deer rifle
- Thread starter RHC
- Start date
RiverRider
New member
RHC, I am prejudiced, but not ashamed of it. Don't buy a .270, get a .280 Remington. Especially if you intend to handload.
There is not a thing wrong with the Ruger M77. I have one in .280 myself, and while I haven't shot it that much yet (even though I've had it three years), I've found it to be very accurate and comfortable to shoot. And the integral scope mounting system of the M77 is nothing less than OUTSTANDING. I think that there is not a rifle produced anywhere in the world today that rivals the 77 in terms of value, quality, accuracy, and features for big game hunting.
There is not a thing wrong with the Ruger M77. I have one in .280 myself, and while I haven't shot it that much yet (even though I've had it three years), I've found it to be very accurate and comfortable to shoot. And the integral scope mounting system of the M77 is nothing less than OUTSTANDING. I think that there is not a rifle produced anywhere in the world today that rivals the 77 in terms of value, quality, accuracy, and features for big game hunting.
DAVID NANCARROW
New member
RHC,
RiverRider has a pretty good selection in the 280. It is a fine cartridge, and the 7mm Remington Mag doesn't beat it by as much as you might think. The only drawback I can think of in the 280 is that factory ammunition can be hard to find, while the 270 and 308 is very common. If you are looking for versatility between the 270 and 308, the 308 has it in spades. I have reloaded for the 308 for better than a decade, with weights ranging from 125 to 200 grains-all with really good result. The 270 I have just started on and have had good experience with 140 grain bullets-both rifles are Remington 700's, but have friends who use the Ruger with good result. Good Hunting!
RiverRider has a pretty good selection in the 280. It is a fine cartridge, and the 7mm Remington Mag doesn't beat it by as much as you might think. The only drawback I can think of in the 280 is that factory ammunition can be hard to find, while the 270 and 308 is very common. If you are looking for versatility between the 270 and 308, the 308 has it in spades. I have reloaded for the 308 for better than a decade, with weights ranging from 125 to 200 grains-all with really good result. The 270 I have just started on and have had good experience with 140 grain bullets-both rifles are Remington 700's, but have friends who use the Ruger with good result. Good Hunting!
How is 308 more versatile? Just curious. 270 allows use of lighter bullets (87gr) for varmints and such. I think the lightest 308 is a 110. 150 gr 270 is suitable for anything in North America correct.
Thanks for answers as I am considering rifle purchase in either 270, 308, 30-06 (maybe even 25-06 or 223)
Thanks for answers as I am considering rifle purchase in either 270, 308, 30-06 (maybe even 25-06 or 223)
Thanks for the interesting replies. I'd never even heard of the .280, and I've never shot a 7 mm, though ammo for 7mm seems readily available here.
Where I live it's pretty brushy. Most shots at deer are close range and many of hunt with shotgun slugs. But I was thinking of going to western Oklahoma, which is much more open and requires longer shots. One of my friends is also talking about an elk trip to Colorado next year, so something bigger would be needed for that, though I have no experience hunting elk and don't know if the .308 is enough for them.
Where I live it's pretty brushy. Most shots at deer are close range and many of hunt with shotgun slugs. But I was thinking of going to western Oklahoma, which is much more open and requires longer shots. One of my friends is also talking about an elk trip to Colorado next year, so something bigger would be needed for that, though I have no experience hunting elk and don't know if the .308 is enough for them.
RHC, one big advantage for the .308 is the availability of good cheap surplus ammo. I just shot a box of the "British '80s .308" from http://www.cheaprethandirt.com and it was pretty good stuff. $3.99 a box of 20. And, of course, you can get a wide variety of premium ammo too. My buddy is partial to anything with Nosler Partitions on the business end.
I suppose I must admit that, between .270, .280 or .308 the differences will be rather small. Check the ballistics--they'll look pretty similar. Some folks will swear by one or the other. Hey, that's why they sell so many different kinds! If one caliber was clearly superior, we'd all buy that.
I bought .308 for 3 reasons:
1) Availability of surplus ammo
2) Lots of military/LEO snipers & long-range shooters use it.
3) Short action (shorter bolt throw than .270 or .30-06).
You may have valid reasons for choosing one of the others.
BTW, the Ruger rifles have a fine reputation. No need to drive unless you find a compelling reason to buy another brand. Mine's a Remington 700, but I could not tell you that it is any better than a Ruger.
If your local business is a good business, I'd stick with 'em. They can probably give you some very good advice on scope/ring mountings, which will be as important as the rifle. My local shop put together an unusual scope mount for me that allows me to keep my iron sights, just in case. I'm new enough to this that I could not have figured that out without lots of trial and error.
Please let us know how your new rifle shoots once you get it set up.
I suppose I must admit that, between .270, .280 or .308 the differences will be rather small. Check the ballistics--they'll look pretty similar. Some folks will swear by one or the other. Hey, that's why they sell so many different kinds! If one caliber was clearly superior, we'd all buy that.
I bought .308 for 3 reasons:
1) Availability of surplus ammo
2) Lots of military/LEO snipers & long-range shooters use it.
3) Short action (shorter bolt throw than .270 or .30-06).
You may have valid reasons for choosing one of the others.
BTW, the Ruger rifles have a fine reputation. No need to drive unless you find a compelling reason to buy another brand. Mine's a Remington 700, but I could not tell you that it is any better than a Ruger.
