Would like to hear opinions on the actual killing power of a 270 Win large game

270 win vs a 30-06.
The 270 barrel is a keeper for sure.
I am thinking there is not that much difference certainly as far as deer and pigs.
How about Elk, moose, Bear etc, but then again I have a 338-06.

I would think a win 270 160 gr nosler or similar weight barnes bullet would do anything a 30-06 heavy load would do.
Besides in the family we have 3 Remi 30-06's.

Wondering why bother even keeping a 30-06 barrel.
Only reason I can think is if I take a hunting trip with say taking a 338-06 and 416 ruger complete rifles, I could drag along a 30-06 barrel
like if I cant find other ammo.

Right now I have these barrels - 270, 30-06, 338-06

I have 95 gr TTSX 270 win loads runing at 3700 fps so its a very flat shooter, but causes a real mess on game close up.
With a 30-06 I could run heavier 220 grain bullets.

Later will be picking up a 22-250 barrel for varmints and a 416 ruger or taylor later on for a heavy hitter.

Saw a large elk being takenby 270 in mannlicher stock on the outdoor channel
Shot placement is key as usual and bullet selection

If you can find an elk that can tell the difference between an 06 & a 270 I'll wash your car :)

Seriously though, if you already have a 338-06 I think you have it covered. Now if you just plain want to have an 06 in the safe, then by all means do it. I'm not one to advocate for less firearms.

No reason to feel undergunned with a 270 sighting down on nice 6 point bull. Heck, I once saw a guy shoot a relatively small northern CA muley with a 30-378, had to put 3 in him to get him down. Poor thing looked like swiss cheese when we got to him. A bigger bullet wont make up for poor shot placement, I don't care what anyone says.

The 270 is all a friend of mine hunts with. Deer, elk doesn't matter to him. He uses 150gr soft points, and not the bullet I would recommend, but I think your 160 would be great. A 160 TSX or std construction 180 in the '06 is good medicine, so no reason a 160 from a 270 won't do it too. It would be a little slower than the '06's 165, but not enough to matter.

check out this article its very interesting.

http://www.longrangehunting.com/arti...shooting-1.php

I like the 270 and will definitely keep that barrel.

I can load it with 95 gr TTSX bullets at 3700 and the trajectory is 0 at 250, -2.3 at 300, -10.5 at 400, -24 at 500.
Really hot load and causes a lot of damage, but will blow a pig apart at under 100 yards.
I also load the 130 game king which is a more civil bullet and 160 gr partition.

The 95 gr TTSX shoots of to the left about 6" from the other two so I have to fiddle with the scope for it..

In 30 caliber I guess 90% of why I am interested is the 208gr Amax.
Great super long range bullet. Used it to hunt with one year.

I have one field I go to regularly that is 800 yards long. Would never try a deer over 400 yards, but would try a hog at any distance
even with a pellet gun if that is all I had.

That said the 338-06 beats the 30-06 for killing power and the trajectory is great with a 185 gr TTSX.
The 270 with a 130 gr pro hunter is probably a better deer round IMO.
30-06 is just sort of in the middle.

Flyinsquirel - My car needs washing so I will look for that Elk.

I wish you luck my friend :)

In the last 50+ years of my hunting the .270 has never failed to kill what I've shot at. I have other clibers but seem always take the .270.

The 270 is adequate for everything up to and including field mice, assuming a good, stout 150 gr. bullet is used, but only for female and juvenile mice. I wouldn't recommend one for a bull mouse as they are much tougher and it is simply not enough gun.

Some of my relatives were lucky enough to go on an African plains game hunt recently. While stalking one species they came upon a 1600# Eland. The guide told my cousin that this was a once in a lifetime opportunity and he took the beast with one shot from a Ruger M77 in .270
Don't doubt the killing power of the .270 for one second.

were are Elmer & Jack when you need them ?
oh well Chuck Hawks will have to do
http://www.chuckhawks.com/column8_oconnor_vs_keith.htm

I would recommend bigger than .270 if hunting moose or in bear territory unless you can outrun your hunting partner.

