Help support WeTheArmed.com by visiting our sponsors.

Author Topic: .270 win or .270 wsm?  (Read 1455 times)

meathammer

  • Lurker
  • Posts: 1

  • Offline
.270 win or .270 wsm?
« on: November 15, 2008, 09:03:24 AM »
Hello,

I've decided for my next bolt action to go with a Savage.  I really like how the .270 wsm looks on paper but can't make up my mind.  .270 wsm advantages: a few hundred fps faster, short action.  .270 win advantages: easier to find ammunition, $8 to $10 cheaper per box of ammunition (I don't reload...yet). 

I'm either going to get a 12FVSS in .270 wsm or buy an action, have a heavy barrel put on (or possibly do it myself).  Opinions?
Thanks,

--meathammer


Help support WeTheArmed.com by visiting our sponsors.

GeorgeHill

  • Co-Founder
  • WTA Staff
  • Senior Contributor
  • *****
  • Posts: 19876
  • The Ogre
    • MadOgre.com

  • Offline
Re: .270 win or .270 wsm?
« Reply #1 on: November 16, 2008, 12:42:41 AM »
Go with the Short Mag.  200 FPS faster than .270 Win and it's faster that .270 Weatherby.
This puts it just a tick below the 7mm Rem Mag.
It's also extremely accurate.  I've not seen one yet that doesn't shoot extremely tight. 
And the recoil is quite managable. 
UtahCo-Founder of WeTheArmed.com
The Ogre from MadOgre.com.

Vires et Honestas
Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.
http://www.madogre.com/

Pat-inCO

  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 505

  • Offline
Re: .270 win or .270 wsm?
« Reply #2 on: November 18, 2008, 11:53:21 AM »
Quote from: meathammer
  .270 wsm advantages: a few hundred fps faster, short action.  .270 win advantages: easier to find ammunition, $8 to $10 cheaper per box of ammunition (I don't reload...yet). 

Do you really need the extra 200 fps? The .270 already exceeds 3,000fps and, as you said, is more readily available and far less expensive.
BN-Life - NRA member.

professor gun

  • Junior Member
  • *
  • Posts: 92

  • Offline
Re: .270 win or .270 wsm?
« Reply #3 on: November 18, 2008, 10:56:01 PM »
Get the caliber you like best.

My two cents: I have hunted deer with many calibers including the .270 Win.  The .270 Win has always worked fine on every deer I have shot with it and if you are somewhere remote and need ammo you are a lot more likely to find .270 Win than you are the .270 WSM.  The deer I have shot with the .270 Win have not seemed to notice the slower bullet..... :neener

GeorgeHill

  • Co-Founder
  • WTA Staff
  • Senior Contributor
  • *****
  • Posts: 19876
  • The Ogre
    • MadOgre.com

  • Offline
Re: .270 win or .270 wsm?
« Reply #4 on: November 18, 2008, 11:07:08 PM »
No one is saying that the .270 Winchester is not a great cartridge.  It's the #2 Cartridge in terms of Ammunition Sales across the country, according to industry.
But the Short Mags have advantages... Shorter, lighter actions, more efficient generally means the cartridge is more naturally accurate, and I think it kicks less when comparing similar (399 Weatherby Vanguards) rifles, and it's faster with a flatter trajectory.
The .270 WSM and the .300 WSM are almost universal now.  I've been out in the middle of no where in Wyoming and you can still find ammo for it.  So that Availability arguement is kinda moot.  The only downside to the WSM is that the ammo is a couple bucks a box more than the standard Winchester.  Considering the advantages, I think the increased cost is just a good investment.
UtahCo-Founder of WeTheArmed.com
The Ogre from MadOgre.com.

Vires et Honestas
Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.
http://www.madogre.com/


Help support WeTheArmed.com by visiting our sponsors.