texashuntingforum.com logo
Main Menu
Advertisement
Affiliates
Advertisement
Newest Members
TraeMartin, Beatixre, MooseSteed, Trappernewt, casyoo
71987 Registered Users
Top Posters(All Time)
dogcatcher 110,788
bill oxner 91,416
SnakeWrangler 65,413
stxranchman 60,296
Gravytrain 46,950
RKHarm24 44,585
rifleman 44,461
Stub 43,764
Forum Statistics
Forums46
Topics536,986
Posts9,719,144
Members86,987
Most Online25,604
Feb 12th, 2024
Print Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3
.270 Winchester or .270 WSM #5529438 01/09/15 11:59 AM
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 945
U
USMCatfish Offline OP
Tracker
OP Offline
Tracker
U
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 945
I am curious what yall have to say about these 2 rounds for here in Texas. Trying to fill a gap between rifles. I never shot a .270 or the .270WSM but loo[b][/b]king at some ballistics the .270WSM looks to edge out the .270 just a little. I could be wrong I am just trying to understand what I read and exactly what are the short magnums for.

The gap is .22-250, .243, ? .30-06, .300wm, .30-.338.

I was also wondering which one would have the most recoil and what it might equal to.

Thank you
Steve

Last edited by USMCatfish; 01/09/15 12:57 PM.
Re: .270 Winchester or .270 WSM [Re: USMCatfish] #5529456 01/09/15 12:11 PM
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,124
P
postoak Offline
Veteran Tracker
Offline
Veteran Tracker
P
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,124
The .270 WCF (WCF = Winchester Center Fire, the full name of the cartridge) is a fine cartridge for all Texas whitetail, mule deer, and antelope hunting. I'm not sure why the WSM was introduced or needed, although I'm sure someone will step in and defend it.

Recoil for the 130 grain bullet in an 8 pound rifle (a standard weight rifle with scope will add up to about 8.3 pounds) is 16.5 fp for the .270 WCF and 18.7 fp for the WSM. By way of comparison, the .30-06 with 150 grain bullet in the same weight rifle is 17.6 fp.


Re: .270 Winchester or .270 WSM [Re: USMCatfish] #5529480 01/09/15 12:51 PM
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 713
H
headhunter54 Offline
Tracker
Offline
Tracker
H
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 713
I own both and they are great for anything you listed. The WSM does have an edge but the 270 is a lot easier to find ammo for. Flip a coin.

Re: .270 Winchester or .270 WSM [Re: headhunter54] #5529498 01/09/15 01:01 PM
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 11,950
kry226 Online Content
The General
Online Content
The General
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 11,950
Originally Posted By: headhunter54
I own both and they are great for anything you listed. The WSM does have an edge but the 270 is a lot easier to find ammo for. Flip a coin.


Most likely cheaper too.


[Linked Image]
Re: .270 Winchester or .270 WSM [Re: USMCatfish] #5529500 01/09/15 01:04 PM
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 32,442
kmon11 Offline
junior
Offline
junior
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 32,442
Agree flip a coin.

Find a rifle you like, if it is a short action WSM for a long action WCF. A deer or hog will never know the difference.


lf the saying "Liar, Liar your pants on fire" were true
Mainstream news might be fun to watch
Re: .270 Winchester or .270 WSM [Re: USMCatfish] #5529554 01/09/15 01:33 PM
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 27,091
N
Nogalus Prairie Offline
THF Celebrity
Offline
THF Celebrity
N
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 27,091
The WSMs were primarily introduced to have long action performance in a short action rifle to lessen weight. It was just a happy coincidence that the cartridge configuration gave the .270 WSM a little added performance over the .270 Win.


Originally Posted by Russ79
I learned long ago you can't reason someone out of something they don't reason themselves into.


Re: .270 Winchester or .270 WSM [Re: USMCatfish] #5529561 01/09/15 01:39 PM
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 60,262
BOBO the Clown Online Content
kind of a big deal
Online Content
kind of a big deal
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 60,262
Originally Posted By: USMCatfish
I am curious what yall have to say about these 2 rounds for here in Texas. Trying to fill a gap between rifles. I never shot a .270 or the .270WSM but loo[b][/b]king at some ballistics the .270WSM looks to edge out the .270 just a little. I could be wrong I am just trying to understand what I read and exactly what are the short magnums for.

The gap is .22-250, .243, ? .30-06, .300wm, .30-.338.

