# How good is the .270?



## hbbrownie (Dec 13, 2006)

Hey All,
Im lookin to buy a new rifle and want to know from all you experienced elk hunters just how effective the .270 is and out to what range can it typically take an elk cleanly and effectively? Im from Michigan and will probably do more deer than elk hunting but just in case that dream hunt comes along would a .270 pull double duty effectively for elk? Thanks alot for the advice and Good Hunting!


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

My son shot a nice 6X6 in Montana with his 270, and 150 Nosler Partition bullets at 265 yards. Many outdoor writers consider the 270 minimum for elk, but old Jack O'Connor shot nearly everything in North America with one. He and Elmer Keith feuded for years over fast light bullets Vs slow heavy large diameter bullets.
In Montana I have seen elk killed with 243, but I would never recommend it. I would consider the 260 Remington the bottom caliber for elk, and the 270 good to at least 200 yards, and 300 yards with a perfect broadside shot. Others will have slightly different opinions. 
You may want to consider the 270's twin the 280. This round is a 7mm and lets you use heavier bullets. It doesn't really outperform the 270 by any measurable margin other than bullet weight. The slight difference of .277 bullet diameter to .284 is very little. Shooting 150 gr bullets the difference isn't worth mentioning.


----------



## Jungda99 (Nov 17, 2006)

An old gun smith once told me you can shoot any animal in North America with a 270.


----------



## Horsager (Aug 31, 2006)

I have hunted (taken) elk. I own a 270. I've never used the 270 to actually hunt elk. I have however taken the 270 along on every elk trip I've been on (6) as a backup rifle. I would not hesitate one bit to use my 270 for elk.

I have loaded my own 140gn Barnes TSX's, I would consider that THE best medicine one could use from a 270 for elk. I think 300yds is about the limit one could reliably take elk with a 270 Win. I would also be very comfortable using a Partition, Accubond, Interbond, TBBC, MRX, Failsafe, A-Frame, XP3, or a Scirocco. I'd have no real preference for any of these bullets, they've all proven themselves extremely capable, although I don't have 1st hand knowlege of the MRX or XP3, the rest I've shot. If your rifle shoot noticeably better with and one of these bullets then that'd be the one to use.


----------



## RogerK (Jan 21, 2004)

The 270 is better for one reason that can't logically be argued: Less recoil. I hunted with a 300 Winchester magnum for years, but swithed to the 270 last year. I shoot between 200 and 300 rounds getting ready for the hunting season, and I just got tired of fighting the recoil.

A 270 will take any grass eating game animal walking North America and will do it better than just about any round you want to compare it to for the reason I stated above: Recoil. You'll shoot better. This last hunting season I downed 3 deer here in North Dakota, and a moose, my once in a lifetime experience. The moose was a once shot kill chest shot with my own handloads. Barnes 130 XLC loaded to 3111 FPS. Shoots below an inch. Moose ran a few feet and went down hard.


----------



## hbbrownie (Dec 13, 2006)

Thanks alot all, sounds to me like the .270 can get the job done. I really appreciate your input. Thanks again and good hunting to ya!
:beer:


----------

