270 Winchester for heavy game?

[daisygordoninc]

I'm sure there is a history of this topic being discussed but the thought of hunting large game with a Winchester 270 is new to me.
I have usually opted for something that starts with a 3 or 4 in the past. I guess my concern would be bullet weight being too small
for large game, bear and moose. Anyone have some thoughts or experience with this?

[BrentD]

It would be more than just fine. Not the slightest problem for any of those.

But I can't say I'd recommend it for a custom chambering in a lever gun

[TedH]

I've been shooting a 270 for 25 years. Always found it up to the task, but I've never took it hunting when I was after bear, and I've never been on a Moose hunt. I'd have no problem using it for Moose or black bear with a premium 150 gr. bullet, they have a good SD, and would provide adequate penetration. If I was after larger Brown bear, I'd opt for something heavier.

[t.r.]

The late Jack O'Connor often wrote about his big game experiences shooting his custom 270 rifles. He toppled large moose and heavy bodied elk using Speer bullets for the most part. He knew where to place those deadly bullets into the chest organs to do the most damage. I've admired Jack's writings since I was a young man.

I have no actual hunting experience with the 270 to share. My moose, elk, caribou, and bear rifle is a Savage 99 in .308 shooting 180 grain bullets. It has the lethal performance to get the job done.

TR

[superchicken]

It's my only bolt gun. I've shot several elk with it and never felt under gunned. With the right bullets, it'll break bone and penetrate deep. The only bullet I've ever recovered was from a pronghorn that was facing me, quartering very slightly. The bullet broke the front left shoulder, exited, re-entered breaking three ribs, traveled length-wise through the body, broke part of the right pelvis, and ended up under the hide about two inches to the right side of it's tail pipe. It was about a yard of penetration. If I needed to hunt a moose or a bear, I have no doubt I could kill it with that gun. But it's a hunting gun, not a protection or stopping gun. The reality is that most people really don't need the latter. The only downside I can say about my 270 is that is about as exciting as a shovel, but I like it for that reason. It's not the latest, greatest ultra magnum. It's not tactical. It's not custom. Its bone-stock, including the scope it came with for $299 when I bought it a Wal-Mart 21 years ago. When I take it to the range, no one bothers to stop and talk to me to see what I am shooting. It's ugly, accurate, business-like, light, and just gets the job done. I don't really need another bolt gun.

[65bee]

In my career as a Conservation Officer of over 20 years the two calibers that stood out as 'game wounders' (deer & bear) according to conversations with hundreds of hunters, were the .243 and the .270. In the hands of capable hunters both are capable of doing the job, but the average nimrod is better off with something heavier, in my opinion. Rarely heard any complaints with either the .308 or .30-06, and if there were, invariably they were shooting 150 grain loads.

[vancelw]

In my career as a Conservation Officer of over 20 years the two calibers that stood out as 'game wounders' (deer & bear) according to conversations with hundreds of hunters, were the .243 and the .270. In the hands of capable hunters both are capable of doing the job, but the average nimrod is better off with something heavier, in my opinion. Rarely heard any complaints with either the .308 or .30-06, and if there were, invariably they were shooting 150 grain loads.

I've heard that alot, too....but I think it has to be attributed to the vast amounts of 270 and 243 rifles out there. Lots of people start their new hunters (esp women and kids) put with a 243. And for years the 270 was the popular caliber.

I've owned a lot of guns in my life, but never a 270. Not sure why, but it has never appealed to me. But, about 90% of the people I know in Montana own one, and have probably had it for 40 or more years.

[Rusty]

You can search the past posts from 86er and you will find that he talked about his uncle, who was a P.H. His uncle use a .270 and thought highly of it.

I think the words that Jack O'Connor used to describe the .270 were "perfectly balanced." The .270 can drive a heavier bullet than a .25-06 even faster. I'm thinking that's what O'Connor had in mind.

[Old Savage]

.308 significantly more effective than the .270????

[superchicken]

In my career as a Conservation Officer of over 20 years the two calibers that stood out as 'game wounders' (deer & bear) according to conversations with hundreds of hunters, were the .243 and the .270. In the hands of capable hunters both are capable of doing the job, but the average nimrod is better off with something heavier, in my opinion. Rarely heard any complaints with either the .308 or .30-06, and if there were, invariably they were shooting 150 grain loads.

