270 WSM shooters

Anyone shooting a 270 WSM? Looked at some ballistics info for a new rifle and was going with the 300 WM and decided to get the 270 WSM instead. Found some pretty interesting info on this site while doing some research. http://www.chuckhawks.com/myth_busting_calibers.htm I ordered a Tikka T3 stainless and waiting on my FFL to get it in. Might put a slightly heavier stainless barrel on it. Anyhow, Looking at several bullet ammo/bullet options. One being the 130 grain Winchester BST. Anyone shooting this caliber and any experience with it. Ive shot several animals with the 270 win and 308 and wanted to try something different. -Taylor

You will enjoy it. Gain about 150-200 fps over the .270 Win in a short action. What's not to like?

I shoot 140 grain Nosler Accubonds and 130 grain TSXs, but the world is wide open to you because there are lots of great bullets for it.

If its the same bullet used in the "winchester deer season" stuff then I give it a thumbs down. It doesnt seem to expand hitting an animal inside 120 yards. As in my wife has shot 2 deer and 2 pigs with it in a .270 win, and with both deer the exit was practically the same size as the entrance. The exit on the hogs was no bigger than a nickel

I like it best of the short mags. Shot two large bull elk with mine with 130 TTSXs. Both were a little over 200 yards; one dropped where he stood, the other made it about 50 yards.

It is a good hunting round, mine gets a diet of 140gr Accubonds. Haven't tried anything else as those shoot very well in my Tikka to the point I see no need for another bullet. To be honest I rarely shoot the 270WSM but it is up to the hunting tasks I will put it to any time.

My hunting load is Winchester silver box 150 grain loads. The gun likes them, and they are easy to find.

The 270WSM launches the 150 grain projectiles at the same speed as the 270 Winchester with 130 grain bullets. The heavier bullet will carry better, and is more likely to penetrate through for a good blood trail. The heavier bullets in a magnum are also less likely to damage the meat.

Most of the points brought up in a 270-280 comparison would apply just as well in a 270WSM-7mmRM comparison. They both shoot a 140 grain bullet at the same speed for example, according to the Speer manual. The only additional difference is that the WSM case is for a short action. - Otherwise, it's the 270-280 debate, all over again.

I find that the 270WSM will do everything that is normally done with the 7mmRM, but with less powder and less recoil. A very pleasant, very efficient and effective round.

Here's mine:

I have a Tikka T3 in 270 WSM and love it !!!
I use Winchester Supreme Ballistic SilverTip 130 grain and could not ask for any thing better as of now.
I have only used it for whitetail, but a couple of them were big Kansas bucks with live weight probably close to 300 lbs., and they performed great. Furthest I have had a deer travel after the shot so far was a doe that made it about 30 yards. Most have dropped straight down even with behind the shoulder lung shots. It is my go to rifle.



Here is one of the big bodied Kansas bucks I shot with my Tikka 270 WSM.

I'm shooting the Browing Hells Canyon in the 270 WSM. Getting 1/2" groups with 130 grain ballistic tips. Only drawback is the availability of brass . I also am getting good groups from 130 and 140 grain Bergers.

It's the only one of the WSMs that gained any appreciable velocity over the basic standard length cartridge of the same caliber.

There is an ongoing debate over why that is....

Pretty sure the 300 WSM makes appreciable gains over a 30-06, like 200 to 300 fps in just about every weight and results in 500 to 600 more lb-ft in every weight. I could be wrong but I'd call that appreciable.

Charles, that rifle is NICE! Mbavo, we need to hunt together!! Thanks guys. I think I'm going with the 130 gr Winchester BST

Another vote for 140 grain Accubonds. Great bullet and caliber.

I like 140 gr Accubonds in my 270 wsm. Shot a scimitar oryx yesterday afternoon with it. Ranch owner said oryx were extremely tuff and that you rarely get exit wounds. Shot through shoulders and dropped right there, with an exit. He said that just doesn't happen and was impressed.

