Impressions of the 270 WSM

[Kachok]

I just got back from the feild. I had to get my new WSM broken in. I am VERY IMPRESSED. I have owned high speed magnums before, but I have never been as impressed as I am now. The word I heard was that the 270 WSM kicks like a 7mm rem mag, haveing owned three 7mm rem mags for over a decade I am very familar with them. I can tell you very matter of factly that the WSM has MUCH less recoil to my shoulder then any of my 7mm's and this savage is lighter then either of my rem 700s and my model 70 so it was not due to weight. The recoil was no more then my 270 win or my 308. After shooting for a few hours my shoulder is neither bruised or even sore. I would say that the felt recoil of the 130 gr Winchester BTs was a full 35-40% less then any of my 7mms with 140gr While I was not shooting off the bench the inital impressions of the accuracy were at leased as good as anything else I have ever shot. To all of those who say that the WSMs are a fad and wont last, come and shoot mine it will change your mind forever, I am never going back to a long action mag ever again (except maby a 375 H&H) Has anyone else had a similar experence with these rifles?

 

[Maverick223]

Has anyone else had a similar experence with these rifles?

Nope, hate to be a wet blanket, but I had the opposite reaction. I loved my Browning A-Bolt, but hated the .270WSM it was chambered in. It was far more power than I really needed...or desired, I found it to have a uncomfortable "snappy" recoil (and I have more powerful magnums that I don't consider nearly as bad), factory ammo was expensive and scarce, bullets were inefficient (poor BCs) and limited in selection for reloading, and the cartridge is severely overbore making for a loud report and fairly harsh blast (which was worsened by the comparatively short 23in. bbl on the rifle). One of the few rifles that I ended up selling...and don't regret the decision one bit. Glad you like yours, but as you can tell it wasn't my cup'o-tea.

 

[hoghunting]

I am a big fan of the 270 and 300 WSMs. Mine are extremely accurate, use less powder for loads than the long-action mags, and are enjoyable to shoot.

 

[Kachok]

Here are some intresting comparisons between the 270 WMS and the big 7. My 7 mags always threw a large muzzle flash even with 26" barrels that was visable in broad daylight, the WSM out of a 24" barrel has no muzzle flash at all even at dusk. All of my 7mms left me sore on the way home. One would even leave me badly bruised for weeks afterward (it did that to everyone)!!! These were heavy rifles and one of them had a limbsaver on it, and it still hurt to shoot. Even though my WSM is lighter and has a cheap hard rubber recoil pad it is comfortable to shoot, not the slightest hint of soreness in my shoulder at the range or this morning. I would never guess that these two had an identical trajectory and downrange energy, the difference shooting them is night and day.

 

[kaferhaus]

Unless you fellas have discovered a way to break the laws of physics, it's all in your head so far as the recoil is concerned.

"Felt recoil" is very subjective. If you THINK it recoils less then you can most assuredly cope with the recoil better.

Muzzle flash.... wait until it gets dark and you'll see the flame thrower that your rifle has become.

Glad you're happy with your rifle, no matter the cartridge it shoots that's all that matters.

 

[Kachok]

That cannot be the case because i was fully expecting 7mag level recoil + this is a 6.5lbs rifle so I was really expecting to have my teeth shaken loose. I was going to get a limbsaver before I brought it out, but a friend of mine was itching to go. He also has shot 7mm Rem mags for years and he was supprised how little it kicked. Besides bruises and the lack there of cannot lie. Some calibers just kick harder by their nature, I know that 12 guage 3" magnum slugs have 30+lbs of recoil, much more then my 7mm rem mag but I could shoot them rapid fire in my lightweight mossberg mavrick 88 without an issue. Some calibers make a "push" while others jolt hard, I think it has somthing to do with the rilfes action as well. My Model 70 7mm badly bruised every single person that ever shot it, even my buddy who is a big bore magnum fanatic. My remington 700 w/limbsaver was not as bad but it still hurt after only 8-10 shots, and I would still feel it a couple days later.

 

[Maverick223]

Besides bruises and the lack there of cannot lie.

Yes it can...fitment has everything to do with it! The difference in recoil between the standard magnums and their short action counterparts is negligible, you probably just found a rifle that fits you better...and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. OTOH I greatly prefer to shoot my .375H&H, which technically has more recoil despite a comparable weight. The screaming magnums (like the .270WSM) don't push, they are fast recoiling and snappy,one reason why I don't like 'em. That said, I am glad you do.

 

[Kachok]

I would not think that the fit makes that much difference especaly since they were all 13.5" LOP (I am short) and my regular 270 win has the exact same stock. Any way you look at it I have always thought of the magnums as a nesacary evil of hunting in the wide open spaces, now I have one that is accurate, flat shooting, and I can shoot all day without getting sore. A combanation that I have yet to get with 300 Win Mag, 3 different 7mm Rem mags, and a 264 win mag. Despite years of trying, that has impressed me.

