Mountain Rifle Cartridge

Greetings PVL,

270 vs 7mmrm, both good, both kill stuff. I would lean more toward the 270 or a 280 and not bloodshot the meat as bad. From what I have seen the 7mmrm seems do a lot more meat damage than the 3006 family of cartridges. Still a great cartridge, but if your intent is to eat what you shoot the 270/280 is probably a better choice.
 
Thank you PVL for defending the A-Bolt, saved me some typing. I've owned one since the early 90's in 300 Winchester and it has served me very well. It was accurate enough to place Nosler Partitions into a 1" group regularly. My only complaint was the trigger but they seem to have fixed that with the A-Bolt II's, and with a little work I was able to get my trigger pull down to a crisp 4.5 pounds. It really sounds to me like you've made your choice and are going with the 270 Winchester and I don't believe you'll be disappointed. It is a great cartridge and with the right bullets is a good elk round. Looking forward to seeing pictures of your new rifle! What scope do you plan on putting on it?
 
Too bad you weren't buying earlier this year! Browning was offering shot show A-bolt composite stalkers chambered in 6.5 Creedmoor. That would have been the bee's knees for a mountain rifle.
 
Get the lightest rifle in a .270. As Jack O'Connor said, "You carry a rifle more than you shoot it." In addition there is a noticeable difference in recoil. I have had both, and prefer the .270 for everything on this continent except the large bears.

Jerry
 
I have hunting rifles that range from .243 Win to .444 Marlin.
My go-to rifle for any type of game, is a .270.
But, it's a heavy .270. Fully loaded, with my preferred sling, it tops 11 lbs. :rolleyes:

My 'mountain rifle' (~7.2 lbs?) happens to be chambered in .30-06, but I'd be perfectly happy with a .270 Win barrel on it.

If I was in the market for another 'mountain rifle', it would be another .270.
A well-placed shot from a .270 is no better or worse than a well placed shot from a 7mm RM... but you have the advantage of not having to deal with as much recoil or muzzle blast.
 
I'm not a Browning fan but I won't try to talk you out of one if that's what you have already decided on.

All I will say is take a look at the Tikka T3 lite stainless.

The .270 is a great choice for mulies and elk. 7mm RM is fine too but as stated earlier it has extra recoil and muzzle blast without any worthwhile advantages over the .270

You might also consider the .270 wsm if you'd like a shorter action
 
I've looked at the Winchester Short Magnums and I think the cartridge is just fine - but the rifles are generally made with too short a barrel for the cartridge.

Some of them are as short as 22".

Too much hot air from gun writers about "short, light and handy" rifles as if they had forgotten that they were writing about a magnum cartridge that needs at least 24" of barrel in order to work properly.

A demand was created for "light, short, handy" short magnums, so that's what the manufacturers made.

I'll be honest about the Tikka, what turns me off of that brand is that I would perpetually be kicking myself for not going ahead and getting a Sako. I understand that they are accurate but so is the Ruger American, if accuracy were my only criteria.

The problem is that I have been spoiled to using the upper-crust stuff and though I have bought less expensive guns plenty of times, I have never really been happy with them, no matter how well they shoot. - They always wind up being traded off for something else after a while.

I suppose that means that I'm a gun snot and if so, then so be it. I've noticed that I spend a lot more time holding and admiring my guns than shooting them, especially on a hunt and it's a lot easier for me to work up admiration for something that is admirable.

But that's just me. I'd rather spend two or three times as much on a Browning, a Sako or a Weatherby that won't shoot noticeably better than a lot of the entry-level guns that you can pick up for a couple of hundred bucks at a chain store.

If money were truly no object, then I would just buy a Mauser 03 model with a nice selection of barrels, bolt heads and magazines.


http://www.mauser.com/Specifications.144.0.html?&L=1

Interchangeable take-down barrels and bolt heads, good looks, top quality, modern design, it's got it all.
 
Last edited:
It looks like I got what I asked for here, good advice that helped me decide about the cartridge. - I'm going with the 270.

I went about this completely backwards... The clever way to go is to pick a cartridge that matches your intended use - then shop among the brands and models that feature your chosen cartridge.

The barrel tuner is important to me though, so that narrows it down to Browning. Winchester bought licensing to use the BOSS tuner, but I don't see it in their catalog so that eliminates the great model 70s.

There is an aftermarket tuner available at Brownells that can be mounted on just about anything, but it only comes with a muzzle-brake and I'd rather take a beating from recoil than blow somebody's ears off. If it had an option like the BOSS does, I would consider it very seriously.
 
