun at a range of maybe 50 or 60 yards. The deer took off, stopped after about 50 yards and worked it's leg up and down a few times waiting for me to reload. Then it bailed off of a steep hill just as I pulled the ramrod out of the barrel. Found very little blood and later found a 2" hictory with a hole in the center of it about midway to the deer. A 300gr traveling at 1600 fps at a range of 60yards couldn't get it done.

The same year I had a 135 yard shot at a really nice buck with my 243. I slipped up behind a cedar, took a good rest and had him broadside. This is a gun that will drive tacks at 100 yards. I shot and the buck went to the woods. I looked for 2 hours and never found a drop of blood. I went back to the cedar and checked things out. There, 5 feet in front of my barrel, was a limb the size of my little finger that was shot in two.

I could go on, but you get the drift.
 
Last edited:
@Captcurt,
Nobody should attempt to drive a bullet though brush to harvest the animal on the far side so that distance to the brush should be considered.
I am not saying this is what happened to you but sometimes it is hard w/o the understanding on how a projectile behaves.
The hardest part of testing this is to be able to reproduce some consistency of the brush situation so here the person who wrote this
instead of finding the ideal place it reproduced and brought the conditions to the firing range.
I don't know all these BP projectiles but this seems to me a good analysis or something that works vs. something that doesn't.

I hope it helps.

http://harvestermlhunter.blogspot.com/2011/02/best-brush-busting-muzzleloader-hunting.html


Best Brush Busting Muzzleloader Hunting Bullets...

400%2BHML%2BHard%2BCast001.jpg

If you've hunted with a muzzleloader for any length of time, you've surely had a few times when you've taken shots at big game in the brush which failed to connect. And that miss was likely due to the fact that many of the muzzleloader hunting projectiles available in the past were far from being ideal brush busters. I've had a few of those "misses" that were unexplainable, until I spent some time looking at everything that had been between me and that deer, or elk, or whatever. And the tatletale sign of the shot connecting with a branch...limb...or sapling usually revealed why my shot failed to connect. The muzzleloader hunting projectiles of 25 years ago were easily deflected, sometimes at a severe angle.

About 20 years ago, I began a search for those projectiles which could catch a limb or sapling or two, and still hit game with enough accuracy to put it down. And what I've noticed as muzzleloader hunting has progressed is that more and more of today's bullets are doing a far better job of busting brush...and still stying pretty much on target.

Early on, I would drive out to a handy maple or willow thicket...place a portable target board back into the tangle of limbs and sapling trunks, and see if I could get a high degree of shots to hit anywhere near where I was aiming. Back then, few would.
Bullet+Test+Thicket+-+2.jpg

Now, most every winter, after the big game seasons have closed, once there is some snow on the ground, I get out a half-dozen or so times to conduct the same test that I first did back in those days. But instead of driving out to a convenient thicket, I now bring the thicket to my range. That's accomplished by cutting a truck load of 1/2- to 1-inch diameter willows, and pushing the cut ends down into a snow bank. Then a portable target board is placed behind 5 or 6 staggered rows of saplings, insuring that every shot will contact at least one of the young tree trunks. More often than not, any bullet shot will hit two or three of the saplings.

Surprisingly, some of today's muzzleloader hunting bullets do a pretty darn good job of plowing through a little brush and hitting the intended target close enough to point of aim to get the job done. But that depends on how far the target is behind that wall of brush - and the construction of the bullet.

Bullet+Test+Thicket004.jpg These tests have also shown that bullet weight plays a big role in resisting deflection. The heavier the bullet, the more it tends to stay on course. This winter, I've put close to 300 rounds through my man-made thicket, and those bullets of 300 or more grains definitely put a much higher percentage of hits into the kill zone than lighter bullets. To simulate that zone, I staple a standard 9-inch diameter paper plate onto my plywood target board. The plate is large enough to be seen behind the stand of saplings, allowing the crosshairs to be fairly centered on the plate for each shot - even if I can't actually see the "center" of the plate.

My first round of testing was with the target board just 5 yards behind the saplings.