Up to Elk a 130g JSP will drop them with ease & yup shot placement like any other caliber will do the job. Thats all my pal has ever used on them in 40 years with his .270 on every hunt we have done out here. I use a 7mm-08 with a 140g bullet myself.

or a be very good shot and have the gods on your side

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rCy5M5Y74o

I would stay in the 140 to 150gr range to keep the speed up and hunt anything you want, the 270 is a fine cartrige.

Mike

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flyinsquirel

If you can find an elk that can tell the difference between an 06 & a 270 I'll wash your car :)

Seriously though, if you already have a 338-06 I think you have it covered. Now if you just plain want to have an 06 in the safe, then by all means do it. I'm not one to advocate for less firearms.

No reason to feel undergunned with a 270 sighting down on nice 6 point bull. Heck, I once saw a guy shoot a relatively small northern CA muley with a 30-378, had to put 3 in him to get him down. Poor thing looked like swiss cheese when we got to him. A bigger bullet wont make up for poor shot placement, I don't care what anyone says.

---

Best advice so far.

Lets assume that you are going to wait for a proper shot, and NOT take a hail-mary into the general side of the animal.
Does "More killing power" mean anything tangible? No. Having no lungs and running 50 yds on adrenaline, is the same as having no lungs and running 50 yds on adrenaline. Between me and my Idaho hunting group, we have killed 5 Elk (5*5 or bigger) with 130gr Hot-Cor's(270) and 165gr Hot-Cor's(308), 1 moose with that 270 loading(130gr) and one with the 308 load. Honestly don't know for sure, but somewhere in the 15 black bear range. Bear are the easy one to kill, IMO. Breaking a hip when they are unhappy with you being there, is not difficult.

IMO, FWIW... MOST of what people "KNOW" about needing this or that for large, or dangerous game comes from 2 interconnected sources:
OLD popular journalist writings and OLD bullet construction.
Remember back in the "golden age of the west", like when Elmer and Keith were alive? Bullets were constructed from generally round copper tubes, a chunk O lead that had the SNOT lubed out of it so they could be pressed together.
There were no expansion tests, there were no heat treated, or skived jackets. They had no inner locking rings, or bonded cores. If you DIDN'T want a bullet failure IF you hit bone, you had better use the heaviest nastiest bullet that existed; or it may deflect/seperate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by darkker

IMO, FWIW... MOST of what people "KNOW" about needing this or that for large, or dangerous game comes from 2 interconnected sources:
OLD popular journalist writings and OLD bullet construction.
Remember back in the "golden age of the west", like when Elmer and Keith were alive? Bullets were constructed from generally round copper tubes, a chunk O lead that had the SNOT lubed out of it so they could be pressed together.
There were no expansion tests, there were no heat treated, or skived jackets. They had no inner locking rings, or bonded cores. If you DIDN'T want a bullet failure IF you hit bone, you had better use the heaviest nastiest bullet that existed; or it may deflect/seperate.

---

There is much truth here ^^^^^^^^

On the same note if you like those 95gr Barnes, try some 90gr Sierra HP and the Barnes 85gr both the MPG and RRLPs, with a full case of RL17 they are good for 4000 FPS +, poor poor piggy's and yotes don't fair that much better either, and the best thing yet is that you can shoot them from an adjacent county and not have to worry about bullet drop.

Tanks Dean

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stockrex

or a be very good shot and have the gods on your side

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rCy5M5Y74o

---

good thing he was wearing shorts.... God is on his side, and the lead was flying man. best shot he'll ever make.

I don't own a 270, but I know a bunch of good hunters that do. They kill everything they want to with them, and many of them would'nt use anything else.

Living in Elk country and with the majority of hunters not being "Rifle Loonies" a .25-06 and a .270win are fairly common, fairly normal use on everything rounds here. Vast majority are fed the cheapest ammo Wal-Mart sells. Lots and lots of dead elk with them.

Contrary to what the slick magazines tell us, having guided for and killed a few elk myself, I do not find them to be tough to kill at all. They take a shot, teter around a bit and tip over. This is with pointy sticks and with "normal" calibers .... 257, 25-06, 270, 30'06 that sort of thing. A good friend of mine uses a 338, there are a few 300's, but for the most part a .30'06 is considered a Cannon here.

