Main Menu
Forum
Guidelines/Rules
Photo Contest
THF Store
Contact/Advertising
Fishing Forum
Advertisement
Affiliates
Texas Fishing & Outdoors Show
Big Billy Kinder Outdoors
Honey Hole All Outdoors Television
Fat Boy Outdoors
 Barry Stokes’ Southwest Outdoors Report
Advertisement
Newest Members
westtexasbuck, rcoles871, Bob Trax, OblongToad, RSR
52210 Registered Users
Top Posters
RWH24 43049
dogcatcher 39471
BMD 38838
Big Orn 37481
stxranchman 36892
rifleman 36217
BOBO the Clown 31538
sig226fan (Rguns.com) 27169
Txkiller 23516
txshntr 23506
facebook
Forum Stats
52210 Members
41 Forums
376470 Topics
4840242 Posts

Max Online: 16728 @ 03/25/12 08:51 AM
Page 2 of 3 < 1 2 3 >
Topic Options
#274889 - 12/12/07 09:38 AM Re: 7MM-08 vs 270 [Re: Curtis]
FoxTrot Offline
THF Trophy Hunter

Registered: 10/03/07
Posts: 6299
Loc: West
08 for sure

_________________________
Originally Posted By: Chief Joe
I avoid Dick's and hope they fold.

Top
#274890 - 12/18/07 09:22 PM Re: 7MM-08 vs 270 [Re: FoxTrot]
robcast243 Offline
Green Horn

Registered: 12/07/07
Posts: 2
Loc: San Angelo, Texas
Difference:
If you buy ammo over the counter, 270 is the way to go since it can be found everywhere. 7mm-08 is limited to 120 and 140gr at most places like Walmart and Academy.
If you hand load then the story changes as 7mm has a greater bullet selection from 100-180gr bullets vs the 270's 120-150gr. You will also save on powder due to the smaller case size. Recoil is a bit lighter with the 7mm-08 than the 270 if loaded with a 130gr bullet on factory ammo.
Opinion: Of the ten rifles I own including my 270, my two 7mm-08's see more action than all the rest combined. I hand load and prefer neck shots. I like short actions based on the 308 case. Less powder, better bullet selection, easy on brass make the 7mm-08 my choice any day of the week. That being said... 270 will work just the same when it comes to dropping deer out to 300yds.


Top
#274891 - 12/19/07 08:15 AM Re: 7MM-08 vs 270 [Re: fastliberator]
txtrophy85 Offline
THF Celebrity

Registered: 08/12/05
Posts: 18468
Quote:

08 is a bigger piece of metal going down range. 270 is a fine caliber, maybe a hair flater shooting. 08 is definately my favorite, with more energy down range.




look at ballistics table for a resonable yardage, not at 500 yards. the .270 with a 130 grain bullet outperforms the 7mm-08 with a 140 grain bullet by almost 200 ft.lbs at 200 yards.

both are great rounds, but i like the .270. both will flatten any deer that walks

_________________________


Top
#274892 - 12/19/07 11:43 PM Re: 7MM-08 vs 270 [Re: txtrophy85]
WileyCoyote Offline
Veteran Tracker

Registered: 09/01/04
Posts: 2853
Loc: Grayson County & North Texas
Robcast, I beg to differ on your assumptions about what is available for 270 shooters in trying to make a case for the superiority of the 7-08.

Here are some bullets you don't seem to think exist that you might want to take a look at when making a comparison between a 270 & 7-08: I've been shooting factory loaded 100 gr 270 for 35+ years...and Remmy I know for sure still makes them and WalMart or Academy still sells them last time I looked. For handloaders: Hornady makes 100 gr Spitzers & 110 gr Vmax, Nosler makes 160 gr Partitons that can pushed at approx 2750-2800+fps - or about 100-200fps faster than a 7-08 can, Sierra makes 90 gr HP's & 110 gr spitzers, Speer makes 100gr spitzers & Hp's, Barnes makes 100 gr solids in X bullets, 110 gr TSX's & they scream outta a 270 at 3200/3300 fps! & 180gr Originals in a spitzer that max out at around 2650/2750 fps...or well over a 7-08 in 175's.

