Relative Amateur Needs Help re .270 Caliber

"...with the exception of the largest Brown bear..." Even them with the right bullet. Wouldn't be one's first choice though.
"...the bare minimum for elk and moose..." Nope. Bullwinkle is far bigger than any elk. The .270 is a long way from the bare minimum.
Difference between a .308 and .270 is primarily the length of the action. Any firearm is going to give you pain with advanced Rheumatoid Arthritis. Even with an advanced recoil system and muzzle brake. Except maybe a semi-auto. With one of those you'll trade felt recoil for weight. Only about one whole pound though.
 
Thanks a million...

...for your fast and knowledgeable replies!

So the .270 has as much recoil as the .308 (& even perhaps more)?! You could knock me down with a feather! It's so counterintuitive! I thought, 'smaller round, less recoil.' I knew the .270 is a long action round, but thought the significantly lighter round would make up for the extra 'umph.'

Handlerer: You say the recoil is greater? Some say it is the same. What, besides of course the obvious (firing each in the same model rifle), can help you determine the recoil of any given round? Like the numbers on a ballistics chart for 'X' type ammo?

To all: I don't load myself, so my ammo would be off the shelf.

Pathfinder: Thank you. What happened was this. I'd come home from the range and leaned my rifle, in its padded gun case, against the wall with the intention of cleaning it. I didn't get to it right away, as I should have, and 2 days later a plumber (one guy and his teenaged son) came in did some work. Two days later, our new oven arrived and a pair of guys came in and installed it. Two days ago, the 17th, I received a soft case for my new shotgun. Only THEN did I think of my .308. It was gone. Brother, let me tell you I took my house apart looking for it on the slender hope I'd stuck it somewhere odd. I hadn't. So I cannot say which crew did the stealing. The plumber price gouged the s___ out of my GF (teaching his son good values, the bastard) so I'm leaning towards them. I was home when the oven guys were here, though I didn't hover over them (more fool I). If I contact each outfit and tell them that their employee MAY have stolen a rifle - well, I'd be slandering a possibly innocent man and perhaps cost him his job. I just have to eat the loss.
The gun has already been reported stolen and I hope they catch the bastard. It's minimum 5 years for having a stolen weapon. I'd be sure to send him letters asking how his day going and filling him in on how he and his wife/gf are getting along. But were they to recover it, would I get it back? I thought they destroyed such weapons?

2DaMtns: A .25-06 might do for white-tail, but could it do an Elf or Black Bear should I ever get the opportunity? I know the closest to nothing about this round and would LOVE to hear more. I like that it's short action, too, but need loads of info.

Mystro: I'm wary of the .243. I'm not convinced I can do what I would ask of it. Now, I'd be the first to admit I'm no ballistics expert, but it seems underpowered. Certainly it couldn't take game larger than a WT deer?


Anyone else have any advice as regards the .243?

KraigWY: A muzzle brake would be an idea, but I'll be replacing my CZ 550FS with another, caliber being the only potential change. A muzzle brake isn't compatible with a Mannlicher stock. TY, though.

William: Thank you for responding. I'm having a heck of a time getting an idea of a .270's recoil. Wish I knew someone with one. Heck, I probably do - but I relatively new to 'my' private range and don't know anyone well enough to ask, yet. If I see someone out there shooting, I intend to approach to see what caliber they're shooting and, if it's one of the ones y'all named, if I may fire it a couple times. It'd be different rifle, yes, but would still give me an good idea as to ecoil.

Allen: Good to hear the .270 can tackle anything North America dishes out, barring grizzlys. But again, no muzzle brake on a Mannlicher. If I'm wrong on this, please do tell me, but I can't see it.

JMR: EXCELLENT info. I like numbers as it makes it less subjective. Where'd you come by this info? I'd love it if you could link me to a list covering all (well, not ALL but you know what I mean) calibers. I understand a lot would depend on several variables, but am assuming your info - and any chart - would keep those variables constant so as to give an accurate comparison.

Stillhunter: Seeing a pattern here. CAN a muzzle brake be used on a rifle with a full stock (Mannlicher)? As for the 6.5x55 and the 7mm-08, isn't the ammo hard to find and super-expensive (compared to the .308, .270, .243)? Please let me know!

