.270win vs .308win for deer

[Kwaynem]

I know this has has been hashed out for years but I want to know what you all think being how we’re all scattered across the United States. If you had both which are you picking up opening day and taking with you and why?

 

[Show Me]

Matters not. Absolutely won't make a difference to any deer.

 

[Chuck R.]

What are the conditions?

IF I'm in a stand/blind and pretty sure the shot will be under 200yds, then the .308Win

IF I'm overwatching a row crop field; spot and stalk etc. conditions where I might need to reach out, then the .270Win.

Rational.. I don't load down my .270, so it's a 130grn at close to 3200 FPS, it does a heck of a lot of damage at the closer distances even with bonded bullets. I can't always guarantee a double lung shot. It's also set up with a higher magnification scope, basically an open country rig. Out to practical hunting distances the .270 will hold an advantage in drop and wind.

IF I'm pretty sure the shot will be closer, then the .308Win.

Honestly I'm not a .308Win fan. I've owned a couple of them and it's kind of a Meh cartridge.. I either want more speed, or more mass at less velocity. I have a little .260Rem carbine that will do anything the .308Win can do on deer sized game with better ballistics, less recoil. IF I want something with more range capability I'm going to my .270 with 130s, or a 300WM loaded with 168 ABLRs.

The 308 Win is a great "all around" cartridge, I'm just not a fan of an "all around" rifle.

 

[Hugger-4641]

From 300yds in I don't treally have preference other than .270 is a bit flatter. Past 400yds, the .308 is dropping more but retaining more energy. I probably wouldn't take the shot with either, but if I had to make a 500 or 600yd shot, I'd want the .308.

 

[Show Me]

It's like comparing a long bed with a 460 to a short bed with a 454.
I've never killed past 300 and that was unsatisfying. I go into the woods where deer live and either have killed right in front of me.

 

[Kwaynem]

I’m older these days kids have all grown and moved off grandkids now come around I have to much time to think about these things lol

 

[Slamfire]

I have read that deer can tell the difference between bullets varying 0.031" in diameter, though I am still waiting for the proof.

If you use factory ammunition, such as the Barnes Vor-Tx 130 grain bullet in a the 308 Win, the factory claims 3125 fps at muzzle and 2,341 fps at 300 yards. If you use a 130 grain bullet in the 270 Win such as a Winchester Ballistic Tip, muzzle velocity is 3,050 fps and at 300 yards 2427 fps. It is one of the confounding things is that 30 caliber bullets can be pushed faster than 0.277 at the same pressure. The so called "ballistic" advantage for those over the horizon shots, is mostly for those who don't shoot at long distances, and think they can hit something out there, first shot. The further the shot, the more wind moves the bullet, up, down, left, right, and in unpredictable ways. Saw the flags reacting to rolling waves of wind at CMP Talladega as the wind spills over berms. How the heck do you compensate for clockwise or counter clockwise wind when you can't see it?

I gotta tell you, 300 yards is a long way out there, not only for marksmanship, but unobstructed view. Just yesterday at the range, I was pointing to the thick underbrush bordering the range where you can't see ten feet ahead, and most of the deer hunters I know, shoot deer under 50 yards just because how heavily wooded things are.

Power line shots of 200 yards are rare, and walk out into any farmers field in the morning, and you will see hoof prints, but the deer are hiding in the underbrush in the daylight. They learn to bed down and stay hidden during hunting season. I talked to a deer hunter in Michigan who had the same experience, and he was 100% sold on his 300 Blackout AR15 rifle, he had taken a lot of deer with the thing, none more than 200 yards away. Most under 50 yards. Lots of forest surrounding fields, and the deer were hiding in the woods.

Animals have adapted to humans, such as in Elkmont Indiana. Elk there have developed types of camouflage that allows them to blend into the background, and no one notices!

 

[JmacD]

Have both. Like both. Shot deer with both. Both kill them very dead. The one uses less powder. lol.

 

[jmr40]

Both will kill deer or elk past 400 yards. 270 shoots flatter but that's mostly negated with modern optics and range finders. Out to 300 yards you can make hits with little to no holdover with either. Much past 300 yards you need accurate range estimation and some sort of BDC scope with either.

I chose 308 because I find it more accurate with less recoil. Ammo is easier to find and cheaper if you don't handload. But if I had a 270 that I liked I could do the same thing.

