Guns Like firearms themselves, there's a wide variety of opinions on what's the best gun.

NWFT Gun of the Year - Remington 700 270WSM

Old 09-10-2006, 03:36 PM
  #11  
DM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location:
Posts: 1,813
Default RE: NWFT Gun of the Year - Remington 700 270WSM

It isn't free DM. I spent about $200 at the NWTF banquet. I will be spending $700 for the Leupold scope. I will be spending $100 to have the scope mounted and lens caps installed. I will be spending $100 for a decent gun case. I will be spending an additional $100 on a gun sling, ammo and target time at the range. All told the "free" rifle will cost me a cool $1000 (not counting the money I spent at the NWTF banquet) to make it usable to me in the field. I hope I love this rifle because it will probably be the last one I get in my lifetime.
First off, i didn't say FREE, i said pretty much free knowing that it did cost you a small amount for what you ended up with.

Secondly, 700 for the scope???? Why?? 100 for mounting???? As other pointed out, there's much cheaper choises out there...Same with the other accessos. you have chosen.

No matter, it should make you a great rifle, and you got a real deal on it...

Drilling Man
DM is offline  
Old 09-10-2006, 04:01 PM
  #12  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,224
Default RE: NWFT Gun of the Year - Remington 700 270WSM

Yes, everywhere I shop they mount the scopes for free and bore sight them for you. You can get a Ziess conquest for around $400 so you shouldn't have as much as you think in it. My nephew just won a rifle and that is what he put on his. So for under $500 he has a brand new Weatherby 30-06.
JeffS is offline  
Old 09-12-2006, 11:42 AM
  #13  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 39
Default RE: NWFT Gun of the Year - Remington 700 270WSM

DM,

I want the Leopold scope that costs $700 because it can be mounted on my rifle using the lowest mounting rings. I want to put my cheek on the stock and see through the scope. That is worth alot of money to me. If I am going to have the scope for the rest of my life I might as well have the one I want. I want the best quality and I am willing to pay a little extra for it. I've had crappy quality (on my model 94) and it was not worth the cheap price. I got a crappy scope and a great price. I paid for it in the long run with a reduced quality of experience inthe field.

The scope has been purchased and mounted. The mounting fee was $65 and that included high quality Leupold parts. There currently is no lens cover that will work with the scope because of its concave design. I will have to purchase that later (I'm guessing $35).

I am not a do-it-yourselfer by any means. When I removed the scope on my model 94 and put in new butt screws, I somehow managed to scratch the barrel and messed up the installation to boot. Now cloth snags on the butt screws when it is run across the barrel. Because I wanted to save a few bucks by doing it myself, I now have to take the gun into the gun smith and have them do it over with new screws (and hopefully fix the scratch I made). What would have cost me $20 to have professionally done in the first place may cost me over $100 to fix. I wouldn't recommend people fiddling with their guns unless they know what the heck they are doing or they don't care what their gun looks like. Messing up a gun can be very distressing to people who care tremendously about the condition of the weapon.

The real reason I am here is that I am perplexed about what kind of ammo to buy. I want 130 grain bullets. I am not interested in paying more for more knockdown power. This gun will have no problem whatsoever taking down a whitetail deer. I am willing to pay more for bullets that have a flatter trajectory and are repeatable. I see that the cost per bullet ranges from a steep$1/bullet to a staggering $2/bullet for the 270WSM. Why is there such a wide discrepancy in prices? Are the more expensive bullets more accurate? If the only difference is in knockdown power, I will take the cheap bullets and be happy. If the difference is in accuracy and distance, I will take the expensive bullets and be less happy. Can anybody help me with some pertinent advice?

Thanks.



