280 Rem vs 270 WSM vs 300 WSM

B

bigdawg

Guest
I am a long time archery hunter. I now wanting to start rifle hunting. I am trying to decide if I can buy one all around caliber for Antelope, Muleys and Elk. I know all of the above "can" work but I am asking for advise on whether the 280 Rem and the 270 WSM are solid Elk calibers.
 
yes, but are you in love with the short mags for a reason? The 280 is on the small side, but Ok, however the 270 and 300 are great by themselves, the short mag isn't necessary unless you just want them, then of course they are!!! Personally I shoot a '06, but as my boys get older I will outfit them with 7mm. Again, in the west you pretty much will find most camps outfitted with at least a few guns in .270, 7mm, '06, 300win. Kinda hard to argue against any of the 4.
 
Hossblur, how can the .280 be on the small side but the .270 is OK? :^) The .280 can do anything the .270 can do and has the ability to shoot better flying heavier bullets if the need arises. I can shoot a 130 grain bullet from a .270 at 3150 + ft per second and can shoot a .280 with 140 grains at 3100++ that's pretty equal. You're splitting hairs on these guys and one isn't going to do anything better than the others truth be told. All are great rounds and the .270wsm can shoot a little faster & flatter but at a bigger price for ammo.

I just had to do it since you stated you were going to outfit your kids with a 7mm!! :^) With the bullets we have today unless there's a need to shoot longer ranges the cartridges on the 06 case are as good as it gets. Fact is there isn't a loser in any of them HOSSBLUR mentioned above.
 
What's your tolerance for recoil??? Any preference for short or long barreled rifles??? Short action, long action??? Do you reload?
 
Thanks for the advice fellas. Pre64 I am comfortable with the recoil level of an '06 but see no need to tolerate the recoil of a bigger magnum if it is not necessary. Since I plan to be doing it by myself on foot, the lighter and shorter the better. That is primarily why I was looking at the short mags.
 
Look into the Tikka T-3 Lites by Sako... I bought one in 270WSM for backpack type hunts...Very accurate rifles many say most accurate out of the box rifle under $1000..


horsepoop.gif


Disclaimer:
The poster does not take any responsibility for any hurt or bad feelings. Reading threads poses inherent risks. The poster would like to remind readers to make sure they have a functional sense of humor before they visit any discussion board.
 
BS, you keep going on about the Tikka t-3 lite but i don't think that they are for everybody.

I was looking at buying one a couple years ago and gave it a good going over. The bolt felt really smooth to me and the gun fit well. Other than that, didn't care for it much. The clip felt like it was made of plastic and it stuck down below the, ah, stock. The trigger area too felt of plastic and the stock was made of something i know not what but felt super cheap to me.

Maybe they have made improvements in the last couple years but once i held that tikka, i knew one wasn't for me. Give me metal over plastic any day please and i know that there are other rifles out there that shoot well right out the box.

Joey
 
No you're right Joey, they aren't for everyone... People that own them sure like them though.. Get on a few different shooting/hunting websites and you will see a lot of folks praising them for their accuracy and function..I hear a lot of folks using them for competitions... This rifle was by far the easiest I have ever developed a load for it was sub MOA with everything I fed it.

This was the first 3 shots I put through it (after a fouling shot)

10D006.jpg


"i know that there are other rifles out there that shoot well right out the box.~Joey"

You are right there are definately accurate rifles right out of the box..But I doubt there are many that are 6 3/8 LBS with a 24" BBL that shoot as good for under $700



horsepoop.gif


Disclaimer:
The poster does not take any responsibility for any hurt or bad feelings. Reading threads poses inherent risks. The poster would like to remind readers to make sure they have a functional sense of humor before they visit any discussion board.
 
The WSMs are magnum cartridges and will bring a punch with them. Joey can give you a better idea of what kind of recoil they bring when coupled with a lighter rifle. Maybe he can tell you how much the factory ammo costs as well.

I'd gladly use any of the three you listed. If you plan on hunting elk much I'd lean toward the 300. But, the WSM would not be my first choice as I like 200 grain bullets.

Hard to beat an 06. 150 grain bullets from an 06 makes good deer and antelope medicine. Have fun.
 