I think the 270 is plenty for anything in North America. Not perfect for every situation but plenty for any.

I find it interesting that Dakker mentions something I have often wonder a LOT about. When going after elk all the writers say ya gotta use this bullet or that caliber, and I noticed that he even used a 168 in the 308, but only a 130 in the 270. Not sure if this is for BC or what, but I have really been wondering about using the Barnes 130gr TTSX in my 'o6. Currently i have 168gr TTSX's in it, and it is fine, but the little 130gr would be slightly less recoil (not a big deal) and considerably better trajectory. In fact it pretty well outdoes the 270 with the same bullet. It can be pushed slightly over the 3200fps mark, but I figured a trajectory path with under 3100 fps and it is pretty much point and shoot clear to 300yds. With a 250yd zero, it's about 2.4" high at 100, and 3.25 low at 300, with only 14in drop to 400 and still retains over 1500ftlb of energy at 400.

Maybe when this crop of 168's are gone that's what I'll do, then I'll have my 30 cal 270:eagerness:

Woodleigh makes a 180 grain 270 projectile.
http://www.midwayusa.com/product/871...oint-box-of-50

Sectional Density: 0.334
Ballistic Coefficient: 0.513
Might be a good, hard hitting long distance bullet.

just me two cents...

Shot placement is the key to any successful hunt.

O'Connor shots were, from what I read and heard, open country hunts. Kieth on the other hand was hunting in brush and heavy cover, that why he prefered a stouter cartridge because he took "raking shots".

I recently asked a tech. at Sierra if thier bullets would penetrate heavy bones and continue to do the job. His answer was, "I don't know of any bullet that could"..... , so I took it that he was saying no. So for added assurance I loaded 180 grain Nosler partitions for my .308 pump, for deer/bear, and 130 grain Barnes TTSX for my .270 winchester, for deer/bear.

Barnes did mention that you could drop down a caliber or bullet weight and still get the job done.

There's nothing wrong with a .270. I prefer the .30-06 because of the wider selection of factory ammo, and its world-wide availability. All of the arguments of the .30-06 superiority at the upper end of terminal ballistics seem moot in your case as you'd be using the .338 anyway.

KeS

wider selection of factory ammo...

the 130 .270 can do all.... shot placement.

So the 165 .30-06 can do all... both have the same BC

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flatshooter

wider selection of factory ammo...

the 130 .270 can do all.... shot placement.

So the 165 .30-06 can do all... both have the same BC

---

:shrug:

I put a 180g TSX diagonally through a zebra and broke the off shoulder with the TSX stopping under the skin. I wouldn't have taken that shot on that animal with a 130g bullet. But like I said, for the OP it's moot as he has a .338 and isn't trying to do everything with the .270.

KeS

Kev...

meant do all North America. A zebra.. with a premium bullet the .270 WILL do it.

medium to heavy game.

Three bulls and three cows in two days from three hunters using 270's loaded with 165 Matrix or 130gr BTSP, all very effectively killed. The only reason I will shoot my 338 RUM over my 270 with 165 Matrix is when the range dictates a 300gr Berger!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by handirifle

I find it interesting that Dakker mentions something I have often wonder a LOT about. When going after elk all the writers say ya gotta use this bullet or that caliber, and I noticed that he even used a 168 in the 308, but only a 130 in the 270. Not sure if this is for BC or what, but I have really been wondering about using the Barnes 130gr TTSX in my 'o6.

---

[QUOTE= I recently asked a tech. at Sierra if thier bullets would penetrate heavy bones and continue to do the job. His answer was, "I don't know of any bullet that could"..... , so I took it that he was saying no. So for added assurance I loaded 180 grain Nosler partitions for my .308 pump, for deer/bear, and 130 grain Barnes TTSX for my .270 winchester, for deer/bear.

Barnes did mention that you could drop down a caliber or bullet weight and still get the job done.[/QUOTE]


The reason I use 165's in the 308, is because they work every time. Likewise in the 270, jack killed half of the animals on the planet with them. When I shoot for the 1,000 yard line, I concern myself with BC. If someone knows drop tables and HONESTLY how far they actually shoot big game; BC is irrelevant in hunting distances.

