# .270 vs .270wsm Advice



## Zelph (Dec 2, 2007)

Any advice between these two calibers guys? Does the 270 wsm kick a lot harder? If so then is it worth the extra energy compared to a normal .270? What about 7mm mag compared to 30.06?


----------



## cfarnwide (Sep 10, 2007)

Look around in the Firearms and Reloading section. LOTS of information in there. Here is one thread in particular. http://utahwildlife.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=20102


----------



## cfarnwide (Sep 10, 2007)

Here are a few charts comparing different caliber trajectories, recoil, and ballistics.

http://www.chuckhawks.com/recoil_table.htm
http://www.chuckhawks.com/rifle_trajectory_table.htm
http://www.chuckhawks.com/rifle_ballistics_table.htm


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

Here we go again :roll:


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

:mrgreen:


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

Bottom line is all are good cartridges, with no significant difference in performance out to about 350 yards. And past that, the reality is that a slight breeze will impact things as much as the slight differences in ballistic performance. So it really comes down to personal preference at that point. Any of the four calibers you mentioned will work for most anything you'll hunt in Utah. I am personally a fan of the 30-06. Not for any scientific reason really. Its what my Dad had, so when I bought my first rifle, I got one too. It has never failed me. Every big game animal I've taken has been with my '06. My own limitations are far more of an issue than the performance of the rifle. No matter what you choose, no ballistic chart will compensate for not practicing enough.


----------



## duckhunter1096 (Sep 25, 2007)

I'm no expert, but I play one on here! LOL
Not sure what the cost of the actual guns are, but the ammo for the .270wsm is more than just the regular .270. As for the 7mm or the 30-06, I couldn't tell ya. I'm a 270 guy, thru and thru.


----------



## blownsmok97 (Nov 8, 2009)

270 wsm shoots faster and flatter, with more energy, but costs quite a bit more to shoot, and has a lil more recoil ive heard. I have been looking into the wsm for a bit now, and i have heard nothing but good about it, and have heard its quite a bit better than the 270. both are great guns, and both will do the trick, i would take the wsm over the 270 if the price of rounds doesn't bother ya.
do a google search 270 wsm vs 270, you will find lots of good info.


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

When you look at the numbers, you will find that the WSM is about 100 fps faster than the Winchester version. woopie. That is an increase of an astounding 3%. You get that by loading an extra 10 grains of powder. That is 16% more powder. Sounds cost effective to me. 
In reality, there is no difference in the performance of any of the cartridges you mention. You might notice an accuracy difference with the short fat cartridge if you were making a comparison in benchrest grade rifles. In a hunting rifle, there is no difference.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

Yea. What Loke said. Only he said it better than I did. Loke is a smart man.


----------



## Al Hansen (Sep 7, 2007)

Loke said:


> When you look at the numbers, you will find that the WSM is about 100 fps faster than the Winchester version. woopie. That is an increase of an astounding 3%. You get that by loading an extra 10 grains of powder. That is 16% more powder. Sounds cost effective to me.
> In reality, there is no difference in the performance of any of the cartridges you mention. You might notice an accuracy difference with the short fat cartridge if you were making a comparison in benchrest grade rifles. In a hunting rifle, there is no difference.


+2. Now ya got three smart guys tellin ya. :wink: :lol:


----------



## Pudge (Nov 24, 2009)

I bought a 270wsm for my wife in 2005 for a moose hunt. It has now killed 2 moose several elk and some deer. Performed great on all. I use a barnes x bullet with magpro powder. I now have one also. Great gun for what we hunt.


----------



## El Matador (Dec 21, 2007)

I don't know where Loke is getting his loading data from, but it's no surprise that he's biased toward the 270 Winchester. 200 fps is a more realistic velocity difference between the original and WSM versions, though the gap does shrink a bit with light bullets like 130s or 120s. If you already have a 270 Win, another 200 fps may not be enough of a difference to justify changing rifles unless you're likely to take some really long range shots. But if you're looking to purchase a deer rifle, why would you not look for the best possible caliber? Why would you get an inferior caliber when you have the choice? The only reason I can imagine would be if the gun will be used by someone who is very recoil sensitive and you have no access to reloading equipment. But even so, if recoil is that big of a deal you'd be better off with something in the .264 or .257 families of cartridges. Get the WSM, it has every advantage.

Bringing the '06 and 7 mag into the discussion: The only reason I would choose one of these over the 270 WSM is if they're going to be used for elk and deer. And if that was really the case, I would just get the 300 WSM. There's a reason the short mags are so popular.


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

Look at the Hornady book. All you have to do is flip one page. Same bullets, powder, barrel lenghts, etc.. Matador, you missed my point completely. Any caliber from the 25's to the 30's will perform pretty much the same on deer and elk at reasonable ranges when loaded with comparable bullets. One will not kill it any deader than the other. If you truely want the greatest 270 ever, get the Weatherby version. It has a 2-300 fps advantage over the standard version, and even better advertising hype than the WSM.


----------



## Rock Pile (Jul 15, 2008)

Consider recoil and noise and buy the gun with the cartridge you can shoot the best. If you have a range finder and know your ballistics, 200fps doesn't really matter much.
Both have more than enough energy to kill big game a very long ranges.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

> There's a reason the short mags are so popular.


Because guns in general are very durable goods - lasting generations before wearing out. So the rifle companies have to do something to sell more. And so Short Mags are the latest way to do that. But the reality is that the short mags are shooting the same bullets as the sandard cartridges, and the standard cartridges can be loaded the same, and yield the same results. But some folks think they need a new rifle so more get sold. And hey - I have no problem with that. I think we all appreciate having another rifle just for the sake of having another rifle. For example, a .308 and 30-06 shoot the same bullets. The only difference is the '06 has a larger capacity for powder since its longer. Shooting 150 grain bullets however, they can be loaded to duplicate the exact same results. Same goes for the 270 and 270 WSM. And so forth.

But as Loke so eloquently laid out - there is no effective difference to a hunter or its prey - between any of the calibers listed.


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

El Matador said:


> There's a reason the short mags are so popular.


and that reason is advertising. We have been led to believe that everything that is new is so much better than the old, and that the old is no longer adequate or able to function. Yes we somehow need a new caliber that has the same ballistics as the 308 winchester (30 TC), or the 300 Savage (30 Rem AR), or the 300 H&H (300 WSM, RCM, Win, WBY, et al ). The rifle manufactures and ammo companies need these items to sell to folks that "need" something "better" than the other guy. Don't get me wrong, I think that all of these new calibers are interesting, as are the new guns that they are chambered in. It would be fun to own them all. But they will not do anything that rifles have been capable of doing for over a century.


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

I've used a 30.06 since I was fourteen and killed a lot of critters with it, some well out passed 300 yards: it has been an awesome caliber for me! This year I bought a 270 win Savage and have never had SO much fun shooting a large caliber weapon! The kick is much less and I have no doubt it will do the job on anything I hunt! In fact, I may now have to take up re-loading since I plan to shoot the heck out of it....my wallet is getting thinner as I think about it! :shock: :mrgreen:


----------

