Tikka T3 .270 ... she kicks!

recoil - old topic but worth reviving.

yesterday I took out 3 rifles to shoot- a Win. M70 300 Weatherby Mag, Mauser K98 sporter rebarreled to 270 Win. w/19.5" barrel, and Mauser vintage German sporter 1930's 8x57 built on a K98 action 22" barrel.

first fired one shot from the Weatherby, the sudden recoil was impressive and different, but not painful, the factory red recoil pad cushioned it well. It really was not that bad. The best I can describe it is like a 30-06 or 35 Whelen with a heavy bullet, but recoiling faster ?

then fired the 8x57, which had no recoil pad, just a fiber bakelite plate. Ouch that hurt a little but was somewhat tolerable. I have many Mauser M98 K98 Gew98 8x57's and this one was on the light side and kicked noticeably more than the dozens I've fired in the past. Was also shooting old Soviet Eastern Bloc ammo, that ammo is known to be loaded "hot" from the factory.

then fired the 270 with factory loads and HOLY CRAP that was a cannon and really hurt like heck, I mean after 4 shots it was downright painful, reminded me of the time shooting rifled slugs from a 12 gauge model 500 Mossberg pump shotgun. OUCH !! I've fired some nasty stuff in my lifetime with no recoil pad, but that 270 will make your teeth rattle. It had an old recoil pad that had dried up and hardened into the consistency of hard plastic. My shoulder still hurts today, and driving home the pain was going down into my arm and elbow.

proceeded to fire 11 rounds from the 270 and about 20 rounds from the 8x57, it was pretty brutal between both rifles. I fire 100's of rounds per year at my own range, and this was the first time that recoil made sighting a rifle in not enjoyable.

I had read long ago a very good rifle/shooting publication by Jack O'Connor where he discussed barrel lengths and gun weight and recoil. His general conclusion was a light 270 will kill on one end and maim on the other. I have many 30-06 rifles (14 of them), a 9x57, a few 308's, 280, 303, 7.7 Jap, lots of 8x57's, etc. and none of them kick like that 270. It kicked more than an 8x57 or 30-06 with 220 grain bullets, and it kicked more than my 9x57 with old Kynoch 250 grain ammo.

my own thoughts are that the 270 is traditionally loaded very hot by the U.S. ammo factories, and on the high side of pressure, in line with it's reputation as a top long range hunting round. Shooting somewhat lighter bullets than the 30-06, the factories got in the habit of loading it with faster powder, and more of it, or more of a slower powder, to push the pressure and velocity limits.

what amazed me was, the light sporter Mausers kicked twice as badly as the 300 Weatherby chambered M70. I could have fired 2 boxes of shells through the 300 W. no problem, it was a decent weight gun with a very efficient recoil pad.

basic rule of thumb, nothing shorter than 22" barrel, keep the gun over 8 lbs. and with a big magnum preferably 9 lbs. 8.5 lbs. seems to be optimum to absorb recoil energy and still be light to carry.

and realistically, there should be a recoil pad on every long arm, be it a shotgun or rifle. Anything from say a 250 Savage length cartridge/powder capacity on up could use a recoil pad. Anything from a 308 on up definitely needs one.

something like a 223 you don't really need one
 
Last edited:
Stock fit and rifle weight have a lot to do with felt recoil. If you dont want to add weight to the rifle, then getting a good recoil pad installed on your stock will make a lot of difference providing that you adjust your LOP to fit YOU while you are getting it installed. BTW 1/2" LOP can make a difference!
 
agreed, in this case the 2 Mausers were somewhat lighter in weight around 7.5 lbs. and the Win. 70 300 Wby Mag was just over 8 lbs.

a half a pound in weight makes a noticeable difference
 
I am thinking of a Tikka T3 but not the "light" (composite stock) version. I'd opt for the "Hunter" (wood stock) version. A little more weight there and really nice looking wood.

There are shortcuts out there to minimize the number of rounds needed to sight in. As someone said these are hunting rifles and not bench rifles.