The bullets shot were: 1.) 260- and 300-grain Harvester copper-plated .451" Scorpion PT Gold; 2.) 200-grain Harvester copper-plated .400" Scorpion hollow-point; 3.) 330- and 400-grain Harvester .451" Hard Cast lead flat-nose; 4.) 250- and 300-grain .452" jacketed Hornady SST polymer spire-point; 5.) 250- and 290-grain all-copper Barnes TMZ polymer spire-point; 6.) 300-grain Barnes all-copper .458" SOCOM polymer spire-point; 7.) 325-grain Hornady .458" FTX soft polymer tipped spitzer; 8.) 300-grain Lehigh .458" all-brass hollow-point; 9.) 350-grain Lehigh .475" all-brass hollow-point; 10.) 300- and 350-grain Hornady .500" bore-sized FPB copper-plated spitzer; 11.) 295-grain BPI .500" bore-sized Power Belt poly-tipped copper-plated spitzer; 12.) 300- and 350-grain Harvester copper-plated Saber-Tooth hollow-point.

All of these bullets were loaded and shot with a volume measured 100-grain charge of Blackhorn 209. Four different rifles were used - a .50 caliber T/C Triumph, a .50 caliber Traditions VORTEK, a .50 caliber Knight Long Range Hunter, and a .52 caliber Knight DISC Extreme. Each was shot and sighted to be pretty much center of a paper plate at 50 yards. Then three shots were taken at a plate on the target board behind the sapling thicket. With the board just 5 yards behind the saplings, only two bullets failed to put all three on the 9-inch plate. The light 200-grain Scorpion hollow-point scored just one hit, while the 295-grain Power Belt put two hits into the simulated kill zone.

When the target board was moved to 10 yards behind the saplings, the angle of deflection became more evident. And so did how lighter weight bullets are more easily thrown off course. The saboted 250-grain Hornady SST, 250-grain TMZ, and 260-grain Scorpion PT Gold each kept two hits on the paper plate. All of the heavier saboted bullets managed to put all three into the zone. Of the bore-sized bullets, only the 350-grain Hornady FPB kept all three on the plate. The 350-grain Saber-Tooth and 300-grain FPB each scored two hits, while the 300-grain Saber-Tooth scored a single hit. All three shots with the Power Belt failed to cut paper. The light 200-grain Scorpion hollow-point also failed to hit the plate. Both bullets were dropped from further testing.

When the target board was moved to 15 yards behind the stand of saplings, six bullets kept all three hits inside the 9-inch circle - the 330- and 400-grain Hard Cast flat-nosed bullets, the 300-grain Scorpion PT Gold, the 300-grain all-copper SOCOM, the 350-grain Lehigh all-brass hollow-point, and the 350-grain FPB. The 300-grain Lehigh all-brass bullet kept two hits on the plate, as did the 290-grain TMZ. The 260-grain Scorpion PT Gold, 300-grain SST, 325-grain FTX, and the 350-grain Saber-Tooth scored one hit each.

Bullet+Thicket+Target+350+FPB001.jpg The heavier copper plated, all-copper and all-brass bullets definitely resisted deflection better than all lighter bullets, and to some degree better than the copper-jacketed bullets tested (SST and FTX). The two bullets that proved to be only slightly affected by smacking into a sapling or two were the 330- and 400-grain flat-nosed Hard Cast bullets from Harvester Muzzleloading. In fact, after dead centering one willow and clipping another one or two, the 330-grain Hard Cast managed to group right at .705" on the paper plate set 15 yards behind the thicket. The 400-grain stayed inside of 1 1/4". The next best grouping with the target board set that far back was with the 350-grain all-brass Lehigh hollow-point (shot out of the Knight .52 DISC Extreme), which kept all three hits inside of 2.7". The 300-grain Barnes SOCOM and 300-grain Scorpion PT Gold grouped right at 3 inches across. (Photo Above Right - Still In The Kill Zone After Plowing Through A Wall Of Brush!)

The past couple of winters, my shooting results with the copper-plated, all-copper and hardened lead bullets varied little from this year's brush busting tests. For several years, I would continue to throw in a few soft pure lead saboted bullets, but found that once they hit one or two saplings, the bullets became so deformed that they tended to stray way off course within a few yards. As accurate as some of these may be, they're best used when hunting open country. Plowing through brush with the accuracy to still hit that sweet spot on a big old buck is the job for bullets that are more solidly constructed.