Last edited:
.270 win and 7mm mag are pretty similar on paper. If you're shooting the 7mm mag from a short-ish barrel, 22-24inches, then the .270 is probably the better choice, as the 7mm wont have much of an advantage over the .270 with that barrel length. With a barrel that short, you are essentially turning any extra MV and ME you may have had, and turning it into extra recoil and muzzle flash.
The 7mm has some better high BC bullet choices, in the heaviest weights, but the Nosler accubond 'long range' makes a .277 150 grain, with a listed G1 BC of .625, which is quite high.

With that bullet, on paper, you have over 1550ft/lbs of energy @ 500 yards and over 1000ft/lbs energy @ 850 yards.
 
"Would I be able to get by, shooting muleys and possibly an elk with the .270?"

Well, you've already decided on the .270 and I say great choice even though it's not my number one favorite. :eek: I've just been having more fun with some of the more slightly exotic rounds so although I've had a .270 of one sort or another, I have shot targets and game with the round. Except for my Ruger #1A, all my .270's have had 24" barrels I shoot no factory ammo and only 150 gr. bullets, the Sierra game King and Nosler Partition. The only exception to use of factory ammo is one box to take fired cartridge measurements and get a rough idea of accuracy. Speaking of accuracy, I currently have four rifles chambered to the .270 and all are sub-MOA with my handloads except the #1 which still stays right around an inch. I shoot rifles from the .22 Hornet to the .416 Rigby and the easiest cartridge I've found to get an accurate load has been the .270 hands down. I definitely would not feel handicaaped if all I had was a .270 to hunt with. Not necesarilly happy but not handicapped. ;):D
Paul B.
 
PVL,

If you are into expensive, eye-pleasing rifles, have you seen the Winchester model 70 Jack O' Connor tribute rifle? I know it doesn't have the Boss system but man it's one beautiful rifle. I'd love to have one someday if funds allow.

Of course it's only available in .270, JOC's favorite
these first pics are from a thread here on TFL started by Mystro, who owns one of these rifles
JOCcombonet.jpg


oconnorfull2.jpg


I believe they were only made in 2012, and they were from Winchester's custom shop.
 
Last edited:
That O'Connor would be beautiful if they had left the signature off the triggerguard and the "the .270 will not let you down" on the receiver.
 
The .270 will be more than enough

I'd even opt for something like a .260 or 7mm-08 so you can shave off a few ounces by going to a short action.
 
When talking featherweight "mountain" rifles I don't think of 270s or 280s in a 20-22" barrel give me a short action 308 based cartridge anyday. There is so little difference in performance between the 270 and 7mm-08 in a short tube that it is hardly worth the mention. The 7mm-08 will recoil less, have less muzzle blast and weigh a few ounces less to boot.
 
"When talking featherweight "mountain" rifles I don't think of 270s or 280s in a 20-22" barrel give me a short action 308 based cartridge anyday. "

Oh really? Currently I have a comercial FN Mauser in .270 Win. with a soda straw thin barrel that is a moutain hunter's dream at 7 pounds with scope, full magazine and leather sling. :eek: It will put three 150 gr. Nosler Partitions into .75" all day long and sometime less when I really do my part. Velocity is 2900 plus a couple with my handload. I hate to say if but the stock is ugly as sin. I believe, to quote the late Jack O'Connor, "It has a stock so ugly it would abort a lady crocodile." I'd restock it but I'm afraid I would lose that almost perfect level of accuracy. Kind of a, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." situation. I never argue with Mr. Murphy. ;)
Paul B.
 
Just some background of the JOC rifle.....The JOC rifle was the most exacting and researched custom rifle Winchester has ever done. The Jack O'Connor Center had to authorize every detail of the rifle. The family also took Jack's famous #2 rifle from the museum and let Winchester take it apart to laser measure the stock. Winchester went into their special archive wood vault to select the French Walnut for the stock. Lord only knows how old that wood is. ;). Winchester said it was their most honored collaboration they have ever done on a Custom Shop Rifle. I spoke to Jack's son about the collaboration and it was a big deal because it will never be done again. The family only wanted one tribute rifle done by Winchester. Even the Jack O'Connor Center supplies the custom rifle cases with each rifle's serial number. About every gun publication made it rifle of the year and it was put on the very short list of rifle of the century. If your a Winchester M70 fan, JOC fan, or 270 fan, it is once in a lifetime must own rifle. You don't need to talk someone into buying a Rolls Royce. You kinda just know.;)

The JOC rifle even though it is a feather weight is about 1/2 heavier than a synthetic stock gun but for what it brings in confidence, ballance and beauty, its AAA grade French walnut is worth it. A black plastic stock might shed some weight but.....it would be like saying your 18k gold wedding ring would be lighter made out of aluminum. :D


its also a shooter.

Range2net.jpg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top