Is there a good .270 Winchester load for the American deer woods?

No, Savage 99 notwithstanding, I might still find a classic bolt-action rifle someday I like that just so happens to be a .270 such as a Husqvarna Model 3000 Crown Grade. I want to primarily hunt woods deer. It would be a shame to dismiss such a gun because there is no perfect factory .270 loading for it for my purposes. Even if there is a perfect factory .270 loading for the American deer woods in terms of conserving meat, how much does this stuff cost round per round and how readily available is it?

 

Ok

 

Ugly Sauce, thank you. BINGO!

Let's forget about rifle makes/models and just focus on the cartridge itself.

This OP was inspired by my favorite YouTube gun expert extraordinaire, Mr. Gun Blue 490. He claims that the velocity of the .270 Winchester has to be reduced to a figure about 2,700-ish with a 150-grain bullet to be a perfect deer killer at closer ranges and that hyper velocity typical of .270 in light 130 bullets is a close-range meat ruiner. He claimed that years ago, ammo makers offered such loadings but that nowadays one might have to take up the loading bench to achieve such ballistics. Younger generations of hunters seem to be dismissing this famous Jack O'Connor caliber for 6.5 Creedmoor or some other newfangled 20-something caliber cartridge. The question really should be can one still easily find factory .270 ammo in a sub-2,800-fps velocity?

 

rogerssportinggoods.com has Fed Power-Shok 150gr .270 Win ammo in stock. $29.99. There are others also there.

 

Look at my post about rogers. Your ammo is there.

 

130 partition and broadside vital shot. DRT.

I see lots of people take shoulder and neck shots and you should expect to have significant loss.

shoot your gun like a bow and you’ll be fine with whatever.

 

Velocity, please? Never mind, thank you for your input, I found out on Google that they do 2,830 fps. A bit too speedy still and a bit too pricey at nearly $1.50 a pop. I have to now stick with an American .30-something for a possible future deer rifle. Preferably good ol' .308 Winchester.

 

Broadside? It sounds like quartering to shots are not feasible for conserving meat since one needs to punch through shoulder with that presentation by the animal.

 

If I had to use a .270 for deer, I'd get the Norma Whitetail 130gr.

 

For strict broadside shots to the vitals?

Will a .308 150 bullet at 2,800+ fps do any more damage to meat through the shoulder on a quartering-to shot than a .270 150 bullet at 2,700-2,800 fps at close range? Is meat damage at any range a toss-up between .270 and .308 in the same bullet weight with the same shot presentation?

 

If I wanted a good rifle to hunt “woods deer”, I’d find a Winchester or Marlin lever gun in 30-30 or 35 Rem and call it done. I’ve killed more whitetail and black bear with a 30-30 lever gun, and a fair few hogs, than any other rifle/cartridge combination. Just works. I’m actually a fan of the 270 Win and love it for antelope, mountain mulies and prairie coyote. Would not be my first choice for “woods deer”.

 

'Bacon, did you read Roverguy's post? A good call.

 

Yes, I did. It seems like he doesn't want a .270 especially within the shooting lane limits of wooded cover. Wooded cover means close shots most likely. It seems like short-action cartridges are better for shorter ranges and for faster cycling action. One must be hasty to get a shot off at a deer in heavier cover. It seems like .308 and .300 Savage are ideal woods calibers for bolt-actions and the exclusive Savage 99 lever job with its non-tubular magazine. The Savage 99 is the only lever-action rifle ever designed to handle ballistically superior spitzer cartridges that were originally bolt-action material. Perhaps, .30-06 and .270 are better for plains, desert, meadows, field and mountains. The lever gun is often touted for its handiness in the woods. My grandfather had a Husqvarna Model 3000 Crown Grade in .308. It seems that this bolt-action rifle had an ideal caliber for even wooded cover. His early-'60's Swedish-made classic also sported iron sights and a front bead hood. The gun was also drilled/tapped for a glass sight. It would seem that this gun might work for deer in more open areas as well as in the smaller fields. The .308 will handle ranges up to which no ethical deer hunter of this caliber should ever exceed being 400 yards tops. 300 yards is MPBR for the .308. The other "longer-range" cartridges including the .270 have a similar MPBR. Hold-over might be needed out to 400 yards. A crafty and patient hunter should be able to stealthily close in on a 'lope on the plains or an elk in the meadow to about 300 yards.

 

Uhhh.....Browning BLR, Henry Long Ranger,

 

oh, don't know about those: my grandfather had a 99 and that's all I know: much of what I know about guns is what has been in my family, I have owned or I have fired in the service

 

Not to mention Winchester models 1895 and 88 . Sako made a levergun ,too at one point . B.L.R. and Henry are currently in production now , though.

Seems OP is enamored with the Savage 99 , and that's never a bad choice , in anything from a 250-300 on up . I say find a nice 300 Savage , and be happy!

 

He tends to be a blow hard. Find a new expert...

 

Yep, the .300 Savage is just enough slower than the .308 to save some bacon, but still fast enough to shoot out to 200 easy.

