270 win vs 300 mag using factory ammo

[scdogman]

So looking into buying a new rifle. I have a tack driving 270 with zero recoil to me. I don't reload and don't plan to anytime soon. I have been reading that the 270 win maybe on the light side for elk. When I compare it to the 30/06 I see little if any difference in velocity and energy. In comparing it to the 300 win mag, I see 400 ft-lb of difference from 0 to 400 yards. Is 400 ft-lbs that much of a difference?

270 win 130 gr GMX

50 yards 3081 ft/s. 2740 ft-lbs
300 yards 2575 ft/s 1913 ft-lbs

30/06 nosler accubond 165 gr

No difference, the 270 win is slightly faster and slightly more energy

300 win mag 180 gr accubond nosler
50 yards 2858 ft/s 3264 ft-lb
300 yards 2425 ft/s 2350 ft-lb.

So is 400 ft-lb that big a difference? I know that the ammo is different, but all choices were quality ammo. If I had compared the Gmx to the TTSX 150 gr, the difference goes down to 300 ft-lbs at 300 yards.


Thoughts????

 

[FEENIX]

Both will take down an elk with a well placed shot at that range.

It boils down to personal preference; I have all chamberings mentioned and prefer the .300 WM.

Also, if you stick with the .300 WM in factory ammo, checkout HSM's and ABM's offerings in 210g Bergers.

 

[jaybo]

Yes both will take down an elk with a perfect shot. How many times do you get a perfect shot? The 300 win mag gives you 400 foot pounds more energy with 50 grains more bullet. What you have to think about is which rifle would you want to be using on the last day of your hunt, one hour before dark, and a less than perfect shot. I'll go with the 300 win mag every time under those conditions.

 

[scdogman]

I guess you are saying that the extra 400 ft-lbs a makes difference.

 

[snox801]

Yep as said 300 win is the better choice. .270 is fine but 300 is better a bad shot with either is a bad shot, but if you happen to hit shoulder or an off angle shot the 300 makes a by difference. 400 might not seem like a lot but after shooting lots of stuff with both it is much better. Now if you were trying to avoid buying another rifle the. The 270 is fine. It will do the job with a good quality bullet. If you know you won't be shooting it really long range ie your not comfortable shooting past say 500 yards. Go with the nosler partition and know that you can drop it with the .270. If reaching out farther do some research and go with a good bullet for the job.

 

[Rifleman513]

I'd have to agree with most of the other statements made here. I have a 300 RUM that I shoot more often and better than any of my other rifles. My wife has a 270 that also goes with me as a spare. Even though my RUM weighs twice what the 270 does I still lug it around for the extra confidence.

With that said if you are undoubtedly confident with your 270 vs the possibility of not being so with a new gun, then I think it's an easy decision. Its kind of like 243 vs 270 for deer. Both will do the job as long as you do, one with a little more insurance.

With no plans to hand load I would however, see how 150gr loads would shoot in your gun, particularly the partition. On the other hand why talk yourself out of the "need" for a new gun? gun)

 

[FEENIX]

So looking into buying a new rifle. I have a tack driving 270 with zero recoil to me. I don't reload and don't plan to anytime soon. I have been reading that the 270 win maybe on the light side for elk. When I compare it to the 30/06 I see little if any difference in velocity and energy. In comparing it to the 300 win mag, I see 400 ft-lb of difference from 0 to 400 yards. Is 400 ft-lbs that much of a difference?

270 win 130 gr GMX

50 yards 3081 ft/s. 2740 ft-lbs
300 yards 2575 ft/s 1913 ft-lbs

30/06 nosler accubond 165 gr

No difference, the 270 win is slightly faster and slightly more energy

300 win mag 180 gr accubond nosler
50 yards 2858 ft/s 3264 ft-lb
300 yards 2425 ft/s 2350 ft-lb.

So is 400 ft-lb that big a difference? I know that the ammo is different, but all choices were quality ammo. If I had compared the Gmx to the TTSX 150 gr, the difference goes down to 300 ft-lbs at 300 yards.


Thoughts????