It was easy to see where the bullets impacted the snow covered bank backstop after plowing through the saplings and 3/4" thick plywood target board. After shooting one afternoon, I walked over to a bare spot where most of the bullets had been hitting the frozen ground, and there lay several of the big 400-grain Hard Cast bullets...with the noses just slightly flattened and bent. And that damage was likely done when the bullet hit the frozen dirt bank. It became very clear why those hardened lead bullets had fared so well during the brush buster bullet test. (Those recovered bullets can be seen in the photo at the top of this post.)

If you hunt thick country, you might want to give this testing some thought...or get out and do some of your own. Plowing through brush and still driving into the kill zone takes a very special bullet. - Toby Bridges
 

Attachments

  • upload_2017-9-12_16-51-37.png
    upload_2017-9-12_16-51-37.png
    88.4 KB · Views: 1
When one wants to do do a job they need the right tools for that job, including and specially the right bullet choices.

Sierra sells Brush Busters and it is not just a marketing stunt, it turns out they actually tested the bullets!

Sierra's Ballistic Technician Paul Box says....

I also learned that round nose as well as flat nose bullet styles cut thru blackberry briars and this brush very well, but the biggest difference was the distance from the brush to the target. If it was something like six feet, then nothing worked very well.

300-gr-prohunter-bullets.jpg Out of all this experimenting, my favorite was the 45-70 with 300 gr. HP/FN Pro-Hunter bullets #8900. If the distance thru this brush was short to the deer target, it would plow thru an amazing amount of brush and still hit within a couple of inches of my aiming point.


https://sierrabulletsblog.com/2016/11/30/brush-busting-bullets/


I am done with this thread.
 
I'm sorry friend, and I mean no disrespect. Brush bucking bullets are the of the worst and most pervasive rifle myths. I don't know who Toby Bridges is, but most folks around here have heard of Col. Charles Askins, Jack O'Conner. Jim Carmichael, David E. Petzel, and Craig Boddington. These guys are some of the most well respected rifle hunting writers of the last 70 years. All of them did their own testing on this subject and came to the same conclusion; all bullets deflect when they hit brush. In addition, to a man, they all wrote that smaller, faster, flatter flying bullets were best in brush because it's easier to shoot through the holes.
As to the OP's question, I'm pretty sure the above real experts would agree that a short .270 would make a fine brush rifle.
 
There is a old wise tale around here, you need a have round nose bullet to bust trough the brush. Some people say the lighter pointed bullets get deflected hitting small saplings on the way to the target.

First its a "wive's tale" not a "wise tale". My wife does that all the time to my endless delight. You ever heard of "opening a box of worms"? Or how about a "can of trouble"? Or "I feel like I have been rode hard and put out in the rain"?

Many years ago I shot at a deer through a mesquite tree that had an open section in the branches. The gun was a Marlin 30-30 with Hornady 170gr bullets. I had a 3x power scope on the gun. The range was about 25 yards. At the shot I saw a bunch of dirt fly up beside the deer. I missed! Turns out there was a small branch just smaller than my little finger and the bullet had cut it clean off. There is an opticle thing that I don't know what it is called but it will cause a camera or a scope to not see things in front of it. And that was why I didn't see that branch.

The 30-30 is a known "brush buster" round. Well I am not convinced. Your .270 will do as good as anything else. Just try to avoid hitting anything between you and the target.
 
First its a "wive's tale" not a "wise tale". My wife does that all the time to my endless delight. You ever heard of "opening a box of worms"? Or how about a "can of trouble"? Or "I feel like I have been rode hard and put out in the rain"?

Many years ago I shot at a deer through a mesquite tree that had an open section in the branches. The gun was a Marlin 30-30 with Hornady 170gr bullets. I had a 3x power scope on the gun. The range was about 25 yards. At the shot I saw a bunch of dirt fly up beside the deer. I missed! Turns out there was a small branch just smaller than my little finger and the bullet had cut it clean off. There is an opticle thing that I don't know what it is called but it will cause a camera or a scope to not see things in front of it. And that was why I didn't see that branch.