You make some great points there Snort, great points but myself, i'm just not one much for plastic instead of metal in my guns. :)

Joey
 
I found and posted this in the sheep Forum a few days ago.


Boddington, from an article, "My Favorite Things"

"Boddington believes the .270 WSM, chambered in a Kimber, is one of the finest mountain cartridges ever--faster and harder-hitting than the great .270 Winchester but able to be housed in a lighter, handier rifle." Also,

"The .270 WSM is far and away my favorite of all the new short magnums, and I like the added velocity over a .270 Winchester. I also like the shorter action and find the increase in recoil to be not enough to worry about. It can be made into a wonderfully light package, yet it packs a whole lot of punch. I have used the .270 WSM on elk with no qualms (and great performance), and I even took it to Tajikistan on my second hunt for Marco Polo, a big-bodied sheep that lives in very open country where ranges are often quite long."

I have to agree with him on all counts!

Joey
 
Pre64!

Don't think the 300 WSM doesn't Pack a Punch!

Yes Ammo is a little more!

No it's not as BIG & BAD as other 300 Magnum Cartridges!

It's a Sweet Shooting Round!

I don't personally own one!

They are a Hard hitting SOB!




For GAWDS Sakes Guys,We Got Kids on this Site,Some of them are 65 years Old!:D

I don't care if they're big or small!
If they throw lead I like em all!
:p
 
If you intend to hunt bull elk a bunch, consider the 300WSM. Using 180 grain Nosler partitions it is potent elk medicene. Deer and 'lopes don't require it and it's fun owning more than one rifle.
 
You all make good sense and that is why I asked for your opinions. However, that is also what I love about this sport --sooo many choices-- a good thing!

I read another article by Boddington last night in which he said "his favorite" Elk/Muley combo rifle was a 300 Win Mag go figure.

I guess no matter if I go with 300 Win Mag or 300 WSM or 270 or 270 WSM or '06 I will be properly equipped.

Next question is does anyone have personal experience with difference in felt recoil b/w 270 vs 270 WSM and 300 Win mag vs 300 WSM? And how they compare to the recoil of an '06 in 180 grain?

I will now sit back and listen and learn.
 
The .300 Winny Mag is one of the all time great cartridges but it does have some recoil. On a lighter weight gun it can be above some peoples tolerance level. You can brake them and that makes them reasonable to shoot and a well designed stock with a good recoil pad can help quite a bit. It is a great all around cartridge and will work for anything in North America. The .300 WSM does kick a little less but excells using lighter bullets for the highger velocity and flatter trajectory but it's a fine cartridge in it's own right like the .270WSM. If you prefer to shoot a gun with less recoil and don't want to use a brake there are other rounds that can fill the bill some were mentioned above.

Accuracy wise everything that has been mentioned on this thread will shoot as good as the guy pulling the trigger if it's built right. It's really a matter of preference because frankly they'll all do the job. If you go to Federal's ammunition sight you can compare loads and see by numbers of loading which ones are more popular. If you don't reload then that may help you narrow down your search. There isn't a dog in the bunch and I think all of them will be around in 50 years, some have already been around that long to attest to how good they are. I think another testimonial to how good they are is the fact that just about every guy on this site that rifle hunts has or has owned one or more of them and many of us still do today. That in itself speaks volumes.
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-28-11 AT 11:43AM (MST)[p]BigDawg, I took from Boddington's words, that he preferred the 270 WSM as a "mountain cartridge", long range on stuff like goats, sheep, and muleys. He throws in there that he believes it adequate for Elk, that it had proved itself out to his satisfaction, but if Elk were on the steady diet, or the question for his recommended chambering, i don't doubt that he might choose something bigger.

We got guys here in these pages that will argue to death with you that Elk can be taken just fine with a .243, .257 Roberts, and the 25-06, all good cartridges but i don't think Elk cartridges. When you compare any of them to a 270WSM, you are talking apples vs Watermelon, the WSM being far and away the potent chambering.