Here's to looking ahead on possibilities ... when you decide to handload and re-barrel your .270. I converted one of my .270 Win to .270 AI (http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f22/my-budget-270-ai-97745/) with 30" Lilja SS 1:8" 3-groove ...

and my current accuracy load is ...

175 Matrix VLD handload
50 yards 2942 FPS; 3322 FT-LB
300 yards 2594 FPS; 2615 FT-LB

(150 NBT .270 Win vs 175 Matrix VLD .270 AI)

As you can see, it changes things significantly. The availability of the heavier and high BC bullets in .277 (150Nosler LRABs , 165/175 Matrix VLDs, 170 Bergers, etc ..., barrels, and powders is making the .270 Win and it's variant even better than what the legendary "O" started with.

Good luck and happy safe shooting/hunting.

 

[scdogman]

Thanks for the info guys. I'll keep shooting the 270, but I'll probably either buy a new rifle before November or take up the guys on the loaner offers(300 win mag or the mighty 338 Lapua).

My plans initially was to limit the 270 win to 300 yards or less.

 

[engineer40]

Bigger bullets make bigger holes... and it's just not the difference between .277 and .308 (0.031 of an inch). Once the heavier bullets mushroom out the difference is more significant.

I love shooting my 270. However, if you have the funds, sounds like this is a great reason to add another rifle to your collection.

 

[bigngreen]

I've watched dozens of guys fall for the idea their under gunnwd on elk only to find out they can't shoot their way out of a wet paper bag with a heavy elk rifle, I've seen more elk piled up with 270's than anything. If you can't effectively kill elk like a machine inside 400 yard with a 270 having a 300 or 338 isn't going to improve anything, trust me I help put down a lot of elk because guy just bought an elk rifle instead of staying with the tried and true and I often use a 270 or 6.5 cal to do it.

 

[djm670]

I've watched dozens of guys fall for the idea their under gunnwd on elk only to find out they can't shoot their way out of a wet paper bag with a heavy elk rifle, I've seen more elk piled up with 270's than anything. If you can't effectively kill elk like a machine inside 400 yard with a 270 having a 300 or 338 isn't going to improve anything, trust me I help put down a lot of elk because guy just bought an elk rifle instead of staying with the tried and true and I often use a 270 or 6.5 cal to do it.

My beliefs exactly.

I have shot a number of elk with a .25-06 and know a .270 has plenty of power to down an elk, just be somewhat conservative with the range you are shooting them at. Better the hunter who knows his rifle and shoots it well, then on short notice picks up an unfamiliar rifle of significantly larger caliber that he may not shoot well.

 

[scfam]

So looking into buying a new rifle. I have a tack driving 270 with zero recoil to me. I don't reload and don't plan to anytime soon. I have been reading that the 270 win maybe on the light side for elk. When I compare it to the 30/06 I see little if any difference in velocity and energy. In comparing it to the 300 win mag, I see 400 ft-lb of difference from 0 to 400 yards. Is 400 ft-lbs that much of a difference?

270 win 130 gr GMX

50 yards 3081 ft/s. 2740 ft-lbs
300 yards 2575 ft/s 1913 ft-lbs

30/06 nosler accubond 165 gr

No difference, the 270 win is slightly faster and slightly more energy

300 win mag 180 gr accubond nosler
50 yards 2858 ft/s 3264 ft-lb
300 yards 2425 ft/s 2350 ft-lb.

So is 400 ft-lb that big a difference? I know that the ammo is different, but all choices were quality ammo. If I had compared the Gmx to the TTSX 150 gr, the difference goes down to 300 ft-lbs at 300 yards.


Thoughts????

400 ft lbs is not that much of a difference until you get down to a comparison between 1500 ft lbs and 1900 ft lbs. The 270 is plenty of elk rifle, and if you shoot it well, it is a great rifle to 400 yards EASY. Do the math. The 300 mag will get you more range really, so if you want to poke out to 600 or 700 yards, you will be better served with that rifle IF you are capable at that range and well practiced. For 99 percent of us who can make a good shot to 300 and with a little care out to 400 yards, the 270 is all you need with bonded bullets. I would not use the Barnes, because you will overpenetrate (stay with me here) and use up a bunch of energy in the dirt on the other side of the elk. Try the accubond, scirocco, ELD-X, or E-tip or something along those lines.