I was also wondering which one would have the most recoil and what it might equal to.

Thank you
Steve


270 wsm has more recoil but it touch hotter also.

Can't go wrong with either. Stxranchman go to rifle his a 270.

257wby is very similar to the 270

Your gap is .25, 26, and .27
260/6.5 creed, (7-08 similar ballistics but 7mm)
25-06, 257wby
270, 270wsm





Donate to TX Youth hunting program.... better to donate then to waste it in taxes

https://secure.qgiv.com/for/gtgoh/mobile
Re: .270 Winchester or .270 WSM [Re: USMCatfish] #5529576 01/09/15 01:48 PM
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,515
E
Earl Offline
Extreme Tracker
Offline
Extreme Tracker
E
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,515
For me it's the .270 because I've standardized my house on it. Both myself and 2 sons own and hunt with the .270 with all 3 rifles sighted in on Remington 130gr Core Lokt's which can be found anywhere ammunition is sold and I buy more of the green and yellow boxes whenever it's on sale.

Either will work, but the .270 will be a bit less on recoil. Either will take any game in Texas. Only the .270 though can be found wherever you find ammunition.


[Linked Image]
[Linked Image]
Re: .270 Winchester or .270 WSM [Re: USMCatfish] #5529595 01/09/15 01:56 PM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 39,481
R
redchevy Offline
THF Celebrity
Offline
THF Celebrity
R
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 39,481
In my opinion with a 30-06 in the lineup neither a 270 or 270 wsm fill a gap.

Are you about the lattest thing and get caught up on numbers? If so the WSM is for you. If you want a good gun that works is reliable ammo has and will always be available in factory loadings and is cheaper to shoot you want a 270 WCF.


It's hell eatin em live
Re: .270 Winchester or .270 WSM [Re: Earl] #5529606 01/09/15 02:01 PM
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,264
F
fowlplayr Offline
Shenanigans Scorecard keeper
Offline
Shenanigans Scorecard keeper
F
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,264
What will you be using the rifle for? Given that you already have a 30-06, your "gap' is actually quite narrow as far as practicality. The 270 Win isn't going to give you anything you don't already have the -06.

If you're just itching for a new toy, get something with some wow factor like the WSM shooting 110 grain TTSX.

Re: .270 Winchester or .270 WSM [Re: Nogalus Prairie] #5529607 01/09/15 02:01 PM
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,124
P
postoak Offline
Veteran Tracker
Offline
Veteran Tracker
P
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,124
Originally Posted By: Nogalus Prairie
The WSMs were primarily introduced to have long action performance in a short action rifle to lessen weight. It was just a happy coincidence that the cartridge configuration gave the .270 WSM a little added performance over the .270 Win.


Of all the BS that gun writers have put out through the decades, the worst is the idea that we need short actions so rifles can be built lighter. It's BS because 1) you can build a light rifle with a long action, 2) the vast, vast, majority of hunters aren't lugging their rifles around at port arms for long periods (and, in fact, in Texas, most of us are sitting in a blind with the rifle propped against the wall (and we got to the blind after a tiring 1/4 mile walk)), 3) if weight is such a concern, how hard is it to lose a couple of pounds of your own weight since most of us are way over weight?


Re: .270 Winchester or .270 WSM [Re: USMCatfish] #5529610 01/09/15 02:03 PM
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,124
P
postoak Offline
Veteran Tracker
Offline
Veteran Tracker
P
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,124
And as for short actions being more "handy", we're talking about 1/2" difference. When I was young I bought into all that and all my early rifles were short action. When I finally did buy a long action rifle, I didn't even notice the difference.


Re: .270 Winchester or .270 WSM [Re: USMCatfish] #5529643 01/09/15 02:20 PM
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 27,091
N
Nogalus Prairie Offline
THF Celebrity
Offline
THF Celebrity
N
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 27,091
Why all the hate? I'm not trying to start an argument.

I have both. I love my Nosler .270 WSM. 7 1/4 lbs all-in, a short stroke action, and 100-150 FPS advantage over the .270 Win. Those are all real-world advantages over my Sako .270 Win. Especially on a tough backpack hunt.

That said, I love my Sako too. So much so I just took it on the most important hunt of my life. The conditions were such that I was willing to tote the extra weight-and I just wanted my old friend of 35 years in my hands when the time came to shoot.

