I'm a .30-06 guy all the way but I like the 270 for Pronghorn.

The .270 is flatter shooting, yes.

Sheridan summed it all up very well. +1

While the .270 is flatter shooting than the .30-06, no rifle is a laser beam of death. It's simple physics, with the bore at zero degrees elevation, the bullet will begin dropping immediately upon leaving the muzzle.

The desired result here is a hit in the target's vitals. Knowing your caliber's performance at varying ranges and practice, practice, practice can overcome any advantage one might perceive coming from a "flatter-shooting" caliber.

Here's a link to get you started:

http://www.remington.com/pages/news-...allistics.aspx

There's a balance between bullet weight and the velocity at which it's driven when it ultimately comes to performance of a particular caliber on game. Generally, you don't want to drive the bullet so fast that it doesn't have an opportunity to expand, nor do you want it going so slowly that it simply creates a superficial wound. Unfortunately, the trend today seems to be to drive a heavy bullet as fast as you can push it. In most cases, the heavy bullet never has an opportunity to expand and simply exits the animal on the opposite side of the hit. Now, some will advocate that this scenario allows for a better blood trail to follow - two wounds being better than one. While that's a great concept if you're bowhunting, it's inefficient when it comes to a firearm. If you transfer all that energy into the vitals of that animal and destroy them, the animal is going nowhere.

My experiences have led me to conclude that for deer-sized game, a bullet of 90-130 grains, driven somewhere between 2700 and 3000 fps, will kill an animal MOST EFFICIENTLY, provided the shot is placed in the vitals. I much prefer my .243s to my .30-06s for exactly that reason when it comes to deer and pronghorns.

Back to the .270/.30-06 comparo, though....

Remington lists basic pointed soft point Core-Lokts at 150 grains as available for both calibers. In terms of long-range trajectory, the .30-06 actually offers better performance if you're just wanting something that shoots "flat", 50.9 inches of drop at 500 yards, versus 61.2 inches for the .270 at the same range. NONETHELESS, if I were to hold my .30-06 50.9 inches high at 500 yards, and you were to hold the .270 61.2 inches high at the same range, both bullets would theoretically hit the same point of impact.

However, comparing the 150 grain .30-06 to a 130 grain .270, the .270 requires only 43.3 inches of hold at 500 yards, versus 50.9 for the .30-06. Again, provided each of us were to hold accordingly, both bullets would still hit the target.

But, back to my original conclusion, a 130 grain bullet tends to be more "deer-sized" than a 150, so were I just building a rifle for deer, given a choice between the .30-06 and .270, I'd pick the .270. If I were only going to own one rifle, and may have a good chance at hunting elk or moose one day, I'd want something that handles the heavier bullets better - the .30-06.

Any 130 grain.

Guys, It's just Larry acting like a child.

He's just following his usual M.O.

First he comes back from being banned and acts like he is the absolute last word on everything guns but doesn't care to explain anything or offer any read advice all the while telling everyone here they are idiots, he names one of his personalities ofter one of the HNI members, posting pictures of himself in his under ware, his guns and him standing in front of big old growth trees.

Then after he has been banned several times he comes back again and acts like a 10 year old buying his first rifle. I hven't figured this one out yet. I think he took too many meds or something. I think he's just baiting anyone that doesn't know better so he can see how many quote factory ballistics tables so he can sit at his computer while "laffin".

Pretty soon after he comes down from his meds he should act like a civil human being for about a day or two and then revert back to Larry the "know it all gun God" and get banned again.

How? Not by reading books and internet forums. I've used everything from the .243 (the legal minimum in most western states) through the .25-06, .30-30, .308, .30-06, 7mm Mag, 7mm STW, .300 Win Mag, .300 Wby Mag, .35 Remington, .375 H&H, and .44 Mag on animals ranging from pronghorns and deer through caribou and elk. Though all will work, some work decidedly better than others, depending on the animal - and depending on the ranges at which the animals are typically encountered.

I did not suggest that the .270 is inadequate for elk. It's limited in what bullet weights are available, the heaviest being 150-grain. 150 is the lightest thing I'd reasonably throw at an elk, given a choice. My experiences are simply my experiences, though. Take them or leave them.

I'd use a .270 for Elk. I would use a good 150 grain bullet however.

Unless you are nine years old I'm going to have to assume you're a troll.

Did you not read what I posted at the bottom of the previous page. :hit:
Hell, he even quoted my entire post on this page for you to read.

I can only help so much. If you don't listen and keep posting replies to Larry then you're on your own.
Good God, you guys just keep adding fuel to the fire.