The proper comparison is to the .300 Win Mag - the cartridge the .300 WSM sought to duplicate in a short action. Which is why it's called a .300 WSM (not a .30-06 WSM, which wouldn't make sense anyway since the .30-06 is not a Winchester-developed nor a magnum cartridge).

270 WSM is the only short mag I would consider.

Dangit, you guys got me searching the internet for a 270wsm!

Should've been in my shoes a few years back. I needed to find a specific 270wsm for my wife and no one had them after they'd been discontinued. Luckily after I burnt up the internet for months a relative mentioned he still had one of the rifles in the box. It cost me a new version 300RUM to make that swap.

I shoot 140gr Accubonds and love the round.

I'd like to get one for Mrs. B but I'm not sure I could pry that 7-08 out of her hands without a hell of a fight.

The 270 WSM is an awesome round and one I would like to have...

The 300WSM is an 300H&H IMO so... why?

And that's really what it all comes down to, caliber and velocity. We tend to re-invent the wheel thinking we've created something new. While I really like the 270 WSM it's nothing new, that caliber and velocity was already being produced by the 270 Weatherby dang near 50 years before the WSM was created. Start pushing bullet weights above 150 and the Weatherby starts getting ahead real quick. About the only thing new being produced is those being based off the 50 cal BMG.

The main reason for the WSM's development was to achieve same performance of the parent long-action cartridges in a short action. Mainly for weight saving purposes in mountain rifles.

The increased performance of the .270 WSM was just a happy bonus for that particular round.

Mine gave her 7/08 up (700 MTN DM), but still takes it to one stand bc it's just easier for her to handle in the stand and she loves that little rifle. I got her set up with a good load and the CDS turrets so she can sit on the stands I usually hunt and to go hunt Colorado.

Why not? Instead of needing an extra long action, it works in a short action. Being more efficient, it will do the same work with less powder, which means less expense and less recoil.

It's like getting something for nothing.

All of the short magnums are there for a good reason, they all do something that the old style magnums cannot do, or cannot do as well. Usually this is a result of the modern case design being notably more efficient.

The 325 WSM for example, is so efficient that it provides much the same performance as the enormous 8mm Remington magnum - and with a shorter barrel. - Nothing but a short magnum will give you that kind of performance in such a small package.

I like the older style magnums too, they are not going anywhere - but a lot of shooters are going for the short magnums these days, and with very good reason.

* Uses less powder to do the same job.

* Fits in a short action.

* Does not require as long a barrel.

* Kicks less while doing the same job.

The 270WSM that we are discussing is going to be very hard to beat for a mountain rifle for example, whicht must be light and handy, while also being powerful and accurate.

My best five-shot, 100 yard group so far with a 270WSM is .317", center to center. With careful loading and the right gun, these cartridges are outstandingly accurate.

Have to some what disagree with you on that one. A 7mm 140 grain coming out at 3250 from a short or long magnum will have the same recoil if both rifles weigh the same. Now should either be lighter than the other then it would have more recoil.

The reduced recoil is a side-effect of the more efficient case, that does the same job with less powder. The powder is more likely to burn within the barrel, you get less of the "rocket effect" that muzzle brakes are designed to fight.

This is also why the WSM's can do well with several inches less barrel than the old style magnums require.

Unless this what you call rocket effect meets with resistance it will have little to no effect. Weight of the rifle is the determining factor.

Incorrect information.

The .270 or the .270 WSM will not shoot a 162 gr, 168 gr, 180 gr, or a 195 gr bullet. The sevens will, and do it well.

People sometimes use that as an argument, but it is a hollow argument as in actual practice, very few people bother with the heaviest bullets in a 7mmRM. - Maybe a 160, they are popular with the 7mmRM guys - and there are 160grn 277 bullets too.

The folks really wanting to push a heavy bullet tend to go the 180's and 200 grain bullets in a 300 magnum, or maybe something heavier in a 338WM. - The "heavy bullet 7mmRM crowd" is in actuality a tiny minority at best, especially among sportsmen (as opposed to target shooters).

