.270 WSM vs. .300 win mag
 

I' ve decided to go for the Tikka T3. I liked the write-up in Field and Stream. Here' s the next choice...I started out thinking that I' d have the rifle chambered in 270 WSM, but now I wonder if 300 win mag would be a better all around caliber in case I feel the urge to hunt animals larger than whitetails. Thanks for all of the help.

RE: .270 WSM vs. .300 win mag
 

I' d be looking for the 7MM or .300 short mag......in any case...

RE: .270 WSM vs. .300 win mag
 

Good decision to go with the Tikka, it' s a nice gun with a smooth action. I am with Vapodog on this one, go with the 7mm or 300 WSM. Then we can both hope that the price of the ammo comes down considerably as more people hopefully maunfacture it.

RE: .270 WSM vs. .300 win mag
 

What about the 7mmrm as an option. It will allow you to tackle big game, offers flat shooting, energy, reasonably priced/good selection on ammo and comes with a tolerable recoil. I use such a beast as my all arounder and it has performed well for deer to elk/moose, I am very happy with the accuracy and game performance with this offering.

Then again I may be partial;)

RE: .270 WSM vs. .300 win mag
 

I have been hunting mule deer with a 270 for years and recently bought a 270WSM. A lot of the area where I hunt is open land. My friend hunts with a 300 win mag. He loses more meat than he should with that 300 win mag. A 270 WSM is plenty enough for whitetail but if you really plan on hunting bigger game I think maybe 7mm would be a better all around choice with less recoil and cheaper ammo than 300 win mag. Have you checked performance of 270WSM with 150 grain power points?

RE: .270 WSM vs. .300 win mag
 

Either the 7mmwsm or 300wsm would be a better choice for game larger than deer.

RE: .270 WSM vs. .300 win mag
 

Raymond270,

If your friend is losing too much meat on deer he could try using a slightly " tougher" bullet. For instance...if he is shooting a 150 grain .30 caliber for deer, (which is surely sufficient), he could try switching to a " tougher" 180 grain for instance. As an example a 180 grain Trophy Bonded or A-Frame would be a little slower to expand....and maybe reduce some of the trauma and " bloodshot" tissue surrounding the wound channel. Of course when using a cartridge like the .300 Win Mag it is inevitable that any hit to large muscle or bone is going to ruin " a lot" of meat. One option, when possible, is a shot through one side of the ribcage and out the other side. Not much to eat between there...(if only we could get deer to " behave themselves" and always present nice broadside shots)!

Of course you can handload and reduce the load...but the Magnum' s case doesn' t lend itself to that very well. And of course the only other solution is to use less gun when hunting deer. (Of course in a pinch I would rather lose 10 lbs of meat and cleaning kill the deer, than not cause enough trauma....and lose the whole deer.)

When it is all said and done, " pay your money and pick your poison" !

Good luck with your decision!

RE: .270 WSM vs. .300 win mag
 

Hi akbound, my friend uses ballistic tips not sure which grain in his 300 min mag. He also hunts bear and elk not sure which bullet he uses then. He does lose more than he should due to bloodshot meat. And I can honestly say all the deer I have killed with my 270 either went down right away or at the most maybe 40 yards after I shot them. This year my friend got a nice 4 pointer with a thirty inch rack I was not there but my dad was. My dad said my friend hit this deer once and it kept going like it was not hit then he shot it again and it still kept going then all of the sudden it just dropped the bullet holes were only six inches apart but he lost most of the shoulder on it due to bloodshot. Have not had a chance yet to hunt with my 270WSM but like it at the range.

Thanks for the info
Raymond270 soon to be Raymond270WSM

RE: .270 WSM vs. .300 win mag
 

That' s about the best answer to tis question. Everyone has their preference on which diameter of bullet to use but the simple fact is that all three of the WSM' s are more than enough gun to hunt any of the hooved animals on this continent very effectively. Each one has something going for it over the other two like the .270 having the flatter trajectory, the .300 having heavier bullets and the 7mm being a good compromise between the other two. No matter which one you pick you will not be under gunned.

RE: .270 WSM vs. .300 win mag
 

Hi Raymond270,

I have used Ballistic Tips on deer size game, though currently out of a .260 Remington. The Ballistic Tip opens up rather quickly and creates a lot of trauma throughout the length of the wound channel. Out of a .300 Magnum I can pretty well imagine that it would bloodshot alot of meat!

It is not uncommon for a deer, (any many other animals as well), to take an extremely well placed...lethal hit....and show little or no apparent sign of being hit. I have had deer travel up to 100 yards or so with their heart and or lungs absolutely destroyed! Whether or not you decide to take a second shot or not is an individual decision. Though I will say....if there is " any" doubt in your mind about the shot placement....a second shot is a good idea. (I know, some will say a second shot is always best when possible if the animal is still on its feet...but how many archers get a second shot into the game? And does that negatively effect making a humane kill.....assuming a proper first shot)?

One of the reasons that the magnums tend to be such " good killers" ....is because they destroy a lot of tissue. And the only sure way I know of not destroying alot of eating meat.....is to shoot through parts we normally don' t eat, (like broadside through the ribcage).

As a kid growing up I remember reading much of the writing of both Jack O' Connor and Elmer Keith. They each had a slightly different take on the issue...to say the least. Jack' s proposed using light/high velocity bullets, (ie. the 130 grain .270 Winchester), and shooting through nonedible body parts...as much as possible. Elmer on the other hand proposed big/slower moving bullets which didn' t bloodshot alot of meat....and as he said, " you could eat right up to the bullet hole" !

Those two differing extremes pretty well sum it up!

Once again...best wishes and good luck!