Nowhere do I see anyone in any of my manuals making a 180 gr 284 diameter bullet....what brand were you referring to? OBTW a 7-08 case will not hold enough powder to make the 175 gr 284 diameter bullet faster than about 2450/2500fps, and if that bullet is what you need I would strongly suggest you get into a 30 cal mag of some sort to get over 3000fps to be able to get any range out of it past about 250-300yards without a drop measured in feet and not inch's. Not that those 2400/2500fps speeds won't kill game but I prefer to use my 9.3x62 and 250gr & 286 gr bullets at those speeds to do the work.

Do NOT misunderstand ... There Are No fly's on a 7-08 when it used in it's most efficient bullet weight range of under 140 grs...but the weight savings of 4+ozs in a short action receiver does not IMO dictate a clear advantage one way or another over a long action 270 except in the mind of the shooter...and the difference of .277 & .284 at .007 is not that big a deal until you can get the same weight bullets to fly at 2-300 fps faster like you can in some 7mm cal long action Mags. Reported recoil advantages IMO also lay in the mind of the shooter and I won't argue either way about that. Nope the 270 IMO is the greatest compromise of all time in a light/medium caliber hunting rifle.

7-08's were created 20 years ago as a wildcat benchrest shooter, but have lost their benchrest 600 & 1000 meter advantages to the better ballistically shaped 6.5's aka .264 diameter bullets especially when driven out of an 8 twist barrel and a 284Win piece of brass... and mebbe the reason Remington has not pushed the 7-08 label any harder than it has. IMO the 260Remmy (another 6.5 diameter bullet with bullet weight ranges from 85 gr to 160 grs) is a better choice in a 308 based round especially for a handloader...but I really like my 1894 designed 6.5x55 Swede better as it can handle a touch more powder than a 308 based case for better fps speeds in bullets larger than 140 gr's.

And while we are picking fly poop outta the pepper...FWIW a 270WSM in about the same length case as a 7-08 will shoot competively against a 7RMg in the same weight bullets....and 250+fps faster than a 7-08. FYI the 270WSM case is 2.10's long, with the loaded round at 2.860"'s long, whie the 7-08 case is 2.035"s long and the loaded round is 2.80"s long... so mebbe the REAL comparison needs to be made between those two rounds that will both fit in the same length & weight receiver. JMHO
Ron



Edited by WileyCoyote (12/20/07 12:00 AM)
_________________________
Bigger Heavier Faster Bullets & Practice Practice Practice Can Eliminate Errors in Aiming...

'Cause Only Accurate Guns & People are Interesting

Top
#274893 - 12/20/07 03:34 AM Re: 7MM-08 vs 270 [Re: WileyCoyote]
Jimbo Offline
Extreme Tracker

Registered: 08/30/04
Posts: 3724
Loc: The last LF ranch in S. Texas
Quote:



And while we are picking fly poop outta the pepper...




Hey, that's a hard job, and it contributed to my poor eye sight, when I held that government job some years ago!


Top
#274894 - 12/22/07 01:27 PM Re: 7MM-08 vs 270 [Re: Daddyboy]
Lou270 Offline
Bird Dog

Registered: 12/17/06
Posts: 348
The .270 & 7-08 are both top-notch deer loads. The .270 holds about 15 gr more powder and when loaded to equal pressures with similar bullet weights will get about 150 fps more velocity. This translates to somewhat better down range ballistics at the expense of more recoil. That being said, either has plenty of oomph for medium game out beyond 400 yards, especially for light framed game light whitetail. The 7-08 is a bit more friendly in light, short carbines though will recoil as much as a full sized .270 due to reduced gun weight. Basically, if I were looking for a full sized rifle with a 22" or greater barrel for all around hunting, I would choose a .270. If I wanted an abbreviated rig that is handier in the bush (or box blind), the 7-08 may get the nod. Probably the biggest advantage of either is how common factory ammo for the .270 is. You can find .270 ammo anywhere they might carry a box or 2 of ammo just like the .30-06.

