» Advanced

Go Back   Shooters Forum > Rifle and Rifle Cartridges > Rifles and Rifle Cartridges
Register FAQ Members List Donate Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read



Like Tree42Likes

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-26-2011, 10:18 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 12
270 or 270 WSM


Registered Users do not see the above ad.


I will be buying a Tikka T3 lite in the next couple of weeks in the .270 caliber and was wondering if I should go with a .270 or a 270 WSM. I know the ammo is more expensive with the WSM but was wondering if there are any significant differences in performance with the WSM vs the regular .270. I also believe the WSM is more expensive as well. Was just wondering if the 270 WSM preforms better than the regular .270? Thanks for the help.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-26-2011, 11:06 AM
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 742
Well the differences are marginal in favor of the WSM. If you're a reloader I'd buy the cheaper gun. If not, go with the standard as factory ammo is considerably more available, and varied.

Assuming they cost the same, I'd probably go with the standard. No real reason, just cause, as I reload anyway. But if the WSM were cheaper I'd get that as I reload so ammo cost is sort of not an issue.

Aside from the cost of the rifle (and "free" add-ons) , go with whatever floats your boat.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-26-2011, 12:14 PM
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Southeast Michigan
Posts: 605
If it were me, I'd simply pick the .270 Winchester as it was originally designed by God and annointed by His son, Jack O'Connor. The .270 Win. wasn't broke, Winchester was. The Short Magnums were meant to be bought as something new always stirs the boys up and gets the juices flowing. I've heard all the arguments for and against. I'm a man, full and growd, and I can carry the extra 6oz of rifle. I can get by very nicely without the real or imagined velocity increase, thank you. I don't really care about the more "efficient" WSM case, I really don't. I much prefer the widespread availability of the original round though. And I'm old. I like old things.
D Lee and Bandit.45 like this.
__________________
"It is the province of knowledge to speak and it is the privilege of wisdom to listen". Oliver Wendell Holmes
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-26-2011, 12:20 PM
Jakeway's Avatar
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinbad12-2007 View Post
If it were me, I'd simply pick the .270 Winchester as it was originally designed by God and annointed by His son, Jack O'Connor. ...
Actually, that was God's Son, but He thought he was Jack O'Connor.
__________________
It's not rocket surgery, for crying outside!
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-26-2011, 12:22 PM
TMan's Avatar
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: NJ - But Not For Long :)
Posts: 2,968
The differences between the two are very small ballistically.

The differences in ammo cost and availability, lots.

One thing for sure, the .270 Winchester will be here, long after shooters who even remember the Short Magnum craze, which will almost certainly fade to oblivion, are in their graves.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-26-2011, 02:13 PM
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 742
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinbad12-2007 View Post
And I'm old. I like old things.
LOL. I'm not old. And I like old things.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-26-2011, 03:38 PM
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Maryland
Posts: 78
I own a 270 WSM and say go with the old 270 Winchester
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-26-2011, 04:18 PM
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 648
Performance you start with the 270 move up to the 270WSM then up to the 270Wby. The cheapest cost of ammo is the same starting with the 270 next 270WSM next 270Wby and reloading cost figure the same way.

I think the 270WSM is alot better rd than the 270.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-26-2011, 05:05 PM
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: north dakota
Posts: 1,484
i'd go with the std 270. there are a few guys around here that are using the 270wsm and overall they seem to like the cartridge but it is hard on venison, i think if you were gonna shoot high end bullets the short mag would be fine but i can't see where it would gain ya much for the added costs...
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-26-2011, 11:14 PM
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,294
I think they are both good although i personally would go with the WSM. The ammo for the most part is cheaper for the 270 Win but sometimes you can get some for the WSM on sale for no more than the 270 win. There's alway's the option of going with something like Hornady Superformane which has a MV of 3200fps with a 130gr bullet versus the standard load of 3060fps in the 270 Win. You then only lose somewhere between 75-100 fps, the standard load with 130gr bullet for the WSM is between 3275-3300fps. Great round no matter which way you go.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 02-27-2011, 02:03 AM
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 358
I had a T3 Lite Stainless in 270wsm. It was an excellent gun. Very accurate and an unbelievable trigger. However, here in the WI woods I think the 270wsm was too much. I shot the 140gr accubond and it left very large holes. If you live/hunt in an area where long shots beyond 300 yards are the norm then I'd go with the wsm. The wsm really shines at long distances. Less than that and you're good with the standard 270. Plus they're crazy with ammo prices. Around here the difference was as about $10 a box.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 02-27-2011, 03:20 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 6
My ruger M77 .270 is 36 years old and never let me down from whiteail, mule deer and (2) bull elk.
I agree with the others that the difference in performance is minor compared to the cost to own and operate.