 

[md7]

I have both. Both have taken deer, and will do so easily. Shot opportunities here max out around 300 yards, at least where I personally hunt. No meaningful difference I can discern between the 270 or 308 for deer at those distances.

I do use 308 more these days due to my barrel being threaded for suppressor and OAL with can and 18” barrel isn’t unwieldy. Similar in OAL to some non suppressed rifles.

 

[Lo-Profile]

Either one will drop a deer without issues if you do your part

 

[courtgreene]

.308, because I hunt in the woods and prefer short actions and shorter barrels. If I hunted more wide open spaces barrel length would matter less, and it would be a toss up. A .270 with a short barrel loses a lot, while a .308 with a shorter barrel loses little. I’m sure there’s science that explains why, but I don’t know it well enough to quote it. I do know that looking at barrel lengths and muzzle velocities for each respective cartridge tells the story well.

 

[Show Me]

.308, because I hunt in the woods and prefer short actions and shorter barrels. If I hunted more wide open spaces barrel length would matter less, and it would be a toss up. A .270 with a short barrel loses a lot, while a .308 with a shorter barrel loses little. I’m sure there’s science that explains why, but I don’t know it well enough to quote it. I do know that looking at barrel lengths and muzzle velocities for each respective cartridge tells the story well.

One teenage grand son acquired a H&R 270 , 20 inch barrel. I have sat next to him in a shack shooting deer for several years. Very loud but effective. In the woods is under 75 yds

 

[.45Coltguy]

At "normal" distances, it won't matter. Place the bullet where it's suppose to be, meat in the freezer.

 

[argonn]

I have, over many years, used various cartridges for our upper Vermont hunting. 250-3000, 30/30, 30-06, 270, 308. With the limited distance we hunt here in the mountains, I have settled on a pump Remington 7600, 308. As has been mentioned, distance and landscape will dictate a lot of needs.

 

[H&Hhunter]

There isn’t one lick of difference out to 600 yards between the two on a deer or an elk. Pick the rifle you spend the most time with and have the most confidence with. Be realistic about your maximum shot distance and hunt.

I’m not recommending that you shoot a deer at 600 yards. I’m just saying that inside that
range they both will kill a critter very handily.

400 yards isn’t even starting to stretch the legs on either from a terminal ballistics standpoint.

 

[Peakbagger46]

I personally have taken quite a few deer with 165 grain .308 rounds but have never shot the intriguing .270. What’s the recoil comparison between say a typical 130 grain .270 and a 165 .308?

 

[.38 Special]

I'd take the .270, because Jack O'Connor.

For a rational person, though, there just isn't a lick of difference between the two.

 

[FL-NC]

Assuming equally performing rifles, I would pick the 308. I can shoot heavier bullets if I want, and I just like a short action caliber.

 

[.308 Norma]

I'd take the .270, because Jack O'Connor.

For a rational person, though, there just isn't a lick of difference between the two.

Yep, and I'm pretty sure Elmer Keith hated them both.

 

[Roverguy]

Some nutters go after them with bow and arrow.

270 though. Because the crusty western hunter in the Rockies carrying a Model 70 so chambered is quintessential to me.

 

[.308 Norma]

I personally have taken quite a few deer with 165 grain .308 rounds but have never shot the intriguing .270. What’s the recoil comparison between say a typical 130 grain .270 and a 165 .308?

I started with the .308 Win many, many years ago, and foolishly "stepped up" to a .270 Win sometime in the early '80s when I convinced myself I needed a "flatter shooting" cartridge for elk and mule deer. I don't remember either of them kicking all that hard. However, the rifles weren't the same - my .308 Win was (is) a Winchester Model 100, semi-auto, while my .270 Win was a post -64 Winchester 70, bolt action.

 

[JmacD]

Yep, and I'm pretty sure Elmer Keith hated them both.

Haha

 

[H&Hhunter]

I personally have taken quite a few deer with 165 grain .308 rounds but have never shot the intriguing .270. What’s the recoil comparison between say a typical 130 grain .270 and a 165 .308?

Kind of like the difference between the acceleration of a Ford Pinto and an AMC Pacer. Not enough difference to notice.

 

[CoalCrackerAl]

30.06 best of both worlds.