.270 win all around caliber?

[ken B]

personally..I think anything such as the .270 or .280 would be a fine all around...but my personal choice is the 30-06, and I am biased because that's literally all I've used when I have hunted.

I think if one was, hypothetically, going to go to Africa for the smaller game, Alaska, Colorado, for most anything antlered elk sized or lower, (bear, buff, different story) then I'd go with the '06 due to the array of loads from small to what...220grains?

Which is hypothetical garbage since all I've ever run through mine were 165's!

 

[Old Granddad]

.30-06?

If the recoil of the .30-06 bothers you (it does me), try the Remington or Browning semi-autos, perhaps with a recoil pad. And don't be too quick to add a scope--if you're hunting in brush or heavy timber, 100 yards will be a long shot, anyway. A good peep sight will be your friend.

So I guess my answer's obvious. The .30-06 is the best all-around cartridge for all American big game, especially if you have only one hunting rifle.

I used mostly a Savage 340 in .30-30 for deer (remember, heavy timber or brush), and a 7X57 Mauser for elk. I'm small, and the lighter calibers have not made me into a flincher. I'm thus able to place my shots more carefully. All of my deer and elk, while I still hunted, were one shot kills. I've never hunted bear nor moose, so I don't need the bigger wallop. But I repeat: for all those animals listed in the original post, the .30-06 seems the only sensible choice. Still the best all-around cartridge yet invented.

 

[Robert Wilson]

With today's "super bullets" the .270 is certainly adequate for any non-dangerous North American big game. If the gun will manage bullets like the Barnes TSX you are in business.

Traditional wisdom holds that the .30-06 is more versatile, and with traditional bullets that's true. I'd rather hit an elk with a .30 caliber 220 than a .27 caliber 150, if I have to use cup-and-core bullets. But with the homogeneous alloy bullets, I'm not sure there's enough difference to matter.

Having said that, I don't find enough difference in recoil between the .270 and the .30-06 to matter, so tend to go with the .30 caliber out of habit. If I need something with significantly less recoil, well, the .257 Roberts is good enough for anything that doesn't want to chew on my blue jeans, if I can get the bullet into the right spot.

 

[sureshot]

The recoil doesnt bother me but I prefer something with a little less kick vie got an impeccable track record of 3 kills, no misses and one shot for each so Id like to keep it that way. I have killed 1 deer with a 30-06, 1 with a .303, and one with a 7mm rem mag. I have used all of them extensively but I'd Luke to be able to go to the gun range and put a box of shells thru a rifle without devoloping a flinch. Mind you I do shoot a BPS 12 gauge with 3" shell regularly

 

[T.R.]

One of my hunting buddies stocked up on FEDERAL LITE ammo couple years back. He swears by it for taking whitetails at typical woods distances. Best of all - the recoil is nearly absent!!

TR

 

[smartshot]

270 not adequate for moose or elk??? Ask any old timer from Colorado how many elk they've killed with a 243, 30-30 and 250 savage, then rethink what the 270 can do with modern deep penetrating bullets. I promise you, the 270 can take an elk at 400 yards. I say again, the 270 can take an elk at 400 yards. Use Barnes bullets, so you get the accuracy and penetration. For animals up close (within 200 yards), use a partition, a-frame or a cheap core-lokt, I say again a core-lokt, its a 270, and its got plenty of snot. A guide I know in Quebec shoots moose at 300 yards with his 25-06 and prefers that caliber over the 270 because of the flatter shooting capabilities, but he does use the barnes bullet 100%copper.

 

[CSA 357]

i thinkthe 270 and 280 are the best if you dont like recoil .277,.30,.284 the game will never know but i have killed many deer with the 7mm rem mag, and 4570 gov shot placement is what its all about

 

[Kachok]

270 is the near perfect deer caliber, and an acceptable elk caliber. The 30-06 is notably more versatile. 200 gr bullets give it adaquate sectional density to penatrate deep enough for even the largest anamals in North America. But the king of versitility is not the 270, 280, or the 30-06 but the old 6.5x55. With 85 gr bullets it matches the 243 for varmints/coyote. With 120 gr bullets it matches the 270 130gr for trajectory with better SD and BC. The 140 gr modern loads push 2800 fps and are great for nearly anything, and the 156-160 gr rounds actualy have a higher SD then the 200 gr 30 cal. These have been commonly used for everything from moose to elephant around the world. An aditional benifit is that it has much less recoil then any 270/30-06 it's recoil is in between the 243 and 7mm-08 which qualifies it as a non-event even to recoil shy shooters. I have owned alot of rifles in alot of different calibers, but if I was to have only one rife to hunt everything around the world there is absolutly no doubt what I would choose. Ask anyone that handloads the 6.5x55 in a modern rifle they will tell you. The 7x57 (Mauser) also gets top marks if you take varmint out of the picture. There is a reason both of these have been around almost 120 years. For those who care nothing for the extra recoil the 30-06 (with 180-220gr) matches or slightly exceeds the 6.5x55 for anthing larger then a white tail deer.

 

[roklok]

YES ! In August I shot a ram at 584 yards with my .270 with the Hornady 130 grain SST, less than a month later, loaned the rifle to a buddy who dropped a 63" Yukon moose with 150 grain Speer Grand Slam at 200 yards.

I have many rifles, and the .35 Whelen is my favorite cartridge, but the .270 has what it takes for the vast majority of hunting in North America.