You will love the 270 in the Tikaa - good luck!

Grab you a Zeiss Conquest 3x9 for $399 and never look back!
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 02-27-2011, 04:26 AM
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 63
I would also second the standard 270. My thoughts on the "improved" 243, 270, etc... is that the slight increase in speed isn't worth the extra cost. You can walk into any gun shop, hardware store, or discount store in the country and get a box of 270 should you forget your ammo or run out. You can't do that with the WSM
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 02-27-2011, 04:43 AM
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 146
I too think the WSM are a passing thing, go with the 270 Winchester.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 02-27-2011, 05:02 AM
fritz1's Avatar
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Idaho
Posts: 679
Deffinitely go with 270Win.!!!!!! I wouldnt own a short mag of any description, if I did it would be cause I got a deal that I couldnt pass up, and beleive me it would be rechambered shortly there after.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 02-27-2011, 05:29 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 12
Thanks for the help everybody. I will be going with the standard .270.
Tnhunter and D Lee like this.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 02-27-2011, 06:40 AM
magnumitis's Avatar
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: PA
Posts: 925
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMan View Post
The differences between the two are very small ballistically.
The difference is basically 9%.

For comparison, it's statistically the same difference between the .30-'06 and the .300 Win Mag.

You decide whether that's an difference you want or need.
__________________
"Too much gun always beats the alternative."
Elmer Keith
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 02-27-2011, 07:17 AM
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Mooresville, IN
Posts: 9,037
You made a good choice, CBrown2008.

As Magnumitis pointed out, the WSM version is roughly 10% more powerful, but that only means you expend 10% less energy on the dirt or tree the bullet plows into after going through its original target, with your choice of the standard 270 Win. Looking at it another way, you would need to get 10% closer to your target, so if you started at 300 yards, you'd need to get to (you guessed it!) 270 yards!

Some things work perfectly, as is...the 270 Winchester is one such thing.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 02-27-2011, 08:35 AM
magnumitis's Avatar
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: PA
Posts: 925
The real differences are seen between the .270 win and the .270 Wby.

On paper it's 12% rather than the 9% between the Win and WSM. Doesn't sound like much, maybe.

But with a 130 gr. bullet and a 200 yard zero, the Wby. drops 15" at 400 yards as oppsed to the Win's 20". At 500 yards the difference is 10" of drop............ 30" for the Wby. and 40" for the Win. A pretty significant 12%.
__________________
"Too much gun always beats the alternative."
Elmer Keith
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 02-27-2011, 09:33 AM
Tnhunter's Avatar
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 3,331
Because of the rifle model you've chosen, I'd say to choose the oldie, .270 Win. The Tikka does not have a SA for the SA .270WSM and also then adds additional barrel length, over the .270 Win. So, you're shooting a SA chambering in a LA and have a 2" longer barrel. Part of what makes the SMs desirable is the shorter actions over the older mags and their efficiecy with shorter barrels. If you were to say the Tikka in .270 Win VS a Model Seven in .270 WSM (I own one of these) I'd go with the Seven, with it's compact action and 22" barrel.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Which scope for a model 7 270 WSM dave_1 Rifle, Shotgun and Handgun Scopes 3 05-19-2010 06:55 AM
270 WSM or 30-06 for blacktail dave_1 Rifles and Rifle Cartridges 51 03-16-2010 11:46 AM
270 wsm by Tikka mike sicowitz Rifles and Rifle Cartridges 30 02-10-2010 11:22 PM
How to tell the difference of 270 and 270 WSM Muse Rifles and Rifle Cartridges 9 01-27-2010 05:31 PM
270 wsm vs 300 wsm vs ???? bmeier Rifles and Rifle Cartridges 16 11-27-2009 01:16 PM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:59 AM.

< Contact Us - Shooters Forum - Archive >

 
 

All Content & Design Copyright © 1999-2002 Beartooth Bullets, All Rights Reserved
View Privacy Policy | Contact Webmaster | Legal Information
Website Design & Development By Exbabylon Internet Solutions
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2