If I was not seeking a specialty mountain rifle, I would pick the .270 Win. over the WSM-primarily for ammo availability as mentioned above. But I sure ain't going to rag on anyone who wants the added performance and the short action of the .270 WSM.


Originally Posted by Russ79
I learned long ago you can't reason someone out of something they don't reason themselves into.


Re: .270 Winchester or .270 WSM [Re: USMCatfish] #5529652 01/09/15 02:22 PM
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,124
P
postoak Offline
Veteran Tracker
Offline
Veteran Tracker
P
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,124
I'm not hating on ya. These are just thoughts I've had rattling around in my head lately and I decided this thread was a good place to get them out.


Re: .270 Winchester or .270 WSM [Re: postoak] #5529658 01/09/15 02:24 PM
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,264
F
fowlplayr Offline
Shenanigans Scorecard keeper
Offline
Shenanigans Scorecard keeper
F
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,264
Originally Posted By: postoak
I'm not hating on ya. These are just thoughts I've had rattling around in my head lately and I decided this thread was a good place to get them out.

That's about like kicking the dog when you get home from a bad day at work. scared grin

Re: .270 Winchester or .270 WSM [Re: postoak] #5529681 01/09/15 02:33 PM
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 27,091
N
Nogalus Prairie Offline
THF Celebrity
Offline
THF Celebrity
N
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 27,091
Originally Posted By: postoak
Originally Posted By: Nogalus Prairie
The WSMs were primarily introduced to have long action performance in a short action rifle to lessen weight. It was just a happy coincidence that the cartridge configuration gave the .270 WSM a little added performance over the .270 Win.


Of all the BS that gun writers have put out through the decades, the worst is the idea that we need short actions so rifles can be built lighter. It's BS because 1) you can build a light rifle with a long action, 2) the vast, vast, majority of hunters aren't lugging their rifles around at port arms for long periods (and, in fact, in Texas, most of us are sitting in a blind with the rifle propped against the wall (and we got to the blind after a tiring 1/4 mile walk)), 3) if weight is such a concern, how hard is it to lose a couple of pounds of your own weight since most of us are way over weight?


It's not BS. I'll take your points in turn:

1) Yes, you can. But, all else being equal-you can build lighter with a short action. Which means in a SĄ you are not having to sacrifice in other areas. Short actions weigh less than long actions.

2)You are correct. But the goal building lighter rifles is not for Texas blind hunting-where you can use a 15 pound rifle if you please. So IMO you are missing the point. I don't think I have seen any writer tout lighter rifles for Texas blind hunting.

3)Weight is always a concern. Have you ever backpack hunted the mountains? Every ounce makes a difference. And two pounds of extra body weight is not the same as two pounds of extra rifle weight. In fact, two pounds of extra pack weight is not the same as two pounds of extra rifle weight. Because there is no easy way to carry a rifle in the mountains, less weight and more compactness are big advantages in a rifle. Much more so than quoting numbers can illustrate.


Originally Posted by Russ79
I learned long ago you can't reason someone out of something they don't reason themselves into.


Re: .270 Winchester or .270 WSM [Re: postoak] #5529683 01/09/15 02:34 PM
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 27,091
N
Nogalus Prairie Offline
THF Celebrity
Offline
THF Celebrity
N
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 27,091
Originally Posted By: postoak
I'm not hating on ya. These are just thoughts I've had rattling around in my head lately and I decided this thread was a good place to get them out.


Lol I got ya. I do that too.


Originally Posted by Russ79
I learned long ago you can't reason someone out of something they don't reason themselves into.


Re: .270 Winchester or .270 WSM [Re: USMCatfish] #5529686 01/09/15 02:34 PM
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,606
R
Revoman Offline
Pro Tracker
Offline
Pro Tracker
R
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,606
Stick with the old 270 Win. Rifles are more available along with ammo



Call'm an Kill'm
Re: .270 Winchester or .270 WSM [Re: Nogalus Prairie] #5529733 01/09/15 03:00 PM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,823
D
Drop Tine Offline
THF Trophy Hunter
Offline
THF Trophy Hunter
D
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,823
Originally Posted By: Nogalus Prairie
Why all the hate? I'm not trying to start an argument.

I have both. I love my Nosler .270 WSM. 7 1/4 lbs all-in, a short stroke action, and 100-150 FPS advantage over the .270 Win. Those are all real-world advantages over my Sako .270 Win. Especially on a tough backpack hunt.