Bee--I'm not a conservation officer. I'm a career wildlife biologist with over 20 years of experience and I've been hunting since my grandfather could carry me on his shoulders. I'm sure our experiences differ, and I won't say yours is not valid.

I've shot deer with a 243. I know people who hunt deer and even elk successfully and repeatedly with 22/250s, 243s, and 6mm Rems. They are all good hunters and some have had decades more experience and success than me. As far as nimrods go, I think there are a lot who don't know how to hunt and don't practice shooting. For them it wouldn't matter if they shot a 155 mm howitzer. But I think that there are more people who's accuracy is negatively impacted by trying to shoot something on the heavier side.

[Bullard4075]

Proper placement assured, bullet construction means much more than caliber. Taking an extreme to make a point, a lightly constructed bullet from say a 243,270 or even any 30 caliber cannot be expected to penetrate properly on the heavier _ say a moose- game. A deer shot properly with any bullet say through the ribs is DRT. Flub the shot, or shot from the wrong angle the second shot that may need to transverse the whole animal or break a shoulder better have some serious SD. Historically the 270, 130 grain was the deer bullet and the 150 grain -or heavier- was the elk and larger game bullet. Today everyone wants speed and pick the faster 130 grain for everything. If their elk drops -hopefully from proper placement- they are a 130 fan. if it gets away the blame may go anywhere ........if they even tell you about it. Modern bullets like the Accubond,Barnes X and the like have narrowed this by some large amount. There are many factors to consider and to say just caliber is paramount is foolish.Where the dividing line is each mans choice.

Now 6 of you jump on me and tell me how I'm wrong and you got both your elephants with a 270 and
130 grain Ballistic Tips.
Gosh I love this place.

[jnyork]

No amount of heavy bullet, big bore, lotsa powder etc. will make up for the poorly placed shot made by Bubba. You miss with a 20 MM , you still miss, same with what some here in Wyoming call a Rock Springs headshot. If you can hunt and you can shoot, the .270 is all you need, as are about 35 or 50 other cartridges. Get yer noses out of the Gunsnammo magazines, get off the couch and go learn to shoot.

[vancelw]

Now 6 of you jump on me and tell me how I'm wrong and you got both your elephants with a 270 and
130 grain Ballistic Tips.
Gosh I love this place.

Not legally, they didn't I'm sure there's an exception somewhere, but the countries that I'm aware of have either a minimum caliber requirement (.375 H&H or 9,3x72R for example) or a minimum muzzle energy requirement (5400 joules, for exampe) for dangerous game.

[Merle]

My ex BIL and one of my nephews are big 270 fans, but I have never used one. FWIW, my OPINION is that with good bullets it will do the job for everything up to the big bears. I have read of several large bears being killed by 270's (and similar rounds) but I sure wouldn't bet on one to save my butt if things turned ugly.

[Bullard4075]

Sometimes forgotten is the 270 messiah Jack O'Connor was also a big 30-06 and 375 H&H fan.

[Grizz]

I know two people who killed coastal brown bears with .270. On purpose. One of those people was later charged by TWO brownies. at the same time. He got ready to shoot them when they broke off and ran away.... KH bought a 30-06 as soon as he got back to town.....

I remember an old thread on another outpost, maybe with Bestlever and crew, about how the .270 is almost a 30-06.

I'm not knocking them. As others noted, if you can hunt and shoot, you can make meat with the .270. But it's not high on my list for defense against man-eaters.

At one time I was romanced by the 7mm WM. It has a lazer like trajectory and overlaps the 270's heavier loads. I quit it when I dropped a couple of bucks on a beach and found a completely expanded bullet in the offside hide. If that's all the farther it goes in venison, it's not too great for brer bear. Know a couple of stories to confirm that. Hopped up to a .338 WM, but it's the same problem as the 7 and the 270, IMO. They're not designed for toe to toe operations. Those bullets are normally constructed to expand at longer ranges.

I guess there's lots of bullet tech since I started, but I like cubes for the tough-guys.

[piller]

I have a .270, and it is great for deer. With a good bullet in 150 grains, I would have no hesitation using it on elk or anything like that. As far as bear, well, I would want something with a heavier bullet and a bigger caliber. That is just my opinion and worth what you paid for it. For bear that might bet close, I would use my .45-70 Guide Gun, or maybe my Model 92 in .480 Ruger with 400 grain bullets. Those .475 caliber bullets moving about 1200 fps seem to go pretty deep in whatever I shoot them at.

[MrMurphy]

All about placement.....

