270 vs 300............

[matt2680]

Sorry, trying to get this transferred to another forum if that's where it belongs. And no offense if I'm beating a dead horse, or whatever..................

So, know I know I'm opening a can of worms here. But which one would you recommend a 270 or a 300 as you see fit. Reasons and results...

Read More

 

[salmonriverjohn]

Posted in other section.

Not even close, hands down the long range winner would be the .300 mag. Better selection of bullet weights and way more power out there at distance, which equals to less drop and wind drift. You were referencing the .300 mag? If not, then the .270 would get the nod. Don't overlook the 25-06 as a real performer also. This "little" round has a lot of potential. Remember, both are based on the venerable 30-06 necked down.

 

[tac]

Here in the UK we commonly use the .300 WinMag as a target rifle out to 1200 yards. The .270 isn't in the same league.........

tac
Supporter of the Cape Meares Lighthouse Restoration Fund

 

[orygun]

Kinda need to know what you want to use the rifle for, ya know? Coyote? Deer? Elk across a canyon? The neighbor's car?

 

[Spitpatch]

I'm with Orygun, and we're a coupla guys outstanding in our field. Literally. Out standing in our field. Nothing to go on, no bearing points. Lost balls in the high weeds. (Drag down Orygun's smiley face and insert here).

I can imagine numerous applications where a .300 (.300 What? Winchester? Weatherby? Short Mag? .300 Savage) would shine against a .270 (Winchester). I can imagine at least as many applications where a .270 would be the infinitely better choice.

Don't worry about beating a dead horse. It is the ".300 (or '06) vs. .270", "Glock vs. 1911", "AR's are junk vs. AR's are proof God loves us" threads that are the veritable and indisputable lifeblood of this and similar websites.

 

[2506]

I'll second the opinion of the 25-06. If you're looking and going under .30 cal, look at that or 7mm.

 

[dnmz]

No Question, Go with the 300 Win. Mag. I could go down the list why, but it would take tooooo long. I have been shooting over 30 years, shot many firearms for many differant applications. Deer to Moose, target to long range, the 300 Mag, will take it over a 270 every time.........

 

[salmonriverjohn]

I'll second the opinion of the 25-06. If you're looking and going under .30 cal, look at that or 7mm.

The "little" 06 is one impressive cartridge! My wife has taken 5 elk with only 1 needing a follow up shot using the Ruger I gave her that she basically stole from me after a trip to the range on her birthday. Loaded with 116 grain bullets it out fly's many larger calibers. It performs quadruple duty from predator's to antelope, deer and elk. Very hard to beat this one.

 

[rickoshay]

Everyone has there pet dead is dead and the 270 does that.

 

[matt2680]

Just to clarify, I was talking about the 300WinMag. And mostly used for Elk and deer, nothing usually over a few hundred yards, if that. Thanks for all the responses.

 

[skywag]

My .270 Winchester Model 70 Featherweight 279## was given to me by our family dentist, Dr. Hart Atwood, in 1959. He grew up on the Tippy Canoe River, where ever that is, or was.

I've shot a couple of deer with it, but Dr. Atwood killed an elk with it every year for decades. He had some advice. "If the elk is running, aim at his nose! The bullet will strike him in the neck and it will be a clean kill."

The .270 Winchester is BY FAR the best cartridge ever made, and everything else pales in it's shadow.

 

[The Cheese]

if you are shooting inside 300yds, I would go 270. 300wm really starts to shine on the long range stuff, but in the end will cost a bit more. Inside 400-500yds, get an '06 or a derivative there of (25-06, 270, 338-06). The 300wm won't kill anything deader than a 270 or 30-06 can at those distances. 300wm would be kind of overkill IMO. Plus the recoil will be much more substantial with the 300wm unless you put a muzzle brake on it.

 

[1bigfoot]

Well that's awful big talk there little britches! You have gone way out on a limb on that one, prepare for a full barrage of "what are you nut's" comments now. Just off the top of my head I can think of a whole handful of cartridges that do everything the 270 does, only better. I aint kicking the old girl around, I own a pre 64 model 70 and a Ruger 77 in this caliber,, but me thinks you REALLY must be in love with yours to say that everything else pales in it's shadow

 

[dnmz]

I'm thinking a little range time at 800 yards will settle this........... I too am not knocking the "little girl", It's a great short range deer rifle, but an Elk at say 500-600 yards is going to walk away from it.....

 

[salmonriverjohn]

My .270 Winchester Model 70 Featherweight 279## was given to me by our family dentist, Dr. Hart Atwood, in 1959. He grew up on the Tippy Canoe River, where ever that is, or was.

I've shot a couple of deer with it, but Dr. Atwood killed an elk with it every year for decades. He had some advice. "If the elk is running, aim at his nose! The bullet will strike him in the neck and it will be a clean kill."

The .270 Winchester is BY FAR the best cartridge ever made, and everything else pales in it's shadow.

:huh:
Oh my skywag, where do we start, the .270.. the best there ever was? Now before you pop your top,, I really like the unit, but for elk I go to my .338 win mag. I know its all about bullet placement but that said,, put a shot into a Elk @ 300- 500 yards with both and compare. For coyotes, Id pick my 22-250. For deer, my 30-06. IN FACT, the old 30-06 may very well be the best over all, most compared to, most versitile and most imitated cartridge ever designed. It in itself can do anything the .270 can, only better in all aspects. Even the dean of all outdoor writers Jack O'Connor himself admitted later in life that he was heavily influenced by manufacturers to the promote the .270. I own and reloaded more .270's than just one and can say that it's never a bad choice,, but (everything else pales in it's shadow) well, you knew you were gonna hear it. Anyway have a great day, and smile,, I'm just having a little fun

 

[orygun]

There's a lot of people talking smack now.

Whatever.

Either of these will do what you want, and do it well.
The .270 will do it for a little less money spent on a box of shells, and less pain to your shoulder. Also, it's usually in a slightly lighter rifle.
Jack O'Connor knew what he was talking about when he heralded the .270. I don't think that "it's the best ever cartridge ever made" but it is a fine one.
The .300 Win Mag is also a very good cartridge. If it wasn't it wouldn't have as big of a following as it has.
Pick one, you'll be fine.

It's far more important that you shoot what you have well.

By the way, for what you want to do, the 30-06 is my pick.

 

[dnmz]

I too am having fun, but while you're carrying around all those rifles you mentioned, then trying to figure out which one to use when it's time to shoot. I'll pull up the tried and true 300 Win. Mag. and drop the elk while you're trying to find the ammo for all those guns......lol I do think this has gotten a little off track though. I belive the question was, what would be an all around gun. I would still have to stand by the 300....... The down range performance is hard to beat....... Please remember this is just a lot of guys sharing their thoughts and having a little fun poking each other on the way........ Everyone has there favorites that they will stay will defend to the death. Bottom line, ballistics tell all ....

 

[salmonriverjohn]

To both orygun and dnmz,,, yep.

 

[dnmz]

This is just way too much fun........

 

[rickoshay]

Over ten of the elk I shot at 500 yards plus did not walk away from my 270 you should look a chart that compares the 270 140 gr at 3000 fps to 300 150 gr at 3100 fps at 500 yards and before you shoot at anything that far away you should practice at that range.