270 WSM VS. 270 Winchester

Camo

Camo

New member
Im looking into buying a new whitetail gun, and I've been looking at reviews on the 270 WSM and 270 Winchester which all seem very positive. Does anyone here have any experience with these cartridges, and if you do what does it kick like in comparison with a .308 with a 150 gr. Also im in the price range of about 500-600 dollars for a new gun (I already have a scope), so can anybody recommend one. I was thinking about another Savage, but I also hear that Remmy 700's are good guns too.

Thanks
-Curt
 
I have one in the Win Mdl 70 Classic FW. Can't comment about 150 grain bullet, but the 130 is not much more recoil than my .308. Will shoot 1" at 100 yards with factory ammo. My son killed a cow elk with it last year at about 150 yards, one shot she went about 25 yards and fell over dead.
 
5-6 bills, get a browning a-bolt, easier to adjust trigger, but if not stick with the Rem. A mod 700 is a great gun, but i own both, and prefer the short bolt throw and adj. trigger on the a-bolt. The round itself is great, probably it and the 300wsm will be the only two to have a long lasting effect. However remember that finding factory ammo is a bit of a pain, if you handload that makes no difference, but most places other than the mega hunting stores like cabelas, bass pro , and sportsmans wharehouse wont carry the full line available.
 
I was just on Walmart.com, and I saw that Ruger makes a 270 WSM. I belive it was an MK II. Good gun, or leave it?
 
I have a friend that bought a 270WSM Mod 70 last year for deer season. Well, it was suposed to be a regular 270. The Walmart guy screwed up and sold him the wsm, and when it goes out the door at Walmart. It doesn't get to come back in. Anyhow, wants me to reload for him down the road but the factory ammunition he got didn't seem to shoot to bad. He did shoot a doe at around 50 yds that ran several hundred before someone else put it down. They said there was blood splurting out pretty hard though before they shot it. It all comes down to shot placement. Heart/lungs. Personally I think the ballistics on the 300wsm and 325wsm seem like a better performer, with more bullet selection. My 2cents.
 
I have a rem. sps in 270wsm. It shoots very well with handloads with the 130gr BT and drops whitetail in their tracks. The stocks on the sps is pretty cheap but the rifle shoots great and recoil is not bad.
 
I would get the 270 wsm. Little bit better ballistics, less weight to gun and doesn't have throat errosion like the wssm.

My order of pick would be the most consistantly accurate guns out of the box:

tikka
savage

Doesn't matter after that cause its a crap shoot if you get an accurate gun or not.

remington
winchester
ruger
 
I've killed more game with a .270 Win than any other and think very highly of it. I settled on a 150 grain Nosler Partition for all hunting to include antelope, deer and elk. I would second the Tikka for out of the box. They say the trigger is easy to adjust, but I've never had any reason to touch mine.

The tikka is not a .270 though. The .270 I mention above was a Ruger. Actually, the .270 took some fiddling to get it to shoot which included a synthetic stock. I gave it to another family member an it continues to do it's good work!
 
Camo: I have a 270 WSM and it has become my "go to" gun among several others (300 WSM, 30-06, 300 Win. Mag. & others). Felt recoil is less and gun is lighter. I love it and its a tack driver. As far as make goes, thats better left to you.
 
Flip a coin.

The .270 Winchester can do anything that needs to get done; cheaper and with better ammo availability "out there", than anything other than the '06.

The .270 WSM is, to me, the only one that makes sense. It does give a bit more than the .270 Win., but for actual hunting use, not that much.

Out to 300, any difference won't be noticed. To 400, the WSM holds a slight edge. And, honestly, how often do you (or any of us, really) shoot at game past 400?

Me? I'd take the .270 Winchester. If I needed more, I'd go either a lot larger (.338 WM), or smaller and a lot faster (.257 Roy).

But, that's just my opinion. Either of the .270s would suit you very well, IMHO.
 
If you handload there really isn't any difference between the 2. The WSM's are loaded to a higher pressure than the standard cases. Load em both up to equal pressures and the difference is nothing to get excited about prolly about 100fps, for a nice factory rifle kimber is it
 
I've been shooting the same 'ol Remington model 700 BDL for around 21 years now and I've only had one deer get away from me and that was all my mistake,not the gun's.Now I shoot them in the neck and the just fall dead,bang-flop.I don't have the luxury of having a place to shoot well over a hundred yds,in fact most of my shots are less than 75 yds,so I cannot comment on the long range effectiveness.I would not trade this gun for anything else out there.
 
I purchased a sako 75 in 270 win a while back and I love it. 3/4 groups all day long. I went with the 270 win because of ammo availability and price. I also shoot a 300 ultra mag and I learned some important lessons about ammo availability. When Murphy steps in and you are a couple hundred miles from the nearest town of any size, ammo availability is extremely important.

One of the best arguments for the short mags is recoil reduction. In 270 win the recoil shouldn't be a problem for the average shooter.

As far as performance is concerned, the slight gain of a short mag is outweighed by the availability factor.

Dave
 
How can you guys say there is no real difference between the two. Granted, this is factory ammo, but here is a head to head comparison using the same bullet, between the 270 Win, the 270 wsm and the 7mm Rem mag. The 270 wsm is considerably ahead of the 270 win and is ballistically superior on paper, to the 7mm mag. All that with less felt recoil. I dont know. The 270 wsm looks good on paper, thats for sure.

http://winchester.com/products/catalog/c...=1&action=1
 

I was just given a Savage 10 in 270WSM I have not had the time to really wring it out yet but I did buy 150 140 and 130 grn ammo for it and a set of loading dies. So I do not think avalibility is going to be a problem. I do know that the 150s do a real job on 2 liter pop jugs full of water at 100 yards.
I will be trying it on Deer this fall, and maybe a yote or two if I get the chance. I do not think recoil is much compared to what I normally shoot. ( I have this thing for 45 caliber rifles)
 
If you want the latest and greatest get the WSM. If you prefer a caliber with a little history (I do) take the standard. Might just be a matter of what rifle you prefer and the price. If you can still find a M70 I'd get that, else a Sako.
 
Quote:
..............The 270 wsm looks good on paper, thats for sure.



Olin has a pretty considerable stake in making it look good on paper.

If you've never shot one, it does kick, and the brass is like work hardened iron in comparison to good 270 Win brass. The 270 Win has been around and has been a real success for a lot of years. I bet the 270 WSM won't be available 10 years from now.

As for a real comparison to a 7 MM Rem Mag....put some 160 grain bullets in it and see what it does...both in recoil and in velocity. The 7mm Mag is at it's best with heavier bullets.
 
Check out the latest Handloader. There is a great article on the 270 Win. The author does a comparison chart with the 270 Win and 270WSM. There is little if no differance when the two loads are chronogaphed.
 
I had a 270 build just got it acouple months ago haven't had chance to chronograph it yet has a 24" barrel. I looked at the 270wsm did alittle comparing what loading data I could find on the 270wsm seemed like it was around 100/200fps faster than the 270 using about 8gr more of powder. Might be more like the 270AI without having to fireform. My next wsm is going to be a 270 should make a nice rifle with 140gr Accubond. Well good luck
 


Write your reply...
Back
Top