Ok tired of the 270 vs '06?

Well my younger brother has bought into the 270 WSM hype.  he is looking at a Sako 75 in 270 WSM.  I know some of you guys have got the 270 WSM.  There has been lots written about WSM, some favorable some not to flattering.

Comments:  Should i talk him into the 270 Win or the 280 Win(my choice)????????

All comments welcomed.

BEAR

Probably won't do any good to try and talk him out of it if he's like most lil bro's.

I think if a person really thinks that 1/2 in less gun length is important and short fat cartridges that probably don't feed well out of a magazine is important then by all means have at it.

Trying to talk him into a .270 Win when he wants a .270 WSM would be a waste of your breath and his ear.  The standard .270 and .280 are nice rounds, but when ya want mag performance, they just won't do.  Let him get the thing.  >>  klallen 

thanks for all the good comments.  I have my morning pint of black hot coffee in hand.

 Im laughing uncontrollably with broken ribs. I said "younger brother" only because I also have an older brother, my little brother is 56!  But Ranch you are still probably right...LOL.

Further, Kallen said "would be a waste of your breath and his ear."  Again interesting in that he actually only has one ear.  I guess more truth passes on the internat than most think.  

I just see the 270WSM as an expensive ammo thing.  He doesn't reload. v Maybe the new cartridges prime advantage is that the factory ammo is higher pressure than the factories would sell 270Win.  Too many Winchester model 54s and early model 70s out there for the ammo lawyers to allow high pressure.

More comments welcome

BEAR

Bear;

Myself, I'd go another direction at it.  Ask him why he's passing up the 7mm WSM for the .270.  It's a reasonable question.  there's only .007" difference in nominal bore size, with the 7mm being the larger of the two.  As was mentioned before, the bullet selection in 7mm is far greater than the .277. 

Hornady shows very few comparable bullets weights, but what there is seems to show that the 7 can drive 'em faster, which would seem to make it the more flexible cartridge.  The 7mm has significantly heavier bullets available with significantly better B/C's also. 

And I'm sure that he knows someone who does reload, if he wants to exploit the flexibility to the max.  Snrk!

900F

Since I already have a nice .270 Win... I won't be rushing out to get a .270 WSM any time soon...

the 7mm WSM is another story, though...

It's more about 'WANT' vs 'NEED'....... and that's my .02

Marcus.

Tika,

Sounds like a good endorsement, if you had a 270 win no reason to run get a WSM (but you did).  I take it your vote would be for the 270 WSM.  Well the 270 bullet size is pretty good so having two is two of a good thing.

Would the Sako be equal to the Tika in your opinion...lol.

thanks,

BEAR

  Bear

   I'd take a Sako over a Tikka anyday,thats like the difference between an S-10 and a Silverado.LOL I went with the Winy because of price and the T-3 and the true short action which is IMHO what makes them so accurate. I haven't been able to do the deer test with it yet,but this year I will for sure. I never paid any attention to the .277 cal. but since the trade for the Ruger I picked up I'm kinda hooked at the deer dumpablity(thats a Tenn. word LOL) of the cal.

I haven't had a chance to fire the 270WSM yet.I am currently working up loads for a 7mmWSM and it is proving interesting.I will post some reports when I finish it in a week or so.

I honestly believe that too improve on the 270win you should step up to the 7mm class or go the weatherby route if performance is your aim.The 7mmWSM is not going to make the 7mm Rem redundent from what I have seen in testing the sporting class rifles.Heavy barrelled targets rifles may be a different matter as some 7mmWSM are starting to do well in long range events.I will get a chance to use one at a 500meter event shortly and will let you know how it goes as well.

Macca

Just two questions from a western hunting guide.  When you encounter a trophy muley at less than 200 yards do you plan to stalk in reverse to take advantage of the flatter trajectory of the 270 WSM?  Will you be shooting at distances in excess of 300 yards on purpose?

Teddy

I'ld be interested to hear from someone who shoots, and reloads for both the 270 and the 270 WSM. From the load data I've seen so far I'm not convinced you're getting enough extra to brag about.

 With that said the 7 wsm looks to be the most interesting one of the bunch so far. I'ld like to see them do one in a 33 or 35.

Personally I would be going back to at least 500 to make it a fair contest.

Macca

Fella's;

If they're that close, I just brand 'em.  Then you can threaten to sue the outta stater for takin' your stock.  They settle out of court & it's all good.

 900F

Both are great cartridges.

     Its really prety simple to me. What are yo shooting at ? and how far can you shoot ? If you are shooting at animals the size of caribu down , the 270win is plenty of cartridge out to say350 or 400 yards, a little more if you are really good.  The Wsm woud hit harder so if your huinting Elk its the better chouce.  And if you are good enough to take advantage of the flatter trajectory, the wsm will give you Its a good way to go !     I havs a .270win and I would love a 270wsm also !   But hell I would love most anything tat says bang if the price is right...tj3006

I find the new short magnums to be a fine income source for the manufacturers.  I want Remington, Winchester, and the rest to stay in business just like the rest of you.  They need to produce rifles to keep the payroll going.

But please do not insist that a magnum is required.  Mule deer, antelope, elk, caribou, moose, etc. are not any tougher to kill than they were 7,000 years ago. A calm hunter and cool rifle shot will get his game without these new toys.

The "old .270" is aging but still a good choice for those long shots past 200 yards that are rarely encountered.  Other effective "oldies" include .243, 250-3000, 6.5 Swede, 7mm-08, 300 Savage, .308, 30-06, 8mm, and 444.

TR  

Teddy

 I agree 100% with your last post, Scary isn't it

Ranch,

My thought exactly.  I just got a 260 rem, not to avoid the magnum word, but because I'm more of an accuracy nut.  I will buy one of the WSM as soon as it comes in 35, 375, 416, or 45 cal.  It will be a Win M70 lightweight with a 24 inch tube.

Regarding the 270 WSM, my brother was fondling a Weeatherby Vangard (aka Howa) in 270 WSM yesterday at Gander Mountain  $$$$ could be affecting him.

BEAR

Well,

Tikkabuck's words are encouraging.

I owned, briefly, a Winchester Model 70 Coyote in 270 WSM.  I sold it to a good hunting buddy of mine and did some shooting with it.  I honestly wasn't real impressed with the accuracy but I believe it was more to do with the crappy Simmons Scope than anything.  I couldn't be sure if I was making scope adjustments because the clicks were so sloppy!  However, we did manage 1 inch groups occassionally.  More often it was 1.5-2 inches. 

IMHO, of all the WSM's the 270 is really the only one with the largest, small ballistic advantage over other WSM calibers.  Comparing the other WSM's to calibers above and below their listing in the ballistics tables doesn't give anything real impressive.  However, with the 270 WSM one sees a margin of advantage that is larger than the others.  Course this all depends on who's ballistics you look at! 

The 270 WSM is going to stick around I think.  But for me, I wanted the tried and true 270 Winchester before selling myself "short"

Either caliber will work but I'm rather fond of the classics.