Lou


Top
#274895 - 12/22/07 03:54 PM Re: 7MM-08 vs 270 [Re: Lou270]
txtrophy85 Offline
THF Celebrity

Registered: 08/12/05
Posts: 18468
i thought of the 7mm-08 as a .243 round of sorts, until i watched 4 deer get shot with it. plenty of umph.

don't let the scaled down rifles their chambered in dieceve you, its a killer.

but, i would't trade the best one for my .270 anyday

_________________________


Top
#1751351 - 10/15/10 10:33 PM Re: 7MM-08 vs 270 [Re: txtrophy85]
SEVENOHEIGHTLOVER Offline
Green Horn

Registered: 10/15/10
Posts: 1
The 7mm08 gives up very little to the .270 infact most 7mm08 loads are right on the heels of the .270. I personally like both I enjoy both, like somebody said in another post, whatever it hits, its gonna be just as dead either way.



Edited by SEVENOHEIGHTLOVER (10/15/10 10:35 PM)

Top
#1751581 - 10/16/10 01:13 AM Re: 7MM-08 vs 270 [Re: SEVENOHEIGHTLOVER]
kmon1 Online   content
junior
THF Celebrity

Registered: 09/27/06
Posts: 14863
Loc: Rowlett, Texas
The 270 has been around a lot longer than the 28 years since Remington brought it out in the summer of 1982 as a SAAMI cartridge. Wiht only .007 inch difference in diameter there is really not mych difference in balistic coeficient or sectional densith between the two calibers.

Sorry if I get a little long winded on this post smile

If you look at the non magnum comercial cartridges between 6.5mm to 7mm there is not really enough difference between them to spark debate of you step back and look at it from a high level.

There are some old military cartridges that fall into this group the 6.5X55 has been killing moose in Sweedon for almost 120 years and has a much younger balistic twin the 260 remington. The old 7X57 has its modern balistic twin the 7mm-08.
The 270 Winchester is a product that I am not sure if anyone living can answer the question of why? Why would winchester decide to make a new caliber size of .277 inches when a 264 or 284 diameter would have worked just fine. Part of the speculation is Winchester did not want to use a metric designation in the US much like the English could not wee using a German cartridge name but the 7X57 and the 275 Rigby are the came round just a different name.
The 280 Remington a very good round ib its own right, due to some strange decisions at Remington has suffered from idenity chrisis 280 remington to 7mm express then back to 280 Remington.

If you study the balistics of all the above when loaded with simular bullets they all have plenty of power for any deer. I doubt there is one hunter in a hundred that can tell the difference in the couple inches difference in trajectory between them all at 300 yards from field shooting positions, if you can then you would probally qualify to use any of them at 400 yards where would all be very lethal.


All of the cartridges mentioned above are so close in preformance that it really doesn't matter which to choose or why. That is a pesonal decision we all make if we own or so not own one or more of them.

All that said I prefer the 7mm08 to all the ones mentioned, why I have a Remington 788 in 7mm08 that I have complete confidence in through 28 years of use. That rifle has accounted for more than 50 deer between myself and others I have loaned it to, all but 3 have dropped withing sight of the hunter, one fell back down the bank into the Lampasas River, out of sight of the shooter, the other 2 were shot low but recovered after a little blood trailing. I may be jinxing it for this year but every deer that has been shot with it and a drop of blood found has been recovered.

What a boring world it would be if we had only one choice in any grouping of cartridges, cars, trucks, blonds, brunetts or redheads.


Top
#1751660 - 10/16/10 07:12 AM Re: 7MM-08 vs 270 [Re: kmon1]
TEXASLEFTY Offline
Veteran Tracker

Registered: 10/26/07
Posts: 3360
Loc: The Island Cres
A three year old thread wow! I guess that better than starting a new one.

_________________________
leftytex, NOT!

Top
#1751690 - 10/16/10 07:48 AM Re: 7MM-08 vs 270 [Re: TEXASLEFTY]
Texpppr Offline
Pro Tracker

Registered: 10/17/07
Posts: 1636
Loc: Harlingen, Texas
There is a ton of ammo options for .270's.. Would rather get a .308 rather than a 7mm-.08


Top
#1751749 - 10/16/10 09:01 AM Re: 7MM-08 vs 270 [Re: Texpppr]
TEXASLEFTY Offline
Veteran Tracker

Registered: 10/26/07
Posts: 3360
Loc: The Island Cres
For hunting if you reload the 7mm-08 has ALOT of options. If you do not reload I would use the .270. I do not own a .308.