 

[CoRoMo]

It's my first choice for everything I'll ever hunt. But I won't hunt anything bigger than say, Bison, maybe a Musk Ox, an Alaskan Brown Bear, or Yukon Moose, maybe Caribou or even Polar Bear. Just the not-so big game animals like that; nothing that is really out of the .270's capability.

But I read a story about a fella who gathered together all the money he possibly could, so that he could go off and hunt in Africa. He didn't have enough money, after buying in on the trip, for a good "African hunting rifle". So he took along his puny .270 Winchester. His guide was not excited about all of this and offered him a couple guns to borrow, but he didn't want to hunt Africa with a rifle he didn't know well. Let's see, if memory serves me, he took something like 19 shots while he was there. But he was only able to make 19 kills with that effort.

 

[b_s_c1]

To much thought is put into finding the perfect caliber. Just find one that you feel more comfortable shooting and go hunting. For the animals the OP listed I would say go with the 270 mainly due to the cost of ammo. I have always believed bigger is not always better and shot placement is key. Some one mentioned in an previous post about unloading a clip + on an animal only to have branches get in the way. Why was this person shotting when they clearly did not have a clean shot? People clam there is not enough energy in a 270. If the 465# boar that I shot at 375 yards could talk he would tell you different, but being that he died about 10 yards from where I shot him after the first shot you will have to take my word for it. I am a big fan of both the 270 and 7mm mag and would not be scared to take eather on a moose or elk hunt.

If you know you are not a steady shooter than a bigger caliber might be better suited for you. Atleast a bigger caliber would be more forgiving on placement. They do carry more energy and leave a bigger hole, so placement is still important there is room for error. If you do plan on going with a harder hitting, heaver recoil caliber don't let the recoil be the deciding factor. There is so many things you can do do that gun to reduce recoil. I installed a after market stock on a M77 300win mag for a friend that reduced the recoil to less than my 270. His 13 year old son was able to run 3 rounds through it. Have you shot a 338win mag? They pack a punch. Replace the stock, add a recoil pad and the gun is much easier to shot. If it still kicks to hard you can still do more.

Bottom line is that the best all around gun depends on the shooters style, accuracy, and likes. All the guns you listed will kill all the animals if placed right. Just get what you feel better shooting and what you are more accurate with.

It is just my opinion but shot placement beats caliber size any day of the week.

 

[Zeke/PA]

The .270 Winchester is a great cartridge BUT, shot placement IS the paramount thing in ANY hunting rifle/ cartridge combo.
The late,great Jack O'Conner touted the .270 and he actually called it "The Poor Man's Magnum" on occasion.
BUT, Jack was the supreme advocate of SHOT PLACEMENT.
My personal .270 is a Ruger # 1 , 200th year job that I use every year in the Deer woods.
I love the rifle, AND the cartridge.

 

[wombat13]

The recoil doesnt bother me but I prefer something with a little less kick vie got an impeccable track record of 3 kills, no misses and one shot for each so Id like to keep it that way. I have killed 1 deer with a 30-06, 1 with a .303, and one with a 7mm rem mag. I have used all of them extensively but I'd Luke to be able to go to the gun range and put a box of shells thru a rifle without devoloping a flinch. Mind you I do shoot a BPS 12 gauge with 3" shell regularly

I've got a Ruger Hawkeye in .300WM (I shoot 180 gr Fed Fusion - 180 gr bullet @ 2960 fps) and a Savage bolt-action slug gun (I shoot Winchester Platinum slugs - 400 gr. slug @ 1700 fps).

The slug gun kicks significantly more than the .300WM. I don't really like to shoot more than four rounds with the slug gun but I can shoot 30 rounds with the .300WM with no problem.

Is it because of a better stock design on the rifle? Maybe, but the point is that I doubt you'll have problems shooting a .300WM if you are used to shooting heavy loads out of a shotgun.

 

[SAUMHUNTER79]

The .270 will kill all the game you mentioned given you choose the right bullet for the task.

 

[CHEVELLE427]

I AS WELL AM FAR FROM AN EXPERT ON THE 270WIN

i traded a 3006 742 BDL DELUXE in on 270WIN A BOLT way back when,

the deer the 3006 killed were all dead and meat was all usable, sometimes the ones shot with the 270 we had to trash because,

THAT PART of the deer that was hit just EXPLODED.

i shot a deer once facing me at about 25 yards with a 3006 and we never found were the bullet went in till we dressed it,

was teased that it died of a heart attack till we found the bullet.
this was many years ago and was over the counter ammo, im sure the new stuff or reloads now days are way better then back when.

but if i were to go hunt bear im NOT TAKING MY 270 IM going to make sure when i shot it it stays shot.

 

[S&Wfan]

We've got a lot of decent cartridges to take the game here in America with ease, and the .270 is one of 'em . . . and a fine one at that. I've got a real tackdriver for a .270 (a 1973-made Remington LH (early left-handed BDL type) so it is my prime rifle here in my part of the country.

My back-up/loaner rifle is in 30.06 though, also an accurate Remington, and it plants every deer its ever shot with immediate authority.

RECOIL? Who really feels the recoil during a hunt?

PS: The deer hide under it? From a PIEBALD Whitetail buck . . . harvested with my favorite deer hunting gun . . . my trusty S&W 6" barreled .44 Magnum. Again . . . as with any gun . . . shot placement is everything . . . always.