Ammocrafter: That round is too 'exotic' for me. TY, though.

603Country: Again, too exotic.

Gary: I appreciate y'all's responding, but I need/want a more 'mainstream' caliber whose ammo is readily available and reasonably priced.

LlamaBob: Thanks for endorsing the .270. It's recoil is beginning to scare me off it, though. I'll be looking at the Limbsaver Nitro pad after posting this.

OldRoper: That's it, alright. So gorgeous. Thanks for the recommendation. I'm sitting on the fence after y'all's input - between the .270 the .243 or simply another .308.

Art Eatman: I'm definitely going to look into recoil pads. As for my condition, it's pretty bad. I could maybe do 5 miles cross-country. Much more and my body would be useless once it had a chance to lock up and swell. I've got you beaten, though, as a young and healthy man. I went on backpacking trips every Fall (sometimes twice in the same Fall) with a 100lb pack and cover 25 miles a day and could push to 30. Wasn't hunting, though.

Hooligan: Look at this: https://www.gunsamerica.com/UserImages/5212/996009312/wm_7685621.jpg
Can't do those things this rifle.

T. O'Heir: Thanks for the advice. I, too, am a bit pedantic when it comes to spelling and grammar. It's really the only way to gauge a person's knowledge (or, more precisely, education) online. We can never forget, though, that lack of an education does not a stupid person make. I also value precision in language - I think it's inherited, my father and all his brothers and sisters are attorneys.

Tobnpr: Roger.

OK, y'all. Now I'm seriously doubting the .270. There's no rush, I will need to find out more about the .243. ANY further info is more than welcome! For available calibers in the rifle I've chosen, visit CZ-USA. I'm after the 550 with the Mannlicher stock. There is a Mannlicher whose model is 527, but it only comes in .223. It doesn't HAVE to be CZ, but must be a Mannlicher stock married to a quality gun - which leaves only CZ as Steyr requires a second mortgage.

THANKS!!!
Pan
 
Hi im not really an expert or anything but I think the 7mm-08 or .260 would be good for you both highly capable very accurate hunting rounds. The 6.5x55 is the same as a .260 just the ammo is hard to come by. I was at the gun shop the other day and someone was at the counter and the owner of the gun shop came in and handed him a cz box. He opened It up and it was a cz with a mannlicher stalk chambered in 6.5 swede. It was a thing of beauty but it looked heavy. The 6.5swede will take hogs with ease using 150-160gr bullets deer wouldn't require nearly as much lead or recoil though. Oh and about recoil the 6.5 isnt really comparable to a .270 maybe a .308 with varmint loads. Its somewhere in bettween a 25-06 and a 7mm-08. Anyways i wish you the best of luck and im sincerely sorry for your loss .
 
I've been quite satisfied with the performance of my .243. It's an old Sako Forester carbine; 19" barrel. Seven pounds, all dressed up to party. I've tagged some two-dozen bucks with it, plus a fair number of cull-program deer at the old family ranch. I've yet to have had to track a deer.

My pet load is the Sierra 85-grain HPBT. Perfect for neck shots and cross-body heart/lung shots. I won't take an angling shot because it's a blow-up bullet that's truly ruinacious on coyotes. :)

While I wouldn't figure it as my elk rifle, IMO it's plenty good for varmints, deer and hogs. Targets? I have no difficulty in 1/2- to 3/4-MOA, reliably; I probably could mess with loads and improve on that somewhat.

And even at seven pounds, the recoil is trivial.
 
Bullwinkle is far bigger than any elk.
Click to expand...
This is true, but by nearly all accounts the elk is the harder creature of the two to bring down. As of yet I haven't managed to pull a moose tag to compare, but hopefully one day.

And I will stand by the statement that .270 is about the minimum reasonable elk and moose caliber along with the very similar 6.5mm calibers. Is it legal to use less? Yes, in some places. Would I recommend it? No.
 
Specifics

Thank, Y'all,

I ought to have made this clear from the get-go. The CZ 550FS comes in the following calibers ONLY: .308; .243; 6.5x55; .270; .30 - 06; and 9.3x62.

