# 270 Win vs, 270 WSM



## tshuntin (Jul 13, 2008)

This has probably been talked over a bunch already...

What are the advantages or disadvantages of the 270 vs 270 short? Which one would you choose and why?

Thanks, TS


----------



## xxxxxxBirdDogger (Mar 7, 2008)

$17.99 every day per box vs. $30.99 when it's on sale. That's the biggest difference. Both are excellent cartridges. I'd go with the traditional .270 Win. every day of the week and twice on Sunday just because of the savings on ammo. In fact, I just sold a few things I didn't need and bought a new .270 earlier this week. 8) Here's a good discussion with someone facing the same choice:
http://shootersforum.com/showthread.htm?t=9021

Here's a rifle trajectory table:
http://www.chuckhawks.com/rifle_trajectory_table.htm
Looks like you get yourself an extra 6 yards of maximum point blank range with the WSM. Trajectory at 100 and 200 yards is almost identical. Mid-range trajectory is exactly the same. Energy is mix and match depending on the bullet you purchase. WSM is a split hair better, but comes at nearly twice the cost for factory loads.


----------



## Bax* (Dec 14, 2008)

One advantage of the .270 vs the WSM is also availability of firearms. By that I mean that there seem to be substantially more rifle manufacturers offering rifles in that chambering as opposed to a WSM offering.

If you reload, you'll probably end up with a WSM because it wont cost you as much to shoot. But if you arent reloading, you'll probably want to just buy the good ol 270


----------



## El Matador (Dec 21, 2007)

The advantage of the magnum is about 150-200 fps in velocity, the disadvantages have mostly been mentioned. If that extra velocity and energy is important to you, by all means get the WSM. That much of a performance gain will be most appreciated when taking longer shots on deer (500 yards +) or if you want to shoot an elk.

Like Birddogger said though, if you're going to be shooting at 100-200 yards (or even out to 400 on deer and antelope) there is not much of a difference in performance. 

One think I like about my WSM, because I handload, is that I can play around a lot with different loads and still be at or above the maximum performance of the standard .270. I don't feel like I have to stay near the max loads all the time to have a load that will perform well at long range.


----------



## Frisco Pete (Sep 22, 2007)

It hasn't been mentioned, but the WSM comes in a short-action whereas the standard .270 is a long-action round. The short action is stiffer, which theoretically aids accuracy, is shorter with a shorter bolt throw, and slightly lighter. Overall gun length is reduced some. These are minor concerns to most hunters, but you basically get 7mm Mag performance from a more compact package. Most manufacturers seem to chamber the .270 WSM nowadays (_but not necessarily the 7mm or .300 versions._)

I like the .270 Win personally and have used one for years, but my .270 WSM is more accurate. Whether this is due to the efficient case shape and subsequent burn, the short action, or the rifle barrel being more accurate, I really can't say for sure. The cost of ammo is more, but it is not something that you shoot a lot of ammo thru. If you handload, the WSM is more versatile - you can equal .270 velocity, but with less pressure as El Matador said, or you can easily exceed it with no more pressure - at an insignificant cost increase.

Both are good rounds and you really can't go wrong here, especially since the .270 Win is a flat-shooting, hard-hitting round in and of itself and has the advantage of using more common and cheaper ammo, but the .270 WSM is a bit more unique and appealing to the hard-core gun looney, if nothing else. 
So it is a tough call...


----------



## tshuntin (Jul 13, 2008)

Thank you all for your comments and help. Now to go find the gun I want to buy!


----------

