I found a pic of Kyle's jeans from the last match.

LOL I can't with y'all.

Between those .270

For a hunting rifle not a boatload of difference between the two of them. Pick which one you prefer and get on down the road. Likely neither you or the deer/hogs/elk/bear etc. will be able to tell much difference.

Why do they get compared? They are both middle of the road popular hunting cartridges in todays day and age. I doubt anyone but a select few really care that one is short and one is long action.

You might want to recheck the history - it was around for a decade before the 143 was introduced. And I know a lot of people that shoot 120s and 130s in their Creedmoor. I'm sorry yours is picky, maybe you got a Monday or Friday rifle? I haven't shot lighter rounds in mine, but it has shot the 143 ELDX (both factory and handloads), as well as the 140 AMAX and 140 ELDM well under 1" at 100 yds, 5 shot groups.

I'll bet the OP wants to hunt deer and hogs with the rifle. Don't get me wrong, 30-06 is a great round but WWIII would be next and 30-06 is not likely to be the rifle to make any difference.

I’ve only loaded for one 260 and one 6.5 CM, so the sample size is too small to matter, but the Tikka 260 and the Bergara 6.5 CM both were easy to handload for. Using just the 120 gr Ballistic Tip in both rifles, I got small, smaller, and tiny groups. Everyone talks about using H4350 in the CM, and I now wholeheartedly agree with that.

It was similarly easy to get my Sako 270 to shoot well. H4831, and Jack O’Conner was right.

I never thought the 270 kicked much, but after much shooting with the 260, the 270 recoil has gotten way more noticeable. I got older too, so maybe that’s a factor.

Anyway, if the OP likes to punch paper when he’s not hunting, the 6.5CM will be more pleasant.

Wasn't O'Conner's load a 130 grain with 60 grains of 4831? That is a heavy stout load and above what most load data calls a max these days. No small wonder a 120 our of a 260 or creedmor recoils less.

I stopped at 59 grains. No pressure signs, so maybe I could have gone to 60 grains. You think O’Conner would have called me a wuss?

In the 6.5 Creedmoor you are burning 10 or more grains of powder per load with about the same weight bullets. That will be exhibited in less recoil if the guns weigh the same weight. Like others have said game will not really know they were shot with one or the other, especially dear sized critters. '

I own neither but have killed deer with the 270 and watched others fall to them and they dang sure work, I also do not own a creedmoor but have shot deer and hogs with loads with the same type 6.5 bullets at the same velocities and they work well,

Agree with those that say id just hunting flip a coin, either will work well. If planning to shoot often I would go Creedmoor with less recoil it will be more fun to shoot more.

Yes, I found that Hornady Black BTHP 140 grain loads, which also fall within my $20/box price point, provide groups within the same 3-inch circle at 100 yards as their ELD-X loads. But I'm still leaning towards the 125-grain Winchester XP's as being my "go to" ammo because of my preference for a lighter bullet.

Here's another point worth making.

I'm sure most guys have a "go to" brand of ammo they always start with after any new rifle purchase. For me, that would be either Remington CorLokt and Federal Fusion. After all, when you find two brands and loads shoot well in your 30-30, .243, 25-06, and .270, you naturally believe they're going to shoot well in your newest rifle. The first load I tried and zeroed my scope with my Creedmoor was the widely recommended Hornady 143-grain ELD-X. The rifle grouped extremely well with them. Naturally, my next move was to try my "go to" loads since they have always shot well in every other rifle I own. I honestly thought I had an issue with the bases and rings when they produced groups nowhere close to the Hornady ammo. In fact, I even went so far as to change to see if the performance between the three brands of ammo would fall closer to one another. All this did was confirm the same differences in performance as before.

Maybe the lesson learned here is that whenever you buy a new rifle, ignore what others are saying and start off shooting and zeroing your scope to the load you have found shoots great in all your other rifles. Just because someone recommends some other load, that doesn't mean it will perform just like your old "go to" ammo. In other words, if I had never tried the Hornady ammo, I would likely have never seen a need to do so.

I've heard several people praise the XP loads in several calibers.

When I see some dude without a man bun who is not vaping and not wearing NASCAR pants toting a creedmoor, I know he is just a wannabe and prolly has a 270 in the closet.

Good pic, nice deer.

I decided to answer this troll thread haha. For me, the270. Because I feel it is a little more capable hunting round and it doesn't look like i will ever get into LR shooting.

It must kill them deader than the Creedmor.

No, it just shoots the same weight bullet faster,and with the right ammo is flatter,and carries more energy to 500 yards than the 6.5. Which IMO equals better for hunting. That is just the facts, if you don't believe me take a peak at the hornady ballistic chart. I won't be hunting any further than 500,and probably not that far, so flatter and more power seems like a win win for me. And 270 still wins in ammo availability, even though i reload. So for me the 6.5 has nothing to offer, may be different for others and that's cool too

My comment was tongue & cheek. I know the 270 Wins on the ballistic chart at hunting ranges. It should, it burns a lot more powder and it's a long action cartridge. I'm not trying to get you to grow a man bun and buy a Creedmoor. I don't have one and don't see me every buying one. I usually shoot a 308 and it's plenty for the distance I hunt.

Care to elaborate?

You never know some people get all heated over their caliber of choice haha, i have had a couple of 270s in the past but own neither of these rounds at this point

If you are a hand loader there are powders and bullets available for the 270 that were not around years ago. Reloder 26 powder and 145 gr ELD-X have breathed new life in the 270 Winchester. The problem with Reloder 26 is temp sensitivity, in hunting conditions it will not be noticeable unless your hunting in high humidity and temps over 95 degrees. However the horse power that RL26 brings to the table is good and I would hope there will be temp stable version soon.

Nothing wrong with the 6.5 CM, Hornady has played that market well and it does well within its parameters. The ballistics of a 6.5 PRC and the 270 are more interesting to me than the 6.5CM but one will not see a 270 at the firing line of a PRS match, it is a hunting cartridge with several more pounds of recoil. The long action vs short action argument will always be around, if you need a few milliseconds for a follow up shot maybe look at a semi auto of some sort

I am glad that long range matches and long range hunting is popular now, its a good time to be a hand loader.

I was referring more to powder capacity than length. Many actions like Tikka are one size so length doesn't matter. The non magnum short action cartridges are usually very efficient with a little less recoil but still very effective on game. There is a point where slightly better performance cost a lot in powder and recoil.

I own both. I enjoy them equally and both kill deer and pigs. If you torn between the two just get both of them. Good lord this is the USA you can’t have too many rifles.

Normal hunting distances the .270 carries more energy and can literally be found in any store that sells ammo including the small town mom and pops or small grocery stores that sell ammo. I have both but unless someone is target shooting or recoil sensitive I pick .270 if having to choose