W.D.M Bell killed most of a thousand elephants with a 7X57 and a .303 British. Penetration was the key, and the fact he was an expert shot and knew EXACTLY where he had to hit. He also got CLOSE (on foot, usually running) to do so.

I've heard African guides comment they'd rather have a guy with a .375 H&H they're comfortable, practiced and accurate with, rather than a .700 Thermonuclearwedgie-delivering Shoulder-dislocating cannon they're afraid to fire, trying to make up for being an inexperienced/unpracticed shot.....


Sort of the same thing here. More guys would (with practice) probably do better with a .270 than a .300 Win Mag or larger many seem to think is necessary for most game.

Me? If I can't kill it with something of the .30-06 class or a bit less (I use a 7mm Mauser at present) I shouldn't have been hunting it, or it's a ticked off grizzly, in which case a 12ga with slugs and/or a .45-70 is what I'll need on hand, since an M2HB isn't one-man portable....

[superchicken]

All about placement.....

...rather than a .700 Thermonuclearwedgie-delivering Shoulder-dislocating cannon they're afraid to fire, trying to make up for being an inexperienced/unpracticed shot.....

This is funny. Why do all these threads end up telling people they shouldn't go outside without a cannon that produces nose-bleeds and concussions for fear of being eaten by a bear? I know bear attacks make the news, but really, I've spent years wandering around bear country and I still have all my OEM parts.

[Old Savage]

As relates to the original question, bullet construction might likely be more important than weight at least in the 130/150s. I think I would pick whichever weight shot better in that rifle. O'Connor wrote that he liked the 130 Nosler.

[Grizz]

All about placement.....

...rather than a .700 Thermonuclearwedgie-delivering Shoulder-dislocating cannon they're afraid to fire, trying to make up for being an inexperienced/unpracticed shot.....

This is funny. Why do all these threads end up telling people they shouldn't go outside without a cannon that produces nose-bleeds and concussions for fear of being eaten by a bear? I know bear attacks make the news, but really, I've spent years wandering around bear country and I still have all my OEM parts.

Not so funny when the bear does eat you. Basically he puts his foot on your neck and eats your guts.

I knew someone who died this way. There was a famous bear-won't-hurt-me "researcher" who also never was bothered by the bears and famously had many published photos to prove it. Until he made the video.

On the video you can hear the bear ripping the guy to shreds and his girlfriend freaking out. THEN you can hear the bear ripping the girlfriend apart. Apparently the bears don't subscribe to the same theories that humans do.

Carrying a 45/70 in the bear woods and shooting deer with it makes more sense to me than carrying a 25-20 in the deer woods and shooting a bear with it.

Glad they let you keep your spare parts. So far.

Grizz

[BrentD]

Grizz, let's be clear about one detail. That guy was, IN NO WAY, a researcher.

Thanks for letting me get that off my chest.

[superchicken]

Grizz, let's be clear about one detail. That guy was, IN NO WAY, a researcher.

Thanks for letting me get that off my chest.

Brent--Thank you for helping ensure that Griz does not confuse me with a whack job in search of a reality show.

[Old Ironsights]

Now 6 of you jump on me and tell me how I'm wrong and you got both your elephants with a 270 and
130 grain Ballistic Tips.
Gosh I love this place.

Not legally, they didn't I'm sure there's an exception somewhere, but the countries that I'm aware of have either a minimum caliber requirement (.375 H&H or 9,3x72R for example) or a minimum muzzle energy requirement (5400 joules, for exampe) for dangerous game.

I have a 9,3x72R... it's a .38-55 in all but the name. I even use the same reloading data.

Now, the 9.3x74.... that's a whole 'nuther thing....

[Grizz]

Grizz, let's be clear about one detail. That guy was, IN NO WAY, a researcher.

Thanks for letting me get that off my chest.

Brent--Thank you for helping ensure that Griz does not confuse me with a whack job in search of a reality show.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Treadwell

and another bear researcher eaten by a bear or bears

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitaly_Nikolayenko

and another, just to confirm the point

http://www.wyofile.com/osha-probes-rese ... -fatality/

I know, sorry for you all, the truth is hard to bear ...

[BrentD]

Girzz to quote your first link
Timothy Treadwell (born Timothy Dexter; April 29, 1957 – October 5, 2003) was an American bear enthusiast, environmentalist, amateur naturalist, eco-warrior, and documentary filmmaker and founder of Grizzly people.

