270 Win VS 270 WSM

K

kraigwy

New member
In my 270 Win. I shoot Horn. 150 gr. IBs at 2750 FPS

If I was to go with a 270 WSM I can get 3000 fps with the same bullet.

My 270 Win Mag goes sub-sonic at 1500 yards.

The WSM goes sub-sonic at 1650 yards.

Besides more recoil, is there really an advantage of the WSM over the 270 Win.

Do we really need magnums???

Just wondering.
 
The larger magnum will have more range.

Where you are there has to be places where better trajectory, less wind drift etc might be useful some day.

I got the WSM's to get a better to handload cartridge over the belted.
 
When your hunting jackalope the extra 150 yards might me nice. You know how hard it is to get close to those things.:D

I believe hunting is more enjoyable if I am getting close, so the extra velocity is useless. For target shooting I have no reason to attempt 1650 yards, even if I could find a place around here that I could see that far. Thus I have little use for a magnum.
 
less wind drift
Click to expand...

Yup, at 1500 yards there is a 1.4 MOA difference with a 10 MPH FV wind between the Win and the WSM.

But my scope has a little knob to take care of that. Assuming the shooter can determine the wind that close at 1500 yards.

The extra recoil will effect the shooter more then the 1.4 MOA difference in wind drift.

But hey, I like magnums too. Just not for hunting or precision rifle shooting.
 
In my 270 Win. I shoot Horn. 150 gr. IBs at 2750 FPS

If I was to go with a 270 WSM I can get 3000 fps with the same bullet.
Click to expand...

MAYBE....

Everyone compares the published figures, but is that what you really get, out of the rifle in your hands????

maybe.

Maybe not.

A friend of mine loved his Weatherby .270 Magnum. Until he got a chronograph, and found out his magnum was only giving him about 20-50fps more than his standard .270 Win.

This was because of the individual rifles he was shooting. His .270 Win was a "fast" gun, with everything it shot, and his Weatherby was a "slow" one.

Typically the difference is not that much, but extreme cases can, and do happen, and you really won't know until you chrono the gun and loads in your hands.

Magnums burn more powder, and whether they are long and fat, or short and fatter, only you can decide if the gain is worth the cost.

Good Luck
 
I don't think the 270 WSM and the 270 Weatherby give any advantage over the 270 Winchester. Here's why I think not:

1) A 24" barreled 270 Winchester can be safely handloaded with 150 grain bullets to 3,000 with appropriate slow burning powders.

2) In a typical bolt-action rifle there is substantially greater magazine capacity with the standard 270.

That being said, I'm sure an enthusiastic handloader could just pour more fuel into their 270 Magnum case and get 3,150 or perhaps more. However, the only reason I will load my 270 Winchester to 3,000 fps with 150 grain Nosler Partitions, is that this combination produces the best long range accuracy in my rifle by a wide margin. I would be just as happy with a milder load if the accuracy was nearly equal.
 
Well, 4runnerman, I hope your choice meets your expectations. I doubt that the 270 WSM cartridge is inherently more accurate. I think the actual accuracy will be a result of how true the rifle is built to the most favorable dimensions, combined with the most favorable ammunition components. Then the weakest link will be the competency of the shooter. A truly well made rifle is marvelous, regardless of caliber. The 270 WSM, and the Weatherby version have to be awfully good performers, as they presume to be an improvement over an already great cartridge that has a well proven reputation. Happy hunting with your 270 WSM; I am sure it will not disappoint.
 
A 270 WSM anywhere near 3000 fps is a max load. However, the WSM cartridges are no more a magnum than a brick. The 'M' is for Marketing.
What either of 'em does velocity wise at 1500 plus yards is irrelevant. Not enough energy left at those distances.
 
Pathfinder- Many studies have been done on this subject. results are always the same a shorter fatter cartridge is always more accurate then it's counter part


This was part of the reason Competition shooters have made switches to short fat cases. You have a better , more consistent powder burn resulting in a more accurate round. Now agreed the shooters ability always comes into play. But case for case a short fat case will be more accurate always under same senerio.
 
The 300 WSM is the real deal. I don't see the advantage with the 270 WSM, or the 7mm WSM and especially the 325 WSM.

It is possible to get 3000 fps from a 270 Win. with 150's if you have with a 24" or longer barrel, and 2900 fps is not difficult even from a 22" barrel. The best 270 WSM loads I've ever found are only 50-75 fps faster than the best 270 loads. I wouldn't choose a 270 WSM over a standard 270 for such a small gain.

I fell into a 300 WSM really by accident and have been wringing it out for the last few years. With 180's in my 30-06 about 2800 fps is the best I can do and still get good accuracy and be within what I consider safe loads. I've seen guys claim another 50-60 fps., but not with book loads. With pretty mild loadings I'm getting 2950-3000 fps with the WSM and have worked up book loads at 3100 fps. Some factory loads chronographed 3100 fps. My best accuracy however is a bit under 3000 fps, so call it about 200-250 fps better than 30-06 and no more than 50 fps slower than 300 WM.

