Anyone else dislike .270 Win & .300 Magnums??

[roklok]

I cant believe such a nonsensical post is garnering this much response, but then I guess I am as guilty as the rest, because here I am adding my two cents.

I don't comprehend hating a cartridge, there are some that I choose not to own, but hating ? Why ? If I had the time on this earth and the funds, I would own a rifle for every chambering ever devised and try to gain real world experience with them. As it is, a lifetime is too short to do that, so I have to settle for a dozen or so.

As for the .270 Winchester, It is not my favorite hunting cartridge, that honor goes to the .35 Whelen, but it is an excellent choice for most big game hunting. Last August I shot a Dall ram at 584 yards wih my .270, then in September loaned the rifle to a buddy who killed a 63 inch moose. With the 130 SST at 3200 FPS it is a great choice for long range deer-goat-sheep hunting, and with 150 grain Grand Slams it works well on bigger stuff.

 

[20thru45]

Once after receiving another abysmal gift from my wife I explained that if she gave me a real gun or a knife I would be happy with it. The extension of this is that I don't hate guns, calibers, action types, or ammo. I do think you have to work overtime to explain why either of these rounds is superior to the 30-06. The .270 is not and the .300 has enough disadvantages to out weigh it's increase in mv. I use my 06 as my go to coyote gun. The .270 is theoretically better at this except that a dead coyote is dead.

 

[jimbob86]

I do think you have to work overtime to explain why either of these rounds is superior to the 30-06.

Nope.

The .270 has a flatter trajectory to 400 yards with less recoil.

That took less than 30 seconds.

 

[hooligan1]

Well said there JimBob!!!!

 

[jimbob86]

It could be that some of the folks expressing "hate" for the .270 WIN dislike it intensely because it gives lie to the Marketing spiel they bought when they picked up the newest in new bestest deer rifle evar .....


I think all these short action cartridges being pushed of late (and the various "short magnums" that were all the rage a couple of years back), aside from getting folks to buy new guns, are being pushed because they work better with shorter barrels (and actions): they are cheaper to produce, and the ammo is cheaper to produce (smaller cases work better with lighter bullets)..... lead, brass, and good steel is not cheap, after all ....... just a WAG, but it makes sense.

 

[Father Time]

The .270 is what it is because someone's grandpa had one and killed a bunch of deer with it, so his dad bought one and killed a bunch of deer with it, so all his kids bought one and killed a bunch of deer with them, and then all of his kids kids bought one

This is exactly why I like the cartrige...

It does what its supposed to without fail. It is pretty much a perfect Deer cartrige. Unless you want a short action rifle.

Ever shot a Remington 700 from the late 60's or early 70's. Those rifles are a work of art compaired to the stuff Remington turns out now. (Thanks a lot Cerberus)
Now I happen to have one of those rifle chambered in .270 and whenever I fire it I'm taken back to a time when making firearms was about puting out a quality product. Not about cranking out crap guns to guys that maybe hunt once a year on someone else's land. (Not that there is anything wrong with that)

The .270 did exactly what it was supposed to without needing any of today's "mall ninja" hype or some fancy expanding point. A simple soft point and a clear line of sight was all you needed to get a trophy buck.

*edit*
Hating the .270 because its old and "modern" cartriges have similar characteristics is like hating the .357 magnum because of .357 Sig.
.357 Sig fans will say it mimics the .357 Magnum in a autoloader. Its looks good on paper but in the real world it dosen't exactly work out that way. Plus the .357 magnum has more potential for a handloader. Just because something has been around a long time dosen't mean it is no good. (I find the opposite is usually true)

 

[jimbob86]

The .270 is what it is because someone's grandpa had one and killed a bunch of deer with it, so his dad bought one and killed a bunch of deer with it, so all his kids bought one and killed a bunch of deer with them, and then all of his kids kids bought one

Sort of..... My Grandpa bought his in '58, after reading Jack O'Connor in OL ..... up to then he had borrowed other people's rifles to hunt with .... he quit smoking to finance the purchase ..... My dad did not think much of the .270, probably because his FIL had one..... I noted my Grandpa killed a lot more deer than my dad did ...... I wanted a .270, so my dad bought me a .243 .... it worked, well enough, but it wasn't a .270 .... I've got Grandpa's gun now, and another just like it, as does my brother.....