1)

2) WAY more info is needed for that conversation to be usefull, was he talking about getting a GK tip plugged? Barnes has to heat-treat their bullets, to keep them from instantly opening. So, unless you can ask the right questions; you think you CAN go lighter than normal. The REALITY is that you HAVE TO. Call Barnes and ask them what the guaranteed operational velocity window for a SPECIFIC bullet. Then call and ask any other bullet maker, about the same weight class.
Barnes has a MUCH higher velocity requirement for reliable expansion. That is why you heard they penetrate so well, and why you can go lighter. If you don't, you may not get them to open; so yeah, they are going to penetrate....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by darkker

T
2) WAY more info is needed for that conversation to be usefull, was he talking about getting a GK tip plugged? Barnes has to heat-treat their bullets, to keep them from instantly opening. So, unless you can ask the right questions; you think you CAN go lighter than normal. The REALITY is that you HAVE TO. Call Barnes and ask them what the guaranteed operational velocity window for a SPECIFIC bullet. Then call and ask any other bullet maker, about the same weight class.
Barnes has a MUCH higher velocity requirement for reliable expansion. That is why you heard they penetrate so well, and why you can go lighter. If you don't, you may not get them to open; so yeah, they are going to penetrate....

---

Um, lots of questionable statements in there, so I'll ask some:

A) What's wrong with "opening instantly"?

B) So, Barnes has to heat-treat bullets to keep them from "opening instantly", and as a result they don't open at all? Wouldn't it seem that Barnes could develop an intermediate heat treatment if this was a problem?

KeS

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NATTY BUMPO

The 270 is adequate for everything up to and including field mice, assuming a good, stout 150 gr. bullet is used, but only for female and juvenile mice. I wouldn't recommend one for a bull mouse as they are much tougher and it is simply not enough gun.

---

I Have to ask, Have you ever used a .270? Also what is your source of such a wealth of information?
I personally have seen a lot of bull moose taken down with a winchester model 70 in .270. As for the field mice you mention, It is probably accurate enough for those too

Ahem, gerard: Learn to recognize sarcasm. I know they don't have sarcasm on your planet but the rest of us are familiar with it and hate necroposts coming back because some etymological genius from a galaxy without sarcasm can't figure it out.

.270 is plenty gun to kill any North American animal. It's all about shot placement. My old man has killed everything in Alaska but a grizz and polar bear with his .270.

He hasn't hunted either yet because they don't taste the best and no point in killing something you aren't going to eat.

Some people are trophy hunters and may disagree, but I don't need a rug on my wall to prove I can hunt.

http://nevadahunters.com/images/Antelope/charles2.jpg
Taken at 400 yards one shot and flop

http://nevadahunters.com/images/Shee...rles%20020.jpg
Taken at 50 yards one shot and flop
Both taken with a 270 Win enough said.

Charles,
Those are nice. Gotta say, that 50yd shot on the sheep is not the norm, at least from what I see on TV. All those guys say you're lucky to get withing 300yds so you need the 300 Ultra Super magnums just to have enough energy to scare them.

A good friend of mine has hunted elk for many years, always used the 270 with the 150gr ROUND nosed bullets. Never had a pass through, but never lost an elk either. He has quite a few to his credit too.

By the way, not all Barnes bullets have the same design parameters. Some will open at speeds over 2100fps and some down as low as 1600fps (LRX bullets) and the TAC X bullets are also designed to open at slower speeds. Most of the bullets are designed to operate correctly at velocities that would fit the ballistic curve of the caliber of cartridges they are expected to be used in, ie. .308 cal spitzer bullets would be expected to perform normally from cartridges like anything from 300 Savage and up.

I am very familiar with those issues, and have spoken with Barnes folks either via email or phone many times on that very topic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 1983Weatherby

.270 is plenty gun to kill any North American animal. It's all about shot placement. My old man has killed everything in Alaska but a grizz and polar bear with his .270.

He hasn't hunted either yet because they don't taste the best and no point in killing something you aren't going to eat.

Some people are trophy hunters and may disagree, but I don't need a rug on my wall to prove I can hunt.