_________________________
leftytex, NOT!

Top
#1751874 - 10/16/10 10:47 AM Re: 7MM-08 vs 270 [Re: TEXASLEFTY]
WileyCoyote Offline
Veteran Tracker

Registered: 09/01/04
Posts: 2853
Loc: Grayson County & North Texas
I think a better comparison of these two cartridges might be the rifles available in the respective calibers. To name just a few EX: Savage & Browning Lever guns in 7-08, but Kimber Montana's in any of the 308 based rounds are much preferable to me balance wise than the longer/bulkier actioned "Standard/Magnum" length rounds more suited for the big mouthed Win Mg's ... but then I think the Kimber Montana in any WSM round regardless of the bullet diameter is the perfect blend of balance and power. Ruger's youth length 16" barreled series in 308 based rounds also come to mind, or their 18" barreled full stocks that the '06 based rounds lose some of their bigger bullet & powder capacity advantages in. All of the 308 based rounds seem to give up less speed in barrel lengths under 20"'s than any of the '06 based rounds is my experience.

Only other odd thing that comes to mind though is the difference in bullet selections to handload with, as well as the more limited factory ammo bullet selections commonly found. The 270, invented in 1925, has been around so long that bullet mfg'ers have perfected the 277 diameter stuff regardless of weight and bullet design to perform specifically at 270 speeds for over 70 years...and the 7mm bullets being reloaded have to satisfy 7x57 speed to 7RMg speeds, with the 7-08 closer to the old Mauser than to the Magnums. Just a thought when you are picking fly poop outta the pepper.

There is the proven fact though that in Hunting Country, you can find 270, 30'06 & 30-30 ammo in any bar, gas station, grocery store, convenience store, BBQ joint or diner no matter what state you are in ...BTDT....and why I still and will always have a 270 in the truck just in case I somehow lose all the 6.5x55 or 9.3x62 handloaded ammo I brought. I feel the same way about a 30'06 but the redundancy between an '06-308 and a 270 doesn't work for me. Even my poor old 300WinMg is the one that is now getting left behind more & more.
JMHO & YMMV
Ron



Edited by WileyCoyote (10/16/10 11:30 AM)
_________________________
Bigger Heavier Faster Bullets & Practice Practice Practice Can Eliminate Errors in Aiming...

'Cause Only Accurate Guns & People are Interesting

Top
#1752479 - 10/16/10 06:09 PM Re: 7MM-08 vs 270 [Re: Texpppr]
txtrophy85 Offline
THF Celebrity

Registered: 08/12/05
Posts: 18468
Originally Posted By: Texpppr
There is a ton of ammo options for .270's.. Would rather get a .308 rather than a 7mm-.08



how many options does a person need?

i shoot one type and weight bullet outta each of my rifles, i keep it simple.


most guys that worry about having more options never shoot anything bigger than a whitetail over 200 yards anyway.



Ron,

good point you brought up about the .277 diamter vs. the wide spectrum of velocities 7mm bullets are thrown at.


had a discussion with my broker the other day about the 7mm mag, and what how bad a rap it hss gotten with alot of the locals the past few years. people calling it the 7mm woundamag and the tired old "i've chased more deer wounded from a 7mag than anything else" tale told by roy hindes.

i noticed something awhile ago while looking at ammo at various sporting goods stores. most 7mm mag bullets are 160 grain partition style bullets.


load those 7mags up with 140 and 150 grain interlocks and you won't have deer running off very far.

bullet type is more important that weight, in any caliber

_________________________


Top
#1752570 - 10/16/10 06:55 PM Re: 7MM-08 vs 270 [Re: txtrophy85]
4X4FOREVER Offline
Tracker

Registered: 02/26/06
Posts: 956
Loc: Lake of the pines.Tx
Since this tread was posted Hornady has come out with the superformance line of ammo. 308 150 grain SSTs going 3000 fps and 270 SST 130 grainers going 3200 fps just sucks all the air outta the 7mm08 for me. lizard

_________________________
A living breathing thing and we are just fleas apon her back.
"MOTHER EARTH"

Top
Page 2 of 3 < 1 2 3 >



© 2004-2014 OUTDOOR SITES NETWORK all rights reserved USA and Worldwide