There is the CZ 527 that comes in only .223. I'm willing to go for other models or manufacturers, but am after a rifle with a full stock - a Mannlicher stock. A nice rifle. I think Century Arms imports a Zastava but it's... a bit rough around the edges. The only other Mannlicher I know of is the Steyr which is too expensive.

Thanks!
Pan
 
Just a quick note for the OP.
A 270 will drive a 150 grain bullet at 2850 to 3000 FPS depending on loads and barrel length
A 308 will drive the dame weight of bullet at about 2850 max
So in 2 rifles of the same weight the 270 can have a bit more recoil. A very very little bit, but a bit.

I have more experience with the 270 Winchester than most other men I know, having shot the throats out of 2 barrel in one of my rifles and having over 3000 rounds now through the 3rd barrel as well as having many thousands of round through the barrels on 3 other 270s I own.

Any thoughts of the 270 being "barely enough" for elk is 100% false.
Not only is it fine for elk, but it's excellent for the task.
I am 60 years old and I have been hunting since I was an adolescent boy and I have been a guide for other hunters for many of those years also. I can't count the number of elk I have seen killed in my life and would have to think hard to come up with the number I have killed.
Gun-magazine authors and those that sell advertising will hate me for this, but the truth of this matter is just this.... I can't see any real difference between how fast a 270 puts an elk on the ground and how fast a 300 mag does the same thing. In fact I see a step up in lethality on elk only when I get to the 375H&H.
I have never killed a moose with a 270, but I have seen it done 3 times. All were one shot kills and all were on the ground in about 5-10 seconds.

The largest animal I have seen killed with a 270 was a buffalo 5 years ago shot by a lady friend of mine. One shot in the neck and the buffalo fell before the recoil was gone.

When I was a teen I killed a few cattle and about a dozen horses with my 270. Never needed 2 shots. Never had any of them stay on their feet more than a few seconds and most of the horses fell instantly. Cows go down slower as a rule, but not slow enough to make me think I didn't have enough rifle. Would not have mattered in those days if I had wanted something bigger anyway, because the 270 was the biggest rifle we had in the home then. My Dad had sold his 300 savage and kept a Winchester 30-30 and I had my 270, so we did everything we needed with those 2 rifles. The 30-30 did not kill as fast, so my dad usually used my 270 too.

Anyway, lay any fear that you are under-gunned to rest.
Use a GOOD bullet. Not one that breaks up, but if you use bullets that hold their weight well, the 270 will do anything you need it to do.

I now own some guns that are more powerful and I love them all. I have killed game with them all too. I don't think the 270 is "better" at killing elk than my 300 mag, but it is not worse either.

I have 30-06s a 300, a 9.3X74R, a 375 H&H and I have owned and used 8mm Mausers, 8X68, 338-06, 338 Win mag, 348 Winchester, 416 Taylor, 45-70s 458 Winchester and 460 G&A, a 50-140 Sharps and also 50 cal, 54 cal, 58 cal and 62 cal muzzleloaders to kill game with.
The 9.3 and the 375 seem to slap them harder then the 270, and the big 41 and 45s do if the bullets are correct and expand (some don't, and an elk killed with a 458 mag with a soft point bullet stayed on his feet for about 10 seconds one time when the bullet didn't open up)
But as I said, I can't see much difference in the killing effects between a good 270 and anything else up to the 375.
 
Last edited:
Can you define "better"?

If it is a numbers game you should look at flight of bullets .277 VS .284 at velocities available from each.
If you are looking at hunting you should look at what constitutes "better" on game.

There is not a thing wrong with a 280.

But as I said in my post above, on elk and probably nay other game up to about 900 pounds, I don't think you'll really find anything 'better" until you get to a 375H&H or there-abouts. My 375 does put elk down faster then the 270 if not big bones are hit. If the big bones are hit there is no difference there either, but for a larger diameter wound from the larger bullet.

In the killing of elk with a 300 magnum VS the 270 I have not seen any real difference in the 40 years I have been doing this.
A 300 magnum fires a larger diameter bullet of heavier weight at the same velocity as the 270, flys as flat or even a bit flatter, but the elk can't seem to tell any difference.
So if a 280 is "better" I have not see that either. We can compare numbers but in comparing kills you don't really see much to argue about.