 

I strongly disagree about using slower heavier bullets unless you are a good tracker. The faster bullets mean faster kills. I wouldn't worry much about damaging a front shoulder. The difference in bullets isn't going to mean much anyway as far as meat damage. The 270 is a good hunting bullet because it is fast in light bullets and upsets easier than some others. If you really want to conserve meat use a much slower bullet. A 150 308 is better in everyway anyway. Or some other round like a 30-30.
I also agree that you need to find a real expert. I don't think he is right about that 2700 figure anyway. This is a silly discussion. if you think that guy is an expert why pose questions on here.

 

That is true, but I think the .300 Savage is close enough to the .308 ("closer enough"?). However, the 99 is/was chambered in .308 so the point is probably moot. I have not shot anything with the .300 Savage, but have hunted much with the ballistic twins, the 7.7, .303 British and the 7.65X53/54mm, and have never had to track a deer. I have used both 150 grain and 180 grain bullets in those.

 

The 30-30 has been around for a long time, and as these videos show, the bullets are expanding at 30-30 velocities and penetrating well. Out to 200 yards, a 30-30 will do the job. Just don't shoot at 300 yards, I have tried it with my Marlin 336, and the bullets start floating in the wind.









Given that DPris said gunwriters get $400 for an article, you won't see many ballistic gelatin test results in their articles. Ballistic gelatin is not free and it takes time to mix and cast the stuff. Just like the old days, in print writers use whatever is cheap and nothing beats free. Used to be duxseal (found in hardware stores), soap, wood, and the old standby's were wet newspapers and phone books. Of course the in print author claimed he shot something that duplicated bullet expansion in his favorite (free) tissue media. Well, the days when you could find free stacks of newspapers and phone books are gone, so in print writers now drive down the street, emptying recycle containers of milk jugs. So, instead of wet newspapers & phone books, the new gold standard for tissue stimulants is milk jugs filled with water.

Within the wound community, ballistic gelatin is treated as a calibrated media that does simulate tissue, so, given the wounds in the videos, the bullets ought to perform similarly in soft tissue.

 

The underlying question I was putting out was about the current availability of .270 ammo factory-loaded with slower heavy bullets, 150+ grains/2,700-fps- (minus). My expert claimed that there were no such current offerings to the best of his knowledge. He gave me the impression the factory ammo market may have abandoned sensible .270 loads for wooded-cover hunting. I wanted to see what people here know about what our current choices are in .270 Winchester ammunition unless most here don't even worry about velocity. I am not a handloader, by the way. Mr. GunBlue is a devout handloader who claims he can easily whip up some slow-moving .270 loads on his bench. Heavier bullets with reduced powder charges. No problem for him. The bottom line, the .270 might not be the best choice in the world for Year 2022 hunters who don't handload and who do hunt in wooded cover a lot.

I don't own a chronograph to speed test my ammo also. The .270 Winchester is based upon the .30-06. A big case pushing a smaller bullet. It's like a 454 motor in a Chevy Vega body. The last time I hunted deer was with a Browning A-Bolt II in the woods in .25-06 Remington. The loads were 117 gr. Federal Premium BTSP. My dinky California blacktail yearling buck about 100 pounds soaking wet on the hoof was taken in a forest shooting lane of about 100 yards. Now, we are talking about a dinky fly-weight bullet coming out of an aught-six case at a blazing 3,100+ fps. This is like a 454 motor in a Chevy Chevette! The buck was quartering toward me at 45 degrees. I mistakenly aimed behind the shoulder and tore up his paunches. I later realized I should have aimed more forward to punch through his shoulder and into his vitals. I don't know how much meat damage would have been done otherwise if I had proper placement on the shot. It was all gut damage. There was a rib broken in two. There was no meat damage that I can remember. The paunch-wounded buck had travelled about a 1/2 mile and was found 45 minutes later dead in a small depression in the side of a hill.

In one of his videos, Mr. GunBlue490 dismisses the .25-06 as a deer cartridge that actually makes his cut. It may cause meat damage in the case of actual proper placement. It's a screamer for speed.

 

Any .270 Winchester load will kill a deer. I never experienced meat damage when shooting them at less than 50 yards. Heart and lungs shots mostly when that close. I always used 150 grain bullets from my 22" semi, usually Winchester PowerPoint because they are less expensive than others. The most damaged deer I killed was shot with my muzzleloader from twenty feet. 295 grain over two pellets of Triple Seven. Huge exit wound.

 

This sounds like the same discussions I’ve heard for a big part of my life. Haha. I’ve killed deer from 30-467 yards with a 270. I hit one high and too far back and buggered the back straps. Now, I don’t think ANY different caliber would have changed that there was damaged meat. The big mags would probably have damaged more. But, I doubt anything smaller/slower would have saved my butterfly steaks.
I personally have used factory Winchester, Federal, and most recently Hornady ammo. None of these begin to compare with our family handload recipe. Reloading is an amazing pastime. Lol it fills the time between hunting seasons.