I'd STILL sight it in on the bench though. I rarely need more then 5-10 rounds to get it right. Once sighted in on the bench go hunt with it! Next year take a couple shots off the bench to make sure it's still on and go hunt with it again. If you're shooting at a game animal you won't even feel that recoil.
 
there is a sensible balance between rifle weight and barrel length, it varies from person to person, I prefer a 22" barrel minimum, and at least 8 lbs. weight, with a recoil pad. 8.5 lbs. is ok. At 9 lbs. the gun starts feeling a bit heavy to carry around for extended distances.

if one is hunting dangerous game in Africa or brown bear and grizzly in Alaska, then it goes with the territory, and the proper tool there is a high powered magnum, and live with the recoil and muzzle blast-

but I would not put up with excessive muzzle blast and recoil, to shoot a 150 lb. whitetail deer, that would be overkill on both ends

most of my rifles are dual purpose, i.e. target/range and hunting. Typically these are the milsurp sporters i.e. Enfield, SMLE, Springfield, Mauser, Arisaka 38 and 99, etc. The milsurp ammo is still relatively cheap and plentiful in my area.

a rifle with a 22"-24" barrel you can shoot a lot and have more fun with as a dual purpose rifle, and the old milsurps being made for it, take it in stride. If they retain the military stock cut down, the stock is reinforced at the front recoil lug and rear guard screw, to survive the pounding of firing 1000's of rounds in battle. I would not take something like a new Remington 700 or Winchester 70 to run 200 rounds of FMJ milsurp ammo through shooting targets. But I would do that with an Enfield or Springfield, and the guns shrug is off like nothing.
 
Last edited:
yeh recoil pads work wonders for perceived recoil

not much one can do about a barrel that's on the short side though, unless the barrels are interchangeable i.d. a takedown type rifle
 
My experience with the .270 Winchester is limited to the SIG SHR 970, I am 5"10", 200 more or less muscular pounds, I found the recoil mild. In addition to the solutions mentioned, I recommend some shoulder work with weights, that builds up your permanently attached recoil pad, so to speak.
 
I've shot lots of hard-kicking rifles from the bench, but wearing a PAST recoil shield on my shoulder they're tamed down adequately. A recoil pad on the rifle makes it even better.

Flinching from recoil is the killer to good shots. It wastes expensive ammo and causes people to sell rifles that would be great when shot from most field positions.

A Caldwell Lead Sled is the ultimate recoil reducer for magnums, but they're not best for accuracy.
 
(chuckle....) Nothing against weight lifting and staying in shape, if you're already into weight lifting, then that would be an added perk- you could tolerate more recoil. But physical fitness has little to do with intelligent firearms selection. One of the best snipers in the world was Carlos Hathcock, and he was not a large musclebound guy. He also won a 1000 yard match with a 300 H&H Magnum rifle back in the 1960's, but rest assured it was not very light and not short barreled. IMHO the money and time spent on weights and lifting, could be spent on loading ammo and shooting. Buy the gun that fits one's stature, and shooting demands, rather than try to build a stature to accomodate a gun, that's too big for one's actual shooting needs anyway.

to make an analogy, there was a reason why fighter planes had 50 cal. machine guns, and battleships had big 16" diameter guns. They didn't try to build an airplane like a battleship, just to put a 16" gun on it.

I'm 5' 10" and 175, and a strong person physically, in good physical condition, but I was firing the same rifles as a kid back in 1970's, when I weighed 130 lbs. I would not buy a 6.5 lb. 18" barrel 300 Magnum, even if I weighed 300 lb. and was built like Arnold Schwartzenegger. Something like that has no practical purpose, and very limited usefulness, and actually needs to be re-barreled, and restocked, to make it useable for the average person.

there's still an explosion blast going off about 24" from your face, and how big you are, doesn't lessen or matter to muzzle blast. As I said before, there's a delicate balance between rifle weight and barrel length. A 10 lb., 300 Magnum, with 18" barrel may not kick as much due to weight, but the muzzle blast and noise would be excessive and intolerable.

it's not just weight and barrel length alone, but both factors together.

I'd want a recoil pad on most any gun, down to even a 410 shotgun or 243W or 250 Savage rifle. It's just a good idea to have padding between a blunt wooden rifle stock and your shoulder, common sense. Think of it like a bushing or bearing on a wearing surface, like a rod bearing in a car. It also protects the buttstock from getting chipped up over time. Many rifles I've seen without recoil pads, have been chipped at the bottom corners of the stock.