The biggest selling point to me of the WSM is reduced recoil. I can come within 50 fps of 300 WM, but with about 12-15 gr less powder. If you do the math that 50 fps along with less powder means recoil about 1/2 way between 30-06 and 300 WM. From the same weight rifles my 30-06 load has 22 ft lbs of recoil, the 300 WSM about 26 ft lbs and a 300 WM about 30 ft lbs.

Do I need it? No, I don't. In fact I'm seriously considering selling the 300 WSM. Not because I don't like the round, or the rifle, I do. But in reality one of my 308's is most likely all the gun I'll ever need. My 30-06 is really more gun than I really need and I'll probably just use it as my big gun.

Winchester borrowed/stole the idea of the 300 WSM from Rick Jamison who developed it as a Wildcat round. It works as designed. For whatever reason the same concept in other calibers just hasn't worked out as well.

Many studies have been done on this subject. results are always the same a shorter fatter cartridge is always more accurate then it's counter part
Click to expand...

This is also why they tend to recoil less too, more efficient powder burns means less powder needed as well as more accuracy. You get the same when comparing 308 to 30-06. The new 1000 yard benchrest world record is currently held by a 300 WSM.
 
Just thinking. You can hand load a 150 gr. SP for your 270 Win to 2980 fps. That is 240 fps faster than 2750. That 240 fps difference in speed does make a difference in trajectory. But why is it needed? Game can't tell the difference. Mentally you can't tell the difference. Your shoulder (will) notice a difference. And so will your barrels chamber & forcing cone. {its life span shortened due to heat erosion} 270 WSM will always have the edge between the two. Simple fact is. It was designed too.
 
Kraigwy according to one gun writer you aren't trying very hard with your .270 Win.

John Barness said:
I've loaded for a bunch of .270's and generally count on 2900 with 150's and 3000 with 140's in a 22" barrel, but it depends of course on the bullet, powder and rifle. 24-26" barrels will of course get somewhat more.

I have generally found that RL-22 (or Norma MRP, which are the same thing) will beat H4831 at 70 degrees. But down around zero, H4831 will still be zipping 'em out there at about the same velocity as at 70, while RL-22 will lose 100-150 fps.

Which is of course why Alliant brought out RL-23. I have a pound on the way and will be testing it in various temps over the next few months.

You can also beat H4831 with some other new powders. Ramshot Magnum will do it, and Hunter will as well (if you can find any of either) and in my experience both are more temp-resistant than RL-22. I am also going to be testing IMR7977 over the next few months, as Hodgdon's data lists some pretty good velocities with 150's in the .270, and it is supposed to be temp-resistant as well. I've tried IMR4166 and it's everything they claim, so am hoping for similar results with 7977.
Click to expand...
 
If 2,750 fps is giving kraigwy excellent accuracy, i.e., substantially better than a hotter load, then why go for more? If accuracy deteriorates, then more velocity will gain you more recoil, more misses, shorter case life, and the slightly flatter trajectory and reduced wind drift will be completely lost in the dispersion of shots fired.
 
John Barness wouldn't state those speeds if they weren't accurate loads for him.

Plus I'm pretty sure Kraigwy knows the proper techniques for mitigating felt recoil to tolerable levels.
 
Last edited:
My 270 Win Mag goes sub-sonic at 1500 yards.

The WSM goes sub-sonic at 1650 yards.

Besides more recoil, is there really an advantage of the WSM over the 270 Win.

Do we really need magnums???
Click to expand...

I don't believe the increase in velocity increases hit probability at distance, which is the basic premise of magnum cartridges.



Marksmanship is the limiting factor for hitting at distance. Shooter's errors exceed by orders of magnitude any other inaccuracy factor. Dunning has found that the less the idiot knows, the more confident the idiot. Similarly, confident idiots believe their marksmanship abilities are enough to hit animals at extreme range, when in fact, they don't and won't. It only shows how gullible the shooting public when shooters believe they can buy accuracy and marksmanship without constant practice. You can't. And you cannot compensate for poor marksmanship skills with magnum cartridges. Nor should people be attempting to inhumanely kill animals at long range. The most likely result is a wounded animal, one that gets away well before the shooter arrives, dying in pain later, assuming the shooter can find the spot where he thought he hit the animal. It is easy to lose location in the woods.
 
The larger magnum will have more range.
Click to expand...
Nevertheless, who among us has the actual ability to hit a target (the vital zone on a game animal) using a field position (no bench rest, etc.), at that further range and who among us is going to lie and say they do?
 
Well, I think I'm better than average with my 270...... But I betcha there's any number of fellows out there that can outshoot me and my 270 while using a black-powder Sharps with iron sights, even at very long range. A laser-flat trajectory in a half-MOA rifle doesn't mean the shooter can hit a milk-jug at 150 yards when you take his bench rest away.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top