 

[Uncle Mike]

Unless you fellas have discovered a way to break the laws of physics, it's all in your head so far as the recoil is concerned.

I was just thinking this very thought! hehehehe

The difference in recoil between the standard magnums and their short action counterparts is negligible, you probably just found a rifle that fits you better

Mav is completely, as usual, correct with this assumption.

I would not think that the fit makes that much difference especaly since they were all 13.5" LOP (I am short) and my regular 270 win has the exact same stock.

It's not just the LOP at work here, but most assuredly the difference in felt recoil is a result from different stock dimensions such as the drop at the heel and comb, cast off, comb thickness, buttpad curvature, pistol grip dimensions and so on, even the finish applied to a stock will have some effect on perceived recoil, from one operator to the next.

Then you have to add the 'balance' of the rifle to the equation, a well balanced rifle 'seems' to recoil less than, a rifle that is butt heavy. Your old 7mag cannons probably are not as short and as well balanced as your new 270 short mag.

Visual and audible ques will affect the way you perceive recoil, if your seeing a huge fire ball, that sucker has to be powerful, and power equals recoil, right... and if it's loud, most people will equate the rifle to being powerful, and power equals recoil, right.....

 

[Maverick223]

I would not think that the fit makes that much difference...

It absolutely can...in fact I have a wee little .30-06Spd. that has more felt recoil than my .375H&H of similar weight (9.5lbs vs. 8lbs). The actual recoil is about 23.0ft*[email protected] in the '06 vs. 43.5ft*[email protected] in the boomer.

Mav is completely, as usual, correct with this assumption.

This statement can and will be used against you.

 

[Kachok]

OK I am not crazy. I just checked my reloading manual and the 270 WSM uses noticable less powder to achieve the same or better speeds. With the same 140 gr weight the WSM loaded with 69.5gr of Magpro gets 3237 fps the 7mm Rem mag loaded with 73.5gr of MagPro gets 3171 fps. + the 27 cal 140 gr has a slightly better BC .496 to .485 w/BTs. As we all know more powder burnt= more recoil.
I checked my reloading numbers in a recoil calculator using a 3200 fps load in each (130gr vs 140gr) and both rifles weighing 8lbs. I came up with a real world difference of 16.43 lbs of recoil @11.5 fps vs 20.08lbs @12.71 fps. This difference is noticable and lines up with my previous statement that the recoil felt more like a 308 (16 lbs in an 8 lbs rifle w/150gr)
Both using 140 gr loads the difference is a still noticable 1.5 lbs and about 1 fps recoil speed. Told ya I ain't crazy LOL
My numbers and loads came streight from the Nosler Manual #6 and the recoil calculator used was on handloads.com.

 

[Maverick223]

OK I am not crazy.

That's what all the loons in the asylum say too.

I still think it is mostly a difference it fitment, rifle weight, or perhaps even bullet weight...but what matters is it works for you.

 

[Gordon]

It has become my go to hunting gun of choice these last 5 years. I shot a .270 Winchester model 70 from 1965 to 2005 for general duty hunting. I retired it for a Model 70 Classic .270 WSM in 2005 and took all my plains game up to Eland with one shoot with 150 grain Federal Nosler Partition loads in SA in 2007. Huge deep wound cavity out to 260 yards!
Now local deer hunts I resighted for 130 grain TSX (as lead free is mandated in Monterey county) and have 4 one shot kills up to 380 yards. My new Win feed perfectly, has a good trigger and Swavoroski scope in Game Reaper unimount. It will do me till I die! BTW I've hunted about every caliber on 4 continents.

 

[Kachok]

Bullet weight will certainly have somthing to do with it. I normaly hunted with 150 Core locks in my 7mm mags which I calculated their recoil at almost 24 lbs!! Big difference from aprox 16-17 lbs and 24 lbs. Of couse both of them kick much harder then my baby, my 6.5x55s recoil feels like a slight gust of wind. That is my go to gun for everything under 300 yards.

 

[Kachok]

The only problem with my 6.5x55 is that it is too sweet, everyone wants to borrow it. My hunting buddy has dibbs on it this year since I am hunting on his land. It has LESS recoil then a 243, less noise than a .38 revolver, less weight then most "featherweights", and kills everything like fliping a switch.

 

[Maverick223]

Now the 6.5x55mmSwede is a round I can work with...a great cartridge for deer at any ethical range.

 

[Kachok]

I know right, that is my fav caliber of all time. I know that no caliber can break the laws of phisics but that little 6.5 can sure bend them LOL. Totaly civilized to shoot, yet it cleanly kills even monster CXP3 game. The only thing I would not use it on inside of 300 yards is dangerious game hunts, and that may be just because I have never done it before.

 

[Maverick223]

Totaly civilized to shoot, yet it cleanly kills even monster CXP3 game. The only thing I would not use it on inside of 300 yards is dangerious game hunts, and that may be just because I have never done it before.