I'm 50 years old, and have been reloading, target/skeet shooting, hunting, collecting rifles, and home gunsmithing for 35 years- the dirty little secret about rifles is, if they are over-powered for the type of hunting or target shooting actually done, or they have excessive muzzle blast and recoil, they usually get sold off, when the owner finds out just how impractical they are.

the gun shows are filled with lightweight rifles and shotguns with 18" and 20" barrels, that are big magnum calibers, or 30-06 308 7MM Mauser shell case family sizes, or slug guns, because the owner who thought he had a cool unique gun, realized he bought or built a lemon, i.e. a flamethrower.

hunting with an 18" barreled 30-06 is like lighting off an M-80 with no hearing protection, 2 feet from your face. Would you do it willingly ? No sane, intelligent person would. Yet under the auspices we are hunting and shooting a firearm, we do it anyway. After many years and a lot of shooting experience, I've come to realize a short barrel, high-powered rifle, is a foolish mistake, and at best a poor decision in firearms selection- you'll never see an experienced old timer rifleman, buy something like that- actually he'll look at it, and smile, or maybe even laugh and shake his head- as he hands it back to you, and walks away.... there's a lot better ways to enjoy hunting and target shooting, than blasting your ears and face off with a short barrel, high capacity round.

If the cartridge is of lesser power like a 30-30, 250 Savage, etc. then it would be tolerable. The Marlin and Winchester lever guns are an exception, because they are relatively low powered in comparison, for the most part, i.e. 30-30, 32 spl, 35 rem, 357 and 44 mag, etc. There are exceptions to that too, such as 444 Marlin, and 348 Winchester. The 405 Winchester was considered the most powerful lever action cartridge ever at one time, in the model 1895, but later the shooting public realized the 1895 stock was poorly designed, and the 405 in an 1895 had tons of recoil. The general consensus other than from Teddy Roosevelt, was the 1895/405 was a poor choice for African game, for this reason. There simply were better performing cartridges and rifles, that kicked less, and had more knockdown power.

I had someone stop by once, trying to trade a 300 H&H Magnum bolt action, for my AR-15 Match Hbar. I declined, then he finally 'fessed up at the end of our talk, and admitted the 300 magnum, along with his other 444 Marlin lever gun, were both too much gun for Pa. whitetail hunting. He said " they blow a a big !@f#$%^ hole in the deer, and ruin the meat, and kick like a mule".

8 lb. rifle, 22" barrel, recoil pad- you can shoot a rifle all day long at the range. and it would be an enjoyable experience. If it weighed 9 lbs. it would be even more enjoyable as a target gun.

7 lb. rifle, 19" barrel, no recoil pad- that is akin to getting beat up by someone with a wooden baseball bat, with an M80 going off in front of your face, while you try to aim and squeeze a trigger. That's not my idea of hunting or target shooting- guns like that usually gets sold pretty quick, and are not the first pick to take hunting to target shooting by an experienced rifleman or hunter. I see those rifles change hands like changing socks. You can lift weights to build yourself up, but then you're just a bigger, stronger guy getting beat up by the same baseball bat, and buffeted with muzzle blast. If you're working out just to absorb the recoil of this gun, then perhaps the gun is too big, or too lightweight. Nothing against physical fitness, but that's like going to hell to light a match.
 
rest the Encore 270 Win. handgun against your right cheek, with the butt against your shoulder, with your eyes right on top of the grips looking over the barrel and sights, and fire a few shots, then you'll know what this 270 rifle is like.

remove your earmuffs and fire a shot like that, that would simulate hunting deer with this 270

a blast indeed- pun intended !
 
I'm right curious about the stock fit on these "hard kicking" .270 WIN rifles, and whether they have scopes on them.

I have a Remmy 721 in .270WIN ...... a 1950's gun with a stock that has a lot of drop, such that to see through the scope put on in the 1980's, one had to break "cheek weld" to get a proper sight picture. Recoil with my deer loads (58gr IMR 7828 under a 150gr SGK for about 2900 f/sec) was pretty uncomfortable until I put a neoprene comb raising kit on it to keep my face in contact with the rifle during recoil, rather then having my neck pulling it back and down into the stock as the rifle moves rearward.

A good sitting position with a properly used M-1907 sling helps as well, IMO.
 
The excellent recoil pad that came with my 700 Ti in 7mm08 makes it quite tolerable at the benchrest. 6.5 pounds with sling, ammo and scope.

Offhand? The stock is an excellent fit for my body. Zero problem with recoil and no complaint from my arthritic shoulder.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top