Home Main Category General Firearms

So... What's wrong with a .270?

245

Replies

  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 24,503 Senior Member
    JerryBobCo wrote: »
    This of it as a 25-06 or 6.5-06 on steroids.

    See Snake, I told you he was incoherently drunk. Not only can he not type.......but he's also dilusional.

    :wink:
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 24,503 Senior Member
    In my recent quest to own everything spurned by this forum, my next purchase is definitely going to have to be a .270 :tooth:

    Coud have saved some money in buying a Savage chambered for .270 Winchester.
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • Virginia BoyVirginia Boy Member Posts: 213 Member
    Like I said before........a .270 is a .30'06 on Slimfast. It's just a skinnier bullet that shoots a flatter trajectory but gives up mass for speed. It was touted as "softer recoiling"......hence the ninny-ribbing.
    I would like to know where the soft recoil came from.
    My son has a Remington 700 BDL, in .270,& I have a Remington
    Sportsman 78, in .30-06, and I don't see any difference in the recoil.
    Rights and freedoms, won with patriot's blood,
    shall not be taken away, by ink from a tyrant's pen.
  • RazorbackerRazorbacker Senior Member Posts: 4,646 Senior Member
    In my recent quest to own everything spurned by this forum, my next purchase is definitely going to have to be a .270 :tooth:

    Then after that get a judge. Taurus and the .410. two birds;one stone and all that.
    Teach your children to love guns, they'll never be able to afford drugs
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 16,131 Senior Member
    I would like to know where the soft recoil came from.
    My son has a Remington 700 BDL, in .270,& I have a Remington
    Sportsman 78, in .30-06, and I don't see any difference in the recoil.
    You are letting facts cloud your judgement. Stop it! Get in the spirit and start calling your son your daughter.
    Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it.
    -Thomas Paine
  • kansashunterkansashunter Senior Member Posts: 1,859 Senior Member
    In my recent quest to own everything spurned by this forum, my next purchase is definitely going to have to be a .270 :tooth:

    get a 270 wsm and you can offend two crowds at once, but don't let cpj shoot it.
  • cappy54cappy54 Member Posts: 269 Member
    oh boy :yesno:"imoit:
  • zorbazorba Senior Member Posts: 23,952 Senior Member
    Or perhaps:
    :deadhorse:
    ... but I *had* to ask!
    -Zorba, "The Veiled Male"

    "If you get it and didn't work for it, someone else worked for it and didn't get it..."
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 22,394 Senior Member
    I know I said I was through with this argument, but since Zorba brought up this thread, here's my defense.

    I have never heard so many meaningless arguments in my life. That's why I know that most of you are only trying to get .270 owner's goat. You have no real tangible argument here. But here go's.

    Yes, the .270 was devised in a period just after WWI when anything European was Taboo to bring up to the American public. So Winchester modified the 7mm and gave it an American sounding name. It has since gotten either praise or it has been cussed. But it has served its purpose. Then some of your arguments, other than bullet availability, which I don't dispute, should pertain to the 7mms also. A 7mm in the same or close bullet weight is no better that any .270. If you want to pick at hairs, the .270 might be just a little superior academically, because it has a higher ballistics coefficient for the same bullet weight than the 7s because it's minutely longer and skinnier. But at only .007 inch difference I doubt that it's calculable in most situations. So I don't usually bring up that point, but there it is.

    All I can say is that the .270 Win. has served me well for right at years. Any animal that has escaped its rath was because I failed to hit it. I also have a .280 Remington and yes, it has even still today a broader bullet selection. Only problem with that is, most of all those extra bullets don't do me a bit of good as hunting bullets go. The 100 grain for varmints, the 130 grain for hogs and deer, and the 150 grain for larger animals is all you need for hunting with it. I didn't buy it to compete at Camp Perry or to bench rest shoot it. I don't shoot anything at 1000 yards either so those old 130 grain and 150 grain Game Kings and Nosler Partitions are all I will ever need.

    True, it is no better than a 280 and doesn't have a whole lot on a 7mm-08 or 7mm Mauser. But it is what It is and it is what I have. Like I say, it has served me well. BTW, how many of you naysayers can say they own both a .270 Win. and a .280 Rem.?
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • JerryBobCoJerryBobCo Senior Member Posts: 8,108 Senior Member
    Zee wrote: »
    See Snake, I told you he was incoherently drunk. Not only can he not type.......but he's also dilusional.