The 30-30 is a known "brush buster" round. Well I am not convinced. Your .270 will do as good as anything else. Just try to avoid hitting anything between you and the target.

LOL,

" Why buy the horse when you can lead it to water for free"

"A bird in the pan is worth two in the fire"

I don't buy into "brush busting" calibers. The only thing most of the "tests" I've seen agree on is that as the distance between the interfering branches and the target increases, the dispersion of all bullets will increase. Much past a few yards.... well I wouldn't risk it with any reasonable caliber...

So what's the draw of trading trajectory and speed for the small chance that you'll have a burning need to shoot something that happens to be standing within a few yards behind a pile of brush? I don't get it, so I just shoot animals that aren't obscured... If you just like shooting heavier, slower, bullets, or feel that they give better on game impact or blood trails, then carry on. I don't see a marginal improvement in performance on shots that probably shouldn't be taken as a reason to ditch the .270 (an optimal medium game killer) for something bigger.
 
cdb1,
At the average distance lets say 25 to 50 yards a larger bore over 35/375 moving slower and with more grain will cut through pretty substantial
twigs and branches (even 1" diameter) w/o significant deviation from the projected point of impact.
All other calibers mentioned will be deflected to the point that might miss the target entirely and/or keyhole.
The 270 is a great caliber like many other popular ones but it is not a brush caliber to shoot through thick forest.
Our personal preferences, likes and dislikes, do not affect the science of physics and change these facts.

You can delude yourself all you want, brush busting cartridges are a myth.
 
I think pissing contests just for the sake of it are quite boring and this is getting to that point.

There is enough information for someone to reach some conclusions but the best might be to take a couple of rifles with calibers
of two completely different nature and do some testing trying to reproduce what was shown above. Grizzly and Buffalo bore are two great
sources for big bore ammunition very powerful. There are others too.

A 1" diameter willow branch doesn't have the same effect on a bullet with 2 or 3 times the momentum of another one.
This is simple physics. I think the various tests posted above prove this fact too while I have not seen one single evidence
in life or in this thread that a faster moving lighter bullets is more effective in this situation.

Here I found more opitions about brush busters. This guy quotes o'connor again. I guess only open minds can learn.

http://www.chuckhawks.com/woods_rifles.htm


Brush-Bucking Calibers and Bullets


I have read about several "brush-bucking" tests in which the authors tried to determine empirically what sort of bullet is most likely to penetrate brush and reach the target (usually a deer silhouette). The test conditions were all different, ranging from firing bullets at a target placed some distance behind actual heavy brush, to intentionally shooting through limbs, to firing into a box filled with equally spaced wooded dowels of fairly large diameter.

One important variable in such tests is the distance the target is placed behind the "brush." Another is the diameter and hardness of the simulated or real "brush." A leaf is different from a twig, which is different from a branch, which is different from a rigidly held wooden dowel. Real brush has a lot to recommend it and is probably the test medium I would choose, but the biggest problem with using real brush is that all bullets cannot hit the same amount of brush at the same angle, skewing the results. I suspect that you would have to fire an awful lot of bullets into real brush to get statistically valid results.

Unfortunately, the results of the tests I have read about varied widely. I have never constructed such a test myself (although I have been tempted), as I am not sure what the test conditions should be. I suspect that the results of my test would be no more reliable than previous tests. Most authorities have concluded that a large caliber bullet of great sectional density gets through brush the best. Cartridges like the .458 Winchester Magnum are frequent winners. That makes sense to me.

Jack O'Connor, in his Gun Book wrote about the results of such a test that he spent several afternoons conducting with a variety of calibers and bullet weights. O'Connor shot at a 3' by 4' outline of a deer through a heavy screen of natural brush. His results indicated several things. One was that, as logic suggests, the farther behind the brush the target was placed, the safer it was. At 6' the "deer" was liable to be hit; at 20' the "deer" was pretty safe.