Ever shot a Remington 700 from the late 60's or early 70's. Those rifles are a work of art

Yep, and 1/2 the price of a new rifle, too.

 

[20thru45]

An 06 and a 270 go hunting both with 24" tubes and 150 grain Nosler CT BT bullets. The 270 has a bc of .496 the 06 a puny .435. The 06 launches that weight of bullet from that length of tube about 100fps faster at 3000. The BC works for the .270 but at 400 yards with a 200 yds sight in the 06 is 3/4" above the 270. The win is the 06 it shot flatter if your counting less than an inch at 400. The 270 burned 4 grains less powder so it kicked less but no one could tell with the rifle to their shoulder, the win goes to .270 if your shoulder is a precision instrument. Every other category goes to the 06, frontal area, availabilty of components, accuracy a hair above .270, versatility, ammo cost, etc.

Other comparisons are available and the .270 is a 26" barrel caliber IMO. With a longer tube and a 130 grain bullet it can be flatter at 500 yards.

We are splitting hairs at that point and both rounds are outstanding, versatile calibers.

Source Nolser #6 upper end MV with rounding.

 

[jgcoastie]

I don't really understand why so many people are hung up on having a super-flat-shooting rifle. I mean, I guess I can see why, but it just doesn't make sense to me.

If I know my rifle and my load and how it performs at range, then what advantage does having a laser-like rifle cartridge give me? As long as you know the drops and are reasonably decent at estimating ranges, the shot is doable.

Even still, for those who believe that the .270 is God's gift to hunters, here's some real data, unaltered or rounded in any way.

All information extracted from the latest version of iSnipe for iPhone.

.270 Win - 130gr Nosler Accubond (BC: .435) - 100yd zero
100yds - 00.00" drop - 2772 fps - 2218 ft/lbs
200yds - 03.04" drop - 2556 fps - 1886 ft/lbs
300yds - 11.40" drop - 2350 fps - 1595 ft/lbs
400yds - 26.07" drop - 2154 fps - 1339 ft/lbs
500yds - 48.25" drop - 1967 fps - 1117 ft/lbs
600yds - 79.44" drop - 1791 fps - 0926 ft/lbs

.260 Rem - 130gr Nosler Accubond (BC: .488) - 100yd zero
100yds - 00.00" drop - 2613 fps - 1972 ft/lbs
200yds - 03.61" drop - 2435 fps - 1712 ft/lbs
300yds - 13.08" drop - 2264 fps - 1479 ft/lbs
400yds - 29.35" drop - 2099 fps - 1272 ft/lbs
500yds - 53.51" drop - 1942 fps - 1088 ft/lbs
600yds - 86.91" drop - 1792 fps - 0927 ft/lbs

So, strictly looking at percentages (of the .270 Numbers listed above), here's what I've come up with...
.270 Win Performance Over .260 Rem
Range - Drop % - Vel. % - Energy %
100yds - 0 % - 5 % - 11 %
200yds - 18.7 % - 4.7 % - 9.2 %
300yds - 14.7 % - 3.6 % - 7.2 %
400yds - 12 % - 2.5 % - 5 %
500yds - 10 % - 1.2 % - 2.9 %
600yds - 9.4 % - -.05 % - -0.1 %

I don't know about you, but none of those numbers show any huge differences between the two... Sure, there's an 18.7% difference in drop at 200yds, but we're talking 18.7% of just over 3" (= .57"). That's not very significant in my mind.

Basically and simply put, the hype surrounding the .270 Win is not substantiated when compared against other cartridges of more efficient design. The .270 was one of the best of it's day, but it's heyday has long since come and gone. Numbers don't lie, there ain't nothin magical about the .270 Win.