I like it...but I don't like it that much. While it can be used for moose and such, I prefer something a bit bigger (.280Rem., .30-06Spd., et cetera) in diameter and case size for Elk and larger game, and .375H&H for the really big stuff (with teeth and claws). I just like to have a little "extra" for that difficult shot.

 

[Kachok]

Don't get me wrong, if I were going on a once in a lifetime elk hunt, it would not be my 1st choice, but if it was my only choice I would not loose any sleep over it at all. I would take my WSM or a 300 win mag as my #1 pick for anyhting over 400 lbs. For Brown bear or other 1000+lbs game with teeth and claws I agree the 375 H&H is still king after all these years, although the 9.3s are great as is the 338 win mag. I almost bought a 798 in 375 H&H not that I have any use for it is south Alabama, but I have just always wanted one+ nothing tells deer to "stop right there" quite like an elephant gun LOL. The 6.5 is remarkable for it's ability to reliably drop moose sized game with less recoil then some varmint rifles nothing else is quite like it because there are no smaller calibers that are designed to shoot 300+SD bullets, and the other 6.5mms are designed for 120 and 140 gr bullets where the mauser was buit spacificaly for the very long and heavy 160s. The 7mm Mauser has the same kind of magic but sadly nobody but Ruger chambers one in the states If Tikka, CZ, Browning or Winchester chamberd a 7mm Mauser I would be standing in line in the snow to get one the day they came out. Great old round.

 

[Maverick223]

I feel the same way...it can do the job, but you a little less margin for error so i'd pick something else given the choice.

Speaking of the 9.3mm...I really want a 9.3x64mmBrenneke but can't justify having one with my .375H&H (which isn't going anywhere...'cept after a Kodiak). Honestly the .375H&H would be the last hunting rifle i'd sell. Sure it is more than I need for deer, but loaded right ("light" bullets at moderate velocity) it won't do any more damage than a .30-06Spd....loaded heavy I can take anything else on the menu.

I feel the same way you do about the 7x57mmMauser (the original elephant cartridge ), fortunately the 7mm-08Rem. has been gaining in popularity and can nearly match the venerable old round. That said, I still prefer the old ones simply because of the nostalgia of using a 100yr. old cartridge. I wish more rifles were available in both the 7x57mm and the 6.5x55mm.

 

[Kachok]

The practical advantage that the old 6.5x55 and the 7mm Mauser have over their modern rivles the 260 rem and 7mm-08 it a higher standard rate of twist. Standard 260 rem will not stabalize the long boat tail spritzer 140 or the massive RN 160s and I think those are the most useful of the 6.5 family. The 7mm-08 is a tad more useful with a standard 1:9.5 twist which will allow it to stabalize 150s and some 160s, but no way on earth will it stabalize the 188gr monsters that made the 7mm Mauser an elephant killing legend. Yes the newer calibers have higher peak speeds with light bullets, but if I wanted crazy high peak speed with light bullets I will shoot my 270 WSM @3400+ FPS!

 

[kaferhaus]

260 stabilizes 140s just fine.... including the Berger VLD which is the longest 140gr 264 bullet on the market. It will also stabilize 160gr flat base bullets (only one I've tried) just fine.

7-08 with a 9 twist (standard) WILL stabilize 175gr bullets all day long.

The biggest issue I have with the swede and 7 mauser is due to the abundance of "old" ammo that uses very long heavy bullets both are chambered with a mile of freebore when used with more modest length modern projectiles.

I had a reamer made for the swede specifically for the 140 BTHPs and it shoots great out of the Remington Action/kreiger barrel I used for the build.

BUT my identical 260 will out shoot it all day as it's a more efficient case...

Nostalgia is great but both of those cartridges have been surpassed by more modern offerings better suited for the bullets used today.

 

[NCsmitty]

When the WSM line was introduced, I thought that the 7mm WSM would prove to be the best of the lot, with 7mm bullets being ballistically superior. It has not turned out that way, with the 300 and 270 WSM being most popular, and the 7mm WSM languishing.
It seems that metric designations remain unpopular with hunters in the U.S.



NCsmitty

 

[Kachok]

The only problem from what I understand is that the 7mm WSM just duplacates the 7mm Rem Mag on ballisitics, so the short action is the only real advantage. That said I have a raloading bench, and as impressed as I am with my 270 WSM I would like to get a 7mm or a 300 as well, just wish they made a .264/6.5 WSM I am seeing what the sort mag hype was all about, they really do seem to produce exceptioinal speed/energy figures with slightly less powder then their long action counterparts, and they have already had solid sucess in the long range shooting arena, so accuracy seems not to be an issue. Only downfall is that they might be a little ahead of their time much like the now deceased 35 rem mag and 6.5 rem mag, the original short magnums. I still say an unbelted 6.5 rem mag would be the perfect long range hunting rifle, and the 270 WSM is as close as I can get to that.