Triton is offline  
Old 09-12-2006, 12:22 PM
  #14  
Typical Buck
 
dvdegeorge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: WNY USA
Posts: 900
Default RE: NWFT Gun of the Year - Remington 700 270WSM

Where to start?First off you could have mounted a 40mm scope in low rings and been where you are now for far less,but seems ya have $$ to burn so go at it if it floats your boat. $700 ,dam your in Swarovski territory!So seeing as how money is flowing freely,purchase as many brands and type bullets as you can and then go to shooting them to see which your rifle spits out the best,as each has a mind of it's own and tastes will vary.As for the $$ in ammo it is bullet construction your paying for,as you stated a whitetail don't take much bullet but hit one with a cheap non premium at 270WSM speeds up close, catch shoulder and a bit of a mess may be on your hands.Accuracy would be my 1st concern,then bullet construction and if I just shelled out $700 + on a crooked scope a couple bucks for more expensive ammo wouldn't even factor in the equation.Good luck hope she shoots for ya
dvdegeorge is offline  
Old 09-12-2006, 05:35 PM
  #15  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Pa
Posts: 4,647
Default RE: NWFT Gun of the Year - Remington 700 270WSM

Anybody that would pay $100.00 to have a scope mounted is a cheese !@#$ in my book

You might want to donate that gun back to the NWTF. That way maybe the gun might actually kill something


Mr. Longbeard is offline  
Old 09-12-2006, 06:29 PM
  #16  
DM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location:
Posts: 1,813
Default RE: NWFT Gun of the Year - Remington 700 270WSM

There's NO WAY to know what ammo will shoot best in your new rifle without trying them to see.... I don't care how much a rifle cost, thiswill betrue.... If you want to use 130's, then you will have to buy a few different brands and try them for yourself.

I agree that 130's work well on whitetails, but that light of a bullet at the speed you will get with that rifle, only the tougher premium bullets are going to givedeep penetration, so try for rib shots if possible...

Good luck on your ammo search...

DM
DM is offline  
Old 09-13-2006, 06:01 PM
  #17  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 39
Default RE: NWFT Gun of the Year - Remington 700 270WSM

DM,

Thanks for the advice. I took it. I purchased 150 grain bullets. I did a little research and they were the ones most recommended for deer in wooded settings. They cost $1.50/shell, I bought 4 cartons (80 shells). A very impressive bullet if I do say so myself. Well here is the total package. I have a new case, a new sling, a new bullet wallet, a new scope and plenty of ammo. The only thing lacking is a shooting stick which I am researching now. This may be the first time in my life that I have looked forward to gun season more than bow season.


Triton is offline  
Old 09-14-2006, 06:07 PM
  #18  
DM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location:
Posts: 1,813
Default RE: NWFT Gun of the Year - Remington 700 270WSM

Triton,

Great looking rig.... Now you need to get out and get some meat for your freezer with it to feed those kids...

DM
DM is offline  
Old 09-14-2006, 07:30 PM
  #19  
Boone & Crockett
 
James B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Wall SD USA & Jamestown ND
Posts: 11,474
Default RE: NWFT Gun of the Year - Remington 700 270WSM

I don't think you need worry about over driving the 130 grain bullets. The 270 WSM is just not much above the 270 Win. I have both sitting here beside my dest. With the top load of IMR 4350, I get 2900 from the 270 Win and just over 3000 from the 270 WSM. The 270 Win has a 4 inch shorter barrel at 22 inche where my WSM has a 26 inch barrel. The manuals says my load should be 3200 fps but as usuall their readings are hard to reach with hunting rifles.

I could try a slower powder and increase the velocity some but this load shoots 1/2 inch at 100 yards so why bother?

WW factory loads are another story. I get 3250 from the 130 Ballistic Silvertips and just under 3200 with the WW 150 Power Points. I often shoot Federal Fusions in the 270 Win. These are 130 grain and they clock 2860-2875. However its lights out for anything they hit. I plan on tryuing the 150 Grain Fusions in the 270 WSM. They claim they make it 130 but I have never found any. The SD of the 130 grain 277 bullet will keep it together well even at 270 Weatherby velocities.
James B is offline  
Old 11-19-2006, 07:57 AM
  #20  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 39
Default RE: NWFT Gun of the Year - Remington 700 270WSM

I got to use the Remington 700 opening day. I have attached the results. I would never have gotten the buck with the Model 94. There is absolutely no comparison. This gun rocks!!

Triton is offline  

Quick Reply: NWFT Gun of the Year - Remington 700 270WSM


Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.