Garandimal
member
I like my Kimber 270 WSM as well as my Ruger Hawkeye stainless 270. The Kimber has a little shorter LOP or fits me better, but for a long action the Ruger is great and balances well: it is my favorite long action rifle. In my two rifles you can tell that the WSM has a little more spice to it. My loads run about 6.5 gr. more powder in the WSM.
The 270 has too much going for it to ever try and be a detractor. I would take a smaller rifle if I knew coyotes were the primary game, and would be tempted to take my WSM if I were going Elk hunting. But that is not to say that the 270 can't do either. It is a heck of a plains cartridge for sure.
Most of the "truck gun" I grew up around were of the 223, 243 variety, but a 270 carries much more punch if something bigger is on the menu.
What is your opinion of the .270 WSM w/r/t the W.C.F. in the field?
Before the current batch of powders upped the 150 gr. NP to ~ 2900 fps, was considering one on performance alone. Short action being a bonus.
"One of the most successful Huntress in the world uses a .270 and Winchester Failsafe ammunition exclusively.
It is not about size and power, but precision and great bullets."
- Ross Seyfried -
"Truth is incontrovertible.
Panic may resent it. Ignorance may deride it. Malice may distort it.
...But there it is"
- Winston Churchill -
GR