I have found my Winchester mod 70, black stocked, Stainless 24" to have a medium amount of recoil and slightly higher amount of Blast. Hope that makes sense. It's very tolerable for me but much more and i might not care to practice much with the thing. I'm getting consistent -3/4" groups after not very much load development, 3300 FPS with 140 gr Accubonds, documented in these pages, last July i believe.

Joey
 
280 with 140 or 160 grain accubonds. nuf said!!

O--one
B--big
A--ass
M--mistake
A--america
 
I have a 280 rem. savage and a 300 wsm also a savage.

The 280 is slightly heavier because the barrel is aftermarket and slightly thicker as it approaches the muzzle.

The 280 is a pleasure to shoot. So, if you are not into recoil and can take good shots, even on elk, this is your ticket when you put those choices together.

My 300 wsm using handloaded hunting loads will but a lick on you if you are not paying attention. It is the best idea of the three for elk in general and especially if the shot you take is not ideal.

I bought a barrel in 270 wsm, because it is a good compromise and I may go to it eventually and just stay with it.

I enjoy shooting the 280. If I have a good elk tag, I am using the 300 wsm, because it only takes one good shot.
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-28-11 AT 03:36PM (MST)[p]The only way you can accurately compare the recoil of different calibers is to compare them shot through the same make and model of rifles... Stock design and weight are the key factors of how hard its gonna thump you.. I have shot 30-06 rifles that kick more than my 300WinMag..

As far as the short mags go 7mmWSM is ballistically the best (there's no argument of the 7mm bullets superiority) I wish they offered it in the rifle I chose for backpacking but they didn't and I settled for the 270WSM...

Joey, 3300 fps with a 140 gr pill is smoking from a 24" tube... Is this an actual Crono'd velocity or just assumed? Not arguing just would like to know..I have to work up a Barnes load soon and was hoping to hit 3200 with a 130...


horsepoop.gif


Disclaimer:
The poster does not take any responsibility for any hurt or bad feelings. Reading threads poses inherent risks. The poster would like to remind readers to make sure they have a functional sense of humor before they visit any discussion board.
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-28-11 AT 05:07PM (MST)[p]bSnort said, "Joey, 3300 fps with a 140 gr pill is smoking from a 24" tube... Is this an actual Crono'd velocity or just assumed?"

Snort, I looked back at the thread i did while working up this load, post #40-#57...

http://www.monstermuleys.info/dcforum/DCForumID22/2526.html#28

...and it appears that i've fudged just a bit. My apologies!!

my hunting loading!!
62 grs Reloader 17
140 gr Accubond
Rem 9 1/2 primers
3280 FPS/thru my mod 70, 24" barrel.

There were NO pressure signs with this amount of R-17 and it was developed in the middle of the summer during a hot spell. Though i'm 20 FPS below what i claimed above, thru a very accurate chronograph, i do believe a guy can/could get more out of it if he wanted to push the envelope a bit.

I'm also getting 3250FPS with my 280 Ackley Imp in 140 grain bullets, same day same crony... Another consideration, a darn fine round! :)

Edit; Snort, though i agree that some of the 7mm bullets can have a higher BC than what you can get them in .277 but when you consider my 140 Accubond loading, my own limit of about 500 yds on game, what Big Buck or bull Elk is going to know the difference, if he is hit in a decent place, out to that kind of long range? He's wacked, done deal with either. I'm a fair shot as they come and go but that's about as far as i ever care to shoot at a animal so can't see the 7mm WSM advantage. If looking to take elk past 6-700 yds, yes, i could see the advantage there but i'm not doing it, very few should, and that's a big for sure!

Joey
 
Nothing wrong with that type of performance Sage! The good rounds perform and will always stand the test of time. hope all's well with you. Regards, CA
 
LMAO... this shows you how bad my memory is sometimes.. I had not even remembered that thread, and I even posted on it..

That is one smoking load... Have you done any testing to see how much R17 deviates with temperature change? I have heard that it is pretty temperature sensitive.. One reason why I am so stuck on H4831 for most of my rifles.. you said you did your load testing when it was warm, I'm curious what how much slower velocity you would get if you put some bullets in the fridge for a couple hours..