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

Basically and simply put, the hype surrounding the .270 Win is not substantiated when compared against other cartridges of more efficient design. The .270 was one of the best of it's day, but it's heyday has long since come and gone. Numbers don't lie, there ain't nothin magical about the .270 Win.

LOL...

This is like a 9mm vs .40S&W in the T&T forum, no one wins, I don't wanna be shot by either...

I load for, and hunt whitetail deer here in GA with .270win, .308win, and 7mm Rem Mag. All but one of the deer I have killed have been within 100yds, the difference in those calibers at that range is negligible. In interviewing the dead deer, they have nothing to say about the caliber of the rifle that killed them, they just sort of lay there dead.

The one deer I shot at longer range was a whitetail at a measured 330yds with my .270win. It detonated like an Hbomb, deer pieces rained down for days, cities miles away were covered in fur, causing havoc with traffic and many news choppers went down in flames. (Actually, it just fell over and died like the rest of them,)

The point I'm making is, who cares? Whip out stats if you like, but if you can't put a bullet on target, it doesn't matter what you're shooting. Just about any rifle ever made will kill a deer within 100yds, and if you're hunting on the east coast of the US, that's probably all you need.

Really... Just pick what you like, learn to shoot accurately with it, and go hunting. Let the others argue what caliber is better or worse.

 

[jgcoastie]

The point I'm making is, who cares? Whip out stats if you like, but if you can't put a bullet on target, it doesn't matter what you're shooting. Just about any rifle ever made will kill a deer within 100yds, and if you're hunting on the east coast of the US, that's probably all you need.

Really... Just pick what you like, learn to shoot accurately with it, and go hunting. Let the others argue what caliber is better or worse.

I honestly don't care which is better or worse, I was simply pointing out that the hype surrounding the .270 Win is essentially nonsense. There's quite a few other cartridges that do what the .270 Win will do, and will do so more efficiently, with a lighter/shorter rifle, and with less recoil. The "magical" world-conquering .270 Win, well... Isn't.

And I've never hunted the East Coast, but I have hunted over a dozen states from MS to AK, from small game to moose, from 5ft to 500yds. And I don't have any problems putting my bullets on target.

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

I honestly don't care which is better or worse, I was simply pointing out that the hype surrounding the .270 Win is essentially nonsense. There's quite a few other cartridges that do what the .270 Win will do, and will do so more efficiently, with a lighter/shorter rifle, and with less recoil. The "magical" world-conquering .270 Win, well... Isn't.

And I've never hunted the East Coast, but I have hunted over a dozen states from MS to AK, from small game to moose, from 5ft to 500yds. And I don't have any problems putting my bullets on target.

I like your posts, and here's my true thoughts on the .270win:

It's a great middle of the road cartridge. If you load, you can load bullets from 90grs to 160grs. It's overpowered for a varmint gun and underpowered for larger than medium game. You can load it for woodchucks and you can load it for moose, but there are calibers that are much more suited for both.

It's a caliber that allows most folks to shoot without punishment. The majority of hunters I know don't load their own, and they fire a few rounds a year to check that their scope is still on target. Five rounds of .270win aren't going to put most folks in the dirt.

The .270win simply allows a majority of the shooting public to own a rifle than "can" be pressed into service on both light and heavy targets, though it's best use is on medium targets(animals).

Nope, the .270 isn't the "magic bullet" anymore than anything else is, it's a good medium range cartridge for most all, but not all North American game.

As an alternate argument, I also load and shoot the 8mm Rem Mag. It's just unreal, folks can't deal with the recoil and muzzle blast, it's a great cartridge, but if you can't put the rounds on target, it doesn't matter what you're sending downrange... horseshoes and hand grenades excepted...

 

[Art Eatman]

If you pull trigger on your Remchester Whizbang and Bambi goes flop, would a Tiko Thumper have made him any more dead?

Enough 'round and 'round and 'round...