You will find quite a lot of cartridges that are just as good.

This is never really about the gun.
It's always 98% about the hunter.
 
270 is a 30-06 case necked down. I never could tell the difference between it and 06.

Intended to be filled with powder and go fast.

You could go 243 or buy 308 and if you hand load you can use bottom of the chargers for target shooting.
 
Well, it might be that a 180 grain 308 could have a different perceived recoil compared to a 130 grain 270. But having a full size rifle with a recoil pad makes either one milder than a light weight rifle. With handloads you can make either one as mild as you need. Then switch out to full strength ammo for hunting. You will never notice the difference for the one or two shots taken on game.
 
Well I guess I'll add my $0.02 worth. I own and shoot the .270, .280, .308 and 30-06 among several other cartridges. Frankly I see little difference in recoil between the four cartridges mentioned which varies anyway depending on thew bullet weight load in use.
I notice that the CZ comes in the 6.5x55 Swede. If it has to be a CZ and light recoil is mandatory, that's the one I'd look at. After all, that cartridge is popular for hunting moose in the Scandinavian nations. The few CZ rifles I've handled were a bit on the heavy side which would go a ways towards mitigating recoil.
Many years ago when I worked part time for a gunsmith I was able to build a lightweight shorter on a 96 Mauser in the 6.5x55. At the point where it came time to test fire the rifle, it surprised me at how light the recoil was. All the rifle needed was a scope mounted as it was for all practical purposes done. It weighed only 7 pounds even.
Perhaps the OP might look at something in the 6.5 Swede, possibly a .260 Remington or a 7-08 Remington. Although ammo is a bit difficult to find I'll even throw in my favorite, the 7x57 Mauser. Most larger sporting goods place will at least have Federal brand 7x57 and it's decent stuff. I believe it comes in 140 and 175 gr. bullet weights and is accurate. If the OP is a handloader, he can improve the power of the cartridge by a noticable amount. It's easy to duplicate the power of the 7-08 in perfect safety in a modern rifle should he decide to do so.
I'm currently working with several bullets in my 7x57 at this time in preparation for a cow elk hunt come next December. I have arthritis in my shoulder as swell so the bigger boomers are going to stay home this year.
My condolences on the loss of that rifle. I have a good friend and all he will buy is CZ rifle. I think he probably has a half dozen or so by now.
Paul B.
Edited because auto-correct strikes again Hope I caught them all. Dang but I hate that thing. :mad:
 
I,m in the same boat your in.My shooting shoulder has a nice 4in. surgical scare,from when i had it fixed,when i was thirty-something.The older i get the more it bothers me.

I agree,i think a muzzle brake is not an option now.Even if it was, IMO it would make it look fugly.

I called a friend of my who thinks the world revolves around the 6.5x55,he said the ammo is readily available online.He reloads now,but he did say even in the ammo shortage time he found it online.

Now i am in no way trying to sell you a 6.5x55,that choice is strictly up to you. But if you don,t mind purchasing ammo online,then the ammo availability issue shouldn,t be a problem.
 
Pan, sorry about your loss. People who think its ok to take something that they didn't earn away from someone who did earn it drives me crazy!

I would highly recommend the 243 to you. My thoughts are enjoy what you know you will do most. If you buy a larger caliber because you hope to hunt elk it'll make every trip to the range less enjoyable and you may never even hunt elk. You might have to make a deliberate decision to not hunt elk so that you can enjoy shooting still. That stinks to let RA dictate that, but my wife has similar joint issues and I have seen how it can control what we do.

Of course one possibility is to buy the 243 and try to find someone who will lend you a larger caliber in the event you do get to hunt elk. That would probably be the best of both worlds!

Whatever you choose, have fun!
 
Last edited:
Most of those who own a 270 have no need for a 243 as the 270 will do everything and more than a 243. However, in this case, I see every reason to have both. With a problem shoulder, I think you should just go ahead and put a recoil pad on the 243 as well. It could make the difference between limiting yourself to just one box, or being able to enjoy shooting all day and not feel it the next.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top