You are right about comparing the 270wsm vs 7wsm under 600 yards there's not much difference... After 600 is where the .61+ BC of the 7mm bullets shine..

horsepoop.gif


Disclaimer:
The poster does not take any responsibility for any hurt or bad feelings. Reading threads poses inherent risks. The poster would like to remind readers to make sure they have a functional sense of humor before they visit any discussion board.
 
"Have you done any testing to see how much R17 deviates with temperature change?"

No, i haven't Snort. She shoots bittle litty groups though. :) I was told from several places including here that R-17 is the chit in the short mags. Seems so!

Joey
 
Gentlemen,

Once again, thanks for all of the advice. This conversation has now been elevated to a level that exceeds my rookie status.
I have nothing else to contribute, except to say that I have made up my mind.....I am going to buy ONE OF EACH!!!

Bo Jackson once said "a man can never have too many arrows."

Likewise, as someone else said "a man can never own too many guns."

Let the buying begin !!!
 
Bigdawg, now you're thinking.. When I got my first rifle I figured I wanted one that I could use for just about everything in North America.. I figured I could just have one rifle chambered in 300WinMag and not have the need for any more rifles...That didn't last long and now I need a second gun safe...lol

Joey, I may have to give R-17 a try....

horsepoop.gif


Disclaimer:
The poster does not take any responsibility for any hurt or bad feelings. Reading threads poses inherent risks. The poster would like to remind readers to make sure they have a functional sense of humor before they visit any discussion board.
 
GEEZUS Snort!

Will you Please tell sage you also have a 270WSM?:D

For GAWDS Sakes Guys,We Got Kids on this Site,Some of them are 65 years Old!:D

I don't care if they're big or small!
If they throw lead I like em all!
:p
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-29-11 AT 03:08AM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Apr-29-11 AT 00:57?AM (MST)

"Will you Please tell sage you also have a 270WSM?"


lol, I've known that for some time now B-Bob. We just don't have the same loadings for it!

Joey
 
>Hossblur, how can the .280 be
>on the small side but
>the .270 is OK? :^)
>The .280 can do anything
>the .270 can do and
>has the ability to shoot
>better flying heavier bullets if
>the need arises. I can
>shoot a 130 grain
>bullet from a .270 at
>3150 + ft per second
>and can shoot a .280
>with 140 grains at 3100++
>that's pretty equal. You're splitting
>hairs on these guys and
>one isn't going to do
>anything better than the others
>truth be told. All are
>great rounds and the .270wsm
>can shoot a little faster
>& flatter but at a
>bigger price for ammo.
>
> I just had to do
>it since you stated you
>were going to outfit your
>kids with a 7mm!! :^)
>With the bullets we have
>today unless there's a need
>to shoot longer ranges the
>cartridges on the 06 case
>are as good as it
>gets. Fact is there isn't
>a loser in any of
>them HOSSBLUR mentioned above.


Fair enough, but I was going with the short magnum not being necessary part, not the .280 being on the small side. The .280 is on the small side if you consider the big 4 in western big game hunting to be .270, 06', 7mm, 300win. The .280 is on the small side. My point was simply that the short mags aren't necessary. If you were to combine the ammount of deer/elk killed by any one caliber the 06' is so far in the lead it will never be caught, and I like mine(mostly for sentimental reasons), but I think the 7mm is the best of all worlds when looking at the big 4 calibers. But I would say, if your in doubt, not really sure, a .30 caliber is the safest bet.
 
Sage,

I read a couple very informative threads about R-17 on another hunting/shooting website.. Some folks did some temperature testing on the powder..To make a long story short it IS a fairly stable powder on up to 92 degrees..After 92 it gets erratic ..Fine by me 92 degrees is bikini watching weather lol...

horsepoop.gif


Disclaimer:
The poster does not take any responsibility for any hurt or bad feelings. Reading threads poses inherent risks. The poster would like to remind readers to make sure they have a functional sense of humor before they visit any discussion board.
 
Thanks for the info Snort, kinda had me wondering!!

Though i'm not going to recommend to anybody to try and up the grain amounts of powder that i found to be accurate in my rifle, or even start off anywhere near it, i'd be curious to see what velocity i could achieve with further experimentation.

