Author Topic: .270 Win and .270 WSM (Read 1882 times)

JPSaxMan · « **on:** October 06, 2004, 01:33:12 PM »

How much of a difference is there? Has anyone used the WSM against the Win and if so what did you see in advantages and disadvantages? Thanx for any info!

Lawdog · « **Reply #1 on:** October 08, 2004, 12:15:44 PM »

Fishman029,

The main difference is the .270 WSM will give you about 200 fps. more velocity than the old .270 Win.(standard factory loads not someone's hot reloads). Next it does seem to be inherently more accurate and does it using a shorter action. I am not saying the .270 Win. isnt a good cartridge, I am saying the new WSM will do it at longer range and be more suitable for larger animals(Elk, etc.). Lawdog

JPSaxMan · « **Reply #2 on:** October 08, 2004, 04:59:18 PM »

Alright Lawdog, let me ask a franker question. If you had to buy one of the two guns for hunting (deer, elk, w/e)...which one would you purchase? Thanx!

RaySendero · « **Reply #3 on:** October 09, 2004, 05:26:24 AM »

Fishman029,

Get the 270 Winchester

and some reloading dies!

Lawdog · « **Reply #4 on:** October 09, 2004, 06:42:26 AM »

Fishman029,

Quote

If you had to buy one of the two guns for hunting (deer, elk, w/e)...which one would you purchase?

I own all three .277 calibers currently on the market(.270 Win., .270 WSM and the .270 Weatherby Magnum) and of the two we are talking about I would go with the .270 WSM. I know that Jack O'Connor is turning over in his grave and all of his followers are grabbing stones to throw but when you throw in Elk in the mix I just fell better about the killing power of the .270 WSM over the old .270 Winchester. Recoil isn't that much greater with the .270 WSM over the .270 Win. in rifles of equal weight. Get the .270 WSM and dont look back. Lawdog

JPSaxMan · « **Reply #5 on:** October 09, 2004, 06:45:04 AM »

Well, I don't reload so I don't have to worry about dies. Unless someone else speaks up it seems like people favor both cartridges. Even though I'm now gonna have to think harder as to which one to choose, it seems both have their advantages. Peace out!

MGMorden · « **Reply #6 on:** October 09, 2004, 08:03:55 AM »

The .270 WSM is probably technically superior to the .270 Win, but it's not a huge difference. The main thing is that there are hordes more .270 Win's on the market compared to .270 WSM's. If the cartridge doesn't garner enough popularity, then eventually they'll quite making factory ammo (and possibly brass for reloading) and then you've got a rifle that it's hard to find ammo for. This might not happen, but it's something to consider when buying such a new chambering. .270 Win is popular enough that you'll never have to worry about them not making ammo anymore.

Lawdog · « **Reply #7 on:** October 09, 2004, 08:57:05 AM »

MGMorden,

Quote

If the cartridge doesn't garner enough popularity, then eventually they'll quite making factory ammo (and possibly brass for reloading) and then you've got a rifle that it's hard to find ammo for.

I wouldn't worry about that happening. The .270 WSM is the number 2 seller of the WSM line up. And they are selling very well. The more the WSM's sell the more loads that will become available and thus the price will come down. It's still a better Elk cartridge than the .270 Win. and that is what he wanted. Lawdog

RaySendero · « **Reply #8 on:** October 09, 2004, 12:51:54 PM »

Quote from: Fishman029

Well, I don't reload so ......

If you pick the 270 WSM you better learn! At $35 per box practice will be expensive - $1.75 per pop!

PS: Lawdog, Jack said "the 270 Winchester was perfect medicine for elk"

stork · « **Reply #9 on:** October 09, 2004, 03:39:16 PM »

well the 270 WSM is better if you look at the numbers, and the 270 win is better if you don't reload because you will be able to find ammo for it any where, and if a box of 270 WSM is $35 then you probably should look into the 270 win a little closer becasue you can buy some real good premium ammo for that price and some cheapo stuff a whole lot cheaper.

270 WSM wins by ballistics
270 Win wins by everything else

JPSaxMan · « **Reply #10 on:** October 10, 2004, 05:37:37 AM »

WOW $35 for a box!!! :eek: . OK, that's starting to tip the scales toward .270 Win. Anybody else?