This does NOT a researcher make. The guy was an idiot, not a scientist.

[superchicken]

http://www.wyofile.com/osha-probes-rese ... -fatality/

Brent,

Your link on the OSHA fatality investigation is interesting. We were up in that country last summer and we fed a gal who was riding her mountain bike home by herself over Togwotee and Union passes from southwestern ID to Steamboat (tough gal). She spent the night before we met her in a bivy sack with her can of bear spray on the floor of the latrine in a campground that was closed to tent camping due to problem grizzlies... Sometimes you have to make the best of a bad situation... Anyway, we hiked around Green River Lake where one of those pictures was taken with our seven year old daughter. Generally speaking, I agree with the article that bear spray will do more to keep you out of trouble with griz. If its just me and I'm not hunting, that's often all I'll carry. But with a child in the party who has a tendency to laugh and squeal like prey, I also packed a revolver loaded with heavy cast loads in my pocket and kept a pumpgun loaded with slugs in camp. Campgrounds and popular trails are the scariest place to deal with big toothy critters because they are habituated to people and often times see people as a source of food (Note I said SOURCE because people feed them, leave food out, or drop packs loaded with tasty snacks as they back off or climb trees). Away from those areas and without kids, I'll generally take the bear spray over the gun. However, there was an article recently from MT were they used radio telemetry to document grizzlies following hunters completely unbeknownst to them often less than a 100 yards away to take advantage of shot game and gut piles. Even with that, I would suggest that most folks are better served by carrying their normal hunting rifle, a can of bear spray, and by paying attention to their surroundings. In really bad areas, I would suggest hunting in pairs for extra vigilance. If you shoot something in griz country and have to make multiple trips to pack it out, I'd hang the meat high well away from the gut pile, exchange my hunting rifle for a shotgun with Brennekes on the return trip, and approach from up wind and open areas with lots of noise when I came back for subsequent loads. In black bear country, I'm just as careful but will generally rely on bear spray in in lieu of the shotgun.

And that's all I have to say about this issue. Folks can and should do whatever makes them comfortable outside. For me that does not include packing a 27# mini howitzer in .700 Bowel Blaster, but other's mileage may vary.

[Grizz]

the other two were and besides treadwell did lose his OEM parts.

you're splitting hairs for no gain friend

[tman]

270 will work. I like the .308 with 180 & 200 grain bullets. But, it is more of a personal preference and I may be splitting hairs here.

[Grizz]

as someone mentioned, the ".270 is almost a 30-06" meme is as old as the two choices. it's only hair splitting if one does and the other doesn't

or another way to put it is some like to drive humvees and some drive "smart cars". (not that there is anything wrong with that) I suppose judicious hair splitting will be able to differentiate between the two.

[tman]

Doubt if a bear hit with a 270, 308, 300 Mag, or a 338 Mag. would know the difference. Some times a bear drops to a .22lr, sometimes it soaks up multiple hits from a .375 H&H. Just the way it is, and nobody has ever been able to figure it out.

[Grizz]

Doubt if a bear hit with a 270, 308, 300 Mag, or a 338 Mag. would know the difference. Some times a bear drops to a .22lr, sometimes it soaks up multiple hits from a .375 H&H. Just the way it is, and nobody has ever been able to figure it out.

agree. but think some of those options are less nuts than others.

[MrMurphy]

All about placement.....

...rather than a .700 Thermonuclearwedgie-delivering Shoulder-dislocating cannon they're afraid to fire, trying to make up for being an inexperienced/unpracticed shot.....

This is funny. Why do all these threads end up telling people they shouldn't go outside without a cannon that produces nose-bleeds and concussions for fear of being eaten by a bear? I know bear attacks make the news, but really, I've spent years wandering around bear country and I still have all my OEM parts.

Don't think you understood me..... that was for the guys who think anything less than a .300 Win Mag or .338 for deer is suicide, or that you can't kill an elk without a similar size cannon....when people routinely do so, because they have "enough" gun and know what they're doing. They're not trying to compensate for lack of skill with size of ammo.

Bears and dangerous game are a whole different ball game. A .45-70, .338 or 12ga slug is entirely correct for bear, and if it was legal to own RPGs for bears, I would recommend them (with the antipersonnel warhead).....

Sort of like lion, a .375 or .416 will kill one deader than a doornail IF YOU DO YOUR PART....up-gunning to a .470 NE or .500 NE won't make it any deader and will probably make you miss (as well as only have 2 shots).