---

I've killed a very big full maned Tanzanian lion with the 270. Two shots were needed, but he was very sick after the first shot and just limped away less than 20 yards to crouch down again on his belly. A lesser but much better maned lion was collected in the same area with 375H&H a year earlier with two shots. The .375H&H didn't kill any quicker. I've killed a griz in Yukon that won my guide the silver buckle. Two elands and two bull elk huge 66"Yukon moose zebra etc. as well as a dikdik also fell to 270 win. Unless you're hunting huge Alaskan brown or polar bear, I feel that 270 with 130gr NosPT is all you need on your continent. I'm not talking LR hunting here. And a 7mm Rem mag with 160gr Nosler PT will have you covered if you limit your shots to 300yds.
BTW I didn't get to eat my polar bear because it couldn't be imported into the US, but the Inuits told me they were good eating. I ate my lion, but I prefer eland.

Ive killed many a deer with my 270, anywhere from 75 too 250 yards and never had one run more than 50 feet..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NATTY BUMPO

The 270 is adequate for everything up to and including field mice, assuming a good, stout 150 gr. bullet is used, but only for female and juvenile mice. I wouldn't recommend one for a bull mouse as they are much tougher and it is simply not enough gun.

---

I once took a bull mouse with a .22 LR. True story. Shot placement is key.

About 6 or 8 years ago there was a story written by Ken Howell entitled "The Indoor Safari" that was published in the Varmint Hunter Magazine. On a whim I just did a Google search and low and behold he's posted it up on the 24hourcampfire forum. So this one's for all you hardcore mouse hunters....

http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthr...pics/6231639/1


And if you don't know who Ken Howell is, well....you're missing out on some darn good stories! And no, I'm not talking about the one that played baseball.

Quote:

---

And a 7mm Rem mag with 160gr Nosler PT will have you covered if you limit your shots to 300yds.

---

Maybe even a bit further if you are up to the task. :confused:

Got to love the back and forth between Jack and Keith over the years concerning the merits of the 270. My favorite is when Keith said "he preferred to hunt his game before he shot them rather than after." When all is said and done the 270 will get it done.

Thank you mr furious for sharing the story.. good laugh!

i witnessed my first long range shot ever at a large animal (a deer) take place with a model 70
in 270 with a unertle scope on it. the shooter was laying prone on a dirt mountain rd while using the back seat from his car as a rest.
it took 3 shots to hit and kill the deer at a claimed 700 yds. wether he dialed the scope i cannot say. the year was 1956 and i was then a
mere 21 years old. about 15 years later the long range bug bit me and i aquired a surplus military rangefinder which i still have.
his claim was right on as for distance. irronicly my first and only pa black bear was taken at the same spot 50 years later. i took that with a wildcat 7x300 weatherby on a lefty 700 action. i didnt use the back seat from a 56 chevy as a rest but rather a portable bench.

The only elk I ever shot was with a 150 grain Partition from a .270 at 50 yards or so in heavy cover, I pulled the trigger, the elk politely fell over where he stood. I have killed a bunch of deer and a few antelope since then and the .270 has always done the job.

Bob

we truly obsessed with caliber, in southeast Asia they kill elephants with .22 ;-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stockrex

we truly obsessed with caliber, in southeast Asia they kill elephants with .22 ;-)

---

if were obsessed with anything here it would be performance. that no doubt due to the desire for a more humane kill.
im sure at some point in history groups of natives killed elephants with spears and clubs.

The old 06 vs 270 debate. Personally I greatly dislike the 06 . And I've had 5 of them. I've owned a 270 and got 1 for my wife. I really like the 270, just because it ain't an 06. But we don't have one any more. The 270 will kill anything the 06 will just as well. . Around here plenty of moose are killed every year with the 270. The 338/06 has a very loyal following in Alaska and like the 35 Whelan is a good killer. For myself tho I hunt all big game with a rifle that will dump a brown bear at close range with a chest shot . My personal favorites are the 9.3×64 Brenneke, 416 Remington and 458 Win Mag. I've killed lots of deer with both the 416 s and the 458. And plenty of bear with them. The 9.3 is just a wonderful little round. Comparable to the 375 H+H. Which I really like also.
If it were me and you wanted to stay with the 2.5" case, I'de build a 6.5/06 AI.