So, my information is correct, and your argument is weak at best. - An argument for argument's sake, which is about what one can expect.

Believe what you want, your information is not correct.

I know a whole lot of hunters that use 180 gr VLD Hunting bullets in 7 Rem Mag. I know even more that use 168 gr. Still the fact remains, your original statement is wrong. Unless in the last twenty minutes bullet makers have produced .277" bullets in those weights.

I'm not making an argument for argument's sake. Simply pointing out misinformation for on-lookers.

There is a 180 bullet in 277 - but I do not imagine that it is a big seller. Fact is, not many use the Nosler 160's, either.

Most people who buy magnums find that they do not like the recoil, and talk themselves into believing that the lightest bullet that will do the job is really best. - Thus we hear stories about bloodshot meat, mangled corpses of game animals, etc..

Personally I see the magnum best utilized when it pushes a heavy for caliber bullet at a good rate of speed. This is why I prefer the 150 grain loads for my 270WSM, as opposed to the 130's that most 270WSM shooters tend to gravitate toward. The 270WSM Will push the 150 at the same velocity that the 270W pushes the 130 grain bullet that has made it's fame. - And to me, that speed is about right.

When you think about it, criticisms of the 270W occur most often when people talk about hunting elk or moose with it. Not enough penetration to go all the way through and make a fast bleed-out/good blood trail, many will say. The 270WSM pushing the heavier 150 at the same speed addresses that criticism.

Since you are into long-range shooting, you will of course get to see more 7mmRM shooters who try the heavier bullets. - This in no way translates into a general trend, though. - Just what the tiny minority of long-range shooters might do. The general trend among hunters is to stick with 140, maybe 150 or 160 grain bullets with the 7mmRM. - Look at how many 7mmRM factory loadings are available for the lighter bullets, as opposed to the few heavy-bullet loads, and perhaps reality will dawn upon you. The lighter bullet loads are wildly more popular than the heavy bullet loads that you fantasize about "everybody" using.

You live in a bubble, and apparently have little concept of what goes on outside of it. My experience is broader and deeper than that, and pertains to hunters, not a tiny cadre of target shooters who might occasionally hunt.

If you want to delude yourself further, be my guest. Meanwhile, I will address the more realistic expectations and habits of Texas hunters, here on the Texas Hunters Forum.

All of that nonsense, and those insults, have zero to do with you being wrong about the statement I quoted.

And it doesn't matter whom uses what, and for what purpose. This is nuts and bolts, these weight bullets are available in this caliber, and not in the other one. My eight year old daughter can understand that.

Takes a solid adult to admit when they are wrong.

Well, struggle along as best you can.

I don't know what to think about you ignoring proven facts. All of which are available at everyone's finger tips.

.277" bullets only get so heavy.

.284" bullets get up to 195 gr, and .277" do not, exactly as I stated.

Woodleigh Bullets 180 grain .277, 38.99 a box A Midway.

Double Tap

2625 fps - 24 inch barrel.

Man they got those on the market fast!

Alcobullets

7mm- 205 and 208 grain.

I've been using my Browning Mountain Ti in 270WSM since 2010 and have killed a bunch of animals with it. I like it it a lot but it's not perfect and here are some of the issues I've had:
1) Some bullets don't feed well.
2) Brass can be hard to find but there's been a shortage on all stuff...
3) The brass I've bought(winchester) is very hard and I've probably had 10 necks split even on the first firing.

Here's some of things I really like:
1) Great in a light rifle that's nice to carry.
2) I've found I really like a short action.
3) Brass life seems to be long.

At some point in time I will buy a 270 WSM.

It's a great hunting round any way you slice it. Especially for particular hunts. IMO it is the best caliber for a pure sheep rifle that exists considering what it brings to the table for a rifle tailored for that specific application. I wouldn't take for my Nosler Custom 48 in .270 WSM.

Short action, don't need a long barrel, low recoil, and plenty of authority to boot.