    :wink:

    I am not di.., uh de... uh inco.. whatever you said.

    Besides, as I posted just a few minutes ago in the hunting forum, I quit drinking after sampling Alec's port. For CPJ and Buffy's benefit, that's wine.
    Jerry

    Gun control laws make about as much sense as taking ex-lax to cure a cough.
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 24,503 Senior Member
    snake284 wrote: »
    A 7mm in the same or close bullet weight is no better that any .270. ................But at only .007 inch difference I doubt that it's calculable in most situations.

    007.jpg

    Oh no, 007 makes the 7mm oh so much better.
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 22,394 Senior Member
    I do know of a couple a three people around here that may be disillusioned, but I don't think one of them is JerryBob. LOL!
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 22,394 Senior Member
    AND you speak with Forked Tongue!!!
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 24,503 Senior Member
    snake284 wrote: »
    BTW, how many of you naysayers can say they own both a .270 Win. and a .280 Rem.?

    minion.gif

    But, I still own a .280 Remington. I was smart.
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • road_warri0rroad_warri0r New Member Posts: 11 New Member
    The last 2 years I have killed a deer with a 270, but each time had to go find it and each ran about 50 yards even though both shots hit "at the right spot". This year I am going to use a 30.06, I also have a 7 mag, but my taxidermist said "no" :(
  • terminator012terminator012 Senior Member Posts: 3,929 Senior Member
    My son when he was 11 killed two deer with one shot with a .270. He was in a ground blind hunting when the does came out in the field. He picked out the biggest one and fired. The first one dropped in it's track. Then another behind her started stumbling and finally fell. What a suprize that was.

    Besides, everyone should own a.270. It's the only ammo Walmart never runs out of in an ammo crisis.:D

    sent from my droid jeeping and surviving in the back woods
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 22,394 Senior Member
    50 yards from a lung shot is not far. But what bullets are you using? What are you shooting for? Heart, Lung, what? I've seen my share of .308 shots at deer that ran that far if not farther. Then again I've dropped them on the spot with my .308 AND my .270. But try an 06 by all means. I really believe you will see in time that it's not that much difference if any. It's mainly about bullet selection and shot placement. But at least you got those deer.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 24,503 Senior Member
    Wambli Ska wrote: »
    Am I the only one hearing the drag screaming? :tooth:

    tumblr_m5rq26Dv1t1rufpeho1_500.gif
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 24,503 Senior Member
    The last 2 years I have killed a deer with a 270, but each time had to go find it and each ran about 50 yards even though both shots hit "at the right spot". This year I am going to use a 30.06, I also have a 7 mag, but my taxidermist said "no" :(


    Welcome!

    tumblr_mpcyi4LF0b1rk6p9mo1_500.gif
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 22,394 Senior Member
    My son when he was 11 killed two deer with one shot with a .270. He was in a ground blind hunting when the does came out in the field. He picked out the biggest one and fired. The first one dropped in it's track. Then another behind her started stumbling and finally fell. What a suprize that was.

    Besides, everyone should own a.270. It's the only ammo Walmart never runs out of in an ammo crisis.:D

    sent from my droid jeeping and surviving in the back woods

    I think I love you Tracy!!!
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • centermass556centermass556 Senior Member Posts: 3,534 Senior Member
    Glad to see I am not the only one with a Minion facination....
    "To have really lived, you must have almost died. To those who have fought for it, freedom has a flavor the protected will never know."
  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 11,861 Senior Member
    The last 2 years I have killed a deer with a 270, but each time had to go find it and each ran about 50 yards even though both shots hit "at the right spot". This year I am going to use a 30.06, I also have a 7 mag, but my taxidermist said "no" :(

    Geez...50 yards. Your tracking skills must have been taxed to the maximum.
    Concealed carry is for protection, open carry is for attention.
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 22,394 Senior Member
    One thing I will say that I haven't mentioned here. Recoil was one reason I bought a .270 in the first place. But was I surprised. My particular rifle is a post 63 Model 70 Winchester, a 1966 model. It kicks the Pooh out of me. I put a pad on it about 28 years back, but it's not as good as some of the more modern softer pads and it still takes its toll on my shoulder. It's light and pounds hell out of me still. I am thinking hard about putting a brake on it.