O'Connor tested a variety of calibers from the .220 Swift to the .375 H&H Magnum, including the standard one ounce 12 gauge shotgun slug. This latter projectile proved to the best brush-bucker of them all, as it is stabilized by its weight forward design rather than by spin. Even the 300 grain Silvertip bullet fired from the .375 Magnum showed considerable deflection in O'Connor's testing. The .35 Remington's 200 grain RN bullet often found the target, but frequently hit sideways.

The worst caliber for penetrating brush was the .220 Swift loaded with a 50 grain Spire Point bullet. It almost never made it through the brush intact. (No surprise, as this bullet is designed to break-up against light resistance.)

Fairly light (for their caliber) high velocity bullets such as the 87 grain .250-3000, 100 grain .257 Roberts, 130 grain .270 Winchester, and 150 grain .30-06 spitzers also faired poorly in O'Connor's brush tests. The 100 grain .250 bullet was better than the 87 grain bullet, but still not very good at getting through the brush. The 117 grain RN .257, 150 grain RN .270, and 180 grain RN .30-06 bullets all gave O'Connor a much improved chance of hitting the target in their respective calibers.

He rated the .300 Savage with a 180 grain RN bullet and the .35 Remington with a 200 grain RN bullet as "good." The best results with any rifle caliber used in O'Connor's testing were obtained with the .348 Winchester using a 200 grain Flat Point bullet. O'Connor summarized his results this way: "I found that the higher the bullet velocity, the sharper the point, the thinner the jacket, the lighter the weight, the greater the deflection."
 
It is definitely true some bullets deflect less than others. No one is arguing that point. As stated earlier though they ALL deflect and as such shouldn't be used to shoot at animals without a clear line of sight. I just got through re-reading a book by Brian Herne titled White Hunters: The Golden Age of African Safaris. Each chapter is devoted to a particular hunter and the book covers all the famous ones and not so famous ones. In the book you read of hunters not taking a shot because of small branches or grass being in the way. And of course they are using round nose, extremely heavy bullets at low velocity so they should be the king of brush busters.

So what I and I think others are saying is that one should never shoot through an obstruction at an animal, even if the obstruction is as small as a twig or blade of grass. On the other hand if one were to shoot at an animal and the bullet hit an unseen obstruction such as a twig or blade of grass then some bullets because of diameter, shape, weight and velocity will not deflect as much as others.

The definition of brush busting to most of us is a cartridge that can be shot through brush at a target and hit where the bullet was aimed. In this regard brush busting cartridges are a myth.

As to this being a pissing contest your view is the minority one so who is perpetuating it?
 
Last edited:
I have run my own test years ago, formulated my own opinions and have come to the conclusion that all bullets deflect to some extent when striking brush. The only round that I have found to be halfway consistent is Buckshot. You can deny, extrapolate, or guess the outcome, but I have seen with my own two eyes.
 
I generally wait for them to step out of the brush before laying the hammer to them. I figure my odds are better and I'll take all the advantage I can because there's two things I hate:

1. Tracking a deer
2. loosing a deer

OK, 3 things

3. Tracking a deer and then not finding it

I don't deer hunt with anything under .30 cal. My favorite is one of those "brush busting cartridges", the .358 win. I believe it might have an edge if it encountered an obstacle between me and my target, but I'm not using it as a machete to chop down a thicket.

What I don't get is why do folks take this subjects so personally? I can see both sides, and I appreciate 1stmarine doing his own testing and sharing his results and observations. Why does everyone seem to talk past each other. Its as much a mystery to me as the subject of "brush busting cartridges: fact or myth"
 
Thanks for taking the time to reply . This makes a lot of sense to me. I mostly hunt in the county where I live ( shotgun only ) with an 870 and a slug barrel. But the 270 I just got was at a price I could not pass up. I an thinking of going up to northern part of the state in rifle country. I guess I will go with biggest bullet I can get and hope for the best.
Well yes to a point, I've seen a .270 on a whitetail at 20-30 yds, stay away from Hollowpoints and ballistic tips, depending on the angle, the penetration COULD be lacking. 150 gr will drop elk. So cup and core above 130 for penetration, or bonded anything, or monometals. I'm less worried about brush busting than what happens to the bullet on impact of the critter. If you handload, your options increase greatly. And if you're under 50 yds try to stay off the big bones with the cup and cores no matter how big you go, cuz you're packing some SPEED my friend.
 