1500 ftlbs placed in a shoulder or in the front ribs is AMPLE energy for a bull elk (oh, there will be some here to disagree with me, but I can verify this is true from experience).

My family has killed about around 15 elk with a 270 (including 5 more this year) and about 6-8 with the 300 WSM. Both rifles have made 1-shot kills with well placed shots, and both have required follow-ups at times. I killed a big lead cow with my 25-06 and used the Barnes because I was fearful I wouldn't get enough penetration. I hit her twice at 350 yards (never hurts to follow up). Both bullets penetrated fully and she made it about 30 yards. My buddy smoked a small bull with a 240 weatherby magnum this year. Tucked a bullet behind each ear at 160 yards using the Barnes TTSX.

My daughter took a bull and a cow with her brother's 270 this year, and is actively working on purchasing a 270 for herself. Beauty of the 270 is the moderate recoil and the better odds of making a good shot. My 300 inspires confidence, and I shoot it well, so I use it interchangably with the 270s, but I'm happy hunting with either one.

 

[scfam]

Yep as said 300 win is the better choice. .270 is fine but 300 is better a bad shot with either is a bad shot, but if you happen to hit shoulder or an off angle shot the 300 makes a by difference. 400 might not seem like a lot but after shooting lots of stuff with both it is much better. Now if you were trying to avoid buying another rifle the. The 270 is fine. It will do the job with a good quality bullet. If you know you won't be shooting it really long range ie your not comfortable shooting past say 500 yards. Go with the nosler partition and know that you can drop it with the .270. If reaching out farther do some research and go with a good bullet for the job.

I agree with this statement in theory and principle; however, in the real world a gut shot elk is a bad thing whether you use a 270 or a 338 Lapua. Also, an elk hit in the shoulder such that you get a lung, heart, or artery shot with any decent bonded bullet hanging onto 1500 foot pounds of energy will result in a one-shot kill, whether a 25-06 or a 375 H&H. I shoot both a 300 and a 270, and I can tell you that in the field, dead is dead, and I've seen good and bad shots from both caliber. At practical hunting ranges inside of 400 yards IT DOES NOT MATTER and the whole argument is theoretical as long as you use quality bullets.

What I will also say, is I've seen a bunch of heroes with their big magnums thoroughly flinch the shot every time and make a mess of things. Hunters are humans and they are far more prone to make mistakes with heavy recoil rifles. If I had to pick one, I'd go with the more mannered 270, but as I said, I enjoy smoking elk with my 300 also. Where the 300 will shine for you is when you gain the competence and confidence to consistently hit what you aim at out to 500 yards and beyond...then the 270 just loses too much energy to do its job very well, depending on your load and bullet and a fast 300 with a high BC bullet becomes a far better choice.

 

[scfam]

Yes both will take down an elk with a perfect shot. How many times do you get a perfect shot? The 300 win mag gives you 400 foot pounds more energy with 50 grains more bullet. What you have to think about is which rifle would you want to be using on the last day of your hunt, one hour before dark, and a less than perfect shot. I'll go with the 300 win mag every time under those conditions.

With a perfect shot, a 223 with bonded bullets will take an elk. We are not talking about perfection here, and a poor shot with a 300 is not a better outcome than a poor shot with a 270, so this is a straw man. What you have to think about is which rifle can you consistently MAKE a good shot, and the rifle with the bigger recoil tends to create less field accuracy due to flinching. If you hit the vitals with either, the elk is dead. If you hit the guts or a leg with either, you are in trouble. 3000 foot pounds dumped in the gut is not any better than 2600 foot pounds dumped in the gut. Focus on using the best bonded bullets and only shoot when you know you will make a lung or heart shot. If you do that the 270 will give you 1-shot kills every time, just as will the 300. BTW, almost every elk I've seen shot in the near shoulder with a 270 or 300 using 140 grain and 180 grain accubonds, respectively, winds up with double-shoulder penetration and recovery of the bullet in the offside hide.