    But having said that, the only time it bothers me is shooting it off a bench, usually sighting it in. As for hunting, I never think about it.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • RazorbackerRazorbacker Senior Member Posts: 4,646 Senior Member
    Zee is certainly on a roll today. If those are kinds of things on his hard drive, I shudder to think what he hasn't posted
    Teach your children to love guns, they'll never be able to afford drugs
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 22,394 Senior Member
    Some things are better left to the imagination Razor.....
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • horselipshorselips Senior Member Posts: 3,628 Senior Member
    On paper, and in the field, the .270 Winchester is a fine performer. But just try to find a cool military-surplus or modern sporting rifle chambered for it. No Garands, no FN49s, no Enfields, Schmidt-Rubins Mausers or Mosin-Nagants. No AK-47s, no SKSs, FALs, HKs or M1As. No ARs (?). Nothing that's FUN. And that means no inexpensive ammunition. You get to bend over and grab your ankles with every dollar-plus shot you take. Or, you have to roll your own, and that's still much more costly than surplus ammo. Yawn.

    It is a rare circumstance that a .308 will not do what a .270 can, but the .308 is infinitely more versatile, and available in so many very useful, flexible, and drop-dead cool high-capacity packages.
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 24,503 Senior Member
    horselips wrote: »
    On paper, and in the field, the .270 Winchester is a fine performer. But just try to find a cool military-surplus or modern sporting rifle chambered for it. No Garands, no FN49s, no Enfields, Schmidt-Rubins Mausers or Mosin-Nagants. No AK-47s, no SKSs, FALs, HKs or M1As. No ARs (?). Nothing that's FUN. And that means no inexpensive ammunition. You get to bend over and grab your ankles with every dollar-plus shot you take. Or, you have to roll your own, and that's still much more costly than surplus ammo. Yawn.

    It is a rare circumstance that a .308 will not do what a .270 can, but the .308 is infinitely more versatile, and available in so many very useful, flexible, and drop-dead cool high-capacity packages.

    Holy CRAP!!!! That's the smartest thing you've EVER said on this forum!!! For the first time, you've talked out of the correct end of the horse. There might be hope for you......yet.

    :jester:
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • bhl2506bhl2506 Senior Member Posts: 1,962 Senior Member
    I went hunting with a 270 once. Didn't see anything while hunting and got bored. So I seen one of them huge skeeters they have around here and shot him. Darn thing laughed so hard he fell out of the sky. So I shot him again a peed him off really bad. About this time he grab the rifle from me and started to beat the ever loving sheet out of me. Just made back to the truck by the skin of my teeth. Not only did beat with the gun the sob put 4 huge arse skeeter bites on my back side! :jester:
    Refusing to conform to the left wing mantra of political correctness by insisting on telling the truth does not make you a loud mouth.
  • orchidmanorchidman Senior Member Posts: 8,145 Senior Member
    Here is how you measure the efficiency of a cartridge according to the guy that was the resident expert at my LGS ( until he got fired)..............

    Take a calibre...........for this example we will use the 270. Multiply the single digits by each other...........2X7= 14. That is the power factor of the 270.

    Compare it with the 308................3X8=24 The 308 has a power factor of 10 more than the 270.

    7mm08....................7x8=56

    30.06......................30x6=180 ( the full stop in the calibre designation indicates that the numbers before it are not single digits but one complete number ie 30 not 3 Thus you multiply by 30....)

    338.........................3x3x8=72

    375........................3x7x5=105 ( exceptions are if it is a proprietary calibre such as the 375 Holland & Holland Magnum which increases the power by a factor of 4 and thus the 375 H&H is rated at 420)

    Try it yourself. Pick a calibre and using the above formula work out its power factor.......

    ( there were some other calculations to take into account like the size of the chip on the shooters shoulder but I cant remember what they are)
    Still enjoying the trip of a lifetime and making the best of what I have.....
  • VarmintmistVarmintmist Senior Member Posts: 7,452 Senior Member
    With the 06, the numbers before the dot are the caliber and the numbers after are the year adopted, which would mean the 30.06 has a power factor of zero...

    Then you have the 7*6*2*3*9 = 2268 but that might be a metric power factor so as a furrin assualt rifle you would have to divide it my 556 to make it Mericin power factor of 4.079
    It's boring, and your lack of creativity knows no bounds.
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.

Advertisement