Lawdog · « **Reply #11 on:** October 10, 2004, 09:48:57 AM »

RaySendero,

Quote

PS: Lawdog, Jack said "the 270 Winchester was perfect medicine for elk"

I loved reading Jack's exploits as much as the next hunter(grew up on them) BUT I never agreed with everything he had to say. I am going by what I have learned about the .270 Win. and how it has performed on Elk in areas like Colorado, Montana, Idaho, etc.. The .270 is a great deer cartridge and will work on Elk IF the hunter picks his shots and has the patience to do so. Most new hunters dont have the patience to wait or pass up a shot that isnt right. And for those quoting $35.00 a box prices for factory ammo try the prices at Midway at http://www.midwayusa.com/rewriteabrowse/6/9298/653***690*** and check out the $20.00(give or take pennies) price per box. Or go to Midsouth at http://www.midsouthshooterssupply.com/department.asp?dept=%41%4D%4D%55%4E%49%54%49%4F%4E&dept2=%43%45%4E%54%45%52%46%49%52%45%20%52%49%46%4C%45&dept3=%32%37%30%20%57%49%4E%20%53%48%4F%52%54%20%4D%41%47&dept4=%42%49%47%20%47%41%4D%45 and see prices from $19.00 per box. Lets get real guys. Lawdog

longwinters · « **Reply #12 on:** October 10, 2004, 11:45:08 AM »

Actually if the 270 win is not gun enough then the 270 short is not going to be either. It is not the speed of the bullet that kills but what the bullet does when it gets there. Even if added velocity creates more energy at the same distance, is it enough to make a difference with the same bullet? I gotta wonder. So, in my mind, all a person is gaining with the short mags is a few feet more in range. And from what I read, when shooting the heavier bullets the short mags lose a lot of that advantage. Even the whole thing with "inherant accuracy" is moot, in the hunting world, because how much under MOA does a rifle have to shoot to be "accurate"? In my mind all the arguments for the short mags are a little on the lite side.

Long

RaySendero · « **Reply #13 on:** October 10, 2004, 12:54:32 PM »

Quote from: Lawdog

I loved reading Jack's exploits as much as the next hunter......
Lawdog

I like reading him too. Guess you can tell!

HogFan · « **Reply #14 on:** October 11, 2004, 08:42:47 AM »

I don't reload and I do own a 270 WSM, and have yet to pay more than $25 for a box of ammo. The box that was $25 was BT, and for the .270 Win, they run $22 a box. I don't think there will be a shortage of 270WSM ammo anytime soon, as Wal-Mart here has started selling that and the 7mmWSM ammo. Now if they would only carry .280 Rem I'd be doing good.

HogFan

bajabill · « **Reply #15 on:** October 12, 2004, 03:58:44 AM »

$20 winchester 150 gr ammo measures 3025 fps from my 270 wsm. I dont have a 270 win and I doubt if it would get that level with run of the mill factory ammo. I dont even handload my 30-06 up to that level.

Which one to buy depends greatly on what you already have, how and how much you intend to shoot it, etc. No one can answer that for you. I think the wsm is going to outperform the original (how much is debatable), ammo will not be as cheap because the 270 win is one of the few offerings that have $12 a box ammo.

Jim M · « **Reply #16 on:** October 12, 2004, 01:06:18 PM »

Here's how I solved the problem long before short magnums came to be. I bought a 270 Winchester to use for deer and then a year later bought a 338 Winchester magnum to use for elk and bear. I've never regretted buying either and both perform great on game. I never felt the need for a lighter rifle or shorter action.

RaySendero · « **Reply #17 on:** October 12, 2004, 02:55:53 PM »

Quote from: Jim M

.... I bought a 270 Winchester to use for deer and then a year later bought a 338 Winchester magnum to use for elk and bear. .....

Jim,

I like that combination of your 2 gun picks!

rickt300 · « **Reply #18 on:** October 19, 2004, 05:47:21 AM »

I just got back from an elk hunt in Wyoming where there were three 270's and one 308 winchester used. My 270 pushed a 150 grain Hornady interloc at 2900 fps. The first bullet hit my elk at 350 yards just behind the shoulder where it stopped still standing, my second bullet broke it's spine exiting leaving a huge exit hole, she dropped. The second shot was unnecessary as the first had destroyed the lungs and seperated the heart from it's pluming ending up under the hide on the far side perfectly expanded. The elk shot with the 308 was hit at 50 yards in the shoulder with a 180 grain Hornady which broke the shoulder and exited. This elk ran 75 yards downhill to a dirt road and expired, this last to me made for perfect bullet performance. Comparing the 270 WSM to the 270. In factory ammo the 270 with Hornady light magnum ammo gets very close to what the 270 WSM gets and has a greater magazine capacity to boot. I have never had a 270 that did not shoot exceptionally well. I will be sticking to my old 270 winchester.

oso45-70 · « **Reply #19 on:** October 19, 2004, 07:33:12 AM »

Rickt300
Hang in there rick, Old Jack will get setteled back in his grave now. I'll have to agree with you when it comes to the differences between the two loadings. There ain't 15 cents worth of difference between the two. I also have the 270 weatherby and the 270win. But i don't have a 270wsm and don't plan on getting one. Bullet placement is the answer.......Joe........

BIGBOREFAN · « **Reply #20 on:** October 21, 2004, 09:35:09 AM »

Get the 270 Win and don't look back. With good shot placement and a premium bullet a Elk should not get very far. Then on deer use a good ole' Remington 130 corloct, $11.94 a box at Walmart. Walmart is also carrying Federal premium at only 20.49 a box.

BBF