Personally, I think the term " Brush country gun/caliber" should be applied to guns useful in areas where thick brush makes targets fleeting, so shots happen quickly and at short range. Not to describe a hunter plowing a bullet through a briar patch in an attempt to hit a deer/hog etc standing on the other side.

Any bullet will deflect from the intended landing spot when fired in such a manner, so the use of "brush buster" to describe this is rather moot.

Many (most?) of these handy rifles are lever guns chambered in the traditional calibers associated with " brush busters", and these calibers are good at the shorter ranges brush country hunting usually entails. But a carbine length Rem 760 in .270 will swat a well hit deer just as effectively in brushy territory as a Marlin 336 or other traditional "brush" gun will, and it will be just as handy in the tight quarters brushy hunting often has.
 
Last edited:
I hit a sapling 10 yards from the muzzle, deer was 12 yards from the muzzle if not closer. Deer fell and got up, never to be found again. This was a .50 hawken rifle.

The best brush gun is one you can thread the needle with. I have killed plenty of deer with HP 7.62x39 and arrows.

Indians used long bows that launched sharp rocks at about 150fps. In Missouri we can use ANY centerfire cartridge. A 270 is ample.

HB
 
Last edited:
Rule of Thumb> Don't shoot through brush!! When I set my blind up, I take loppers and cut obvious brush out of the way. I do so 3-5 days before occupying the blind. In the last 2 seasons, my buddy and I have killed 4 fat does for our freezers with .243 and .270; all head shots because they are close. We hunt in the brush because that's where the deer have been. The OP asks about using a .270. The answer is, absolutely you can use a .270. In the same area a really nice buck came through a little further away and in the brush. I put the crosshair just below his chin, hoped for a clear path for the bullet, and squeezed the trigger. He looked around with a puzzled look on his face and sauntered away untouched.....don't shoot through brush!
 
Rule of Thumb> Don't shoot through brush!! When I set my blind up, I take loppers and cut obvious brush out of the way. I do so 3-5 days before occupying the blind. In the last 2 seasons, my buddy and I have killed 4 fat does for our freezers with .243 and .270; all head shots because they are close. We hunt in the brush because that's where the deer have been. The OP asks about using a .270. The answer is, absolutely you can use a .270. In the same area a really nice buck came through a little further away and in the brush. I put the crosshair just below his chin, hoped for a clear path for the bullet, and squeezed the trigger. He looked around with a puzzled look on his face and sauntered away untouched.....don't shoot through brush!
 
Beginning in the 1940s, about every ten years or so there would be an article in the American Rifleman's "Dope Bag" about bullets and brush. The testers shot various cartridges from small up to around .45-70. Everything deflected to some extent. The primary issue was the distance from the impact in brush to the target. You might have little problem with a two- or three-foot distance, but once into five yards or more there were high odds of either a missed shot or (on a deer) a crippling. I recall reading at least three such articles, and the conclusions were uniform: Don't shoot through brush.

And, really, a "brush gun" is one which is light and handy for ease of moving through dense cover and able to quickly get on target for a snap shot.
 
Rule of Thumb> Don't shoot through brush!! When I set my blind up, I take loppers and cut obvious brush out of the way. I do so 3-5 days before occupying the blind. In the last 2 seasons, my buddy and I have killed 4 fat does for our freezers with .243 and .270; all head shots because they are close. We hunt in the brush because that's where the deer have been. The OP asks about using a .270. The answer is, absolutely you can use a .270. In the same area a really nice buck came through a little further away and in the brush. I put the crosshair just below his chin, hoped for a clear path for the bullet, and squeezed the trigger. He looked around with a puzzled look on his face and sauntered away untouched.....don't shoot through brush!
 
Sorry for all the repeats...something weird is going on with the THR site or my computer. Keep getting error messages, but then it posts it anyway.
 
Our hunting land is thick woods and sloughs in north central Minnesota. 3 of the 4 in our hunting party use 270's and I mostly use a 25-06. Most shots are 50-75 yards. They work just great. Our favorite bullet for the 270's is a factory federal 150 round nose. Awesome terminal performance even at point blank range.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top