As I said at the beginning, what's not to like?

And that's what got me, could't find one thing I didn't like about the round, other than I don't own one.

Time to go shopping!

Wish they still made the Alaskan TI

Sweet rifle. Gunbroker, GunsInternational, GunsAmerica. I finally quit sending you Nosler sales because I know where your loyalty lies.

You got me! Didn't know those existed.

Who's got a .277 with the twist to stabilize them?

I agree with Fireman and I own two 7 mm wsm and they have the twist to stablize the heavy bullets.

Your mistake lies in assuming that you know more than anyone else on the forum, and the assumption that if you do not know about something, then it must not exist. Then there's your apparent belief that if you point out an exception to the rule, that it somehow invalidates the rule.

This leads to some great comedic moments, so don't look for me to complain.

Meanwhile, the fact remains that the overwhelming majority of hunters who do use the 7mmRM tend to gravitate toward the lighter 140 and 150 grain game bullets, in order to reduce recoil that they do not want to deal with. Because of this, when you compare actual usage of the 7mmRM and the 270WSM, it very closely resembles the picking of nits over the merits of the 270 vs the 280.

I'd especially like to thank you for insisting that pointing out this comparison to the 270/280 debate is all wrong - then immediately trotting out an argument directly from the 270/280 debate to "prove" your point. - That the 7mm allows heavier bullets.

Duh!



Again, my sincere thanks for backing me up, pointlessly arguing for the sake of arguing while simultaneously providing us all with a bit of comedic relief.

I've had two 270WSM rifles so far, and haven't had any problems with either one. - Other than the regular old stuff that comes with any magnum, like having to let the firearm cool between shots at the range, so I will not wind up damaging the barrel.

I find that a .22 rifle is great for killing a little time so the magnum can cool off, between shots.

When a rifle with a muzzle brake recoils less, this is solely due to the "rocket effect" being diverted to the side, instead of being allowed to go forward. - This is how much difference the "rocket effect" makes.

The "rocket effect" is strengthened when there is more powder than can be burned in the barrel. - So, muzzle brakes are most often found on rifles chambered for a magnum cartridge. On a low-pressure round, a muzzle brake still makes lots of noise, but recoil is not reduced nearly so much.

Muzzle brakes are sometimes put on 45-70's, but the reduction in recoil is not nearly so pronounced as when a brake is put on a high-pressure over-bore round like the .300 Winchester magnum, for example.

The weight of the rifle is an important factor in perceived recoil, but it is not the only factor. Note that guns over nine pounds are not very popular, nobody wants to lug them around. So there are practical limits to how much recoil you can really reduce by making the gun heavier.

Couldn't tell ya I'm not a lobber, I like them fast and as flat as I can get them. Of the 4 rifles I shoot the most 3 have 1-12 twists, and all 4 shoot 3500 fps minimum with two busting 4000 fps.

I clearly stated it had to meet resistance and that's exactly what a muzzle brake does by applying resistance through re-direction to redirect some of the force. A professor once called it the Water Wiggle principal. Now put that same break on both rifles and we're back to square 1.

You would make Roy proud.

Have you tried the Nosler screamers or do you just consider them reinventions of the Weatherby wheel?

This may have a direct bearing on how and why the Weatherby kills them deader.

To be honest they don't do much more than the Weatherby's do and in one case less, just use a larger case. Just a quick look shows the 30 Nosler running just a few fps under the 300 with 180 grain bullets and that's heavier than anything I'll ever shoot. 28 has about a 100 fps advantage over the 7mm Roy but I never liked the 7mm Roy anyway. A hand loaded Rem 7-Mag hangs right with it. Only one that really caught my eye is the 26, but that 1-8 twist would have to go for the weights I like to shoot. They built a race horse and then hobbled it by doing that.

I was thinking similar thoughts, without the knowledge you have.

I don't know how all this happened^^^ Hahahaha

Sometimes a thread takes a life of its own with many tangents