If your local business is a good business, I'd stick with 'em. They can probably give you some very good advice on scope/ring mountings, which will be as important as the rifle. My local shop put together an unusual scope mount for me that allows me to keep my iron sights, just in case. I'm new enough to this that I could not have figured that out without lots of trial and error.
Please let us know how your new rifle shoots once you get it set up.
RHC, I suscribe to the notion that the best deer rifle is the one that the user can shoot comfortably and hit with consistently. I've owned several Rugers, have no complaints about any of them, and think that you will get good service from one.
As to caliber: the .270 Win. has been around for a very long time and is still quite popular today. I suspect that with the proper bullet/load, it would handle just about anyting that you would be hunting -- short of large bears.
The .280 Rem is ballistically very similar to the .270 and was actually Remington's answer to the very popular .270 Win. A kind of one-upsmanship that the two competitors have played for years. You could likely get a little more speed and power out of the .280, but I doubt the game would notice the difference.
The .308 Win. is a versatile round and is preferred by shooters who like the 30 caliber bullet. As others have mentioned, ammo is widely available and military rounds make for cheap practice. I prefer it to the .30-06 because it is ballistically similar without burning as much powder.
I guess I'm saying that you would likely be happy with any of these choices. And, if later, you decide you need more versatility than you are getting from your choice, then you have the perfect excuse to add another rifle to your rack!
As to caliber: the .270 Win. has been around for a very long time and is still quite popular today. I suspect that with the proper bullet/load, it would handle just about anyting that you would be hunting -- short of large bears.
The .280 Rem is ballistically very similar to the .270 and was actually Remington's answer to the very popular .270 Win. A kind of one-upsmanship that the two competitors have played for years. You could likely get a little more speed and power out of the .280, but I doubt the game would notice the difference.
The .308 Win. is a versatile round and is preferred by shooters who like the 30 caliber bullet. As others have mentioned, ammo is widely available and military rounds make for cheap practice. I prefer it to the .30-06 because it is ballistically similar without burning as much powder.
I guess I'm saying that you would likely be happy with any of these choices. And, if later, you decide you need more versatility than you are getting from your choice, then you have the perfect excuse to add another rifle to your rack!
Art Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
For jp2us
While the difference between the .270 and any .30 is only a nominal thirty-thousandths of an inch, there are important considerations due to this difference. Aside from issues of the jacket thickness of different weights of bullets, and shapes (boat-tail or flat-base, pointed or round nose, etc.), barrel-twist comes into play.
In 30-caliber, a broad range of weights can be fired quite accurately (certainly for hunting accuracy) with a "medium" twist rate. E.g., 110-grain to 220-grain bullets and a twist rate of one turn in nine or ten inches.
In a .270, to go much beyond 150 grains means a very long bullet. For proper overall length, it must be seated rather deeply, thus limiting powder charge and thus velocity. Then, the long bullet requires a faster twist rate for stability and thus accuracy--which then limits the ability to shoot the 87-grain varmint bullets.
Sorta "quick & dirty"; hope this helps about "why".
For decades, the majority of .270-shooters just used a 130-grain load for deer or antelope, and usually a 150-grain load for elk. It was strictly a hunter's gun. Experimenters and tweakers mostly played with the '06. The 1960s saw the advent of many new cartridges, notably the .308 and its variations like the .243, the 7mm-08, etc. Most of these show most of their promise due to the quality of modern rifles, tuning techniques and scopes, not by anything inherent in the cartridges themselves.
FWIW, Art
While the difference between the .270 and any .30 is only a nominal thirty-thousandths of an inch, there are important considerations due to this difference. Aside from issues of the jacket thickness of different weights of bullets, and shapes (boat-tail or flat-base, pointed or round nose, etc.), barrel-twist comes into play.
In 30-caliber, a broad range of weights can be fired quite accurately (certainly for hunting accuracy) with a "medium" twist rate. E.g., 110-grain to 220-grain bullets and a twist rate of one turn in nine or ten inches.
In a .270, to go much beyond 150 grains means a very long bullet. For proper overall length, it must be seated rather deeply, thus limiting powder charge and thus velocity. Then, the long bullet requires a faster twist rate for stability and thus accuracy--which then limits the ability to shoot the 87-grain varmint bullets.
Sorta "quick & dirty"; hope this helps about "why".
For decades, the majority of .270-shooters just used a 130-grain load for deer or antelope, and usually a 150-grain load for elk. It was strictly a hunter's gun. Experimenters and tweakers mostly played with the '06. The 1960s saw the advent of many new cartridges, notably the .308 and its variations like the .243, the 7mm-08, etc. Most of these show most of their promise due to the quality of modern rifles, tuning techniques and scopes, not by anything inherent in the cartridges themselves.
FWIW, Art
Victor L. Brophy Jr.
Inactive
I would personally prefer either the .280 Remington or the .30-06 to the .270 Winchester for an all-around cartridge for hunting American big game. The .280 shoots just as flat with the lighter bullets for long-range work on the smaller species and offers heavier bullets for deeper penetration on the big ones. The .30-06 is nearly as flat as either one with light bullets (just as flat if loaded to the same pressures) and has the advantage of the real heavyweights like the 200 and 220-grain for heavy game at close range. It also has the advantage of a larger frontal area that tears up more nerves and tissue along the way. One of the strongest points of the .30-06 is its modest chamber pressure. At forty-eight to fifty thousand pounds per square inch, case life and barrel life are at their best. More-modern cartridges like the .270 Winchester and the .280 Remington operate at considerably higher chamber pressures-- fifty-two to fifty-four thousand--to closely duplicate the performance of the .30-06.