I think i'll stand pat, as is, though. I believe that 140 gr Accubond loading will perform brilliantly under a wide variety of hit location conditions, suffice to drop anything i care to hunt, way out farther than i care to take the shot.

Joey
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-30-11 AT 09:11PM (MST)[p]FWIW, EVERY powder on earth is temp sensitive to some degree, the one to worry about for most is cold, not heat...If '17 is stable to 92F I like it even more.

Joey, I say takem to the top, then back off a tad, you may be there I dont know..But many,many guns, esp mags it seems like to be driven hard. its win win really, the more volume you take up,you can literaly watch your extreme spread drop via the chrony. and in the end consistency/repetability is where its at, esp in LR shooting.

Snort I fondled a Tikka again today, because thats about all they had in Dicks sporting goods here in the south.(I think there is a gander in this town somewhere, but I aint found it yet. I know they are shooters, but damn I cant bring myself to own one! Tikka pre-beretta foul up, ya, I'd buy that in a heart beat..damn i hate bean counters!
 
My wife has a .270 short mag. in a Browning A-Bolt and it needed a new recoil pad but shoots great with factory loads (3250 fps with 130 gr. Ballistic Silvertips and well under an inch) but I couldn't get reloads to go well although must admit I didn't give it the same work I gave my .300 Wby.

I will be looking at Reloder 17 when I pick up the cause again, Thank Sage.

Bill

Look out Forkie, FTW is watching us!
 
huntindad4 said:
My wife has a .270 short mag. in a Browning A-Bolt and it needed a new recoil pad but shoots great with factory loads (3250 fps with 130 gr. Ballistic Silvertips and well under an inch) but I couldn't get reloads to go well although must admit I didn't give it the same work I gave my .300 Wby.

I will be looking at Reloder 17 when I pick up the cause again, Thank Sage.

Bill

Look out Forkie, FTW is watching us!
Click to expand...
My wife uses same in the Micro-Hunter edition. With a Limb Saver pad taming the recoil. She and I love this rifle. Great for everything we hunt in Cali-Rado.
 
bigdawg said:
I am a long time archery hunter. I now wanting to start rifle hunting. I am trying to decide if I can buy one all around caliber for Antelope, Muleys and Elk. I know all of the above "can" work but I am asking for advise on whether the 280 Rem and the 270 WSM are solid Elk calibers.
Click to expand...

Here's my anecdotal evidence FWIW:

270 Win - medium recoil, it's been around for longer than anyone on this site. Factory ammo is common enough to where you can find a box at a local ACE Hardware in Smalltown, USA.

270 WSM - a little more "bark" than the regular 270, but not by much. It's the added muzzle velocity without pushing it too hot that gives it the advantage over the 270 Win. Have killed many elk and a few oryx (free range gemsbok in NM) with it using a 140 gr Nosler AB.

300 WSM - more noticeable "bark" than the 270 WSM, but not uncomfortable. My dad has and uses one, even at the age of 78. I don't care for it.

300 Win Mag - shot one one time in 1998 and haven't shot one since. Didn't care for it at all.

The short magnums seem to have a "pulse" kick and the regular magnums have more of a stiff "push" kick.

My 270 WSM has a custom made brake on it. I can see bullet impact through the scope. Recoil is like shooting a 25-06.
 
Last edited:
To really muddy the water, my go to is my 7mm WSM. 140 gr AB at 3210 fps (chronoed) has turned a good day into a bad day on many elk, a few oryx, and one mule deer. My small frame daughter, when a teenager, has used it a few times to fill some elk tags.
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

FB_IMG_1647232607108.jpg
AD5E4F7C-91B6-4B84-AFA1-11A35631451D.jpeg
8378A5D9-8C75-46B7-93C9-D37EDCD3E921.jpeg
IMG_4626.jpg
9A752641-E29C-422B-A682-E3E32970F537.jpeg
How wide?
EB87CB75-9741-498A-B48A-AAE4A5E2D2E1.jpeg
FB_IMG_1669057874555.jpg
IMG_8587.jpeg
5978F653-88A8-43EB-91F5-6EEABD98471A.jpeg
AE11AF3F-B42D-41BD-827E-02733DD7E527.jpeg
All 3 .jpg
Back
Top Bottom