That said, I love my Sako too. So much so I just took it on the most important hunt of my life. The conditions were such that I was willing to tote the extra weight-and I just wanted my old friend of 35 years in my hands when the time came to shoot.

If I was not seeking a specialty mountain rifle, I would pick the .270 Win. over the WSM-primarily for ammo availability as mentioned above. But I sure ain't going to rag on anyone who wants the added performance and the short action of the .270 WSM.



I have both also, actually 2 of each. (Probably gonna be selling one of the wsm, don't need 2 exact rifles)My wsm's are Tikka T3 Lite's in Bell and Carlson stocks. All in about 7 1/2 lbs. Terrific balance and easy to carry. The 150 gr .277 bullets compare slightly better to 180 gr .308 bullets in BC and SD. This is where the wsm begins to shine. 150 gr at 3150 puts some serious smack down when needed. Mine recoils similar to my Browning X bolt 30-06. In a lightweight mountain rifle set up, it's about my max for comfortable recoil. I had a Sako A7 in 300 Win that was not any fun to shoot. I enjoy shooting these rifles. I could also run a 110 gr Barnes TTSX at 3600+ to pretty much match 257 weatherby 100 gr TTSX. I'd have no reservations running a 150 gr Partition or Scirocco into bull Elk or Nilgai. DoubleTap sells a 160 gr Partition load that is supposed to run 3025 fps. .298 SD in a Partition over 3000 fps should penetrate like no tomorrow.


[Linked Image]
Re: .270 Winchester or .270 WSM [Re: USMCatfish] #5529759 01/09/15 03:11 PM
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 945
U
USMCatfish Offline OP
Tracker
OP Offline
Tracker
U
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 945
My goal in filling the gap was to go from a (85gr .243) to a(168gr .30-06)
So when my kids get a little bigger they can manage the recoil. That is were I thought about the (130gr .270). Plus as a added bonus as I get older I think I would like the less recoil of the .270.

I just heard and read a lot about the .270's(WSM and WCF)and was curious about the pros and cons of both.

Steven

Re: .270 Winchester or .270 WSM [Re: USMCatfish] #5529786 01/09/15 03:20 PM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 39,481
R
redchevy Offline
THF Celebrity
Offline
THF Celebrity
R
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 39,481
Personally if your looking for less recoil than a 30-06 throwing 168 grains, I think you need to look further than a 130 gr 270. I don't think there will be any noticeable difference.

If looking to cut recoil I would be looking at 25-06, and the 308 family of cartriges, you already have a 243, so 260, 7mm08, 308 itself, or a 6.5 creedmore.


It's hell eatin em live
Re: .270 Winchester or .270 WSM [Re: USMCatfish] #5529807 01/09/15 03:26 PM
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 60,262
BOBO the Clown Online Content
kind of a big deal
Online Content
kind of a big deal
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 60,262
270 has a lot less recoil then the 30-06. Now the 270 wsm will be similar to the 30-06


Donate to TX Youth hunting program.... better to donate then to waste it in taxes

https://secure.qgiv.com/for/gtgoh/mobile
Re: .270 Winchester or .270 WSM [Re: USMCatfish] #5529809 01/09/15 03:27 PM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 39,481
R
redchevy Offline
THF Celebrity
Offline
THF Celebrity
R
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 39,481
Yeah ive heard that my whole life and its never been true to me.


It's hell eatin em live
Re: .270 Winchester or .270 WSM [Re: USMCatfish] #5529814 01/09/15 03:28 PM
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,124
P
postoak Offline
Veteran Tracker
Offline
Veteran Tracker
P
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,124
Just shoot Remington Managed Recoil loads in your .30-06. These fire a 125 grain bullet at 2660 fps.


Re: .270 Winchester or .270 WSM [Re: BOBO the Clown] #5529827 01/09/15 03:31 PM
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,264
F
fowlplayr Offline
Shenanigans Scorecard keeper
Offline
Shenanigans Scorecard keeper
F
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,264
Originally Posted By: BOBO the Clown
270 has a lot less recoil then the 30-06.
That is true if using the same gun, weight, etc. I've shot some light weight 270's that would stomp you like a mule, but those were 150 grain too.

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3
Previous Thread
Index
Next Thread

© 2004-2024 OUTDOOR SITES NETWORK all rights reserved USA and Worldwide
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.3